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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: KLP who wrote (171570)	9/30/2005 5:08:49 PM
From: stockman_scott	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

Retired general: Iraq invasion was 'strategic disaster' lowellsun.com By EVAN LEHMANN WASHINGTON -- The invasion of Iraq was the “greatest strategic disaster in United States history,” a retired Army general said yesterday, strengthening an effort in Congress to force an American withdrawal beginning next year. Retired Army Lt. Gen. William Odom, a Vietnam veteran, said the invasion of Iraq alienated America's Middle East allies, making it harder to prosecute a war against terrorists. The U.S. should withdraw from Iraq, he said, and reposition its military forces along the Afghan-Pakistani border to capture Osama bin Laden and crush al Qaeda cells. “The invasion of Iraq I believe will turn out to be the greatest strategic disaster in U.S. history,” said Odom, now a scholar with the Hudson Institute. Homeward Bound, a bipartisan resolution with 60 House co-sponsors, including Lowell Rep. Marty Meehan, requests President Bush to announce plans for a draw-down by December, and begin withdrawing troops by October 2006. The measure has not been voted on, nor has the House Republican leadership scheduled hearings. But supporters were encouraged yesterday, pointing to growing support among moderate conservatives and the public's rising dissatisfaction with the war. Meehan, one of the first to propose a tiered exit strategy in January, when few of his Democratic colleagues dared wade into the controversial debate, pointed to “enormous progress.” “Talking about this issue, having hearings on this issue, getting more Americans to focus on it will result in a change of policy,” Meehan told The Sun. “The generals and commanders on the field in Iraq overwhelmingly are saying we need less in terms of occupation and more Iraqis up front, and that's the only strategy I think that will result in getting American troops back home.”

To: KLP who wrote (171570)	9/30/2005 5:11:47 PM
From: cnyndwllr	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Karen, I give up on trying to engage you on the important issues regarding Iraq. Every time we start to engage and I ask you to answer a tough question it seems you move to another question. In answer to your last post, however, you're right, one soldier's life sacrificed in an unjust or futile effort is one life too many. And "volunteer" doesn't change that at all. It doesn't matter if it's the life of someone who was patriotic enough, poor enough or adventurous enough to volunteer because implicit in the contract we have with our soldiers is that we will not send them to kill and die for unjust or undoable causes. We owe them that and we owe that to their children, spouses, mothers, fathers, family and friends. With regard to why the "left" never talks about terrorists or has suggestions on how to deal with them, you're wrong. I don't know who you consider the "left" but there have been many discussions of alternatives among those opposed to our current "strategy" of using the war in Iraq to deal with the dangers of terrorism. Those discussions generally address the long term solutions in terms of law enforcement, politics and, to a much lesser extent than Bush, military power. I think you must have dismissed their ideas based on dismissive comments about weak-kneed responses from the left, but you'll notice that more and more we're hearing in Iraq itself that there is NO military solution to the terrorist/insurgent problem there. Our most senior military leaders now say that the only workable solution must be found in a political solution. They're right and that's smart. The use of conventional military power to effect change in another country's culture or to "capture and kill" terrorists is tiny. Those are political and law enforcement matters and the use of a slow and crushing club to try to kill that mosquito on your knee is just silly, no matter what you felt and were told when you were scared angry after 9/11. It's time for cooler, brighter heads to prevail. I wish someone would make a bumper sticker that said; "Proud to be a THINKING American." I'd sport THAT sticker. Ed

To: KLP who wrote (171570)	9/30/2005 10:47:07 PM
From: jttmab	Respond to of 281500

We were in VN for several years, and 55,000+ of our military was killed. 1960-1973 is "several years"? Wouldn't "over a decade" be more appropriate? How about "nearly 15 years"? Maybe we could agree on 13 years? We have been in Iraq for 2 1/2 years, and not quite 2,000 have been killed. 1960-1963, we topped off at 15,000 advisors in South Vietnam. I suspect our death rate Iraq is well ahead of Vietnam for the same corresponding period. As much as I HATE it that even one has been killed, because they volunteered, and I believe are the "best of the best", I thik it would be even worse if we leave before the Iraqi's can handle the job there. If they were drafted you wouldn't mind so much? ... The "best of the best" has been trading pictures of dead Iraqis for hardcore porn. Are you hoping for a date with one of these "best of the best"? Maybe when they retire from the military they can work with children. I notice that you don't mention any Iraqis dying. I think that's more than a subtle indication of your belief that "one" American death is more important than any number of dead Iraqis. Why is it the left NEVER talks about the terrorists who are in Iraq, and other places in the Middle East, and has any kind of suggestions as to how to deal with them? Golly Karen...have you forgotten the left mentioning that nearly all the 9/11 terrorists were from SAUDI ARABIA? Have you forgotten the left mentioning that Osama Bin Laden was from SAUDI ARABIA? Have you forgotten the left mentioning that the SAUDI ROYAL FAMILY continues to fund terrorism? Have you forgotten the left mentioning the schools in SAUDI ARABIA are teaching SAUDIS to hate Americans? Maybe you forgot that when you saw Bush walking through the flower garden holding hands of the SAUDI prince. Do you think there is the smallest chance that you might have forgotten what the left has said about dealing with terrorism? jttmab