A "timeline" for Iraq?
Submitted by charlie.collins on Tue, 06/28/2005 - 10:06
Tagged:
There is much talk lately about low numbers for Bush and growing disapproval in the states with the Iraq debacle (and the President will address the nation on television about the matter tonight). There have even been several moves in the legislature to introduce a "timetable" to US military involvement in Iraq.
Adding to the confusion has been the VP saying the insurgency is "in its last throes" while the Secretary of Defense says the US will be in Iraq at least a decade and a half.
The President has said a timetable wont do. The President has said we must now stay the course. In this case, the President is correct. (And credit to the Secretary of Defense for what may be an honest estimate, more than a decade, even if its a change from the original "weeks not months".)
The US has a long history of getting involved in all sorts of nonsense (nonsense meaning jumping in with overt or covert actions where threats are perceived but do not really exist - "Soldier of Fortune" style foreign policy) in the middle east. The US also has a long history of bailing out when things dont readily go they way the US envisions or hopes (with or without planning). The bailouts of the past (Afghanistan before during and after the soviet invasion) have proven very costly.
Now is not the time to leave Iraq, despite the difficulties and the cost. It is certainly true that there were many valid issues and concerns about getting into the Iraq situation in the first place, and many things were done profoundly wrong during the invasion and during the *years* since the President declared "mission accomplished" and "bring em on". Yet all of that is in the past now, that is done, and the original action was supported by a large majority of the legislature in HJ114 (Senate vote, House vote) and by a majority of the American people. Despite the misgivings the states must "finish" what was started in Iraq, see Iraq through to self sustainable government, or risk even greater problems.
It would lead to simply greater chaos and confusion and further destabilization of the region if the US were to leave Iraq at present. Those that once supported the Iraq war should not now reconsider, its too late now. The poll numbers, the actions in congress, so on, all reflect an about face of sorts that is inexcusable.
(And the common argument that legislators seem to use when backtracking is "we were lied to". I will grant that when it comes to WMD and terrorism links in Iraq there was some lying, OK a lot of lying, but it came from the President AND the legislature - its a large part of HJ114 itself "Whereas . . . WMD", "Whereas . . . terrorism" - its not a valid excuse to say "we were lied to" when you either KNOW its a lie or are complicit in the lie.)







Comments
RE: A "timeline" for Iraq?
RE: A "timeline" for Iraq?
RE: A "timeline" for Iraq?
RE: A "timeline" for Iraq?
RE: A "timeline" for Iraq?
RE: A "timeline" for Iraq?
RE: A "timeline" for Iraq?
RE: A "timeline" for Iraq?
RE: A "timeline" for Iraq?
RE: A "timeline" for Iraq?
RE: A "timeline" for Iraq?
RE: A "timeline" for Iraq?