"George Bush, Meet Reality"
President's speech on Iraq strategy conjures a dreamworld
Iraqis want the U.S. out.
(bonus link)
"America will not run in the face of car bombers and assassins so long as I am your commander-in-chief," says Bush, the man who squirmed his way out of Vietnam duty.AGAIN:
All of this seems removed from reality, in which the U.S. can’t guarantee security and its allies in the Iraqi military are commonly viewed as U.S. puppets sent out to conduct torture. The Iraqis want the U.S. out.
Most of all, Bush himself and his strategy statement omit oil, a major reason--if not the only reason--for invading Iraq to begin with. And here the U.S. is on the verge of executing a total takeover of the once nationalized industry, turning it instead into a privatized business to be run by the big international companies--descendants of the original oil companies that colonized Iraq to begin with.
Iraqis want the U.S. out.
(bonus link)
posted by SheaNC at 1:50 AM
8 Comments:
The Iraqis want the U.S. out of Iraq, they just want it accomplished in the same way Bush is advocating:
The participants in Cairo agreed on ``calling for the withdrawal of foreign troops according to a timetable, through putting in place an immediate national program to rebuild the armed forces ... control the borders and the security situation'' and end terror attacks.
They want a timetable linked to the rebuilding of their national forces, control of the border, increased security, and an end to terror attacks. How is that different then what Bush is calling for?
Bush has said, publicly, that ever since the hand over of sovereignty to the Iraqi people, U.S. troops remain in Iraq at the pleasure of the Iraqi government. Our troops would pack up and leave tomorrow if the Iraqi government said so, if they wanted us out so badly all they'd have to do is say "please leave now."
Instead, they're articulating a plan identical to Bush's.
Did you listen to Bush's speech, man? Here's the condensed version regarding timetables:
"Timetables Bad! Timetables Bad! Timetables Bad! No No No on Timetables!" - George Bush
Timetables based on specific dates are bad. They tell the enemy how long they have to hold out before respite. They allow the enemy to plan and coordinate attacks for the dates troops are scheduled to be leaving, or the day after.
Timetables based on operational goals are much better. Rather than saying, "we'll pull 1/2 the troops out on May 15, 2006", say "we will pull out troops as Iraqi forces are equipped, trained, and able to operate without support from U.S. troops." That tells the enemy that even though U.S. troops are leaving, they leave behind Iraqi troops fully capable of taking the reins.
I just think that's a better plan than to mark a date on calendar.
Iraqis want to control their own country. Do you think for a moment that those Iraqis freed from Hussein's tyrany want America to leave before their own military and police forces are prepared to secure the peace? Of course not.
Sean: The Guardian UK story says the Iraqis want us out, and they want a timetable for withdrawal. Bush said, "No war has ever been won on a timetable - and neither will this one... these decisions about troop levels will be driven by the conditions on the ground in Iraq and the good judgment of our commanders, not by artificial timetables.." The two are obviously at odds. Of course, our flip-floppper-in-chief was opposed to withdrawal before he was for it, so it is hard to keep score.
Kevin: Yes, I do believe the Iraqis want us out of the country. The battle rages because we invaded their country. What would you do if a powerful enemy waged a military invasion and occupation of your country? Just accept it? Besides, if Iraq was really the awsome threat the repukes would have us believe, then surely they have the wherewithall to handle their own security.
But you know what? This discussion is moot and hypothetical, because the purpose for our invasion involves permanent military presence in the middle east, forever, period. The neocons have no intention of leaving. Any talk of doing so is just more smoke-and-mirrors public relations pandering by them.
If the libs took over D.C. and Canadian military forces invaded the U.S. to liberate us conservatives, I would have no problem with it ;) I would also want the Canadians to stay long enough for us to build up our military forces to keep the libs down permanently. Same logic, equally just result.
Heck, I might even welcome the French.
I did read the Guardian article, Shea, that's where I pulled the quote. The Iraqis want a timetable based on specific action items - exactly what Bush is saying.
Er ... can I get a little help with that reference, Gotham?
Post a Comment
<< Home