Political Discussion

[Minnymouth]

EXACTLY - We only get half or part of the facts.......... and that is only what they want us to read in the news.....

I enjoy listening too and reading the speeches of other Leaders of Nations.....see what "their goal" is, how they feel, etc..... They too are dying on the battlefields....

I often check online to see what I can find in England, France, Russia, etc and see what is going on, what the talk is, and what other countries reactions are to our behavior.

I find it all very interesting, especially the things that our news doesn't tell us......

The upcoming elections should be real interesting, to see what platform everyone takes and see if they can "walk the walk, and back the talk".........

[FilingOnMyOwn]

I just don't feel that this bk forum is the time or the place to be 'schooled' by the enemy. Its simply not a matter that is contructive to those who are already undergoing the most difficult time of their lives.

[lrprn]

I just don't feel that this bk forum is the time or the place to be 'schooled' by the enemy. Its simply not a matter that is contructive to those who are already undergoing the most difficult time of their lives.

FOMO, my son is active Army and is in Iraq at this very moment putting his life on the line so that each of us here can say what exactly we think without fear of reprisal. That's what this country was founded on - that everyone has a voice, no matter how repugnant you personally may find that voice.

Personally I want to be aware of every facet of this conflict so I understand it better and can make informed decisions as a citizen of this country. That includes being aware of what someone who hates Americans with every fiber of his being says about us. To pretend this hatred doesn't exist by forcibly keeping it out of sight, out of mind for fear of offending someone is the worst kind of censorship. My $.02.

[robivi3]

The issue with Iraq is China, is spending on Iraq detracting from our preparedness for the next major war which will be with China. They are already building a pipeline through Pakistan to help satisfy their thirst for oil. The Chinese Navy is already making inroads into the Sea of Japan and the Indian Ocean. They have bases in Panama and are supplying Venezuela and other Countires with assistance. They are spending heavy money in infrastructure in the Dominican Republic. And from one article I read are expressing heavy interest in that massive oil deposit in Canada which recent technological advancements have made accessible (8 X's the Saudi reserves).

It is not a matter of wanting war with them, it is simply going to happen. Pressure for resource is the cause of ALL wars in modern times.

Incidentally, they are applying our stolen stealth technology to cruise missiles. That war is unavoidable and will be awful in scope. All wars and battles are awful in actual fact.

and fifth columnists, hell we've opened the floodgates and neither party wants to stand up to that. In an invasion we wuill be shooting on this side of the fence first.

[HRx]

Rumsfeld memo admits Iraq strategy failing

POSTED: 7:53 p.m. EST, December 2, 2006




WASHINGTON (Reuters) -- Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld told President Bush before he resigned that the administration's strategy in Iraq was not working and he proposed changes, including possible troop reductions, The New York Times reported Saturday.

"In my view it is time for a major adjustment. Clearly, what U.S. forces are currently doing in Iraq is not working well enough or fast enough," Rumsfeld said in the classified memo, dated November 6. The Times posted a copy of the memo along with an article about it on its Web site.

The Pentagon confirmed the memo's authenticity but declined to comment further.

Rumsfeld, as a planner and defender of Bush's Iraq strategy since well before the U.S.-led invasion in March 2003, has been a leading public face of the war. His memo adds to the voices calling on Bush to make a significant shift in strategy as the White House, the Pentagon and a congressionally created study group consider changes.

Rumsfeld outlined several options in the memo for policy changes, including reductions in U.S. forces and bases in Iraq as well as a recasting of the U.S. mission and goals there, but he endorsed no specific recommendations. (Watch destruction caused by Baghdad car bombs )

He said, however, a multiparty conference modeled after the 1995 Dayton, Ohio, talks that led to a peace agreement ending the Bosnian war was a "less attractive" option, as was continuing on the current path.

The memo was dated a day before Democrats captured control of Congress in midterm elections amid voter dissatisfaction over the Iraq war, and two days before Rumsfeld's resignation was announced.

Rumsfeld's language was echoed in remarks Bush made on November 8 when he announced the resignation. Bush said it was time for a change in Iraq and Iraq policy was "not working well enough, fast enough."

Rumsfeld remains in office pending Senate confirmation of former CIA Director Robert Gates, nominated by Bush to succeed him.

The study group, co-chaired by former Secretary of State James Baker, is expected to urge a gradual withdrawal of U.S. combat troops when it makes its report Wednesday.

There are about 140,000 U.S. troops in Iraq, and more than 2,800 have been killed since the 2003 U.S.-led invasion that toppled Saddam Hussein.

'Want to hear all advice'
Bush has indicated he will look closely at -- but not necessarily heed -- the study group's findings and insisted he was not looking for a "graceful exit."

"I want to hear all advice before I make any decisions about adjustments to our strategy in Iraq," Bush said in his radio address Saturday.

Bush pledged to seek bipartisan consensus on the way forward in Iraq, and offered conciliatory words but no concessions to critics of his Iraq policy.

Among the proposals outlined in the Rumsfeld memo were positioning substantial U.S. forces near the Iranian and Syrian borders to reduce infiltration and reduce Iranian influence on the Iraqi government.

Many in Washington hope the bipartisan Baker commission will give Bush a way to start extricating the U.S. forces from what is increasingly being viewed as a sectarian civil war.

But State Department and National Security Council officials told foreign diplomats Wednesday not to expect any major policy shifts, no matter what the group recommends, The Washington Post reported, citing unidentified diplomats familiar with the private briefing.

The group's proposals -- said to include a U.S. shift away from a combat role over the next year or so, and a regional conference that could lead to talks with Iran and Syria -- will carry significant weight even if Bush chooses to ignore them.

Long accused by Democrats of ignoring their advice on Iraq, Bush in his radio address acknowledged violence there was unsettling for many Americans.

"Success in Iraq will require leaders in Washington -- Republicans and Democrats alike -- to come together and find greater consensus on the best path forward. So I will work with leaders in both parties to achieve this goal," he said.

Bush will hold talks Monday at the White House with a powerful party leader of Iraq's Shi'ite majority, Abdul Aziz al-Hakim.

[Spartan]

Words from the rumour mill.....

Work is underway to path way for a military coup, with the blessing of Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Syria. The US will maintain forces to prevent Iran, Turkey or Syria from grabbing a piece of Iraq. Other than that, the US will let the new ruling junta to revert back to the good ol tradition of strongman politics, ie, suspend democracy and kill anyone who don't obey. The new thinking is, we don't care what form of government, just as long as the US interests are protected.

[HRx]

The good news is the group of ignoramouses we have "running" the country will go down in history, admitting they were major screw-ups! lol There's nothing worse than leadership that won't take responsibility, admitt error, and make the necessary provisions to rectify mistakes made!!! Look at where this country now, because of this republican/political mess that was made over these last six years!

[robivi3]

These folks dismantled an existing Army and beauracracy and tried to reassemble a Country from tinkertoys. It all makes no sense, we even used the existing beauracracy in Germany and Japan to run the Countries we occupied. Did these folks have a plan? Do they actually think that taking the place was enough and that everyone would just "don't worry, be happy"? They had absolutely no plan. Did they think that they were just fighting an Army, were they looking at WW2 for an example? I mean damned, we may have dropped more ordinance on Iraq but there were no 1600 degree firestorms that encompassed whole square miles in Dresden, Berlin and frankfurt! That made the civilians compliant, something is out of whack with these folks, these people have no idea of reality.

Not trying to ramble, just trying to figure out what they were thinking when we invaded.

[HRx]

Not trying to ramble, just trying to figure out what they were thinking when we invaded.

Money, Oil, Revenge.....

[robivi3]

Securing the oil supply I would not have any problem with. All wars are for resource and they can be necessary. I just have a problem with the total lack of a plan. This has done more to "unsecure" the flow of oil to the US than leaving Saddam in power. The Chinese are making major inroads in the Middle East now through Arms and aid, namely through arms. Poor planning, it will come home to roost.

[HRx]

Securing the oil supply I would not have any problem with. All wars are for resource and they can be necessary. I just have a problem with the total lack of a plan. This has done more to "unsecure" the flow of oil to the US than leaving Saddam in power. The Chinese are making major inroads in the Middle East now through Arms and aid, namely through arms. Poor planning, it will come home to roost.

See that's where a lot of the debate lays. A bunch of old men making young men lose lives over "resources" (oil)! This doesn't make any sense! Especially when you consider the fact that the United States gets less that a 1/4 of it's oil from the Middle-East! The poor planning of the war is entirely another issue in itself.

War should be the politics of last resort. And when we go to war, we should have a purpose that our people understand and support.
- Colin Powell

[robivi3]

I think your Powell quote says it in a nutshell, but nearly a quarter is a huge amount of oil. Obviously Noriega and Saddam didn't fit the Bush plan so we oust them. I also wonder if we aren't securing oil to keep the third world stable but as there was obviously no beginning plan I doubt that.

When the Kelo vs. New London issue ruling came out I called the Whitehouse and asked for the Pres. to make a statement on the issue. I also told the operator that I would defend my property in the case of any similar siezure (to which she replied "are you serious?" I said yes), then gave my name and address figuring I'm to old to hide anymore. Seems like I might wake up to find troops on my doorstep! You don't wanna' play with the Bush boys!!!! They don't get mad and take the toys home, they turn the toys on you!!

[Credit Hater]

This country is on a downhill slide, has been since 911 (and even before). We'll never be what we once were. It makes me angry, sad, and frustrated to the point where I am just numb to everything now. I try to envision the future and I can't help feeling anything but hopelessness. The politics, the lawyers, terrorist issues, immigration issues, the public school system, the politically correct pundits......BAH! I want it to be 1985 again.....wish me luck

[robivi3]

CH, gotta agree, young and happy in 1984, it was a wonderful yesr.

[HRx]

I'm curious to see how the execution of Saddam effects U.S. Military "progress" in Iraq. Based on the look on his face before, and during his hanging...it look appeared as though Saddam wasn't afraid to die the way he did.