House to Legislate Surrender in Iraq

[Radio Frequency X]

link

Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives have secured enough votes to pass legislation setting a September 1, 2008, deadline for withdrawing American troops from Iraq, lawmakers said on Friday.

A House vote was expected later on Friday on a bill that would provide about $100 billion to fight wars in Iraq and Afghanistan this year. Attached to the bill are provisions mandating the troop withdrawal and conditions to ensure troops being sent into war in the meantime are properly trained and equipped.

House Democrats were pushing the legislation despite warnings from the White House that President George W. Bush would veto it.

And this is why Democrats are dangerous. Never be surprised at what the shockingly ignorant members of our congress are capable of. It's time that Americans really begin to fight back against these guys. We need to push them out of office as fast as is humanly possible.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Exactly what do you find stupid about what the Democrats are doing? ... and why?

 

[Radio Frequency X]

Exactly what do you find stupid about what the Democrats are doing? ... and why?

A time table is the most ignorant and idiotic idea I've ever heard of. It means that the insurgents can stop fighting, until the established date or retreat. This will give the Iranians an exact time table with which to work. It's just absurd. The congressmen should be... well, I just hope none of the congressmen that voted for this are reelected, as the blood of thousands will be on their hands.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

A time table is the most ignorant and idiotic idea I've ever heard of. It means that the insurgents can stop fighting, until the established date or retreat. This will give the Iranians an exact time table with which to work. It's just absurd. The congressmen should be... well, I just hope none of the congressmen that voted for this are reelected, as the blood of thousands will be on their hands.

A carrier group in the region should serve as a deterrant. Sure, Iran could attack Iraq, but they'd pay dearly for it.

I don't support the Democrat's plan for a timetable either, but the simple fact (to my mind) is that people are going to die and it's going to be messy in Iraq whether Americans are there or not. America has been working for the freedom of the Iraqi people - if they don't want it, fine. Let them kill one another - or Iranians -and not us.

 

[Radio Frequency X]

A carrier group in the region should serve as a deterrant. Sure, Iran could attack Iraq, but they'd pay dearly for it.

I don't support the Democrat's plan for a timetable either, but the simple fact (to my mind) is that people are going to die and it's going to be messy in Iraq whether Americans are there or not. America has been working for the freedom of the Iraqi people - if they don't want it, fine. Let them kill one another - or Iranians -and not us.

I disagree, but fair enough. I still have hope for the democratically elected Iraqi government. If that is naive, then I'm probably in the wrong here.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

I disagree, but fair enough. I still have hope for the democratically elected Iraqi government. If that is naive, then I'm probably in the wrong here.

I hope for it, too. Maybe it will happen. If it does, it will bring great prosperity to that nation.

We must remember that there are some folks still alive - in both Iraq and Iran - who have a score to settle with one another. Iraq will be vulerable if the US leaves, and Iran is vulnerable if the US stays or if Iraq "succeeds" with democracy. So Iran "loses" both ways, unless Iraq forgets the crimes of Iran (and vice-versa) and establishes trade and diplomacy both now and when its new government ever gains sufficient power.

I don't know of a good historical example of a country with good natural resources being conquered and taking off on its own in a short amount of time. What Iraq needs for peace, IMHO, is a good hard kick in the arse (eg., absolute martial law and total weapons bans imposed by a foreign force that directly manages her natural resources), imperial rule for a while, and a forced re-education of the entire society which incorporates an elite Iraqi educated and monied class who can eventually run the country aristocratically.

It may not be democracy, but it will be better than people brutally butchering one another.

 

[anders]

America has been working for the freedom of the Iraqi people

Oh yeah: first starving them to as near to death as possible, and then bombing and shooting those who miraculously survived. Some freedom!

 

[Mathematician]

Quite ironic. If this does get past the Senate, which I doubt, Bush will veto funding.

And this is why Democrats are dangerous. Never be surprised at what the shockingly ignorant members of our congress are capable of. It's time that Americans really begin to fight back against these guys. We need to push them out of office as fast as is humanly possible.

Almost 60% of Americans agree with the decision, so I'm wondering why you're making this a partisan attack when it extends into the moderate and Republican field.

http://www.pollingreport.com/iraq.htm

 

[kateyes]

As Gene points out--it would have to pass the Senate as well (it seem unlikely at this point--but stranger things have happened). I would like our troops out of Iraq as well--but I don't want to leave willy-nilly as the Dems seem to find necessary. I also don't see the purpose in establishing a firm pull out date. To me that would be the safe as if we had launched Dday during WWII and said okay we will be here a month--get it done cause after that we are outta here. It seems to me like all we accomplish is letting everyone sit back--stockpile weapons and make plans for what they are going to do on 2Sept.

To me this would all make more sense if we withdrew US troops to the borders (to prevent outside interference-Iran, Syria etc) and held them. Then let the Iraqi people do what they are going to do to establish a democratic government. I think right now the majority are banking too heavily on US troops to keep order, when they should be establishing that themselves and the others are using the US targets rather than figuring out how to live together.

 

[Comprehend]

Bush has promised to veto the bill. I will be surprised, he has vetoed about 2 bills in 7 years...

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Bush has promised to veto the bill. I will be surprised, he has vetoed about 2 bills in 7 years...

Having a Republican Congress helped.

 

[greatcalgarian]

A time table is the most ignorant and idiotic idea I've ever heard of. It means that the insurgents can stop fighting, until the established date or retreat. This will give the Iranians an exact time table with which to work. It's just absurd. The congressmen should be... well, I just hope none of the congressmen that voted for this are reelected, as the blood of thousands will be on their hands.

When US withdrew from Vietname, there is also a time table. What is the difference?

 

[kiwimac]

Whether or not some here like it, the US has lost the war in Iraq. The only thing left to do is get out. About time some sense prevailed.

 

[Bubber]

There is no longer any point in allowing our troops to die in a civil war. We cannot win. There is nothing to win. I disagree with the timetable as well but what this does is firmly plant this as Bush's war. Bush can have his money, the republicans can have their money, every cent, how badly do they want it?

Bring our boys home, they cannot win and it is not a reflection on their abilities but the leadership they have followed. They are dying over there. American families are forever destroyed. Many of the soldiers there are 18 and 19 and 20 year old CHILDREN who have barely begun to taste life and love and start families of their own and they are dying. Why? For what? This is not the way to beat terrorists and it so far has done more generate them than anything else so please, bring them home.

 

[michel]

A time table is the most ignorant and idiotic idea I've ever heard of. It means that the insurgents can stop fighting, until the established date or retreat. This will give the Iranians an exact time table with which to work. It's just absurd. The congressmen should be... well, I just hope none of the congressmen that voted for this are reelected, as the blood of thousands will be on their hands.

I agree; it has already been made clear that the insurgents are "lying low" for the most part, just biding their time until we both decide to get out.

The moment we do, there will be a blood bath.

 

[Radio Frequency X]

I agree; it has already been made clear that the insurgents are "lying low" for the most part, just biding their time until we both decide to get out.

The moment we do, there will be a blood bath.

This seems to be what the liberals in congress are aiming for.

 

[Bubber]

This seems to be what the liberals in congress are aiming for.

Oh yeah!!! Can't wait! This has been our goal all along!

Please....

 

[Mathematician]

Time heals wounds bombs blow open. Western influence has already dug its heals in the bedrock of the Middle East; just pull out and wait. Societies may have bumps in the road, and temporary set-backs, but they always move forward.

 

[Mathematician]

Kucinich's plan. Gotta' love that guy:

1. The US announces it will end the occupation, close military bases and withdraw. The insurgency has been fueled by the occupation and the prospect of a long-term presence as indicated by the building of permanent bases. A US declaration of an intention to withdraw troops and close bases will help dampen the insurgency which has been inspired to resist colonization and fight invaders and those who have supported US policy. Furthermore this will provide an opening where parties within Iraq and in the region can set the stage for negotiations towards peaceful settlement.

2. US announces that it will use existing funds to bring the troops and necessary equipment home. Congress appropriated $70 billion in bridge funds on October 1st for the war. Money from this and other DOD accounts can be used to fund the troops in the field over the next few months, and to pay for the cost of the return of the troops, (which has been estimated at between $5 and $7 billion dollars) while a political settlement is being negotiated and preparations are made for a transition to an international security and peacekeeping force.

3. Order a simultaneous return of all US contractors to the United States and turn over all contracting work to the Iraqi government. The contracting process has been rife with world-class corruption, with contractors stealing from the US Government and cheating the Iraqi people, taking large contracts and giving 5% or so to Iraqi subcontractors.

Reconstruction activities must be reorganized and closely monitored in Iraq by the Iraqi government, with the assistance of the international community. The massive corruption as it relates to US contractors, should be investigated by congressional committees and federal grand juries. The lack of tangible benefits, the lack of accountability for billions of dollars, while millions of Iraqis do not have a means of financial support, nor substantive employment, cries out for justice.

It is noteworthy that after the first Gulf War, Iraqis reestablished electricity within three months, despite sanctions. Four years into the US occupation there is no water, nor reliable electricity in Baghdad, despite massive funding from the US and from the Madrid conference. The greatest mystery involves the activities of private security companies who function as mercenaries. Reports of false flag operations must be investigated by an international tribunal.

4. Convene a regional conference for the purpose of developing a security and stabilization force for Iraq. The focus should be on a process which solves the problems of Iraq. The US has told the international community, "This is our policy and we want you to come and help us implement it." The international community may have an interest in helping Iraq, but has no interest in participating in the implementation of failed US policy.

A shift in US policy away from unilateralism and toward cooperation will provide new opportunities for exploring common concerns about the plight of Iraq. The UN is the appropriate place to convene, through the office of the Secretary General, all countries that have interests, concerns and influence, including the five permanent members of the Security Council and the European community, and all Arab nations.

The end of the US occupation and the closing of military bases are necessary preconditions for such a conference. When the US creates a shift of policy and announces it will focus on the concerns of the people of Iraq, it will provide a powerful incentive for nations to participate.

It is well known that while some nations may see the instability in Iraq as an opportunity, there is also an even-present danger that the civil war in Iraq threatens the stability of nations throughout the region. The impending end of the occupation will provide a breakthrough for the cooperation between the US and the UN and the UN and countries of the region. The regional conference must include Iran, Syria, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Jordan.

5. Prepare an international security and peacekeeping force to move in, replacing US troops who then return home. The UN has an indispensable role to play here, but cannot do it as long as the US is committed to an occupation. The UN is the only international organization with the ability to mobilize and the legitimacy to authorize troops.

The UN is the place to develop the process, to build the political consensus, to craft a political agreement, to prepare the ground for the peacekeeping mission, to implement the basis of an agreement that will end the occupation and begin the transition to international peacekeepers. This process will take at least three months from the time the US announces the intention to end the occupation.

The US will necessarily have to fund a peacekeeping mission, which, by definition will not require as many troops. Fifty percent of the peacekeeping troops must come from nations with large Muslim populations. The international security force, under UN direction, will remain in place until the Iraqi government is capable of handling its own security. The UN can field an international security and peacekeeping mission, but such an initiative will not take shape unless there is a peace to keep, and that will be dependent upon a political process which reaches agreement between all the Iraqi parties. Such an agreement means fewer troops will be needed.

According to UN sources, the UN the peacekeeping mission in the Congo, which is four times larger in area than Iraq, required about twenty thousand troops. Finally the UN does not mobilize quickly because they depend upon governments to supply the troops, and governments are slow. The ambition of the UN is to deploy in less than ninety days. However, without an agreement of parties the UN is not likely to approve a mission to Iraq, because countries will not give them troops.

6. Develop and fund a process of national reconciliation. The process of reconciliation must begin with a national conference, organized with the assistance of the UN and with the participation of parties who can create, participate in and affect the process of reconciliation, defined as an airing of all grievances and the creation of pathways toward open, transparent talks producing truth and resolution of grievances. The Iraqi government has indicated a desire for the process of reconciliation to take place around it, and that those who were opposed to the government should give up and join the government. Reconciliation must not be confused with capitulation, nor with realignments for the purposes of protecting power relationships.

For example, Kurds need to be assured that their own autonomy will be regarded and therefore obviate the need for the Kurds to align with religious Shia for the purposes of self-protection. The problem in Iraq is that every community is living in fear. The Shia, who are the majority fear they will not be allowed to government even though they are a majority. The Kurds are afraid they will lose the autonomy they have gained. The Sunnis think they will continue to be made to pay for the sins of Saddam.

A reconciliation process which brings people together is the only way to overcome their fears and reconcile their differences. It is essential to create a minimum of understanding and mutual confidence between the Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds.

But how can a reconciliation process be constructed in Iraq when there is such mistrust: Ethnic cleansing is rampant. The police get their money from the US and their ideas from Tehran. They function as religious militia, fighting for supremacy, while the Interior Ministry collaborates. Two or three million people have been displaced. When someone loses a family member, a loved one, a friend, the first response is likely to be that there is no reconciliation.

It is also difficult to move toward reconciliation when one or several parties engaged in the conflict think they can win outright. The Shia, some of whom are out for revenge, think they can win because they have the defacto support of the US. The end of the US occupation will enhance the opportunity for the Shia to come to an accommodation with the Sunnis. They have the oil, the weapons, and support from Iran. They have little interest in reconciling with those who are seen as Baathists.

The Sunnis think they have experience, as the former army of Saddam, boasting half a million people insurgents. The Sunnis have so much more experience and motivation that as soon as the Americans leave they believe they can defeat the Shia government. Any Sunni revenge impulses can be held in check by international peacekeepers. The only sure path toward reconciliation is through the political process. All factions and all insurgents not with al Queda must be brought together in a relentless process which involves Saudis, Turks and Iranians.

7. Reconstruction and Jobs. Restart the failed reconstruction program in Iraq. Rebuild roads, bridges, schools, hospitals, and other public facilities, houses, and factories with jobs and job training going to local Iraqis.

8. Reparations. The US and Great Britain have a high moral obligation to enable a peace process by beginning a program of significant reparations to the people of Iraq for the loss of lives, physical and emotional injuries, and damage to property. There should be special programs to rescue the tens of thousands of Iraqi orphans from lives of destitution. This is essential to enable reconciliation.


[..]

http://kucinich.us/node/1780

 

[Bubber]

Good post Gnostic. Love that guy. If I thought he had a snowballs chance in hell of winning, I'd vote for him for pres.