Results 1 to 10 of 10
  1. #1
    W4A1 143 43CK? Nbadan's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Post Count
    32,408
    Before It's Too Late in Iraq
    By Wesley K. Clark
    Friday, August 26, 2005; Page A21


    In the old, familiar fashion, mounting U.S. casualties in Iraq have mobilized increasing public doubts about the war. More than half the American people now believe that the invasion of Iraq was a mistake. They're right. But it would also be a mistake to pull out now, or to start pulling out or to set a date certain for pulling out. Instead we need a strategy to create a stable, democratizing and peaceful state in Iraq -- a strategy the administration has failed to develop and articulate.

    From the outset of the U.S. post-invasion efforts, we needed a three-pronged strategy: diplomatic, political and military. Iraq sits geographically on the fault line between Shiite and Sunni Islam; for the mission to succeed we will have to be the catalyst for regional cooperation, not regional conflict.

    Unfortunately, the administration didn't see the need for a diplomatic track, and its scattershot diplomacy in the region -- threats, grandiose pronouncements and truncated communications -- has been ill-advised and counterproductive. The U.S. diplomatic failure has magnified the difficulties facing the political and military elements of strategy by contributing to the increasing infiltration of jihadists and the surprising resiliency of the insurgency.

    On the political track, aiming for a legitimate, democratic Iraqi government was essential, but the United States was far too slow in mobilizing Iraqi political action. A wasted first year encouraged a rise in sectarian militias and the emergence of strong fractionating forces. Months went by without a U.S. ambassador in Iraq, and today political development among the Iraqis is hampered by the lack not only of security but also of a stable infrastructure program that can reliably deliver gas, electricity and jobs.

    Meanwhile, on the military track, security on the ground remains poor at best. U.S. armed forces still haven't received resources, restructuring and guidance adequate for the magnitude of the task. Only in June, over two years into the mission of training Iraqi forces, did the president announce such "new steps" as partnering with Iraqi units, establishing "transition teams" to work with Iraqi units and training Iraqi ministries to conduct an errorist operations. But there is nothing new about any of this; it is the same nation-building doctrine that we used in Vietnam. Where are the thousands of trained linguists? Where are the flexible, well-

    resourced, military-led infrastructure development programs to win "hearts and minds?" Where are the smart operations and adequate numbers of forces -- U.S., coalition or Iraqi -- to strengthen control over the borders?

    With each passing month the difficulties are compounded and the chances for a successful outcome are reduced. Urgent modification of the strategy is required before it is too late to do anything other than simply withdraw our forces.

    Adding a diplomatic track to the strategy is a must. The United States should form a standing conference of Iraq's neighbors, complete with committees dealing with all the regional economic and political issues, including trade, travel, cross-border infrastructure projects and, of course, cutting off the infiltration of jihadists. The United States should tone down its raw rhetoric and instead listen more carefully to the many voices within the region. In addition, a public U.S. declaration forswearing permanent bases in Iraq would be a helpful step in engaging both regional and Iraqi support as we implement our plans.

    On the political side, the timeline for the agreements on the Cons ution is less important than the substance of the do ent. It is up to American leadership to help engineer, implement and sustain a compromise that will avoid the "red lines" of the respective factions and leave in place a state that both we and Iraq's neighbors can support. So no Kurdish vote on independence, a restricted role for Islam and limited autonomy in the south. And no private militias.

    In addition, the United States needs a legal mandate from the government to provide additional civil assistance and advice, along with additional U.S. civilian personnel, to help strengthen the ins utions of government. Key ministries must be reinforced, provincial governments made functional, a system of justice established (and its personnel trained) and the rule of law promoted at the local level. There will be a continuing need for assistance in ins utional development, leadership training and international monitoring for years to come, and all of this must be made palatable to Iraqis concerned with their nation's sovereignty. Monies promised for reconstruction simply must be committed and projects moved forward, especially in those areas along the border and where the insurgency has the greatest potential.

    On the military side, the vast effort underway to train an army must be matched by efforts to train police and local justices. Canada, France and Germany should be engaged to assist. Neighboring states should also provide observers and technical assistance. In military terms, striking at insurgents and terrorists is necessary but insufficient. Military and security operations must return primarily to the tried-and-true methods of counterinsurgency: winning the hearts and minds of the populace through civic action, small-scale economic development and positive daily interactions. Ten thousand Arab Americans with full language proficiency should be recruited to assist as interpreters. A better effort must be made to control jihadist infiltration into the country by a combination of outposts, patrols and reaction forces reinforced by high technology. Over time U.S. forces should be pulled back into reserve roles and phased out.

    The growing chorus of voices demanding a pullout should seriously alarm the Bush administration, because President Bush and his team are repeating the failure of Vietnam: failing to craft a realistic and effective policy and instead simply demanding that the American people show resolve. Resolve isn't enough to mend a flawed approach -- or to save the lives of our troops. If the administration won't adopt a winning strategy, then the American people will be justified in demanding that it bring our troops home.
    Washington Post

    Clark seems to be framing the issue and setting up the GOP for 2006. In his op-ed, he says that IF the Bush administration doesn't change its strategy quickly, then a pull out recourse will be the only solution left. As Clark said....the clock is ticking. Soon the clock will stop ticking and we will be out of time.

    As we are all quite aware, W ain't about to pull-out.....with Clark offering a rational plan short of pulling out that the Bush admin will be ignoring, then very soon a Pull-out will be the only alternative plan left to be offered. But when it is, Bush and the media cannot say that Democrats did not offer alternative plans short of pulling out.

    I think it's the way to get us to the Pull-out position while having covered all bases via constructive debate. Screaming pull-out can only be effective if it is clearly understood that the WH kept screwing everything up and listened to no one.

  2. #2
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Post Count
    29,564
    When are the Democrats going to stop trying to puff up the anti-war sentiment?

    Here's the deal...you guys lost the ing election. We were in Iraq at the time of the election...the Administration gave no time frame for pulling out of Iraq at the time of the Election...when American voted for Bush they voted for continue the strategy in Iraq, they voted for staying the course...

    It's been a little over 2 years, we lost 2000 troops and you guys are tyring to paint this as the biggest military up up on history, when it fact, it's arguably been the most successful up thos point.

    You guys are in the ing minority...the people elected Republican leadership...stop trying to ing commandeer the country by creating articificial perceptions...based on polls. Low approval rating for Bush does not me mean we are ready to embrace anti-Americanism..er I mean the Democratic Party.


    I like Clark...but this is just political grandstanding...he's so full of on certain issues...he thinks we're going to get Iran, Syrai and Saudi Arabia to sit around and sing Kumbaya with us as we install a Democracy in Iraq...he's an idiot if he thinks that is possible. We couldn't even get the Iranians and Saudies to sing Kumbya together if they were doing it after killing us....the Iraqis are going to have to beat the insugency...Iran and Saudi Arabia don't want it to end...unless it's to their benefit.

    He's full of and if he was in the White house right now...he'd be threatening to nuke Iran off the planet if they don't stop ing around in Iraq....This guy is more of a hardass than Bush...that's one of the things I like about him...but he's delusional if he thinks we can build an uncorrupt coalition of Iraq's neighbors.

  3. #3
    My Cousin Kobe Medvedenko's Avatar
    My Team
    Los Angeles Lakers
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Post Count
    5,521
    It's been a little over 2 years, we lost 2000 troops and you guys are tyring to paint this as the biggest military up up on history, when it fact, it's arguably been the most successful up thos point.
    Are you serious.....most successful...in what way...please explain.

  4. #4
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Post Count
    29,564
    Show me one time we've overthrown a dictator via military invasion or toppled any governemtn via military invasion...that had a military the size that Iraq did(500,000 men minimum at the start of the war)...and lost only 2000 troops in the process...

    Show me one time any country has pulled that off....

  5. #5
    Keith Jackson mookie2001's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Post Count
    13,278
    only 2000 troops
    thats like saying Duncan has only won 3 les, 3 fmvps and 2 mvps

  6. #6
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Post Count
    29,564
    Mookie...you are a sad example of the American educational system.

  7. #7
    Keith Jackson mookie2001's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Post Count
    13,278
    please whottt tell me how many people died in WWII
    ???
    i dont know
    what was it like 300 or 400?

  8. #8
    Multimedia Spurs
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Post Count
    6,659
    "they voted for continue the strategy in Iraq, they voted for staying the course..."

    Enough of the people were fooled some of the time. In 2004, shrub squeaked by to a extrememly narrow win for a sitting president because red-staters didn't want to change in the middle of the bogus war. Without war, shrub would have been defeated. Perfectly cynical calculation by Rove, the s bag.

    now the tide has turned, it's overwhelmingly, A ING MAJORITY OF EVERY ING RECENT POLL, against this bogus war as too long, too expensive, too many lives lost, for no demonstratable benefits to the USA or the Iraqis.

    The ing nebulous "course" to be "stayed", just yet another inane shrub slogan (slogans are the maximum his alcohol/drug-addled brain can manage), is totally undefined and is stretching out for several more years at least. The tide, AKA American citizens of all political stripes, is against shrub and his posse's handling of the war, esp total neglect of post-war planning.

    sure, Ramsey's running for office. He's a ing poilitician making hay at shrub's expense. Why hold him to any different standards?

    Your "dissent is anti-American" stinks now, and it stunk in the NV 60s and 70s. As the cartoon, says most of American is anti-American because most of America is dissenting against his disastrous, murderous war.

    shrub is ed
    Repugs are ed
    the war is ed
    and the edness is gonna get worse.

  9. #9
    Keith Jackson mookie2001's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Post Count
    13,278
    "they voted for continue the strategy in Iraq, they voted for staying the course..."

    Enough of the people were fooled some of the time. In 2004, shrub squeaked by to a extrememly narrow win for a sitting president because red-staters didn't want to change in the middle of the bogus war. Without war, shrub would have been defeated. Perfectly cynical calculation by Rove, the s bag.

    now the tide has turned, it's overwhelmingly, A ING MAJORITY OF EVERY ING RECENT POLL, against this bogus war as too long, too expensive, too many lives lost, for no demonstratable benefits to the USA or the Iraqis.

    The ing nebulous "course" to be "stayed", just yet another inane shrub slogan (slogans are the maximum his alcohol/drug-addled brain can manage), is totally undefined and is stretching out for several more years at least. The tide, AKA American citizens of all political stripes, is against shrub and his posse's handling of the war, esp total neglect of post-war planning.

    sure, Ramsey's running for office. He's a ing poilitician making hay at shrub's expense. Why hold him to any different standards?

    Your "dissent is anti-American" stinks now, and it stunk in the NV 60s and 70s. As the cartoon, says most of American is anti-American because most of America is dissenting against his disastrous, murderous war.

    shrub is ed
    Repugs are ed
    the war is ed
    and the edness is gonna get worse.
    ^ I like the cut of your jib

  10. #10
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Post Count
    29,564
    please whottt tell me how many people died in WWII
    ???
    i dont know
    what was it like 300 or 400?
    ...

    Show me one time we've overthrown a dictator via military invasion or toppled any governemtn via military invasion...that had a military the size that Iraq did(500,000 men minimum at the start of the war)...and lost only 2000 troops in the process...

    Show me one time any country has pulled that off....

    If you do that then you can judge this war a failure...if you can't then STFU...because the only other explanation for your stance is that you think there is no excuse for war...which means a country full of you would be sucking terrorist, german, or british right about now...and I wouldn't have internet...So you and your naivete of human beings that threatens my way of life...get out if you don't like it. Go to Pakistan...live there and be ruled...no one is keeping you from doing it.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •