16 Dec 2008. I agree USA needs to leave Iraq. Am just wondering, however, what the numbers will be soon thereafter regarding open season on Sunnis, maybe Kurds, maybe Iranians, on the few remaining Christians, etc. That is, I believe there will be a huge blood-letting, not that there has not already been one. Am wondering if the surviving Shiite majority will purge the Al Queda outsiders, Irnanians, etc.?
What say you guys/gals?
Posted by Robert in Austin Texas at December 16, 2008 10:45 AMWhen did we cross the 4,000 dead Americans in Iraq mark? Not one word from the media. I guess it is no longer that important, now that we have the Blago scandal to divert our attentions.
Posted by Judith at December 16, 2008 12:03 PMJudith, we crossed 4200 dead GI's in Bush's War back in November.
Posted by T2 at December 16, 2008 12:11 PMT2, I sure missed that. Don't know how, but I did.
Posted by Judith at December 16, 2008 03:44 PMBy using the same or similar "advisors", Obama is demonstrating that GWBush "could" have made different choices. That will deny Bush the needed cover to put his own decisions off on others.
If that is the thinking then the next several months could be interesting. Just sayin'
Posted by IntelVet at December 16, 2008 04:31 PM"A new Washington Post-ABC News poll offers strong incentive for President-elect Barack Obama to fulfill his campaign pledge to get us out of Iraq."
Obama never pledged to get the U.S. out of Iraq. He pledged to withdraw "combat troops" within 16 months. He also pledged to leave a "residual force" in Iraq for an undefined period to undertake a variety of "missions", some of which would certainly entail combat. He also pledged to keep troops "over the horizon" that were prepared to move into Iraq at any time.
In other words, what he pledged to do was reconfigure and rebrand the occupation, not get out of Iraq.
Posted by Shirin at December 16, 2008 06:28 PMIn other words, what he pledged to do was reconfigure and rebrand the occupation, not get out of Iraq.
Yeah, but I bet he will never get shoes thrown at him.
Shirin, It's not a perfect scenario but there's a ray of "hope".
Posted by Seven of Six at December 16, 2008 07:48 PMRegardless of what Obama said or meant, it is clear that the American people want our military out of Iraq, period. He can either do the will of the people, or he can ignore that will, and not withdraw troops. I know one damn thing, the cost of this War is draining our ability to meet the needs of this Country.
I was Listening to those who run food banks on NPR yesterday. I was outraged. We allow children to go hungry in this Country due to limited financial support, but military spending has no limit. Time to end this insanity and I mean now, not some future speculative date.
Posted by Judith at December 16, 2008 08:12 PMSoS, no, I am sorry. This really is an all or nothing type of thing, kind of like being pregnant. Either the United States is occupying Iraq or it is not occupying Iraq, and as long as there are United States troops in bases in Iraq, then Iraq will be a country under occupation. '
Extending the occupation is nothing more than a way of buying time - time that can be used to create a series of faits accomplis that will result in a permanent presence.
And then there is the little matter of the imperial citadel - laughably called an "embassy" - in Baghdad.
Once country A has committed an aggressive invasion and occupation of country B any "agreement" that country B is forced or induced to accept with country A is fruit of the poisonous tree of aggression, and therefore has no legitimacy. The so-called SOFA granting the United States three more years of occupation is fruit of the poisonous tree, and so illegitimate. Any other agreement with the U.S. on the part of the mainly U.S.-appointed "government" is also fruit of that poisonous tree and illegitimate. And the "embassy" in Baghdad is also fruit of the poisonous tree.
The only legitimate thing the U.S. can do is 1) get out completely, 2) pay reparations with no strings attached. After that if a legitimate Iraq government decides, independent of coercion, to establish diplomatic relations with the United States and allows the United States to establish a normal embassy in a location of the Iraqi government's choosing, well and good.
Posted by Shirin at December 16, 2008 09:29 PMJudith, among Obama's campaign pledges was a promise to increase the size and the budget of the military. This was one of several things that concerned me deeply enough that was unable to support him.
Posted by Shirin at December 16, 2008 09:34 PMPS SoS, to sum up what I was saying, a reconfigured and rebranded occupation is not a ray of hope, or a ray of "hope". In fact, in some respects it is the opposite. It is a sign of a change of tactics and an attempt to dig in for the long term.
Posted by Shirin at December 16, 2008 09:39 PMAfter 16 months we will not have any "combat forces." We will have what will be called "training forces." What they actually will be is "occupation forces."
Posted by Bill H at December 17, 2008 07:42 AMExactly, Bill H. Well and succinctly said.
If you change the size and shape of a box of shit, and put a label on it saying its a box of roses is it still a box of shit?
Posted by Shirin at December 17, 2008 01:44 PMonly if it is actually manure for fertilizing rose bushes.
Posted by the young Judith (tyj) at December 19, 2008 04:08 PMRegarding the British withdrawal, with the way things have been going for Gordon Brown this year, this will probably blow up in his face somehow.
Posted by Colin at December 20, 2008 11:49 PM