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 : Just the Facts, Ma'am: A Compendium of Liberal Fiction -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Elroy who wrote (54490)	1/19/2007 4:47:03 PM
From: Bill	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 90947

I agree with you about preferring 20K fewer troops. In fact, an orderly withdrawal can't come soon enough for me. However, I think the question, "Do you personally want the Iraq plan President Bush announced last week to succeed?" is straight-forward and succinct. Even though my preference differs from Bush's plan, I would LOVE to see his plan succeed. Frankly, I don't understand any American who would want Bush's plan, whatever it is, to fail. Yet, a large percentage of Democrats are rooting for failure. The poll is alarming and illuminating.

To: Elroy who wrote (54490)	1/19/2007 4:51:31 PM
From: Jim S	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 90947

Elroy, I can understand your reluctance to sign on to the additional troops. What I don't understand is how people can be so opposed without offering a better idea. NOT sending the additional troops equates to continuing as we are now, and most of us acknowledge that the status quo isn't working as we'd like it to. Pulling troops out now equates to admitting failure and condemning Iraq to chaos and even more senseless slaughter, not to mention another stain on America's image as a country that "can't stand the heat." I don't know if sending in another 2.5k troops will swing the pendulum in our favor or not; I do think that we have to allow the Prez to do what he can to bring the mess to some sort of favorable conclusion. To not TRY to solve the problem is craven. IMO, the main fear is not that the extra troops won't help -- the fear is that they WILL swing the fortunes of battle in our favor. Again, IMO, the Dems are terrified that Bush might actually settle the country and bring stability. If that were to happen, what would they use to tear a rift in this country for the next election?

To: Elroy who wrote (54490)	1/19/2007 4:52:58 PM
From: mph	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 90947

I have no idea what will work. What I do know is that, if asked, I would say yes to a question that asked me whether I personally hoped a given plan would succeed.

To: Elroy who wrote (54490)	1/19/2007 7:30:16 PM
From: Solon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 90947

"Personally I prefer actions that move more toward putting Iraqis more in charge of their country and Americans less in charge" Good. Because that is the purpose of the temporary addition of troops: to divide Baghdad into nine segments that may be secured and held. Currently, Iraqis are incapable of controlling the mayhem and taking "charge of their country". The action of a temporary troop addition appears to be the only workable means to achieve the end that you seek. Withdrawing troops at this time does not put the Iraqui government "in charge". It sets them up for complete and utter failure--and nullifies all the work and all the lives sacrificed. So the poll response seems utterly thoughtless to me...