“Independent Democrat” Sen. Joe Lieberman (in photo) argued in a Washington Post op-ed for more troops in Iraq. “The most pressing problem we face in Iraq is not an absence of Iraqi political will or American diplomatic initiative, both of which are increasing and improving; it is a lack of basic security,” he wrote.
Lieberman contends that we’ve never had enough troops in Iraq. He supports a troop surge but said it “should be militarily meaningful in size, with a clearly defined mission.”
He acknowledges that more troops won’t guarantee success, but he thinks it is a prerequisite. “Just as the continuing carnage in Baghdad empowers extremists on all sides, establishing security there will open possibilities for compromise and cooperation on the Iraqi political front — possibilities that simply do not exist today because of the fear gripping all sides.”
Posted by Phillip Brownlee
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- Raptor on Open thread 11/22
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/22
- BobChi on Moran correct about Cuba
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
- American_Way on Open thread 11/22
- American_Way on Health care reform would save state money
- satatom on Open thread 11/22
- satatom on Open thread 11/22
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/22
- American_Way on Open thread 11/22
19 Comments
Lieberman and the rest of the Washington establishment’s support for escalation is completely at odds with the will of the American people…
“only 11 percent of those polled backed calls to send more American troops to Iraq, as President Bush is said to be considering.”
http://www.cnn.com/POLITICS/blogs/politicalticker/2006/12/cnn-poll-us-support-for-iraq-war-falls.html
This push for more troops is nothing less than a slap in the face of the American people. It has been demonstrated through consistent poll numbers and, oh yeah, the ELECTIONS LAST MONTH, that we want troops to start coming home NOW. Starting this war was a criminal act. Escalating it (especially in the face of such overwhelming public opposition) so Bush and the Washington elite can try to save face is downright treasonous.
Washington DC = ARMPIT OF AMERICA
Surge, surge, surge! That’s the latest buzz word from the Bushistas, just like ’stay the course’ was used to fool the masses.
The draft is coming….and unless we make drastic changes in the political process in 2008, I’m afraid our kids will soon be forced to deploy over to the ME.
A draft isn’t such a bad idea. Men of my generation lived with the idea that you owed minimum of 2 years service to your country. Military service builds character, something the current generation could use some pointers on. There’s more to life than loud stereos and cell phones.
I have been giving a great deal of thought to the situation and here is a idea. Use our forces to safeguard the infrastructure while it would be the Iraqis that provided the security for the country. At present, there is no real improvement in the average Iraqis life. Electricity is come and go at best, drinkable water is still not a everyday occurrence, gas is in short supply. Any repairs that are done are then left for the most part unguarded and the insurgency can just set it back to squire one.
Perhaps it comes from a pure American point of view, but home is a safe place and a place of normalcy.There are places I know would not be safe for me so I can avoid them, thing that if I would do them would be dangerous so I do not do them. But at home I set in a well lit room, drink a glass of clean water and if I do not want to know what is going on I can watch my TV. or listen to the radio and escape. But left with setting in a darken room and the only noises that I can hear are the sounds of gun shots and bombs. I could not feel safe anywhere. It would cause me to want to do something to change all of it and of course if my government seem to not be changing anything and is part of the problem. If some great foreign saviors that have come to make me safer seem to be more of a threat to me then the “bad guys”. If every time I go out, I am looked at as a possible enemy.
I would want to take action, being a simple minded human being and remembering that my life was normal before all this was happening. I do not see the “bad guys” with their bombs and guns as I go to the market.I mainly see the foreign saviors that do not look like me, talk like me, act like me. They have guns and tanks and tell me in a language I do not understand. Where I can go and what I can do, who do I see as the real problem then?
No our foot print would be less if we were insuring the infrastructure, focused on the rebuilding and securing of the basic services. Right now with the patrolling we are the targets. Let the bastards come to us for a change! Hearts and minds….Hearts and minds!
“Hearts and minds….Hearts and minds!”
That’s the money quote, Dog. We don’t win ANYONE’s hearts-and-minds when the only thing we propose to address the situation is more grunts with guns. And THEN, Mr. Lieberman? More targets for “improvised explosive devices.” Think about that for a moment, folks. What are the “insurgents” fighting, when it comes to our troops? What constitutes “victory”?
Lieberman is partially correct: the “sectarian violence” came about in a nation with no leadership, no security, no legal structure, enforced unemployment, and at best spotty basic services, wherein extremist thugs with their own agendas filled in the power vaccuum. Average Iraqis didn’t have much say in what happened, elections or not.
I recall in the early days of the occupation when a museum was looted at the same time troops were guarding the oil wells. I cannot conceive of a more apropos metaphor.
I’m not sure how to undo that.
A start: Go to the UN. Eliminate the “occupation” issue (and the sub-issue of treating Iraqis like shit, as has commonly occurred). If security is the issue, an international peace-keeping force is a start.
Basic services: Not even Al-Quaeda has a political interest in keeping those out of whack, except when it can be blamed on the Americans. Fix them!
Abandon PNAC’s glorious plan for Iraq, including the 13 permanent military bases.
Then maybe, just maybe, we would be on the road to something resembling a bearable situation.
Nice pic at your My Space page, Ian Asbestos.
But is that not a problem Rage? our current tactic is to provide security for the cities and on occasion do a raid on a suspected insurgency hide out. Patrolling provides a soft target for the enemy, even with the best armored vehicles still we are stretched thin and easy targets for the simplest and least costly way of waging war.remote controlled bomb (IEDs) allow the enemy to remain hidden while our troop stay in the open.
Thus after the bomb goes off, all hell breaks loose and it is the citizens that end up paying. Believe me if a bomb goes off close to me I will be looking for someone to shoot! But other then the occasional sniper or mortar attack. Our bases are not suffering a major attack, that is where all the men and weapons are and the enemy does not want a front on confrontation. It would be a major loss to them in men and material, even with seven virgins waiting in the here after.
Don’t get me wrong, I do not think protecting the infrastructure would be easy. But it would be more focused then what we are doing now. Of course there is the same problem that is happening now, the Iraqis forces. Leaving the security of the cites to them would be chaos, but is that not what we have now?But the up side is that like the bases, they would be coming to us. On that level we have the upper hand with our technology to be better warned of a attack. And would take no more troop then we have there now, plus it is easy to tell the enemy. I.E. If someone is close to a pipe line and you have not been told they will be there. THEY ARE THE ENEMY!.
As to the Al-Qaeda (in fact the name Al-Qaeda has become as passé as “stay the course”. It is a mixture of many different groups. Shiites extremists, Sunni, Iranians, Syrians, etc. Al-Qaeda and Saddam loyalists hold about the same numbers in this fight.) and the basic services, of course they are concerned, killing workers, blowing up the pipe lines, power line and water lines. As I said they know how it effects the general population and how powerful that effect is on the outcome. It has not been a problem of fixing what is wrong it is a problem keeping them from being destroyed once they are fixed.
“But is that not a problem Rage?”
Yep. Actually, in terms of our involvement at present, it’s THE problem.
Liberman is a good guy, one of the few the Democrats have.
Go Joe! :)
At THIS point, more troops sent in would be like trying to put out a fire with a hammer.
Better idea? Train the Iraqi troops out of country. Mix and re-mix the units. Break down their personal prejudices. Maybe put them into combat together in a place like Sudan.
I hope against hope that Lieberman is right. But, my money says he is wrong. Out escalation will do nothing to improve the situation and may well make is worse. IraqNam is lost to us. The majority of the Iraqi population hate us.
Aside from the fact that an extra 20,000 or 30,000 troops are unlikely to be anywhere near enough to make any impact, it’s all just another added cost to an unpaid for war. Part of LBJ’s Vietnam unpopularity was when he raised taxes in 1967 to pay for the war. GWB doesn’t bother to pay for anything, he just adds it all to the debt and then adds some more. The war was naive and stupid to begin with, the failure to pay for it is cowardly and stupid.
“MAYBE” a way to salvage things: Focus our troops in Baghdad and perhaps one or two other major cities. Cities that are ‘hopelessly’ ethnically mixed. Bring the bast possible Iraqi troops – ethnically mixed – into those cities. Maybe – just maybe – those can be saved as meeting places.
The rest of the country – de facto partition. Sunnis policing Sunni areas, Kurds Kurdistan, Shiites the south. This will necessarily require ethnic cleansing to relocate people to their “home areas” ethnically. Maybe – just maybe – those areas can be stabalized inside themselves and then find a way to work with their neighboring areas.
Would this approach work? Quite frankly, doubt it. But, I think that approach is less bad than anything else in front of us right now.
The bloodshed and internecine warfare will continue, unabated in Iraq until 2010. In 2010 all Muslims will unite but will be utterly defeated by the technology of the military of European Hegemony.
Ya know sometimes I learn stuff reading here.
I found out that there was indeed a “seer” named Van Rensburg. I did a search on the name and read a little.
The guy was a profit of some respectability in that ..uh…field. He died in 1926.
SO our “seer” here is not him. OR the deceased profit has managed to do what Harry Houdini could not and is contacting us from…..uh…beyond? Perhaps. If so, I am curious as to what Saddam Hussein is up to this evening. For starters.
Or this poster is a fan of Rensburg and is posting his predictions here? That would be interesting to know.
What say ya seer? See an answer for my questions?
The truth will be generally known in 2009 that the man executed by Iraqi puppet government last night was not the real Saddam. Rather, they executed one of the former dictator’s many body doubles. the real Saddam is living safely in another country.
JR, Harry Houdini hasn’t contacted anyone from the “other side” because he, personally, didn’t believe in what we now call the “paranormal.”
I read an interesting article on that a few weeks ago. Two gentlemen have studied Houdini for several years and written a book. The authors suggest that Houdini was a spy for U.S. and Britain. They also think his death may have actually been caused by a beating from one of the “spiritualists” he hated.
A couple of good links:http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2099-2278656_2,00.html
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6668263
He wasn’t a democrat when he was a democrat, but an Israel spy he has always been.
He has become more brazen about now that Bushco is working for Israel and not the United States.
Poor ol’ droopy dog,don’t get no respect.