232273 Bullies, 3978 online  
  • Register
Our Sponsors:

Results 1 to 8 of 8
Sponsored Links Spacer Image
  1. patfromlogan is offline
    patfromlogan's Avatar

    Heavyweight

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Hilo Island of Hawaii
    Posts
    8,871

    Posted On:
    11/19/2005 1:22am

    supporting member
     Style: Kyokushinkai / Kajukenbo

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!

    Murtha 1, Cheney 0

    A top Democratic Representative that has earned bipartisan respect and is a Marine Vietnam vet, John Murtha of Pennsylvania has called for immediate withdrawal from Iraq.

    (Murtha: Marine colonel with a bronze star and two purple hearts, combat in Vietnam. Retired from Marine Corps Reserves in 1990 after 37 years of service. House of Representatives: First Vietnam veteran elected to the House, in 1974).

    "The U.S. cannot accomplish anything further in Iraq militarily. It is time to bring them home," said Rep. John Murtha of Pennsylvania. "The war in Iraq is not going as advertised. It is a flawed policy wrapped in illusion," Murtha said.

    "It is time for a change in direction. Our military is suffering, the future of our country is at risk. We cannot continue on the present course. It is evident that continued military action in Iraq is not in the best interests of the United States of America, the Iraqi people or the Persian Gulf region,"

    In the 2004 vice presidential debate, Cheney noted that, "One of my strongest allies in Congress when I was Secretary of Defense was Jack Murtha, a Democrat who is chairman of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee."

    After Murtha's call for withdrawl...

    Cheney said, "The president and I cannot prevent certain politicians from losing their memory, or their backbone -- but we're not going to sit by and let them rewrite history."

    Murtha's response:
    "I like guys who got five deferments and have never been there and send people to war, and then don't like to hear suggestions about what needs to be done," said Murtha, referencing the vice president's long record of draft avoidance in the 1960s.

    "If you heard (soldiers and their families) reaching out and asking for a policy, a bi-partisan policy. When I introduced this resolution, I didn't introduce this resolution as a partisan resolution. I go by Arlington Cemetary every day, and the vice president criticizes Democrats? Let me tell you, those grave stones don't say Democrat or Republican, the say American."


    ===========================================
    Murtha's speech: http://www.house.gov/apps/list/press...51117iraq.html

    Murtha's plan:



    Whereas Congress and the American People have not been shown clear, measurable progress toward establishment of stable and improving security in Iraq or of a stable and improving economy in Iraq, both of which are essential to "promote the emergence of a democratic government";

    Whereas additional stabilization in Iraq by U, S. military forces cannot be achieved without the deployment of hundreds of thousands of additional U S. troops, which in turn cannot be achieved without a military draft;

    Whereas more than $277 billion has been appropriated by the United States Congress to prosecute U.S. military action in Iraq and Afghanistan;

    Whereas, as of the drafting of this resolution, 2,079 U.S. troops have been killed in Operation Iraqi Freedom;

    Whereas U.S. forces have become the target of the insurgency,

    Whereas, according to recent polls, over 80% of the Iraqi people want U.S. forces out of Iraq;

    Whereas polls also indicate that 45% of the Iraqi people feel that the attacks on U.S. forces are justified;

    Whereas, due to the foregoing, Congress finds it evident that continuing U.S. military action in Iraq is not in the best interests of the United States of America, the people of Iraq, or the Persian Gulf Region, which were cited in Public Law 107-243 as justification for undertaking such action;

    Therefore be it Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That:

    Section 1. The deployment of United States forces in Iraq, by direction of Congress, is hereby terminated and the forces involved are to be redeployed at the earliest practicable date.

    Section 2. A quick-reaction U.S. force and an over-the-horizon presence of U.S Marines shall be deployed in the region.

    Section 3. The United States of America shall pursue security and stability in Iraq through diplomacy.
    "Preparing mentally, the most important thing is, if you aren't doing it for the love of it, then don't do it." - Benny Urquidez
  2. Quikfeet509 is offline

    Acupuncturist / Anesthesia Student

    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Kansas City - the mecca of civilization
    Posts
    1,622

    Posted On:
    11/19/2005 1:53am


     Style: Mostly weights now...

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    On the news a republican congresswomen called people that wanted to pull-out from Iraq "cowards"...it appeared it was in rebuttal to Murtha's change of heart.



    After her comments, it was like watching British parliament: I heard people booing and heckling in the background.




    On Harball, McCain said that he has mucho respecto for for Murtha but just happens to disagree. Unfortunately, while I agree with the principle of what Murtha said (and while I am very offended that the war was started on BS reasons), I think leaving too early would be a mistake. Get the Iraq forces up to snuff, then let them demonstrate their fortitude by getting US out (and let them take all the casualties).





    Before anybody jumps in with the "Sadaam gassed his people", let me say I fucking know that. I also know if the former Yugoslavia had oil, those rape camps would have been shut down long before they actually were. It's BS that Bush gave two fucks about Sadaam's murderous rampages. **** happens in many other countries and we don't care unless we can make some money there. [/off topic]
  3. Sharki is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    93

    Posted On:
    11/19/2005 3:06am


     Style: Full contact Fighting

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    money, money,money, oil, oil ,oil, kill, kill, kill, lie,lie,lie, while our soldiers citizens die,die,die
    sharki
  4. Ian G.R. is offline

    Sociocidal sociocider

    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Legoland
    Posts
    759

    Posted On:
    11/20/2005 8:40am


     Style: Currently a SAMBO newb

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Count the bodies like sheep
    Count the bodies like sheep

    Counting bodies like sheep
    To the rhythm of the war drums

    Count the bodies like sheep

    Go back to sleep
    Go back to sleep

    Counting bodies like sheep
    To the rhythm of the war drums

    I'll be the one to protect you from your enemies and all your demons
    I'll be the one to protect you from a will to survive and a voice of reason
    I'll be the one to protect you from your enemies and your choices son
    They're one in the same, I must isolate you...
    Isolate and save you from yourself ...
    Hatred is gained as much by good works as by evil. - Machiavelli
  5. TheManchu is offline

    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    588

    Posted On:
    11/21/2005 10:48am


     Style: luk chua bik da

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    I believe Murtha's point is not that we should leave before we train their army, it's that we should leave since we have consistently moved backwards in training their army by current methods. He is trying to push a conversation on the topic, instead of "stay the course", because he, who is educated enough to have a strong opinion on it, believes "stay the course" is identical with defeat anyway.

    Basically, as long as Bush et all stick to "either stay the course or leave", leaving is the only rational answer in Murta's view. However, if other options, such as fire Rumsfield and listen to your experts for once, pop up, then that's another issue. But until then, he is sees choosing between staying the course and leaving as choosing between two different forms of losing.

    For those who believe that we should stay until we train their army, how does this work when the estimates of trained Iraqis have generally been going down, not up?
  6. Quikfeet509 is offline

    Acupuncturist / Anesthesia Student

    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Kansas City - the mecca of civilization
    Posts
    1,622

    Posted On:
    11/21/2005 2:26pm


     Style: Mostly weights now...

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by TheManchu
    For those who believe that we should stay until we train their army, how does this work when the estimates of trained Iraqis have generally been going down, not up?



    Simple. If the estimates don't get any better, fire the person that makes those estimates. Then replace that person that is more pliable. Make them use a different method of calculating the estimates that result in a more favorable estimate. Claim victory, then leave.








    I think Hitler did that during Operation Barbarossa. He cut down the size of his divisions so it would look like he had more of them (with the same number of troops). He also was a vegetarian.
  7. Yrkoon9 is offline
    Yrkoon9's Avatar

    Brock Sampson

    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Land of the Living
    Posts
    4,590

    Posted On:
    11/21/2005 4:34pm

    supporting member
     Style: 5.56

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Lets take a look at the situation and realistically look at the cost v benefits.

    I say that because hindsight shows we fucked up. We did. There is no getting around the fiasco other than to say 'bad intellegence' and move on. Because if you want to stay at this point I most certainly will sit here with you and point to U.S. sales of biological weapons, Detroit handing Saddam the key to the city, the CIA sponsoring of Saddams rise to power, the U.S being the only nation out of the UN security council to abstain from reprisals for Iraq using chemical weapons against Iran, and a whole host of OTHER **** that completely eliminates any moral highground or crap out removing a brutal dictator or that our reasons for invading Iraq were altruistic. We had no problem supporting this same brutal dictator in the past. And the time for chastizing him for using chemical weapons is long gone - back in the 80's we had that opportunity and it passed, or more explicitly WE passed during those UN security reprisals. We don't suddenly get to point the finger now.

    So moving on we look at the here and now. What are our options?

    A) Stay the course.
    B) Cut and run.

    Those seem to be the viable options, right?

    But lets look at them for a moment.

    A) Stay the course.

    What is the course exactly? Has it been clearly and REALISTICALLY defined? Or is it an open ended license to sit in Iraq until 'stability has been achieved?

    The reality, IMHO, that we are beginning to realize is that stability in Iraq is a myth. There has NEVER been stability in Iraq. Not for thousands of years. Ethnic and religious differences combined with a long history of warfare is not going to allow any kind of 'stability'. The idea that America is going to march in and declare democracy was laughable at best. And at worst it was ignorant to think that we could just dump money and troops into this volatile area and think we could fix it.

    The other sad reality of option A is that staying the course means more money and more troops. We are basically funding Iraq. We are paying for 2 countries. Which wouldn't be such a bad deal if we were to get say...an ally. Unfortunately though the resentment of Iraqis toward the U.S. is rising. Many will remember the good ole days under Saddam. Where kids all went to school, everyone had a job, nobody had to worry about getting blown up, etc. This might not have been the reality of things, but it will be what is remembered. They see their war torn streets, thier killed babies, and constant warfare and they need a target. A scapegoat. Or some place to direct thier anger. And it will be the U.S. unfortunately. The downside of this stay the course decision is that every day we are there we create new terrorists or insurgents. Every bomb that goes off. Every child killed. Every business ruined. Every wholesale neighborhood roundup for questioning creates new opposition. The idea that we could somehow remove the insurgents is wrong. Many of the children growing up in Iraq today are going to learn to hate the U.S. they will remember the good ole days as well. But they are growing up under IED's, checkpoints, mortars. We are essentially grooming the next generation of terrorists.

    So that brings us to the alternative to Stay the Course, which is cut and run. Many people's ENTIRE ideology of staying in Iraq is so that we do not 'appear' to have lost, or been defeated, or whatever. They want to stay in Iraq until it is 'won'. Thier definitions for winning are a bit unclear but they do NOT want America to be characterized as cowards. Some will turn this around and say that if we don't stay Iraq will fall into chaos and all our efforts will be for nothing. And we can't have 2000+ soldiers killed for nothing! By God, we will stay the course! It doesn't matter how many lives are lost on either side, or how much money we spend! We will stay the course! Ever heard the expression, Throwing good money after bad?

    But for how long? 5 more years? 10 more years? In all honesty nobody can tell when we are going to be leaving Iraq. Probably never. That is the honest truth. We will always have troops there. Much like Korea. Another little colony of democracy that we will pour money into until the end of time.

    So does option B automatically mean the opposite of option A?

    Of course not. The cut and run strategy is just as flawed as stay the course. Usually preached by those who have no idea the repercussions of such a withdrawl. They are short term thinkers who are tired of hearing about body counts and casualties. They are tired of hearing about billions and billions of dollars pouring into Iraq.

    They believe that by leaving Iraq we can solve many problems. When pressed on which problems will be solved they point toward the body count and the dollars. On the surface those are good points. But looking a little deeper the body count won't go down. It will reduce American casualties for sure - but Iraqi deaths will spiral out of control as civil war ensues. So when the liberal left start crying about the humanity of it all they don't realize the only thing stopping a civil war is the U.S troops and the U.S funded and propped up government. So lets not take the moral high ground here either. Lots of people will die if we leave. Just not so many Americans.

    Looking to the future of Iraq, what are the advantages of pulling out other than money and deaths?

    One thing is for sure the U.S. has a big black eye over this debacle of foreign policy. Pulling out would give us a matching set of black eyes. Walking in and blowing the crap out of a country, then leaving it in shambles wouldn't exactly set us high on the humanitarian awards. The world is looking at us like a big arrogant bully at the moment. Staying the course certainly demonstrates a committed intent to actually promote democracy and stability in the region even if those are only a dream. If we bailed out, Iraq would look more like a hit-and-run incident. Criminal.

    Now I do see Murta's point. And I believe, if I have interpretted him correctly, is that we are trying to cut our losses. At a certain point things are 'unwinnable'. The only reason I agree with pulling out is that I believe America has a lot of work to do here at home. And if we took that 227 billion dollar price tag and applied it to domestic issues I think we could have done a lot of good. Looking to the future and say another 3 years with a similar price tag I believe that America could really use that money. And the troops that are dying every day in Iraq could actually be dying for a reason, a cause, rather than imposing our will based on an egotistical refusal to leave. The idea that they are fighting the war on terror just doesn't sell me. The war on terror isn't won with troops, machineguns, and bombs. It is won with ideology. Unfortunately I believe our ideology and foreign policy is deeply concerned with putting its fingers in everyones pie and imposing our will and the RESULTS of this policy have manifested themselves making America the target. "They" don't hate our freedom - they hate our policies. And in particular they hate our imperialistic, belligerent, and arrogant policies. We are demonstrating those in Iraq. And that makes the U.S. such a wonderfull target.

    IMO that whole area is fucked. Completely and irreversibly fucked since the dawn of civilization. The entire area is has been at war, and will be at war. It is a natural reality of the area. What we should have been doing is finding ways NOT to get involved in a war there. We failed at that task though. It is unrealistic and complete fantasy that we can somehow impose peace in Iraq or in the middle east for that matter. The best idea is to remove ourselves as targets and let them fight amongst themselves. They will be so busy fighting that they will forget about us. Stop subsidizing Israel. Stop trying to bring democracy. Just let em go at it. Let Iraq have its civil war. Let the whole area go to ****.
  8. Dr._Tzun_Tzu is offline
    Dr._Tzun_Tzu's Avatar

    It's pretty beat up, but it is a complete copy....

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    California
    Posts
    2,528

    Posted On:
    11/21/2005 6:31pm

    supporting member
     Style: EBMAS WT/ Latosa Concepts

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    What he said...:XXbazooka

    We need to pull out of Cuba, the Philipines, Germany, and Japan too, ......

    We never pull out of anywhere really, so we just need to build some bases, hold on to the oil fields, make our $400 Billion back, and call it a victory....

    Maybe divide in Half like we did Korea?

    Even if that means letting Southern Iraq becomes another Al Q. hotspot.

    "If anything is gained from this, it should be you both wanting to get better so you can make up for how crappy you are now." KidSpatula about the Sirc vs DTT Gong Sau Event
    Until the Bulltube is fixed:
    DTT vs Sirc

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Powered by vBulletin™© contact@vbulletin.com vBulletin Solutions, Inc. 2011 All rights reserved.