Last and final warning. I do not have this blog so childish people like you can indulge their insecurity complexes. Suggest you take a time out and figure out how to get past puberty before you post again.

AJStrata

Reality in the form of Webb/Allen caught up with you; reality in the form of Bush’s willing or forced retreat will catch up with you.
Even you, who says “we are not winning or losing” when the political goals –of implanting a pro-American, pro-Israeli pseudo-democracy, sans Shariah law…are already lost.

Oh, and the al Qaeda taking over Iraq bit? That went out sometime
in late 2004 as an effective lie. You drive a Yugo?

1. It provides political cover – and while that may look like a bad thing, it actually is a good thing. It defuses the Dems – who can now ignore Iraq instead of having hearing after hearing. Thus condoning in reality a stay the course lite plan after all.

2. A deadline didn’t make much sense a year ago when the Iraqi government looked like it could do something. Now, they might need some pushing and a deadline might concentrate some minds. Plus, deadlines can always be changed. A cooling of period where the militias and insurgents “wait” for us to leave might also be very useful on its own right.

3. The focus on the training of the Iraqis is the right one – we were doing that anyways and it should be accelerated. So, when do we push the fledging Iraqis out of the nest to see if they can fly? Well, every mother is nervous, but maybe we shouldn’t be. Many third word armies deal with long running insurgencies pretty well.

4. Al Qaeda in Iraq is not going to win. The majority of people in Iraq hate them and the Anbar tribes are fighting them. This is the least of our worries in terms of meltdown scenarios. The civil war or Iranian capture of Iraq are much more serious. I would guess we will keep units dedicated to killing those folks off the withdrawl lists.

5. Talking with Iran and Syria – who knows? This is the weakest part of the ISG, but we already offered talks to Iran about nukes. And while often times these talks end up being sweet nothings, they do serve a purpose of denying the Left the ” if only we’d talk” fantasy critique. Personally they will probably amount to the Nork talks, i.e. talks about talks. In any case, talk IS cheap, and we aren’t promising anything but talks at this point. We should merely follow the Nork/Iran diplomatic strategy which has been so successful.

Now this part is more speculative: Selling Lebanon out will be much harder than it sounds, and probably result in a nice backlash among Lebanese and world opinion that ends up ixnaying any such plans. Remember if America is FOR something, most likely Europe and the Left will oppose it vigorously. So let’s use that to our advantage.

Okay, that’s just some thoughts.

Our country and the world are a far better place for our taking down Saddam’s thugocracy. Yeah, it’s a tough slog right now, but it’s not as bad as all the doomsayers. Iraq is a key battle in the global war on terror. Let’s keep the big picture perspective and forge ahead. Unfortunately, we also have to contend with the anti-Bush and anti-military MSM and the liberal lefty peaceniks.

The absolute guaranteed way to lose a war is to continue telling your opponent that they are winning and to tell your troops and your allies that you are losing. War is 90% psychological these days because we dare not use our full force. Our media decides these days who wins a war. I just hope the idiots at the Times refuse to pray 5 times a day and are the first in line to get their heads chopped off.

This is why I call the Baker boys psuedorealists and why the media doesn’t quite get it….

The recommendations of the Iraq Study Group are out, and those who are eager for a quick American defeat will be disappointed. The full report is here, and the Associated Press summarizes the findings:

President Bush’s policy in Iraq “is not working,” a high-level commission said Wednesday in a blunt, bleak assessment that urged an immediate diplomatic attempt to stabilize the country and allow withdrawal of most combat troops by early 2008. . . .

“Military priorities must change,” the report said, toward a goal of training, equipping and advising Iraqi forces. “We should seek to complete the training and equipping mission by the end of the first quarter of 2008.”

The commission recommended the number of U.S. troops embedded to train Iraqis should increase dramatically, from 3,000-4,000 currently to 10,000-20,000. Commission member William Perry, defense secretary in the Clinton administration, said those could be drawn from combat brigades already in Iraq.

Then, by early 2008, combat troops could begin to leave the country.

More than a year ago, Rep. John Murtha caused a stir when he said America should “immediately redeploy,” though he later claimed this wasn’t what he meant (another botched joke?). The ISG’s recommendation is much more moderate: a partial withdrawal, beginning more than a year from now, contingent on the success of efforts to train Iraqi forces. It seems like a plausible approach.

Either GW Washington or
H S Truman

Exactly what elected positions do any on this stupid Iraq committee hold? THEY ARE IRRELEVENT.

THERE IS ONLY ONE COMMANDER IN CHIEF.

And for the record: which of these former commanders-in-chief would you want protecting America today?
JFK
LBJ
J. CARTER
W.J.CLINTON

The democrats do not know how to protect America. Period. They, along with their media cohorts have aided and abetted the enemy bordering on high treason.