Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Elroy who wrote (203142)	9/20/2004 11:48:49 AM
From: TigerPaw	Respond to of 1577019

If the government and security of Iraq is turned over to Iraq, then the pseudo-leadership of old exiles will come to an end rather quickly. So will the plan to sell off the oil company to private interests. It may be better for Iraq, but it doesn't help Cheney's pocketbook. TP

To: Elroy who wrote (203142)	9/20/2004 12:08:35 PM
From: i-node	Respond to of 1577019

>>>>>>So no, I prefer a fixed date withdrawal as opposed to a commitment to stay indefinitely. There is no commitment to "stay indefinitely". However, under NO circumstances does it make sense to have a date certain for withdrawal. To do so virtually assures continued bloodshed until that date arrives, at which time we take what is left of our military and go home. It isn't the way intelligent people run a war. Don't you think that with more planning/preparation/etc. that Iraq RIGHT NOW should be on its way to a peaceful democracy? I think it certainly is on its way. But I think there are a lot of naive people who think it is an easier task than it really is. If you look at what has been accomplished in less than two years it is nothing short of amazing. Yes, there are these difficult spots, but they'll be handled in due time. To say it has been "mucked up" is just armchair quarterbacking fed by chronic media bias, both US and abroad. I give him a D, which isn't good enough for the prez of the US.... What should he have done differently? (Please, no "assembling a coalition" -- it wasn't going to happen, no matter what). Dead Iraqis, dead coalition troups, dead hostages, George says we'll stay as long as it takes. Hell, we haven't even fought these people yet, and you're wanting to pack up and go home? We've been trying to handle these problems, basically diplomatically, and it has failed. So, we have to go in and kill these people a few at a time. But at least we made an attempt to deal with it with minimal bloodshed. I'm not about to start second guessing the job the military has done or is doing right now.

To: Elroy who wrote (203142)	9/20/2004 12:47:25 PM
From: Joe NYC	Respond to of 1577019

Elroy, I think Iraqis should be responsible for their own security. It's hard to understand how $10 billion and one year can't train 200k Iraqis to police the streets. I don't know why the Iraqis aren't policing themselves TODAY. If they can't do it in one year (a certain date), how can outsiders? So no, I prefer a fixed date withdrawal as opposed to a commitment to stay indefinitely. One of the problems is that $10 bilion and 1 year may not be enough to buy a nightstick under the US procurement rules / laws. We have rules designed for peacetime, inefficiency and slowness used for wartime situation. Whenever something is done quickly to avoid months or years of procurement bidding, you get whiners complaining about Haliburtons. Don't you think that with more planning/preparation/etc. that Iraq RIGHT NOW should be on its way to a peaceful democracy? What do you go by? The whole Eastern Europe (well most of it) took up democracy without any outside help and planning. There must be some differences, obvious one is a group of people that is ready and willing to use the most barbaric terrorist practices to prevent the democracy from prevailing. It is easier to motivate the crazies to give their life fighting infidel than to give their life fighting democratically elected government. Joe

To: Elroy who wrote (203142)	9/20/2004 2:12:19 PM
From: combjelly	Respond to of 1577019

"It's hard to understand how $10 billion and one year can't train 200k Iraqis to police the streets." Because their own people either blow them up or kill their families?

To: Elroy who wrote (203142)	9/20/2004 2:18:30 PM
From: tejek	Respond to of 1577019

You appear to have fallen for the rhetoric. Kerry has said he'll pull out troops by a date certain. You don't think THAT's worse than anything Bush is doing? I think Iraqis should be responsible for their own security. It's hard to understand how $10 billion and one year can't train 200k Iraqis to police the streets. I don't know why the Iraqis aren't policing themselves TODAY. If they can't do it in one year (a certain date), how can outsiders? So no, I prefer a fixed date withdrawal as opposed to a commitment to stay indefinitely. Unfortunately, American training of Iraqis has not met with a lot of success. Turnover is very high and desertions are common. The Iraqis often refuse to go on patrol with American troops. It has become very dangerous for the Iraqis to 'collaborate' with Americans. Three Kurds were beheaded yesterday because they work with Americans. While we continue to see the US as the liberators of Iraqis, they don't always perceive us as benefactors.