Iraq is nearly over. BTW we won.

[Undertoad]

Originally Posted by Radar

UT, never assume that you know anything that would confuse me.

I put it in bold, put your name on it and you still glossed over it. You should always read for comprehension, not for attack.

"We let him keep the gun because every Iraqi family is allowed to have a personal weapon,"

[Radar]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

I put it in bold, put your name on it and you still glossed over it. You should always read for comprehension, not for attack.

"We let him keep the gun because every Iraqi family is allowed to have a personal weapon,"

Perhaps now they are allowed to have guns, but this was not the case when America invaded in 1991, or 2003.

[lookout123]

America didn't invade in 1991.

[Undertoad]

Originally Posted by Radar

Perhaps now they are allowed to have guns, but this was not the case when America invaded... in 2003.

So now your narrative is that the entire country was systematically disarmed so that a massacre could take place, but has re-armed in the last, what, six months?

[Radar]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

So now your narrative is that the entire country was systematically disarmed so that a massacre could take place, but has re-armed in the last, what, six months?

I've seen video of soldiers breaking down doors, shoving people to the floor, and taking all of the guns in the house so don't even pretend it didn't happen. As far as the massacre, America is responsible for the deaths of at least 1 million Iraqi people and probably closer to 2 million. This is through 2 illegal invasions on the part of America, and bombing Iraq daily for 12 years, setting up illegal "no fly" zones, searching homes illegally...including those of the leader of their country, keeping Iraq from life saving medicines and food, destroying Iraq's ability to defend itself and thus allowing a flood of terrorists into their country, imprisoning people who have committed no crime, torturing them (sometimes to death), etc.

I don't know when they decided to start allowing people to have guns again. Perhaps it was when they had their fake election?

[BigV]

Iraqi Official Says Government Wants Timetable for Withdrawal
BAGHDAD, July 8 -- Iraq's national security advisor said Tuesday that his government would not sign an agreement governing the future role of U.S. troops in Iraq unless it includes a timetable for their withdrawal.

The statement was the strongest yet by an Iraqi official regarding the politically controversial negotiations between Iraq and the United States over the U.S. military role in Iraq. A United Nations mandate that sanctions the presence of U.S. troops in the country expires in December.

Speaking to reporters in the holy city of Najaf, National Security Adviser Mowaffak al-Rubaie declined to provide specific dates, but said his government is "impatiently waiting" for the complete withdrawal of U.S. troops.

"There should not be any permanent bases in Iraq unless these bases are under Iraqi control," Rubaie said. "We would not accept any memorandum of understanding with [the U.S.] side that has no obvious and specific dates for the foreign troops' withdrawal from Iraq."

So, "we" "won", great. Why are we still there?

And this confuses me:

The Bush administration has long opposed a firm timetable for the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq, arguing that the American military should leave only when Iraq's security forces are capable of securing the country and that setting a pullout date would allow insurgents to lay low until after U.S. troops were gone.

What are the alternatives? Stay indefinitely? Sneak out and hope the insurgents don't notice? How in the hell can you square this circle?

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by BigV

So, "we" "won", great. Why are we still there?

And this confuses me:
What are the alternatives? Stay indefinitely? Sneak out and hope the insurgents don't notice? How in the hell can you square this circle?

Well if anyone thinks we will not be there indefinately is fooling themselves. Maybe not in Iraq, but we will be close by. I would guess we will keep support personel and some form of aviation as well as a quick reaction force, maybe a few battalions, in Iraq for many years to come. The majority will be out in a few years. As long as our relations sour and continue to decline with Iran we will have a few carriers on station to protect the oil routes through the straight. Don't kid yourselves, we aren't completely leaving.

[spudcon]

The insurgents will be giving up en mass if Obama wins the White House. They'll all be wanting their free tickets to Club Gitmo before Obama surrenders.

[Undertoad]

Yes, it's true: we can leave now. It is becoming time for us to leave. Install a nice protectable embassy and a few bases, and otherwise leave.

[Griff]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

Yes, it's true: we can leave now. It is becoming time for us to leave. Install a nice protectable embassy and a few bases, and otherwise leave.

I suppose few adjusted for inflation is 58. I'm all for declaring victory and getting out, but that would involve actually getting out. We've, reportedly, defeated an enemy that wasn't there when we invaded, but if that's what it takes to declare victory and actually get out count me in.

Of course, some would assume that this clears the decks for the next war of choice in Iran. Anyone interested in a world war should really get rolling on that before a new administration takes over. I'll leave the bin Laden commentary to tw and the other nutters who think that the Stans have oil er... terrorists.

[BigV]

Iraq says timetable. US says no.

Iraq says complete withdrawal. US says "a few battalions" "a few bases" (I paraphrase, but that is a very common sentiment).

Who decides? If there is no timetable, will we have "won" that battle? If there are no bases and no battalions will we have "lost" that battle? Will Iraq have "won"?

I think this paradigm "win / lose" is nearly useless by virtue of its rigidity. It is counterproductive, at best, even for those in favor of this whole process, to continue to oversimplify the possible outcomes this way.

[Radar]

Yes, American soldiers illegally invaded Iraq in 1991 when Iraq and Kuwait were having a dispute that had nothing to do with America.

[lookout123]

Uh, I thought one of the major complaints was that this current Iraq war was due in large part because our troops stayed in Kuwait rather than driving all the way to Baghdad?

[Undertoad]

US troops killed in Iraq in the first 9 days of July: 2

[BigV]

You're only as sovereign as the country occupying your land...