An Intreasting Email @ Iraq

[mrssalvo]

Date: 6/7/2005 12:15:42 PM
Author: widget
We Americans really are something else, aren''t we?


We impeach Clinton for lying about sexual dalliances.


We force the resignation of Nixon for lying to cover up the crazy antics of his underlings...


And what do we do to Bush for lying in order to invade a sovereign country?



We reelect him!

go figure...

Bush was told by our intelligence that there WERE weapons there. He believed them, after 9/11 he couldn''t take a chance they might be false. Congress believed them too.

I just don''t view it as a LIE. If my kids spend the afternoon at our neighbors and come home and tell me they have ice cream in their freezer, i believe them. i decide I want to go and get some ice cream, so I tell my hubby there is icecream in our neighbors freezer. we decide to invade in order to get the ice cream. when we get there, no ice cream. did I lie to my husband? My kids, whom I trust, told me it was there and I believed them and acted on it. I believe Bush got bad intelligence but didn''t intentionally LIE. If it is ever proven then I will be very

i used to be a elementary school teacher, best analogy i could come up with quicky

 

[AGBF]

Date: 6/7/2005 4:22:52 PM
Author: mrssalvo
i used to be a elementary school teacher, best analogy i could come up with quicky

I'll never knock a clear analogy! The ice cream analogy you offered is good and clear. I do not know that it is a good analogy for the *TRUE* situation, but it is a good analogy for the one President Bush has told us is true.


Deborah

 

[MINE!!]

Date: 6/7/2005 4:30:37 PM
Author: AGBF

Date: 6/7/2005 4:22:52 PM
Author: mrssalvo
i used to be a elementary school teacher, best analogy i could come up with quicky

I''ll never knock a clear analogy! The ice cream analogy you offered is good and clear. I do not know that it is a good analogy for the *TRUE* situation, but it is a good analogy for the one President Bush has told us is true.


Deborah

But the one thing that we must all remember is that the MAJORITY of people in the US really believed that there was ice cream in the freezer. It is very easy to wag ones finger when something happens that they don''t agree with. There is a difference between wagging the finger and saying.. ok... let''s figure out what is going to be done now.. tsk tsk.. Besides, one of things that people are forgetting to mention is the fact that we were talking to a man (saddam) who repeatedly broke a resolution and would not let inspectors in to ''look'' for WMD. I don''t know about you, but if there is cause to beleive that someone next door has a meth lab in their home and they can blow away our entire neighborhood, and after refusing to voluntarly, under order, let the police search, then you can bet your buckles that I would want someone to force their way in to find out what that man is cookin. Whether it be meth or mashed potatos..

I think I am hungrey now.

 

[widget]

Date: 6/7/2005 4:22:52 PM
Author: mrssalvo

Bush got bad intelligence but didn''t intentionally LIE. If it is ever proven then I will be very

I think he chose to "believe" the intelligence that best suited his purposes. Many experts (American and foreign) seriously questioned the existance of WMDs, and advised that Iraq''s threat to the international community was vastly overrated.

I suppose one could argue that "believing what you want to believe" and acting on it is not lying...but it sure is lousy statesmanship! (can you get impeached for that?)

And IF it wasn''t a lie in the beginning, to me it became one when he changed his tune mid-stream and started carrying on about "freeing the Iraqi people".

 

[Logan Sapphire]

I''m not at liberty to say more (and neither do I know the classified particulars) but at least one intelligence agency had solid indicators there were WMD in Iraq.

 

[widget]

Hey, Steve....this will teach me to dip into online politics!

I'm sort of a "big picture" type of gal. I think we're ALL going to have to wait fifty years or so to get some historical perspective to finally determine whether Bush is a hero or a goat.
Do you agree with me on that, at least?

In the meantime, and because I won't live fifty years (I'm old), I must stay with my feelings today: Bush has not made the world a safer place since 9/11...I think he's made it a whole lot scarier.

I vote for "goat".

widget

 

[rubydick]

Date: 6/4/2005 5:47:15 PM
Author:Matatora
Did you know...

Did you know that in the month of April 2005, there were 69 suicide attacks, more than all of 2004? Did you know that May 2005 saw a "we-can-now-see-the-light-at-the-end-of-the-tunnel" 90 suicide attacks?

Only those in denial can believe that things are going well in Iraq. Of course, only the truly delusional could also have bought into the Iraq adventure in the first place.

While I'm at it, I should comment on the remark by Steve about how we can't compare Iraq to Vietnam. If you're gonna run numbers, you gotta compare more than simple combat deaths. Remember the whacko statement by one of Dubya's minions that it was more dangerous driving in California than being a soldier in Iraq?

Dude, seriously, there are tens of millions of people in California. There's only 130,000 US troops in Iraq. When it came to math skills the man that made that statement was a textbook example of Dubya's "child left behind."

Steve, I love ya man, but no, you cannot have my last Bud Light, and yes, there is probably (still) a Community College near you that teaches statistical analysis. I'm probably as ignorant as you on the subject, but when I use numbers I do try to think things through with my admittedly twisted logic. And while we're at it, how come you didn't look me up in either Tucson or Vegas. I know we'd have a lot of fun. I can look beyond politics. Some of my best friends voted for Dubya (and I'm not making that up).

Anyway, back to the remedial math class. The US involvement in SE Asia (Laos, Vietnam, Cambodia, in order of involvement) covered a period of close to twenty years. At the peak, it involved over a half-million US troops in various theaters. The current Iraq war has been going just two years. Give it time, baby, give it time.

And don't forget to figure into your calculations the body armor that US troops now wear. Fewer are dying outright, but if you do the math with the above in mind, I think you'll find that Iraq is not that different from Vietnam. Factoring in the troop levels, the length of the current engagement, the degree of engagement with the enemy, the improvements in medevacs and body armor, etc. I suspect you will find that with Iraq we are right back in Nam.

Moving on, the 12,000 dead Iraqis mentioned by AGBF referred just to "insurgents." The civilian death toll is so much higher, not to mention the generations of both Iraqis and US soldiers that will be dealing with the effects of depleted uranium. Remember Agent Orange? Yes indeed, this is another Vietnam.

If people truly believe that Iraq is getting better, then let me politely suggest a simple test of your political belief. Let's call it the 2005 Witch Test. Don't just talk to people who have talked to people who have been there. Go there yourself. Personally examine all those new schools, those universities, that Iraqi navy, that police academy. Perhaps you'd can even interview some of the prospective cadets as they wait in line to sign up. And when you read a story in the US press out of Iraq, ask yourself if the journalist just phoned it in after attending the daily US military briefing (termed the 'five-o-clock follies' in Vietnam), or if they actually ventured outside the Green Zone. From what I've read, few journalists today dare to venture outside of the Green Zone, so dangerous has this "improving daily" Iraq become.

Even better, if you think this is such a noble venture, then if you have children of the proper age, encourage them to enlist. Come Barb, come Jenna, come all the children of those who raised their hands in Congress to support this war (included John Kerry's). The next time I see these kids on TV, the next time I see the Bush twins, the next time I see Mary Cheney et. al, I sure hope it's in uniform, with Iraq campaign pins, not those from the 2004 election.

While I've generally stopped providing links to my posts, since those that need to read them don't, I will give you just one, a recent interview with Sy Hersh, the man who helped break the My Lai story and also that of Abu Ghraib. He talks about both in an interview that literally left me in tears as I read it.

Seymour Hersh: "Iraq Moving Towards Open Civil War"

I feel like saying "put up or shut up." Looking at some of these posts, I should say that. But I won't. I'm no longer a child. People form opinions for a variety of reasons; facts are important, but emotions even more so.

Like Vietnam, it will probably take a decade or two before the "hearts and minds" of most Americans can admit the mistake, before the heart becomes subservient to the mind. Some never will. Some will continue to argue that America could have won in Vietnam, and when the last Amercian has left Iraq, there will also be those arguing that America could have "won" there, too, but for the "leftists" and the "liberal media." I won't bother to mention that river in Egypt.

Nowadays, when I think about Iraq, I'm beyond anger, beyond words. I just feel sad, very very sad.

 

[AGBF]

Ok, here''s my list:

Kennedy: Gorgeous and sexy, but a lousy husband.

Johnson: Crass; evil in Vietnam; good social programs in the US

Nixon: Truly a disgrace. Phoney (the Checkers speech!). Anti-semitic.

Ford: A nice guy with a great, down-to-earth wife, a pretty daughter and (I think) a Golden Retriever. Too good a guy to be President.

Carter: Brilliant. Kind. Good. I wish I could have married him. A man of principle.

Reagan: Charming. Bright compared to the current President. Hung with a rich crowd and
voted for their benefit.

Bush 1: Intelligent, despite the current apple from his tree.

Clinton: No values to speak of. Disgracefully cut welfare to please the moderates. Better as an ex-President.

Bush 2: Words fail me. How could we?

Deborah

 

[AGBF]

Uh oh! Richard is back and I was making a silly list. If I''d known he was back in town I wouldn''t have gotten silly with Steve! Better go read his (no doubt serious and impressive) posting that probably doesn''t mention Kennedy being sexy. Bad Deb! Bad, bad Deb! (Hi, Richard!)

 

[AGBF]

Date: 6/7/2005 8:42:30 PM
Seymour Hersh: 'Iraq Moving Towards Open Civil War'

Thanks for the link, Dick. I have always admired Seymour Hersh and, after having read this, admire him even more. I completely believe the stories that he cannot prove about further abuse in Abu Ghraib. I also believe that the United States is making use of Saddam Hussein's enforcers (the Mukhabarat), something about which I had not read because I have been reading far too much of the mainstream press. I have been concerned about Guantanamo for a long time. It is all very frightening. If one is stuck in Abu Ghraib or Guantanamo, he has all the rights of a prisoner without a name in a cell without a number in Pinochet's Chile.

Deborah

 

[MINE!!]

Date: 6/7/2005 9:17:24 PM
Author: AGBF

Date: 6/7/2005 8:42:30 PM

Seymour Hersh: ''Iraq Moving Towards Open Civil War''

Thanks for the link, Dick. I have always admired Seymour Hersh and, after having read this, admire him even more. I completely believe the stories that he cannot prove about further abuse in Abu Ghraib. I also believe that the United States is making use of Saddam Hussein''s enforcers (the Mukhabarat), something about which I had not read because I have been reading far too much of the mainstream press. I have been concerned about Guantanamo for a long time. It is all very frightening. If one is stuck in Abu Ghraib or Guantanamo, he has all the rights of a prisoner without a name in a cell without a number in Pinochet''s Chile.


Deborah

There in lies the problem.... "I believe that the United States... something about which I had not read.. (before this article)" You can''t read 1 article by someone who entices your senses and think that his word is the ultimate one. This is where the danger liles.. in ''believing'' only after this one... because it already agrees with your opinion and hence makes you feel empowered and justified... careful!

 

[movie zombie]

richard, thank you once again for being so eloquent when i can merely come out with terse statements.

i am lucky to live in an area where i can hear democracy now each and every day on the radio...and there are many online alternative news sources as well.

i''m afraid that iraq will make vietnam look like a cakewalk. i, too, feel very very sad.

i encourage those who support this war to make sure their own children and grandchildren enlist, or even enlist themelves.....putting one''s actions where their words are so to speak. it might be a hardship for your family but no more so than for the reservists and regular troops stationed there. perhaps then we can avoid the draft which will be unavoidable at this rate.

i also encourage this war''s supporters to become active within their own community and with the VA hospitals to make sure that there are enough volunteers to help out as staff is cut and facilities closed. please get involved in your own community so that the returning vets will have housing, medical, and employment support.

to those currently in the military, please know that i respect you but do wish you had not been ordered to go. we are a deeply divided nation regarding this ''war'' but one thing i hope does unite us and that is our desire that you come home safely.

peace, movie zombie

 

[MINE!!]

Date: 6/8/2005 12:06:27 AM
Author: movie zombie
richard, thank you once again for being so eloquent when i can merely come out with terse statements.


i am lucky to live in an area where i can hear democracy now each and every day on the radio...and there are many online alternative news sources as well.


i''m afraid that iraq will make vietnam look like a cakewalk. i, too, feel very very sad.


i encourage those who support this war to make sure their own children and grandchildren enlist, or even enlist themelves.....putting one''s actions where their words are so to speak. it might be a hardship for your family but no more so than for the reservists and regular troops stationed there. perhaps then we can avoid the draft which will be unavoidable at this rate.


i also encourage this war''s supporters to become active within their own community and with the VA hospitals to make sure that there are enough volunteers to help out as staff is cut and facilities closed. please get involved in your own community so that the returning vets will have housing, medical, and employment support.


to those currently in the military, please know that i respect you but do wish you had not been ordered to go. we are a deeply divided nation regarding this ''war'' but one thing i hope does unite us and that is our desire that you come home safely.


peace, movie zombie

Not to worry.. I think that this is the funny idea here.. "Make sure that your children and grandchildren enlist..." Just in case people have not caught it.. it is OUR children and grandchildren who are there putting their butts on the line, while people here are poo pooing in their posh little homes and going out to ''lunch.''

My brother was a Marine. My father was in Vietnam, My grandfather was in the Korean War and my other grandfather was in WWII. My X-husband was Navy. And since my X was Navy, I could not join when I graduated from high school. And if my children want to sign up one day, knowing the danger and knowing that they have a PROUD heritage of people in their family that actually put their a$$es out in the breeze instead of warming their hands on a ket board, then by God, I will kiss them and tell them I am proud then.

Those statements are BLATANT disrespect for those that are over there. Just because you are not signing up.. doesn''t mean that that everyone else is too "scared" to do so as well.

i also encourage this war''s supporters to become active within their own community and with the VA hospitals to make sure that there are enough volunteers to help out as staff is cut and facilities closed. please get involved in your own community so that the returning vets will have housing, medical, and employment support.

You want to compare this to Vietnam? Ok, well let''s hope these fair weather.. anti-war people now do not follow the same ''regime'' as they did when we welcomed home our vets from Vietnam.

 

[movie zombie]

sorry, Mine, but you''re off base.

my dad is an ex-marine from WWII who survived every major campaign in the south pacific. he walked in blood on those beaches and when finally wounded, saw his two best friends killed rescuing him. he survived to return home weighing less than 90 pounds to a family that didn''t recognize him and thought he was dead. this man does not support this war and this man does volunteer at the local VA. he has given me his dress uniform hat with the specific instructions to wear it at any demonstrations i might participate in.

you are proud of your family military history. i am equally proud of my father;s military history.

yes, the bush, cheney, rumsfelds et al. are sitting at home in their plush houses and having lunch. why aren''t their children on the line in the field? where was bush, cheney, and rumsfield during vietnam? was it not cheney who said he had other things to do? and again these same families are not paying the ultimate price nor making the ultimate sacrifice for their country.

side note: i had an interesting conversation with a young man right after the war broke out. he was gung ho let''s go kill them. talked with him a while and then i asked him that given how strongly he feels about it, why he hadn''t enlisted and gone over there. he was taken aback. he then said he wanted to be an airforce mechanic but ''they'' wouldn''t let him. my response was that given how strongly he felt, it would seem that it wouldn''t matter what he did as long as he was supporting a cause he believed in. we talked some more. he finally said ''you know, maybe you people can make a difference. i hope so.'' i asked him his name and told him mine and then said ''you''ve given me hope to continue on''.

please reread my previous post. you will find that i said and i quote

"to those currently in the military, please know that i respect you but do wish you had not been ordered to go. we are a deeply divided nation regarding this ''war'' but one thing i hope does unite us and that is our desire that you come home safely. "

please explain the BLATANT disrespect in that statement.

if you have followed any of the political threads i''ve posted in, you will note that i''ve always been supportive of veterans. i have yet to talk to anyone against this particular war that isn''t concerned that this administration is short changing our veterans.

again, i encourage you and others to join my parents as volunteers at your nearest VA facility. they won''t care that you support this war and they don''t. they will, however, appreciate your assisting veterans.

btw, Mine, you may want to check out how prior administrations have dealt with veterans and their needs for housing, employment, etc. it is an interesting piece of US history that it was in washington dc that MacArthur led a horseback charge and fired upon WWI vets [ike was against it] because said WWI vets were camped out to try and get long promised benefits. so don''t blame the anti-war movement for mistreatment of vets...it starts in the presidential office and runs throughout congress.

peace, movie zombie

 

[AGBF]

Date: 6/8/2005 12:04:02 AM
Author: MINE!!
You can't read 1 article by someone who entices your senses and think that his word is the ultimate one. This is where the danger liles.. in 'believing' only after this one... because it already agrees with your opinion and hence makes you feel empowered and justified... careful!

You believe I read only this one article about the war in Iraq?

Deborah

 

[AGBF]

Date: 6/8/2005 9:06:13 AM
Author: Feydakin
Deb, real real fast -

Thanks for the link, Dick. I have always admired Seymour Hersh and, after having read this, admire him even more. I completely believe the stories that he cannot prove about further abuse in Abu Ghraib. I also believe that the United States is making use of Saddam Hussein's enforcers (the Mukhabarat), something about which I had not read because I have been reading far too much of the mainstream press. I have been concerned about Guantanamo for a long time. It is all very frightening. If one is stuck in Abu Ghraib or Guantanamo, he has all the rights of a prisoner without a name in a cell without a number in Pinochet's Chile.

I bolded part of your comment.. If I said the same thing about something positive in any war, how would you react??

I honestly don't know how I would react. I know how *YOU* reacted. This, that you wrote above to Richard, appeared to be aimed at me:

"Also, I do read your links.. I just don't agree with most of them, unlike others who seem to see god in every one of your posts since they reenforce their beliefs.."

I find Seymour Hersh, who has a sterling reputation, to be credible. I do not find all liberals to be credible even if what they are saying "reinforces (my) beliefs". If you want to believe I find all liberals credible, who am I to stop you? Mine also thinks I am unable to think critically, that I read one article and make up my mind. Should I be publishing lists of what I read daily like a student completing an assignment in civics class? Would you two then give me an "A" because I proved I had done my reading homework? Let's put it this way: I guess I will have to live with your low opinion of my intellectual capacities.

Deb

 

[movie zombie]

steve, no, i''m not trying to make anyone out to be a bigot re the military nor trying to be superior. again, what part of united to support our vets do you not understand?!

i''m really tired of hearing support for this war and then finding out that the person hasn''t enlisted, doesn''t do any work to help vets, etc. i''m so tired of it in fact that i figure that if those that support the war don''t care enough to help returning vets, then why should i? after all i''m merely a liberal. ok, so i''m tired....

so, steve, don''t take it personal when i invite war supporters to support their belief with action. it wasn''t meant at anyone personally. it was the rhetorical ''you'' with the hopes that if someone who reads this thread hasn''t thought about the issue more carefully, then perhaps they will. and maybe just maybe our vets will get the services they deserve when they return.

peace, movie zombie

 

[movie zombie]

this refers to some issues not being discussed as part of this thread but most of it is about iraq. the last paragraph is particularly worth reading.

peace, movie zombie
======

Poll Finds Dimmer View of Iraq War
52% Say U.S. Has Not Become Safer
By Dana Milbank and Claudia Deane
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, June 8, 2005; A01

For the first time since the war in Iraq began, more than half of the American public believes the fight there has not made the United States safer, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll.

While the focus in Washington has shifted from the Iraq conflict to Social Security and other domestic matters, the survey found that Americans continue to rank Iraq second only to the economy in importance -- and that many are losing patience with the enterprise.

Nearly three-quarters of Americans say the number of casualties in Iraq is unacceptable, while two-thirds say the U.S. military there is bogged down and nearly six in 10 say the war was not worth fighting -- in all three cases matching or exceeding the highest levels of pessimism yet recorded. More than four in 10 believe the U.S. presence in Iraq is becoming analogous to the experience in Vietnam.

Perhaps most ominous for President Bush, 52 percent said war in Iraq has not contributed to the long-term security of the United States, while 47 percent said it has. It was the first time a majority of Americans disagreed with the central notion Bush has offered to build support for war: that the fight there will make Americans safer from terrorists at home. In late 2003, 62 percent thought the Iraq war aided U.S. security, and three months ago 52 percent thought so.

Overall, more than half -- 52 percent -- disapprove of how Bush is handling his job, the highest of his presidency. A somewhat larger majority -- 56 percent -- disapproved of Republicans in Congress, and an identical proportion disapproved of Democrats.

There were signs, however, that Bush and Republicans in Congress were receiving more of the blame for the recent standoffs over such issues as Bush''s judicial nominees and Social Security. Six in 10 respondents said Bush and GOP leaders are not making good progress on the nation''s problems; of those, 67 percent blamed the president and Republicans while 13 percent blamed congressional Democrats. For the first time, a majority, 55 percent, also said Bush has done more to divide the country than to unite it.

The surge in violence in Iraq since the new government took control -- 80 U.S. troops and more than 700 Iraqis died in May alone amid a rash of bombings -- has been accompanied by rising gloom about the overall fight against terrorists. By 50 percent to 49 percent, Americans approved of the way Bush is handling the campaign against terrorism, down from 56 percent approval in April, equaling the lowest rating he has earned on the issue that has consistently been his core strength with the public.

The dissipating support for the Iraq war is of potential military concern, because, as Marine Lt. Gen. James N. Mattis wrote in a note to his troops as he led them back into Iraq in February 2004, "our friendly strategic center of gravity is the will of the American people."

Some authorities on war and public opinion said the figures indicate that pessimism about the war in Iraq has reached a dangerous level. "It appears that Americans are coming to the realization that the war in Iraq is not being won and may well prove unwinnable," said retired Army Col. Andrew J. Bacevich, a professor at Boston University. "That conclusion bleeds over into a conviction that it may not have been necessary in the first place."

That is the view of poll respondent Margaret Boudreaux, 63, a casino worker living in Oakdale, La. "I don''t think it''s going well -- there''s too much killing," she said, worrying that the Iraq invasion could move more enemies to violence. "I think that some of the people, if they could, would get revenge for what we''ve done."

"You hear a lot about Saddam but nothing about Osama bin Laden. I don''t think he [Bush] does enough to deal with the problems of terrorism. . . . He''s done a lot of talking, but we haven''t seen real changes," said another poll respondent, Kathy Goyette, 54, a San Diego nurse. "People are getting through airport security with things that are unbelievable. . . . I don''t think he learned from 9/11."

While Bush has shelved his routine speeches about terrorism, and Congress has turned to domestic issues, fear of terrorism has receded from the public consciousness. Only 12 percent called it the nation''s top priority, behind the economy, Iraq, health care and Social Security.

The drop in Bush''s approval ratings on fighting terrorism came disproportionately from political independents. In March, 63 percent of independents approved of Bush''s job combating terrorism. By April this had fallen to 54 percent. And in this weekend''s survey, 40 percent gave him good marks.

The poll suggests that views on the Iraq war''s impact also remain highly partisan. Three in four Republicans said the Iraq invasion has boosted domestic security, while three in four Democrats said it has not. Political independents lean negative on the issue: About six in 10 said the war has not made Americans safer.

Overall, Bush''s 48 percent job approval rating was essentially unchanged from the 47 percent rating he received in a late-April poll. And there was growth in the proportion of people who said the economy was doing well: 44 percent, up from 37 percent in April.

But the public took a generally gloomy view of the White House and Congress. A plurality said Bush is doing worse in his second term than in his first, and 58 percent said he is not concentrating on the things that matter most to them -- the worst showing Bush has had in this measure in Post-ABC polls.

Congress fared no better. The proportion of the public disapproving of the legislative body was at its highest since late 1998, during President Bill Clinton''s impeachment. More people said they would look at a candidate other than their sitting representative than at any point in nearly eight years. For the first time since April 2001, Democrats (46 percent) were trusted more than Republicans (41 percent) to cope with the nation''s problems. But at the same time, favorability ratings for the Democratic Party, at 51 percent, tied their all-time low.

A total of 1,002 randomly selected adults were interviewed by telephone June 2 to 5 for this Post-ABC News poll. The margin of sampling error for the overall results is plus or minus three percentage points.

The poll also found disapproval or division when it came to Bush''s performance on several other recent, high-profile issues. One-third of those surveyed approved of the way Bush is handling federal funding of embryonic stem cell research, while 55 percent disapproved. The public was divided on the president''s handling of judicial nominations, with 46 percent approving and 44 percent disapproving. And half said they were opposed to drilling in Alaska''s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, a proposal backed by Bush and being debated in Congress.

But the most striking trend identified by the survey was the spreading impatience over Iraq and national security matters. While six in 10 were confident that the United States was not violating the rights of detainees at the military base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, Americans were more skeptical that the government is protecting the rights of U.S. citizens at home. Only half said Americans'' rights were being adequately protected, down from 69 percent in September 2003.

James Burk, a sociologist at Texas A&M University, said disillusionment about Iraq may have grown to the point that policymakers will have difficulty reversing it. "People all across the country know people in Iraq [so] there''s a direct connection to the war," he said. Burk sees a "disjuncture" between upbeat administration rhetoric and realities the public perceives. "These data suggest we will soon reach the point, if we haven''t yet reached the point, where that kind of language will seem too out of touch."

Polling director Richard Morin contributed to this report.

© 2005 The Washington Post Company

 

[widget]

Thanks for your post, Richard, and the link to Seymour Hersh''s talk. Sobering stuff. So, so sad.

And movie zombie: I''m from the Viet Nam Era...reading that poll was like deja vu all over again...

I have a question. While it may be "fun" to debate whether or not we should be there, the fact is...we are there. What''s the current thinking, left and right, on how to proceed? Continue as we are? What changes should be made in executing this "war" to make it end sooner?

Am I correct in assuming that almost everyone agrees that the one thing we can''t do is pack up our bags and go home tomorrow?

widget

 

[MINE!!]

Date: 6/8/2005 3:18:19 PM
Author: widget
Thanks for your post, Richard, and the link to Seymour Hersh''s talk. Sobering stuff. So, so sad.


And movie zombie: I''m from the Viet Nam Era...reading that poll was like deja vu all over again...

I have a question. While it may be ''fun'' to debate whether or not we should be there, the fact is...we are there. What''s the current thinking, left and right, on how to proceed? Continue as we are? What changes should be made in executing this ''war'' to make it end sooner?


Am I correct in assuming that almost everyone agrees that the one thing we can''t do is pack up our bags and go home tomorrow?


widget

Well said Widget.. for both sides of the ''arguement!''

 

[fire&ice]

Date: 6/8/2005 3:18:19 PM
Author: widget
I have a question. While it may be ''fun'' to debate whether or not we should be there, the fact is...we are there. What''s the current thinking, left and right, on how to proceed? Continue as we are? What changes should be made in executing this ''war'' to make it end sooner?

Am I correct in assuming that almost everyone agrees that the one thing we can''t do is pack up our bags and go home tomorrow?

widget

I like the way you think. One''s reality is one''s reality.

 

[rubydick]

Date: 6/8/2005 3:18:19 PM
Author: widget
Thanks for your post, Richard, and the link to Seymour Hersh's talk. Sobering stuff. So, so sad.

And movie zombie: I'm from the Viet Nam Era...reading that poll was like deja vu all over again...

I have a question. While it may be 'fun' to debate whether or not we should be there, the fact is...we are there. What's the current thinking, left and right, on how to proceed? Continue as we are? What changes should be made in executing this 'war' to make it end sooner?

Am I correct in assuming that almost everyone agrees that the one thing we can't do is pack up our bags and go home tomorrow?

widget

Widget,

A solution begins with admitting the mistakes that were made and then making sure there is accountability. The Downing Street memo is only the most obvious proof of the lies that were fed to us by our leaders. These were criminal acts of the highest order, and thus those responsible must be prosecuted. Remove them from office and prosecute them. It's that simple.

Simultaneously, we need to prove to the Arab world that we actually do more than pay lip service to democracy and the rule of law. Thus we should tell the Jordanians that we are willing to hand over Chalabbi. Let him face the music for his crimes just like Saddam.

And we must rescind the rules put in place by Paul Bremer that basically allow the looting of the Iraq economy by foreign corporations.

We should remove the restrictions on the press in Iraq, including Al Jazeera. Again, we need to do more than just talk the talk.

Regarding things like depleted uranium, we need to come clean. We were long aware of the dangers, we now need to 'fess up and start cleanin' up.

When ordinary Iraqis see that we are serious about helping, when Iraqis see proof that the ladder of law is level, that it applies equally to Americans, when Iraqis see Bush in the dock right alongside Saddam, the security situation will take care of itself and we can begin packing our bags and heading home. Until then, heaven help us.

 

[MINE!!]

 

[widget]

(deleted)

 

[widget]

I guess I just need to blather here...forgive me if all this sounds stupid...

Richard, I think your "simple solution scenario" is probably dead on right. But I also agree with with MINE!!!: "What do you dream in, black and white, or color?" It just won''t happen.

This is all so so depressing, and so sad.

I''ve almost been having flashbacks to my own misspent youth. I was at Berkeley in the ''60s. I was a rather sweet, sheltered, naive, middle class girl, who continued to believe, inspite of all the anti-war activity around me, that those nice well dressed men in Washington, who looked like my Dad, must be doing what is best for the country....and that the long-haired, crazily dressed , hippy protesters were just a bunch of unpatriotic troublemakers.

As you mentioned earlier, it took me a decade or two to finally figure out that those "crazy hippies" had been right all along.

I really can relate to all those who defend George Bush today...he seems to be a decent man who sincerely believes that what he''s doing, even if lies might be involved, is best for the country and the world.

But I truly believe that what he''s done and is doing is utterly wrong and profoundly evil....and that in a few decades, a vast majority of Americans will agree.

It is so disheartening. As I said earlier: deja vu all over again...

widget

 

[movie zombie]

amen, brother richard

i feel the same pain, sister widget.

it didn''t have to be this way. but it is.

so, yes, we get out. we admit our guilt, get out, pay reparations, and prosecute those that lied to set this into motion. it is the only way this country can reclaim its claim to honor democracy and freedom.

peace, movie zombie

 

[fire&ice]

I find it interesting that no one has mentioned the neo conservative point of view. In simplisict form - if you build it they will come. Iraq is a valuable piece of real estate in an incredibly hostile part of the world. These fundementalists are trained TO KILL. Specifically, JEWS, WESTERNERS AND CHRISTIANS - does anyone get the threat here? Does anyone know what these Mullah are teaching their eager pupils - the disinfrachiased youth? I don''t know about you - but I am each and every one of their targets. It is thought that if you put a democratic leaning government friendly to the west that suite could follow. And, a benefit of getting our bases OUT of Saudi Arabia.

When Wiget asked the thought provoking question - I thought finally some discussion.

Nope, admit wrong doing, pay reparations? Yep, great solution to a complex problem. While we are at it - who would we pay reparations to - Saddam? So, we just bow out and let the chips fall? Your "solutions" are the same digested thought thread as - I''m against the war.

 

[widget]

It is thought that if you put a democratic leaning government friendly to the west that suite could follow.

F&I...so...how do you think we''re doing so far? Are you pretty confident that Iraq will end up with a "democratic leaning government friendly to the west"?

Should we increase our troops to hurry the process along? Start to slowly withdraw now? Stay the present course?

widget

 

[AGBF]

Date: 6/9/2005 10:00:14 AM
Author: fire&ice
I find it interesting that no one has mentioned the neo conservative point of view. In simplisict form - if you build it they will come. Iraq is a valuable piece of real estate in an incredibly hostile part of the world. These fundementalists are trained TO KILL. Specifically, JEWS, WESTERNERS AND CHRISTIANS - does anyone get the threat here? Does anyone know what these Mullah are teaching their eager pupils - the disinfrachiased youth? I don''t know about you - but I am each and every one of their targets. It is thought that if you put a democratic leaning government friendly to the west that suite could follow. And, a benefit of getting our bases OUT of Saudi Arabia.

I am missing your point. Are you saying we invaded Iraq because we wanted it as a democracy (instead of a fundamentalist Islamic state) for diplomatic reasons? It wasn''t one. It was one of the few middle eastern countries *not* friendly to Islamic fundamentalists. Saudi Arabia *IS* an Islamic fundamentalist state, as is Iraq''s age-old enemy, Iran.

But I am NOT sure that is your point?

Deborah

 

[fire&ice]

Date: 6/9/2005 10:49:27 AM
Author: widget

It is thought that if you put a democratic leaning government friendly to the west that suite could follow.

F&I...so...how do you think we're doing so far? Are you pretty confident that Iraq will end up with a 'democratic leaning government friendly to the west'?

Should we increase our troops to hurry the process along? Start to slowly withdraw now? Stay the present course?

widget

Yes, I do think Iraq will end up w/o a dictatorship & I don't think the Mullah's are going to run the show. Democratic leaning - yes - one has to look no further than the vote.

Historically, Iraq has been the cradle of civilization. This is PERSIA. I don't have the article nor could I begin to dig it up - but I read they have the highest literacy rate & the most higher educated population in the middle east. Always has been. A people by their very nature primed for democracy of some form.

The suicide bombers are a most unfortunate happening. I don't think many people would argue that MANY are not Iraqi's. And, I agree as mentioned that the bombers are being paid - hence providing for their family. I KNOW this is the case in Israel. What to do? Keep hunting them down.

We made quite a few tactical errors. I believe we should NOT have disbanded the Iraqi army. Most were not loyal Saddam followers. I think we should have used the army to seal the borders immediately. Water under the dam at this point.

What to do at this point? Eliminate the threat of suicide bombers. How? I'm not battle savvy to begin to understand how to do that. Keep building/rebuilding the infrastrucure. Build military bases in Iraq LIKE WE HAVE IN OTHER COUNTRIES. Get out of Saudi - a big Bin Laden rally flag.

Was I for this war? A pre-emptive strike scared the sh*it out of me. But, on the other hand, I do believe a case can be made that Saddam INDEED threatened the US & Israel - directly. Since he was not in compliance, a case could be made that we were still at war. A case could also be made that the neo conservatives wanted to "finish" what they wanted to do back in the Gulf War I. I didn't want us to go. But, I have to admit that I wasn't unhappy when we did - much to my surprise.

Bottom line - we are there. And, while we can post articles this way or that way, only HISTORY will see whether this was a blunder/fiasco or the first step to providing peace in an area that I know of no one who wouldn't agree is dangerous. Really, they lop off Nick Berg's head to cheers?????

I think the Neo Conservatives have a point. Albeit a risky dangerous one - but a very valid point of argument.

BTW, I do not consider myself to be right or left. I just am not quick to see all the bad in something. If the NCon's were right, this could be a catalyst for stabilization in this area. I, for one, hope they are - since this is already our course.

Edited to add: History will be the only determination.