I watched the debate between Gingrich and Dodd, and they both made good points. I agreed more with Dodd, but Newt had his points too. Dodd says we have lost our moral authority over there, and on that I agree. Gingrich said if we leave, that the situation is going to get worse. That is probably true as well.

We are told that we can't leave until there is a stable government in Iraq. When will that be? They are no closer not to being stable than they were two years ago. To add insult to injury, the government is planning on taking a two month summer vacation while our troops continue to die there daily, trying to stablize their country. How's that for gratitude?

As of today, we have lost 3422 troops in Iraq, and that number will continue grow as the war rages on. No one but the troops and their families have personally felt the impact of this war. Sure, there are many who feel bad about the loss of life, but how many have been affected on a personal level? Taxes haven't been raised, there's been no draft, and no one is asked to conserve things like in wars past. We are financing this war on the future of generations to come, and it seems no one is worried or cares about that.

There are two sides to the argument of withdrawal timetables. Those opposed say it will inflame our enemies and send them the message that all they have to do is sit and wait it out. They will say that the enemy knows we don't have the wherewithal to stick it out to the end. The problem is, we don't have a clear cut knowledge of who the enemy is, and we don't even know what the end is. It's been changed so many times.

The anti withdrawal crowd also tell us that if we don't stay there until victory is achieved, they will follow us home. That is the one of the dumbest things I've ever heard. They are already here! Look at what happened last week in Fort Dix.Do you think they are the only ones? The pro war people point to the fact that we haven't been attacked since 9/11. They tout that as a justification for our war in Iraq and the larger war on terror. We haven't been attacked yet because those who wish to do us harm are patient. We didn't have any attacks from foreign enemies after the first WTC bombing for 8 years. If anything, the war has made us more likely to be attacked again.

The majority of Americans do support a timetable and want an end to this fiasco. I am in that group. We have been more than patient with the Iraqis, and sacrificed more than they have ever been willing to do. How much longer are we willing to give?

We can't leave until the Iraqi military is ready to take over their own security. Do you know how many Iraqi troops are actually ready? A mere 6000, that's how many! The other problem is that there are Iraqis who join up, only to turn on us and kill our troops. How can we tell who is really on our side? We just don't know. There have been stories about men in stolen uniforms who go and ambush the 'good guys'. I am not making this up. You can look this up yourself.

I know we cannot go back in time and undo what's been done. This war is is going to go down as one of the greatest failures in our history. I wish we had never gone, but it's too late for it. This war has damaged our credibilty around the world, and we have have lost our moral authority. We have acquired more enemies as a direct result of this war. Not only that, we have weakened our military. Even the generals say we would be in dire straights if we had a real crisis that would recquire a military solution. We simply don't have the manpower.

Some will deny it, but Iraq is engaged in a full-fledged civil war in which our troops are caught in the middle . How do we accomplish victory? We have people blowing themselves up daily by way of car bombs and suicide bombers. How do you win a war against those who aren't afraid to die? We can ill afford to take sides.

The hardest thing for me to swallow is I know we are stuck there indefinitely. We created this mess, and it is up to us to fix it. I just don't know how we are going to do that.

Another thing a lot of people don't want to think about is the loss of innocent Iraqi civilians. Some are killed by bombs, while others are kidnapped, tortured, and then dumped on the streets. Does anyone read the daily body count? It is staggering. I would wager that in hindsight, the majority of Iraqis wish this war was never started. Sure Saddam was a bad guy, but at least they didn't have to worry daily about being killed just going to the market for a quart of milk. I read a few months back that some of the Iraqis' biggest wish is to die of natural causes. How sad is that? I am deeply ashamed to know that the Iraqi suffering is a direct result of our presence there.

There is so much more I want to add, but I will stop here for now. Thanks for listening.

First of all, may I suggest you read the COIN manual, or at least parts of it (even reading just the Introduction give's one a better understanding of our goals and strategy). To have a better understanding, it would be advisable to separate the conflict in Iraq into 2 parts: the Global War on Terror (Al Qaeda) and the Insurgency. Those are 2 completely different entities.

How long?: Historically, insurgencies last 10-12 years before they fail. To win them you need an understanding of local society, good intelligence, establishing security and rule of law, and a long term commitment militarily, politically, and economically.

Civil War: I think a more accurate statement would be it is a civil war within all of Islam. (and that's been going on for what? About 1500 years now?)


Yes, there are problems. Some of the ones you stated, such as infiltration of Iraqi police and security forces, are quite accurate.

Keep in mind the 'Surge' is NOT the strategy, the surge is needed to implement the new strategy of clear and hold. It only started in Feb, 2007. The last batallion just arrived a few weeks ago. It's not even fully in place yet. The major operations have just started. The difference between now and the recent past, we always did the 'clear' part, but we never really did the 'hold' part. That's because there weren't enough troops (disclaimer about troop numbers: that's just my opinion...some may disagree).

I'd like to see your source for where you mentioned only 6,000 Iraqi troops, because the number is significantly higher...more like 20,000 now and growing everyday. You may be thinking, "great, we're eliminating Al Qaeda from Baghdad, but they are moving to other areas of Iraq". That would be correct, but you need to realize that in those other areas Iraqis have now joined the coalition in fighting Al Qaeda . They never did this before. (see above where I mentioned "hold") Well, certainly not in the magnitude that's happening now. This is occuring in both the Anbar and Diyalah provinces. Now think of your "civil war" statement for a minute. Yes, there has been and still is tension and warring between the two Muslim sects, but Sunnis are now fighting Al Qaeda (who are Sunni). That kinda blows that "this is a civil war" theory out of the sky now, wouldn't you say?


You asked: " How do you win a war against those who aren't afraid to die?" Well, Mr. Left, that would be called PSYOP, or, as I like to call it "behavioral influence". You recently read and commented on my post concerning Jihad and Islamic reformation. That's one way, and IMHO, the most effective way to win. BUT, and as I stated earlier, that takes time and commitment.

Good post, KenRI!

There is clearly a dynamic that pits Sunni against Shi'ite, it's just not been in the news so much lately... not that the news is a good source of information about what's actually going on. I think it just so happens that everyone's gotten really tired of al-Qaeda throwing in their lot in Iraq, and common Iraqis, Shi'ite and Sunni alike, are fighting them. It seems, too, they're succeeding. This is good.

I'm not sure I know enough about actual conditions in Iraq to form a totally informed opinion about the situation... but it seems there is a complex of rivalries: Sunni v. Shi'ite; Al-Qaeda v. moderate Sunnis; al-Sadr's militants v. Iraqi nationalists; nationalists v. pan-Arabists... the Iranian influence casts a shadow over the entire situation, as does Syria to a lesser degree... there are all sorts of permutations of the above, really. It would seem that political, religious, and national interests are combining in all sorts of ways, causing an ever-shifting jungle of alliances and rivalries... I think this is why we're having trouble deciding if a civil war is going on or not.

I suspect, ultimately, that this will come down to Iraqi national interests versus Iranian ambitions, which in itself is a complex of the above aspects... Iran's Syrian puppet makes the situation even more difficult. While the vigilantes have seemed to have quieted down a bit lately, and while I sense actual progress against the bona-fide terrorists, I think the Shi'ite militias with links to Iran still remain at large, and they're sitting back, waiting, biding their time. I think this is because Iran, to a large degree, directs them... they've advised them to lay low for the time being while Iran's dispute with the West unfolds. Nevertheless, they continue to flood Iraq with arms and munitions.

Iran definitely wants to be the big-kid on the block, and they want to throw their weight around and have influence in the future... I think they see bringing Iraq into their orbit of influence as a key to making that happen. I think this geo-political aspect of Iran's ambitions is the real threat from Tehran; they've already got Syria, now their gunning for Iraq... it would be a very bad thing for the world, in my opinion, if Iraq has an Islamic Revolution akin to Iran's... the two would become very close, and Shi'ism would have a resurgent political embodiment, and really have the most power in the Islamic world since the 11th-12th centuries... I think that's the idea they're trying to bring to pass... The radical messianism of the twelver Shi'a gives it an especially prophetic aspect - e.g., the Hidden Imam returning to lead the Shi'ite revolution to it's fruition, to restore justice in the world, or so they say... They think they're on a mission from God, and unfortunately, this isn't the emtpy rhetoric of the terrorists - this is serious Shi'ite theology and tradition with real weight in the human psyche. There is reason to be concerned, here... this is the thing the Iranian government is pushing.

The very idea that all this could come to pass vis-a-vis Iraq is the number one worst result of this ill-conceived war, second to the human toll, both Allied and Iraqi. I think some people will be wishing for Saddam to come back (especially Israeli and Western military analysts) if Iranian-backed Shi'ite power becomes a juggernaut in the Fertile Crescent; that'll be a far more explosive situation than that under Saddam...

KenRI, I agree with your paragraph about the surge. Iraqis are joining the coalition and Sunnis are going after Al-Qaeda and even better, intra Sunni/Shia fighting between splinter groups is clearly in evidence-especially with the Mehdi Army.
One small point though, the civil war between the Shia's and Sunnis lay dormant for a very long time and only recently has it resumed with ferocity. They were not fighting for 1500 years, more like less than 15 years. Arabs don't ask each other whether they are Sunnis or Shia's, and even in Malaysia no mention is ever made that we
are part of the Sunni branch. That question has only come up since 2003.

And it also takes money...money from future American taxpayers.

I acknowledge that the worst aspect of this war is the loss of life, both American lives and Iraqi lives. But let me focus this on one concept that concervatives are always screaming about when it comes to domestic programs; money. How much money will this "time and commitment" require of the American people when it comes to "winning" the war in Iraq? Why, in the conservative mindset, is it a waste to spend tax dollars on programs that benefit American citizens, but something to be ignored when it comes to waging this sensesless war that will take "time and commitment" to win?

Please, some of you who favor our undelimited occupation of Iraq, can you quantify in dollars how much it will cost American taxpayers over the next century? Please explain how we will pay for it. Please justify, if you can, the diversion of funds from other needs, such as educating our children and tending to their health needs, for such a dubious effort in Iraq.

Well, LC, I don't really consider myself a true Conservative (I'm FOR huge defense spending) so I don't know if I'm "qualified" to answer your question. But you should look all the money being spent in Iraq this way: it is all part of the defense budget.

No easy answers, MrLeft. It's a quandry. My only hope is that there is more progress than is being reported and that we, the American people, have been kept in the dark about the positives, some of which are available if one digs. The negatives are widely publizied.

As far as the timetable to leave..........we really haven't left any place where we've been, have we?

I know this is trite, but I just pray to God to help us out of this mess, meaning the civil war that has been going on since Abraham's day.

I don't think any one person really does. It depends on what MOS one has, the rank, where you are located in the country, who you listen to or trust, etc. Also, many of the generals and other higher ups are just a bunch of kiss a$$es. They'll say whatever they think the President or SoD wants to hear...and that's not right. I understand somewhat why they do that...but it's primarily to make themselves look good. A lot of their reason too, I think, is because they say what they think people want to hear or they are fearful to say things (until after they retire). Too bad they just couldn't be leaders WHEN IT COUNTED!

I just want to hear the truth. We're (well...most of us) aren't stupid. We know it's a war. We know there's bad things and good things happening. Just tell it like it is, that's all I ask. Don't make it sound better than it really is, but don't ignore the good things either.

I trust Petraeus. He's realistic and, as far as I know, honest. At least he'll tell you when things aren't going well. Casey on the other hand...why hasn't he retired yet?? He's a good example of a bad general. He is a failure in generalship, IMHO. Why the Bush administration kept him in that position for so long is beyond any understanding.

Bottom line is we can't win... History has proven this time and time again. Short of turning the Middle East into a plate of Glass, Once we leave all hell will break and then the soldiers that are there will have to see their children fight the same battle.

You can not win a war without declaring war. Until War is declared the politicians control the military. But how do you declare war when there is no Gov to have war against. In the mean time we send our soldiers over with strict rules of engagement against an enemy that has no such rules. The problem with "Do not fire unless you are fired upon" It means "Hope they miss and then shoot back"

We are fighting a Holy War to give Bush a place in the history books. Who are we to bring democracy to the world? What right do we have to dictate how other countries are run? If you are going to send our children to fight then for the love of god let them fight!!!! Car bombs killing soldiers?? Easy fix. No cars allowed in the cities and anyone trying to enter a city in a vehicle should be fired upon..... No weapons allowed in the city unless they are carried by US/UN soldiers... If you are standing around with an AK47 and a towel on your head you are a target... If you want to send our men in then let the military do their jobs. Let the Generals control the rules. Politicians are not qualified to direct our troops. If political talks fail then the politicians should stand aside. Why did Desert Storm succeed? Because it was run by the military. Why did Vietnam fail? because it was run by politicians. We have never won a battle that was commanded by politicians but we have won every battle run by our generals... Why? Because that is their jobs.

Okay Rant over.....

Can't win? Ever hear of the Crusades? You talk of history yet ignore the crushing of the Muslims in the past. They will be crushed again and soon. It is these rabid pigs that refuse to move out of the middle ages. Killing a few million of them will set them back another thousand years before they get uppity again.

And if we need to glass them so be it. If they could they would glass us in a second. Fk them all.

Off subject: I notice that at the end of my page, all the previous posts' titles are listed at the bottom, but the contents are not shown on the page unless each post title is clicked.

This happened one time before and somehow I was able to change that format, but this time I just cannot find what to do to expand the posts to include all the written content.

Is anyone else having this problem, is this the forum acting up, or have I pushed some wrong button somewhere?

We're not at war with Iraq. We are there helping them set up a democratic-type government. Just don't expect it to be a mirror-image of ours, because it won't.


It WAS like that, until now. Before, even if they saw an insurgent placing an IED on the roadside, they couldn't do anything. Rules have changed. Iraqi or American Soldiers can now shoot or detain them (without having to get "permission")


We're a pretty darn good country to care about other people like this. That's who we are and that's what makes America a great nation.

We're not "dictating" anything. Read their Constituion. It's based on Islamic (not sharia) law. Now are you still going to say we're dictating how they should run the country?? Give me a break!
What we are doing is giving others the opportunity to have freedom. THEY made their own constitution. THEY elected their own government. THEY, not us, are decided what's best for them. Good God, it's only been 4 years. Have some freaking patience! Along with the many Iraqis who are angry at not getting their way, there are a lot of powerful, external forces who don't want this democracy to happen.

So are you saying you want an evil regime or police state back? Why should we not allow cars? The majority of them are just going about their daily business. A better solution is more security with more security check points...which is exactly what the Iraqi security forces are doing.



Solo, everything looks normal to me. A little (well, a lot) slow the past 2 days, but other than that, it looks fine.