[rextilleon]

Its obvious that the Iraq adventure is not working out to well. So how does Bush get out of it while preserving his virility. Hypothetically, he could do the following:

Go to the UN and the Arab League and ask them to supervise a referendum in which the Iraqi people would be asked the following question: Do you want the US to remain in Iraq and to supply security and material assistance while your new government is being formed?

If the majority ask us to leave, (I sense that they will) then Bush can say that we rid Iraq of Hussein and the Iraqi people have democratically spoken. If for some strange reason they want us to stay, then maybe citizens of America can at least take solace in the fact that we are truely wanted, and that the sacrifices of our children are worth it.

I suspect that after we leave the country will continue along its chaotic path towards total anarchy. Eventually a fundamentalist fanatic would take control and put all the ladies in bourkas. Thats life in the Middle East.

[LANMaster]

Rex, there's no "getting out" if this until we have achieved certain specific goals.

This has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with getting elected or re-elected.

It has to do with doing the right thing. A concept that seems to be alien to some who discuss politics here. The "majority" means very little. Leadership is often making unpopular decisions based on information that the "majority" doesn't even know about.

Going to the UN and the Arab League are all fine ideas for a place to have constructive dialouge, but nothing more at this point.

Your prediction of anarchy is precisely why the idea of mass pull-out would be rediculous. Nobody said this was going to be a cake-walk. The US will have a presence in Iraq for a very long time, but sovereignty will be retuned to Iraq inb an un-precidentedly short period of time. The June 30th implementation of their TEMPORARY INTERIM government must not be delayed.

The sooner we get these people making their own decisions on basic infrastructural issues, the better it will be for everyone.

[bassetman]

Originally Posted by rextilleon

Its obvious that the Iraq adventure is not working out to well. So how does Bush get out of it while preserving his virility. Hypothetically, he could do the following:

Go to the UN and the Arab League and ask them to supervise a referendum in which the Iraqi people would be asked the following question: Do you want the US to remain in Iraq and to supply security and material assistance while your new government is being formed?

If the majority ask us to leave, (I sense that they will) then Bush can say that we rid Iraq of Hussein and the Iraqi people have democratically spoken. If for some strange reason they want us to stay, then maybe citizens of America can at least take solace in the fact that we are truely wanted, and that the sacrifices of our children are worth it.

I suspect that after we leave the country will continue along its chaotic path towards total anarchy. Eventually a fundamentalist fanatic would take control and put all the ladies in bourkas. Thats life in the Middle East.

Good idea rex. That would also dispell the myth that Bush is only there for the oil!

[plschwartz]

Say he was captured by aliens for the missing time after 9/11 and brainwashed into invading Iraq.
He was cured only after he saw Janets nipple

[bassetman]

Lol :d

[rextilleon]

I have always thought that this Iraqi escapade had more to do with virility, revenge, pleasing Dad, and a bizzare group of academicians who really believe that you can change the spots on a leopard. Not that I discount oil, but I think it plays a minor role. If you read the diplomatic and academic history of this adventure, you can't help but to conclude that the theorticians (Wolfowitz and Pearle), convinced Cheney and Bush that the best way to mitigate against terrorism, would be to get the Arab masses to think like us. They completely ignored what we know about human nature and what is required for democracies to function.

[rextilleon]

Lanmaster---what and who is Iraq? Do you really think that the administration has any idea of what they are dealing with? Why are we afraid to let the Iraqi people tell us what THEY want? Is it possible that what they want is a theocracy? Is it possible that they want is civil war? Is it possible that they want something that we dont want?

[oldie]

Originally Posted by rextilleon

Lanmaster---what and who is Iraq? Do you really think that the administration has any idea of what they are dealing with? Why are we afraid to let the Iraqi people tell us what THEY want? Is it possible that what they want is a theocracy? Is it possible that they want is civil war? Is it possible that they want something that we dont want?

[bassetman]

Originally Posted by rextilleon

Lanmaster---what and who is Iraq? Do you really think that the administration has any idea of what they are dealing with? Why are we afraid to let the Iraqi people tell us what THEY want? Is it possible that what they want is a theocracy? Is it possible that they want is civil war? Is it possible that they want something that we dont want?

[LANMaster]

At this point we are the occupying force in a time of war.
Whether you think the US should have taken on Iraq is 100% irrelivant.
We're there, we intend to win. Troops will still be in Iraq long after Bush is gone 5 years from now.

Iraq lost their freedom to choose over the past 15 years of the highly aggressive behavior of it's former leader.

I think the Bush Administration is fully aware of what they are dealing with .... now. I'm not so sure they knew what they were going to be dealing with going into Iraq. The over-confidence was definitely a mistake that I place squarely at the feet of this Administration.

Once the interim government is established, and free elections are held to elect a new Iraqi government, then I think we would only be staying there at the request of the duly elected government.

[bassetman]

At this point we are the occupying force in a time of war.

I keep forgetting that everytime I hear the Prez is still on vacation!

[Stoner]

Originally Posted by LANMaster

At this point we are the occupying force in a time of war.
Whether you think the US should have taken on Iraq is 100% irrelivant.
We're there, we intend to win. Troops will still be in Iraq long after Bush is gone 5 years from now.

Iraq lost their freedom to choose over the past 15 years of the highly aggressive behavior of it's former leader.

I think the Bush Administration is fully aware of what they are dealing with .... now. I'm not so sure they knew what they were going to be dealing with going into Iraq. The over-confidence was definitely a mistake that I place squarely at the feet of this Administration.

Once the interim government is established, and free elections are held to elect a new Iraqi government, then I think we would only be staying there at the request of the duly elected government.

I remember much the same was said of VietNam back in the early 60's.
That gov't eventually folded.
Now you think an imposed govt will make a difference in Iraq?
Bush seems to be making all the choices.
You are right in this respect LAN, US troops will be an occupying force in Iraq for a long time

[LANMaster]

Originally Posted by bassetman

I keep forgetting that everytime I hear the Prez is still on vacation!

The President is never really on vacation. I never had a problem with Clinton spending the time he spent at Camp David. Presidents need their time to sort things out and relax. I wouldn't deny that for any President.

[rextilleon]

Vacation thing is of no importance. In fact, if you hate Bush then you can make the case that he does less damage when on vacation (I don't hate Bush). Lan, I appreciate the fact that you fault the administration for somethings--thats healthy---It amazes me how ideologues on both sides of the issue can never give an inch. As far as 15 years go---I doubt it.

[Stoner]

Originally Posted by LANMaster

The President is never really on vacation. I never had a problem with Clinton spending the time he spent at Camp David. Presidents need their time to sort things out and relax. I wouldn't deny that for any President.

Maybe, but I've heard Bush has been out to lunch going on .......well......most of his adult life