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 : Moderate Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Skywatcher who wrote (20397)	12/1/2005 2:03:42 AM
From: tsigprofit	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 20773

Those are good points, Chris. I think the proposal to look at a plan to withdraw sometime in 2006, before the November elections might be the most that we could hope for at this point - seeing the stubborness of Bush today on TV. I also heard commentators talking after that we will be there 5, 8, 10 years from now. If we do, we will lose tens of thousands, not 2100 like now. It is insanity to have no plan, except to stay the course. We went in for the wrong reasons, for lies, and now find ourselves in a situation that we cannot win in. We could escalate, and invade Syria and Iran, but we would need a few million not 150,000, and who knows where it would go from there. But why escalate? They hold the territory there, very difficult to win even if you are the US. Ask France in Algeria, or the US in Vietnam, or the Russians in Afghanistan. I really think and hope that the American public says enough, we are not going to put up with this until Bush leaves office in 2009, let alone another 5-10 years after that. Make a plan, transfer what we can in the next 6-12 months to the Iraqis, spend more to train them if we need to, and then get out. It's not our country, and not in our interest to stay forever there.