Four more years in Iraq

[Nathan Poe]

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&u=/ap/20050820/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/army_chief_interview_4

Rememeber when "Four More Years!" was chanted during Bush's re-election campaign?

Apparantly there was a double meaning to that.

 

[puppydogs]

This is not a surprise. We will be in Iraq for a long time, longer than four more years if we have our way about it strategic interests and all. The Iraqis may however choose to kick us out when and IF they ever get a real government going.

 

[KenH]

There is no way we will have a large force in Iraq for four more years. There are millions of folks like me who support the effort in Iraq but we would drop our support if we still have a major force there after December 31, 2006.

Plus the Republicans know that if there is not a significant draw down of troops that they will take a major hit in the midterm elections in November 2006.

 

[Nathan Poe]

There is no way we will have a large force in Iraq for four more years. There are millions of folks like me who support the effort in Iraq but we would drop our support if we still have a major force there after December 31, 2006.

Plus the Republicans know that if there is not a significant draw down of troops that they will take a major hit in the midterm elections in November 2006.

Alas, this puts the Repubs in a no-win situation, then. If they do pull out, then Iraq's infrastructure will disintegrate, US corporations will lose their profits, repubs will lose corporate support, the dems will play it off as a Colossal republican failure, and the Repubs will take an even bigger hit in the midterm elections.

 

[puppydogs]

There is no way we will have a large force in Iraq for four more years. There are millions of folks like me who support the effort in Iraq but we would drop our support if we still have a major force there after December 31, 2006.

Plus the Republicans know that if there is not a significant draw down of troops that they will take a major hit in the midterm elections in November 2006.

What happens come the end of 2006 and Iraq is still ungoverned?

 

[KenH]

Then we still need to withdraw. If it can't be made governable after almost four years then I don't think staying another four years will change that situation.

By the end of next year we had best be substantially out of Iraq, say, less than 50,000 troops left, or else even as a supporter of eliminating the threat that Saddam Hussein posed, I will consider us to be in a Vietnam-like quagmire.

 

[JPPT1974]

What happens come the end of 2006 and Iraq is still ungoverned?

I worry about that too. As the Iraq government needs to have their constitution and government in place. And in order and what would happen if they weren't ready yet. They need time to prepare.

 

[MadeInOz]

A government which has a foreign power holding the sway of power in their country is not a real government.

 

[Nathan Poe]

Then we still need to withdraw. If it can't be made governable after almost four years then I don't think staying another four years will change that situation.

By the end of next year we had best be substantially out of Iraq, say, less than 50,000 troops left, or else even as a supporter of eliminating the threat that Saddam Hussein posed, I will consider us to be in a Vietnam-like quagmire.

And a quagmire is exactly what the dems need to steamroller the Repubs at the next election.

Of course, if we pull out early, and let Iraq disintegrate after all of Dubya's pounding on the War Drum, then the Iraq war will be written off as a failure, and the Dems will use it to steamroller the Repubs at the next election.

 

[Fantine]

The only positive thing about the Department of the Army's statement was that there was no mention of a draft.

 

[KenH]

I think that if the elections go well and we have a substantial reduction in our troop presence by November of 2006 that the GOP can maintain control of the House and Senate in the midterm elections, Nathan Poe. But they could lose a little ground.

 

[ClaireZ]

Personally I believe we will be there much longer than 4 years.

I would wager we will still be there in 10 years, possibly even as long as we have been in Korea. I have yet to see any improvement at all in the situation.

 

[Illuminatus]

I think that if the elections go well and we have a substantial reduction in our troop presence by November of 2006 that the GOP can maintain control of the House and Senate in the midterm elections, Nathan Poe. But they could lose a little ground.

A very large "if". I'm curious, though, as to how the Pentagon plans to maintain current troop levels for another four years. I don't see how that's remotely realistic, at least without a major withdrawal from South Korea.

 

[Nathan Poe]

The only positive thing about the Department of the Army's statement was that there was no mention of a draft.

"No mention of a draft" is not as positive as "mentioning there will be no draft."

 

[Jipsah]

There is no way we will have a large force in Iraq for four more years.

Awww, c'mon, why not? We're not losing many people over there anymore, and it's only costing us about 16 thousand million dollars
($16,000,000,000) a week. Why not just stay? We can always print more money.


Whee!

 

[Chuck_Darwin]

Iraq is the bed that GWB made now he has to sleep in it.

If Iraq is not stabalized by the time his second term is over, I think we should send him and him cabinet to live there until it is working properly. If he believes in accountablity so much, make him accountable for his actions...