Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Ripsnort on December 02, 2005, 08:09:54 AM
-
Anxiously awaiting opinionated replies from Sakai, Nash, Sandman, et al.
Our Troops Must Stay
By JOE LIEBERMAN
November 29, 2005; Page A18
I have just returned from my fourth trip to Iraq in the past 17 months and can report real progress there. More work needs to be done, of course, but the Iraqi people are in reach of a watershed transformation from the primitive, killing tyranny of Saddam to modern, self-governing, self-securing nationhood -- unless the great American military that has given them and us this unexpected opportunity is prematurely withdrawn.
Progress is visible and practical. In the Kurdish North, there is continuing security and growing prosperity. The primarily *****e South remains largely free of terrorism, receives much more electric power and other public services than it did under Saddam, and is experiencing greater economic activity. The Sunni triangle, geographically defined by Baghdad to the east, Tikrit to the north and Ramadi to the west, is where most of the terrorist enemy attacks occur. And yet here, too, there is progress.
There are many more cars on the streets, satellite television dishes on the roofs, and literally millions more cell phones in Iraqi hands than before. All of that says the Iraqi economy is growing. And Sunni candidates are actively campaigning for seats in the National Assembly. People are working their way toward a functioning society and economy in the midst of a very brutal, inhumane, sustained terrorist war against the civilian population and the Iraqi and American military there to protect it.
It is a war between 27 million and 10,000; 27 million Iraqis who want to live lives of freedom, opportunity and prosperity and roughly 10,000 terrorists who are either Saddam revanchists, Iraqi Islamic extremists or al Qaeda foreign fighters who know their wretched causes will be set back if Iraq becomes free and modern. The terrorists are intent on stopping this by instigating a civil war to produce the chaos that will allow Iraq to replace Afghanistan as the base for their fanatical war-making. We are fighting on the side of the 27 million because the outcome of this war is critically important to the security and freedom of America. If the terrorists win, they will be emboldened to strike us directly again and to further undermine the growing stability and progress in the Middle East, which has long been a major American national and economic security priority.
* * *
Before going to Iraq last week, I visited Israel and the Palestinian Authority. Israel has been the only genuine democracy in the region, but it is now getting some welcome company from the Iraqis and Palestinians who are in the midst of robust national legislative election campaigns, the Lebanese who have risen up in proud self-determination after the Hariri assassination to eject their Syrian occupiers (the Syrian- and Iranian-backed Hezbollah militias should be next), and the Kuwaitis, Egyptians and Saudis who have taken steps to open up their governments more broadly to their people. In my meeting with the thoughtful prime minister of Iraq, Ibrahim al-Jaafari, he declared with justifiable pride that his country now has the most open, democratic political system in the Arab world. He is right.
In the face of terrorist threats and escalating violence, eight million Iraqis voted for their interim national government in January, almost 10 million participated in the referendum on their new constitution in October, and even more than that are expected to vote in the elections for a full-term government on Dec. 15. Every time the 27 million Iraqis have been given the chance since Saddam was overthrown, they have voted for self-government and hope over the violence and hatred the 10,000 terrorists offer them. Most encouraging has been the behavior of the Sunni community, which, when disappointed by the proposed constitution, registered to vote and went to the polls instead of taking up arms and going to the streets. Last week, I was thrilled to see a vigorous political campaign, and a large number of independent television stations and newspapers covering it.
None of these remarkable changes would have happened without the coalition forces led by the U.S. And, I am convinced, almost all of the progress in Iraq and throughout the Middle East will be lost if those forces are withdrawn faster than the Iraqi military is capable of securing the country.
The leaders of Iraq's duly elected government understand this, and they asked me for reassurance about America's commitment. The question is whether the American people and enough of their representatives in Congress from both parties understand this. I am disappointed by Democrats who are more focused on how President Bush took America into the war in Iraq almost three years ago, and by Republicans who are more worried about whether the war will bring them down in next November's elections, than they are concerned about how we continue the progress in Iraq in the months and years ahead.
Here is an ironic finding I brought back from Iraq. While U.S. public opinion polls show serious declines in support for the war and increasing pessimism about how it will end, polls conducted by Iraqis for Iraqi universities show increasing optimism. Two-thirds say they are better off than they were under Saddam, and a resounding 82% are confident their lives in Iraq will be better a year from now than they are today. What a colossal mistake it would be for America's bipartisan political leadership to choose this moment in history to lose its will and, in the famous phrase, to seize defeat from the jaws of the coming victory.
The leaders of America's military and diplomatic forces in Iraq, Gen. George Casey and Ambassador Zal Khalilzad, have a clear and compelling vision of our mission there. It is to create the environment in which Iraqi democracy, security and prosperity can take hold and the Iraqis themselves can defend their political progress against those 10,000 terrorists who would take it from them.
* * *
Does America have a good plan for doing this, a strategy for victory in Iraq? Yes we do. And it is important to make it clear to the American people that the plan has not remained stubbornly still but has changed over the years. Mistakes, some of them big, were made after Saddam was removed, and no one who supports the war should hesitate to admit that; but we have learned from those mistakes and, in characteristic American fashion, from what has worked and not worked on the ground. The administration's recent use of the banner "clear, hold and build" accurately describes the strategy as I saw it being implemented last week.
We are now embedding a core of coalition forces in every Iraqi fighting unit, which makes each unit more effective and acts as a multiplier of our forces. Progress in "clearing" and "holding" is being made. The Sixth Infantry Division of the Iraqi Security Forces now controls and polices more than one-third of Baghdad on its own. Coalition and Iraqi forces have together cleared the previously terrorist-controlled cities of Fallujah, Mosul and Tal Afar, and most of the border with Syria. Those areas are now being "held" secure by the Iraqi military themselves. Iraqi and coalition forces are jointly carrying out a mission to clear Ramadi, now the most dangerous city in Al-Anbar province at the west end of the Sunni Triangle.
Nationwide, American military leaders estimate that about one-third of the approximately 100,000 members of the Iraqi military are able to "lead the fight" themselves with logistical support from the U.S., and that that number should double by next year. If that happens, American military forces could begin a drawdown in numbers proportional to the increasing self-sufficiency of the Iraqi forces in 2006. If all goes well, I believe we can have a much smaller American military presence there by the end of 2006 or in 2007, but it is also likely that our presence will need to be significant in Iraq or nearby for years to come.
The economic reconstruction of Iraq has gone slower than it should have, and too much money has been wasted or stolen. Ambassador Khalilzad is now implementing reform that has worked in Afghanistan -- Provincial Reconstruction Teams, composed of American economic and political experts, working in partnership in each of Iraq's 18 provinces with its elected leadership, civil service and the private sector. That is the "build" part of the "clear, hold and build" strategy, and so is the work American and international teams are doing to professionalize national and provincial governmental agencies in Iraq.
These are new ideas that are working and changing the reality on the ground, which is undoubtedly why the Iraqi people are optimistic about their future -- and why the American people should be, too.
* * *
I cannot say enough about the U.S. Army and Marines who are carrying most of the fight for us in Iraq. They are courageous, smart, effective, innovative, very honorable and very proud. After a Thanksgiving meal with a great group of Marines at Camp Fallujah in western Iraq, I asked their commander whether the morale of his troops had been hurt by the growing public dissent in America over the war in Iraq. His answer was insightful, instructive and inspirational: "I would guess that if the opposition and division at home go on a lot longer and get a lot deeper it might have some effect, but, Senator, my Marines are motivated by their devotion to each other and the cause, not by political debates."
Thank you, General. That is a powerful, needed message for the rest of America and its political leadership at this critical moment in our nation's history. Semper Fi.
Mr. Lieberman is a Democratic senator from Connecticut.
-
Key points for those of you that are short on time and long in denial:
More work needs to be done, of course, but the Iraqi people are in reach of a watershed transformation from the primitive, killing tyranny of Saddam to modern, self-governing, self-securing nationhood -- unless the great American military that has given them and us this unexpected opportunity is prematurely withdrawn.
Progress is visible and practical. In the Kurdish North, there is continuing security and growing prosperity. The primarily *****e South remains largely free of terrorism, receives much more electric power and other public services than it did under Saddam, and is experiencing greater economic activity. The Sunni triangle, geographically defined by Baghdad to the east, Tikrit to the north and Ramadi to the west, is where most of the terrorist enemy attacks occur. And yet here, too, there is progress.
There are many more cars on the streets, satellite television dishes on the roofs, and literally millions more cell phones in Iraqi hands than before. All of that says the Iraqi economy is growing. And Sunni candidates are actively campaigning for seats in the National Assembly. People are working their way toward a functioning society and economy in the midst of a very brutal, inhumane, sustained terrorist war against the civilian population and the Iraqi and American military there to protect it.
It is a war between 27 million and 10,000; 27 million Iraqis who want to live lives of freedom, opportunity and prosperity and roughly 10,000 terrorists who are either Saddam revanchists, Iraqi Islamic extremists or al Qaeda foreign fighters who know their wretched causes will be set back if Iraq becomes free and modern.
None of these remarkable changes would have happened without the coalition forces led by the U.S. And, I am convinced, almost all of the progress in Iraq and throughout the Middle East will be lost if those forces are withdrawn faster than the Iraqi military is capable of securing the country.
The leaders of Iraq's duly elected government understand this, and they asked me for reassurance about America's commitment. The question is whether the American people and enough of their representatives in Congress from both parties understand this. I am disappointed by Democrats who are more focused on how President Bush took America into the war in Iraq almost three years ago, and by Republicans who are more worried about whether the war will bring them down in next November's elections, than they are concerned about how we continue the progress in Iraq in the months and years ahead.
Here is an ironic finding I brought back from Iraq. While U.S. public opinion polls show serious declines in support for the war and increasing pessimism about how it will end, polls conducted by Iraqis for Iraqi universities show increasing optimism. Two-thirds say they are better off than they were under Saddam, and a resounding 82% are confident their lives in Iraq will be better a year from now than they are today. What a colossal mistake it would be for America's bipartisan political leadership to choose this moment in history to lose its will and, in the famous phrase, to seize defeat from the jaws of the coming victory.
-
Thanks for posting this, Rip.
-
Lieberman is not nearly as flamingly liberal as the rest of the Democrats.
In my book, he's one of the best ones.
-
fwiw, most of the lefties on this board will predictably:
disregard the post, pretend they never read it
Attempt to discredit Lieberman
Ask where the WMD are...
-
*checks todays Democratic memo (not sent to Lieberman of course)*
LIES!
-
Originally posted by Makarov9
*checks todays Democratic memo (not sent to Lieberman of course)*
LIES!
:rofl
I read this before rip posted it and I thought it was pretty fairly written and fairly honest as well.
-
Sean Hannity was reading most of this on his radio show the other day. It's a perfect account of what is going on in Iraq, the plan that is being implimented and could not be said any better.
You guys that keep saying "where's the plan" getting any clues from reading this? The plan is being carried every day over in Iraq, it's working and we are winning.
When people say "Iraq is a mess" I wonder what they mean by that. What is a "mess" about Iraq?
-
Nice post Rip.
Several of the MSM news outlets have not even mentioned this story or put it page 9. I imagine they don't want to feed the propaganda that we are winning :)
These two statements sum it up nicely
Does America have a good plan for doing this, a strategy for victory in Iraq? Yes we do.
The administration's recent use of the banner "clear, hold and build" accurately describes the strategy as I saw it being implemented last week.
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
fwiw, most of the lefties on this board will predictably:
disregard the post, pretend they never read it
Attempt to discredit Lieberman
Ask where the WMD are...
In other words, you we're trolling?
-
Its too bad something like this doesnt get air time with the national media. But then again, the nightly news programs seldom report any good news on any topic.
-
If the Dems had fielded this guy the election would likely have gone the other way. Not necessarily a bad thing if Lieberman had won. I'd imagine the arabic press would have run large stories denouncing a "Jewish" president. That very well could have ramped up opposition by itself.
-
Rumour has it that Rumsfeld might be stepping down soon. Rumour also has it that Lieberman is at the head of the list for replacements.
-
IMO, it would be extreemly shortsighted to place a man in that position who's religious affiliation and dual citizenship would likely fuel more terrorism, hatred and mistrust towards the USA among the worlds Islamic population.
-
Leiberman has dual citizenship?
-Sik
-
And you know what I think about that Flatbar?
**** the terrorists.
I like Lieberman, put him in.
-
a resounding 82% are confident their lives in Iraq will be better a year from now than they are today.
Ha ha! How could their lives possibly get worse?
For those of you who don't know, I supported (just) the decision to go to war in Iraq but I think that the majority of people there are feeling much more pain than they did under Saddam.
That said in all of our histories, we have had ancestors who have had to suffer in order to make the lives of their decendants better and I think that Iraq today is a case in point.
Ravs
-
Great post Rip.
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Anxiously awaiting opinionated replies from Sakai, Nash, Sandman, et al.
<-----------Anxiously awaiting an opinion from Ripnort.
-
Hey MT and Sandy?
What do you guys think of Lieberman?
I agree with those who said he would have won if the Dems had run put him up.
Every conservitive I know would have voted Lieberman over Bush.
-
Originally posted by Flatbar
IMO, it would be extreemly shortsighted to place a man in that position who's religious affiliation and dual citizenship would likely fuel more terrorism, hatred and mistrust towards the USA among the worlds Islamic population.
Please post links to your assertion......
-
Originally posted by GtoRA2
Hey MT and Sandy?
What do you guys think of Lieberman?
I agree with those who said he would have won if the Dems had run put him up.
Every conservitive I know would have voted Lieberman over Bush.
This country isnt ready for a women, black or jewish president. To much hatred and bigotry still exist....
-
Originally posted by Gunslinger
:rofl
I read this before rip posted it and I thought it was pretty fairly written and fairly honest as well.
Lieberman is entitled to his opinion.
You righties are really sweet when a Dem talks your talking points.
:)
We can get into a posting war of opinions from the senate and house on how its going in Iraq if you want ?
Will you be as sweet and open to say MURTHAS comments on his visits which are 180 from yours and Liebermans?
:)
-
See Rule #4, #5
-
Hi Flatbar,
Originally posted by Flatbar
IMO, it would be extreemly shortsighted to place a man in that position who's religious affiliation and dual citizenship would likely fuel more terrorism, hatred and mistrust towards the USA among the worlds Islamic population.
Quite so, they might become so offended that a large percentage of them engage in a holy war to drive us out of the Middle East and then destroy or subjugate or progressively Islamacize the west.
Good thing Chamberlain became Prime Minister instead of Churchill. The Germans might have been so offended had "Warmongering Winnie" gotten in they might have annexed the Sudatenland and invaded Poland.
Or Something...
:confused:
-
if it pisses off the islamists then i will vote for him
-
Originally posted by Silat
This country isnt ready for a women, black or jewish president. To much hatred and bigotry still exist....
So you think the pressure on Colin Powell to run in 2000 was just window dressing, and that Lieberman was a heartbeat and 2 or 3 electoral votes from the presidency that same year means nothing....
-
Originally posted by Silat
Please post links to your assertion......
When I get my opinions published I may then be able to provide a link to them :)
As for the DINO's religion and dual citzenship, that's common knowledge.
-
Originally posted by Seagoon
Hi Flatbar,
Quite so, they might become so offended that a large percentage of them engage in a holy war to drive us out of the Middle East and then destroy or subjugate or progressively Islamacize the west.
IMO, it would be more like electing George Wallace president during the height of the equal rights movement, not a very pragamtic solution to the problem.
-
Holden...is that Betty Grable in your icon? she looks familiar.
Ravs
-
Is it just me or do the democrats want equal rights for everyone except for when it's time to give equal rights to everyone?
-
Originally posted by Flatbar
As for the DINO's religion and dual citzenship, that's common knowledge.
He is an orthodox jew, but the dual citizenship thing is not common knowledge, it is wrong.
-
Originally posted by lasersailor184
Is it just me or do the democrats want equal rights for everyone except for when it's time to give equal rights to everyone?
it's you.
-
Originally posted by lasersailor184
And you know what I think about that Flatbar?
**** the terrorists.
I like Lieberman, put him in.
Well, getting rid of Rummy WOULD be some sort of a plus. However, the possibility of an appointment like this to embolden more potential terrorists to act isn't in our best interest. We should be trying to defuse the terrorists and destroy their ideology thereby creating a safer environment instead of poking at them with a stick. IMO.
-
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
He is an orthodox jew, but the dual citizenship thing is not common knowledge, it is wrong.
I guess it depends with whom you're talking. Most people that I converse with on politcal issues know that Joe has dual citzenship, the same goes with Karl Rove , < or his given name Rover > and his dual American/German citzenship.
-
Originally posted by Flatbar
I guess it depends with whom you're talking.
It does not depend on who you talk to. It is either right or wrong. Truth is not relative.
-
Originally posted by Silat
Lieberman is entitled to his opinion.
You righties are really sweet when a Dem talks your talking points.
:)
We can get into a posting war of opinions from the senate and house on how its going in Iraq if you want ?
Will you be as sweet and open to say MURTHAS comments on his visits which are 180 from yours and Liebermans?
:)
I agree and get most of my view from people that have been there. I can't honestly say if Murtha has been there but what he says is a 180 to the people that have been there. Take Michael Yon for instance. He doesn't paint a rosey situation of Iraq, but he does paint a picture of good people who our soundly deserving of freedom, who hated Sadam, and who are activly engaging in the political process to make a better Iraq. The insurgents in Iraq made their biggest blunder when they started attacking Iraqis. You should read his blog sometime.....it's very touching. http://www.michaelyon.blogspot.com
But where I think you're wrong silat is that these aren't just talking points.....this isn't about politics.....it's about getting the job done.
-
Apparently it is just a rumour that rumsfeld is retiring. He has just discounted it.
Though I do think that Lieberman would make a great secretary of state.
-
Originally posted by ravells
Holden...is that Betty Grable in your icon? she looks familiar.
Ravs
It's Betty...
-
Originally posted by Flatbar
Well, getting rid of Rummy WOULD be some sort of a plus. However, the possibility of an appointment like this to embolden more potential terrorists to act isn't in our best interest. We should be trying to defuse the terrorists and destroy their ideology thereby creating a safer environment instead of poking at them with a stick. IMO.
Our mere existence is "poking them with a stick"
I'll explain.
There are currently several former members of terrorist organizations giving talks in the states and are to soon appear at Princeton University.
A local Radio station managed to get 3 of them in studio for a live interview.
! has former ties to Al Quiada. Another to the PLO and another to the Islamic Jihad.
All have been involved with and committed acts against either other Arabs or Israel. Including firebombing and an attempted lynching of an Israeli soldier.
Another has over 150 kills of Arabs to his credit (if you want to call it that.
! of them was even raised in the US (I forget which state)
what they do is try to explain the mindset behind these people in terms we can understand
They say. even in this country they are indoctrinated early. Almost from the time of birth that the Jew is to be hated and killed as well as those that support them.
One tells of one of the first songs sun in their kindergarten class being named something like "God is great and the Jews must die"
They compared what they are taught as opposed to what Christians and Jews are taught religiously. Whereas with the latter two. Jews and Christians that being good is the pathway to heaven Killing the enemies of Islam is their pathway to heaven
. Right now they see it as having two primary enemies First and foremost The Jews have always been and will always be their primary Enemy. The United States is their second enemy
And just as many Christians and Jews believe absolutely and completely in the teachings of their religions is how absolute their belief is in Islam.
And they are guaranteed entry to heaven if they themselves die while killing the enemies of Islam
One who has now converted to Christianity (The penalty for converting from Islam is death)
Tells how his father now near death hopes to become closer to God by killing his son who is now seen as an enemy of Islam.
THAT is how strong their faith is.
As for the one that has so many Arab kills. He explained that just as there are many different sects of Christianity The are many different sects of the Muslim religion. Each feels theirs is "the one" So they have alot of fighting among themselves unless they have a common enemy. Which is currently both the Jews and the US because we support the Jews and Israel.
So you see. Simply because we exist and we support Israel and Jews as a whole in their minds. We must die.
THAT is their mindset.
I really wish I had been able to record this interview. It was fascinating and I know I haven't given it justice by what I posted. But that is pretty much the gist of it.
Kinda reminded me of the scene in the movie "Independance day" where the President is talking to the alien and looking for a peaceful solution which the alien declines. and then he asks "what is it you want?"
The Alien replies "We want you to die"
Thats about the size of it
-
silat said.. "This country isnt ready for a women, black or jewish president. To much hatred and bigotry still exist.."
A few people on this board lookat me as being a biggot sooo... my take is...I wouldn't vote for lieberman... not because he is jewish but because he is a liberal socialist of the highest order.
I would vote for any jew who was a part of the "jews for the preservation of firearms ownership" group..
I would vote for Sandy Froman for a woman.
I would probly vote for a black guy with the right ideas but I haven't really seen one worth voting for yet.
lazs
-
Originally posted by lazs2
silat said.. "This country isnt ready for a women, black or jewish president. To much hatred and bigotry still exist.."
A few people on this board lookat me as being a biggot sooo... my take is...I wouldn't vote for lieberman... not because he is jewish but because he is a liberal socialist of the highest order.
I would vote for any jew who was a part of the "jews for the preservation of firearms ownership" group..
I would vote for Sandy Froman for a woman.
I would probly vote for a black guy with the right ideas but I haven't really seen one worth voting for yet.
lazs
OMG did you guys notice????? Laz said "black" instead of "colored" :rofl ;)
-
Did I make a mistake? I hope I didn't offend anyone... It is so hard to tell what offends the negroes these days. I have heard that they prefer "melinen superior" these days.... is that true?
lazs
-
Republicans are more liberal than democrats. They're both entirely too liberal and conservative for my tastes.