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: stockman_scott who wrote (208140)	11/10/2006 9:20:44 AM
From: Wharf Rat	Respond to of 281500

My hero.

To: stockman_scott who wrote (208140)	11/10/2006 12:50:21 PM
From: geode00	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

OK, what is the worst case scenario if the US were to leave within 6 weeks lock, stock, barrel. PERIOD. Leave and not provide a penny of money for anything, not provide any kind of contingency force in the north or in Kuwait, not provide any kind of provision for UN peace keepers or Muslim forces (neither of which has ever expressed the desire or the ability to go in and clean up Bush's mess anyway). What is the worst case scenario? Civil war (already there) Insurgency (already there) Iraqis hate the US (already there plus the Shiites want us gone anyway so it's just the Sunnis who are shooting at us anyway) Brutal strong man emerges (which is already a scenario for the Bushies who just want to pick the man) So we see the worst case scenario, figure out where we can mitigate the damage and then proceed. There is no good out when the country is in a shambles and hundreds and thousands are dead and there is no central government. The key is to prevent as much damage from here on out as possible. So we get the heck out and bribe (from afar) everyone in Iraq: send cash, not people to war. It's still far cheaper -- anything else is far cheaper -- than this whack-a-mole, incompetent operation over there. Saddam was able to quell insurgency and civil war in Iraq using just what he had on hand so it can certainly be done by Iraqis again. Plus this has the added advantage of destroying all ExxonMobil/Bushies dreams of permanent oil bases in the country. As for those who say it's bad for the US to admit defeat, then HAVE A DRAFT, send in 150K-200K forces and get it done in the next year. It takes, what, 6 weeks to get the draft up and running, 4 months (?) to get people trained up so, in 6 months there could be a double (or more) of the forces in Iraq. Is this significantly different than stretching out this meat grinder of a war for a decade? Get it done, fix it and don't ever do it again.

To: stockman_scott who wrote (208140)	11/11/2006 7:56:38 PM
From: Bilow	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

Hi stockman_scott; Re leaving Iraq. I'd love for us to get out early, but I don't see the political will for it. Instead, I think that they have to make some "changes", and try again for another couple years. The next president will be lucky if we're out of Iraq before January 2008. Gosh, it looks to me like some of the war heads are no longer talking war. Maybe they've realized that the American people just won't stand for it. Well, I can hope. -- Carl