1. Welcome! Please take a few seconds to create your free account to post threads, make some friends, remove a few ads while surfing and much more. ClutchFans has been bringing fans together to talk Houston Sports since 1996. Join us!

A Colossal Mistake

Discussion in 'BBS Hangout: Debate & Discussion' started by basso, Nov 29, 2005.

  1. basso

    basso Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2002
    Messages:
    33,390
    Likes Received:
    9,308
    nice to see that at least one senator, and a democrat at that, gets it. how's a rudy/joe ticket in 2008 sound?

    http://opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110007611

    --
    Our Troops Must Stay
    America can't abandon 27 million Iraqis to 10,000 terrorists.

    BY JOE LIEBERMAN
    Tuesday, November 29, 2005 12:01 a.m.

    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nationhood--unless the great American military that has given them and us this unexpected opportunity is prematurely withdrawn.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 Shiite 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.
     
  2. wizkid83

    wizkid83 Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2002
    Messages:
    6,347
    Likes Received:
    850
    War by it self was not the problem, having no one in charge to be able to lead, plan a course of action, gather international support, having a good strategy is the problem.

    If Clinton was still in charge, he would've worked out some sort of backroom deal with France and Russia and we'd all be going into Iraq like the 3 stooges and get the job done.
     
  3. Baqui99

    Baqui99 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2000
    Messages:
    11,495
    Likes Received:
    1,231
    Joe Liebermann is a flaming douchebag. He is a sellout and disgrace to his Party.
     
  4. vwiggin

    vwiggin Member

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2002
    Messages:
    1,951
    Likes Received:
    2
    I'd like to point out that I lean Democrat and I do not share Baqui99's sentiments.

    Not all Democrats support troop withdraw. And to call a fellow Democrat a sellout just because he holds an honest dissenting opinion is as silly as calling a person unpatriotic because he disagrees with President Bush.

    I agree with Libermann to a certain extent. This war was probably a mistake, but to leave prematurely will be a BIGGER mistake. If you think Iraq is a hotbed of terrorist activity now, just wait until we leave.

    However, I disagree with Libermann's rosy assessment of our situation there. He seems to imply that things are going well. Um, no it isn't. The Bush administration has conducted the war badly and handled the "peace" in a even worse way.

    The presidential candidate I will support is a person who is willing to stick it out in Iraq but propose real changes that will rid the country of its corruption and provide lasting stability before we set a timetable for leaving.
     
  5. Sishir Chang

    Sishir Chang Member

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2000
    Messages:
    11,064
    Likes Received:
    8
    Not a bad piece and if the Admin and more supporters of the war would layout the case for staying in Iraq in as thoughtful and well structured as Lieberman has maybe support wouldn't be flagging. Instead we've just seen rhetoric telling people to keep quiet and trust the Admin..

    As I've said before war in a democracy is a political exercise and instead of blaming those those Americans who don't support the war the Admin. should be looking to make the case for why. Lieberman has done a far better job in that piece than most in the Admin.. I'm still skeptical about a lot of what he says but I will give him credit for laying out a good argument.
     
  6. Deckard

    Deckard Blade Runner
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2002
    Messages:
    57,791
    Likes Received:
    41,228
    Ditto, and then some.



    Keep D&D Civil.
     
  7. Baqui99

    Baqui99 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2000
    Messages:
    11,495
    Likes Received:
    1,231
    I've always thought of Lieberman as a tool, not just because he dissents against his party. This article is just another reason why. Like you said, he's acting like things are going great over there, with no regard to the billions of dollars that we've spent there and countless American soldiers that are being killed.

    There is no mention of timeline for withdrawing troops, nor does he discuss the complete inepititude of the Iraqi army. We should never have been there to begin with, and Joe refuses to admit that.
     
  8. geeimsobored

    geeimsobored Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2005
    Messages:
    8,968
    Likes Received:
    3,389
    My how quick we are the start calling people out and hurling insults and accusations at people who disagree with you. Regardless of whether you agree or disagree with him, there's no reason to call him a disgrace or a sellout or a "flaming douchebag."

    I couldve sworn that we were all yelling at Republicans and Conservatives to stop the name calling but I guess we didn't really learn anything from that.
     
  9. AMS

    AMS Member

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2003
    Messages:
    9,646
    Likes Received:
    218
    The reason why a vast majority of muslims voted bush in 04 ???


    joe the ho
     
  10. Invisible Fan

    Invisible Fan Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2001
    Messages:
    45,954
    Likes Received:
    28,048
    He's accurate that it's a bipartisan movement. It wasn't long ago when interventionalists were considered liberal.

    I'm not sure what reports he's read to claim we're near the jaws of coming victory, but at least he's been consistent since the time he voted for war authorization.

    However, his religion is fair game in this matter....
     
  11. insane man

    insane man Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2003
    Messages:
    2,892
    Likes Received:
    5
    i dont disagree but he is from connecticut. what do you expect? i dont want him switching parties.

    but yeah f'ing douche.
     
  12. Batman Jones

    Batman Jones Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 1999
    Messages:
    15,937
    Likes Received:
    5,491
    basso, everything you and your guy have advocated for in the last five years has turned out to be wrong. After all that, do you really still have the nerve to give advice? L.M.A.O.
     
  13. geeimsobored

    geeimsobored Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2005
    Messages:
    8,968
    Likes Received:
    3,389
    What a great idea! Let's tank the season less than 15 games into it for an unknown commodity! Not smart.
     
  14. Invisible Fan

    Invisible Fan Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2001
    Messages:
    45,954
    Likes Received:
    28,048
    Do you want more balls in the draft lottery or do you want try to buy overpriced players through free agency, Isiah Thomas?
     
  15. wnes

    wnes Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2003
    Messages:
    8,196
    Likes Received:
    19
    Talk is cheap, Lieberman. Show the War is worthwhile by sending your own kids to the combat field. Until then, no need to spew any more BS.
     
  16. SamFisher

    SamFisher Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2003
    Messages:
    61,853
    Likes Received:
    41,363
    It's wonderfully droll how basso tries to bind "the liberals" as inexorably bound by the word of one senator, be it his #1 american idol lieberman or his public enemy #1 Robert Byrd and yet is blissfully and intentionally ignorant of the dissent on the other side of the aisle.

    I've always thought of lieberman as a tool as well, his moronic anti-violent video game/movie/tv crusade is a model of stupidity. He should just become a republican and get it the f- over with.
     
  17. giddyup

    giddyup Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2002
    Messages:
    20,466
    Likes Received:
    488
    Don't you think that that is for his kids themselves to decide? We still have a volunteer army don't we?
     
  18. gifford1967

    gifford1967 Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2003
    Messages:
    8,306
    Likes Received:
    4,653
    From Atrios-


    Feel the Joementum!


    Time magazine Baghdad bureau chief Michael Ware on Morning Sedition this morning:


    I and some other journalists had lunch with Senator Joe Lieberman the other day and we listened to him talking about Iraq. Either Senator Lieberman is so divorced from reality that he's completely lost the plot or he knows he's spinning a line. Because one of my colleagues turned to me in the middle of this lunch and said he's not talking about any country I've ever been to and yet he was talking about Iraq, the very country where we were sitting.


    http://atrios.blogspot.com/
     
  19. nyquil82

    nyquil82 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2002
    Messages:
    5,174
    Likes Received:
    3
    Lieberman's support for the war stems from his strong historical support and ties to Israel. He supports the war, but for very different reasons than the pro-war group (I can no longer say republicans are pro-war). He's not divorced from reality, he just has seperate allegiances that cause him to support US presence in the middle east. I doubt the pro-war group have the same reasons.

    addendum: and Sam, I didn't vote for Gore in 2000 because i didn't like Lieberman. I can't stand authoritarian politicians and he was too left for my tastes.
     
    #19 nyquil82, Nov 30, 2005
    Last edited: Nov 30, 2005
  20. basso

    basso Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2002
    Messages:
    33,390
    Likes Received:
    9,308
    more crushing of dissent.
     

Share This Page