Is the Reconstruction of Iraq Failing?

[rmcrobertson]

First off, Kaith--"Iraq is mostly intact?" I don't want to be excessively rude, but are you trippin'? Their infrastructure's shot to hell, they can't get oil out of the ground and out of the country, all their major cities have been bombed again and again and again, they have no police/army to speak of, the Kurds want to break away from the rest, the average wage is something like 25 cents a day, there're bombings and shootings five times a day, they just beheaded more guys on TV and--oh yes--there's gotta be unexploded ordinance lying around everywhere.

Second off--you do realize that what you're arguing for is a garrisoned State, along with Afghanistan, as we hare off down the road to Empire?

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Robert,
2/3 of the country is rebuilding. A good deal of the damage was not caused by US action. Neglect, sabotage, and other actions contributed to the damage.

Interestingly enough, the roadside bombing clip I saw showed some roads in pretty decent repair, with traffic flowing. Repairs and modernization continue on water/electric/etc.

While a few months out of date, this makes for an interesting read: http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/iraq.html

Oh, and this just in:

Official: Iraq Oil Fields Resume Exports
09.21.2004, 10:27 AM
http://www.forbes.com/home/feeds/ap/2004/09/21/ap1553475.html

Exports from Iraq's northern oilfields are back to normal after a spate of attacks earlier this month crippled the main pipeline carrying Iraqi crude to Turkey, the state-run Northern Oil Co. said Tuesday.

Repairs were completed and oil began flowing through the line to the Turkish port of Ceyhan on Tuesday, a senior company official said on condition of anonymity.

Iraq was pumping an average of 400,000 barrels of crude a day through Turkey before a series of sabotage attacks earlier this month.

By using substitute lines, the pumping rate was brought back to 250,000 barrels a day last week.

With the main line repaired, the country is now ready to start pumping 600,000 barrels day, the official said. However, some analysts question Iraq's ability to reach such targets.

Insurgents waging a 17-month campaign here have repeatedly targeted Iraq's crucial oil infrastructure in a bid to undermine the U.S.-backed interim authorities.

With crude oil selling above $40 a barrel, the frequent sabotage has cost Iraq more than $2 billion, interim Prime Minister Ayad Allawi has said.

Also "current production is averaging 2.2 million barrels per day (bpd) of which two million bpd were coming from southern oil fields." http://www.busrep.co.za/index.php?fArticleId=404344

As to the bombing, stop making it sound like they are being carpet bombed back into the stone age. The attacks are being done with precision weapons, that take out -a- building in most cases. This is happening in a -few- locations, in cities that are Sunni strongholds, at the -request- of the Iraqi government.

As to the Kurds, they have always wanted that, and now see the chance. Negotiations are ongoing.

As to Unemployment:

Unemployment Levels
Prewar: 60 percent
Oct. 2003: 70 percent
Current: 25 percent to 30 percent

(Source: CPA)

More than 55,000 Iraqis are employed by contractors, at an average wage of $4 to $5 per day, according to the U.S. Defense Department.

CPA's Explanation of Drop in Unemployment: The "about 70 percent" figure that the CPA gave ABCNEWS in November was not an official figure, but an estimate based on consultations with Iraqi economic officials. It was never a concrete figure. Since then, experts say they have had the advantage of time on the ground to help gauge more accurately the employment picture. Our own view is that this remains a very rough estimate.

$5 a day sounds real bad..until you factor in that gas sells for 35 cents a gallon. (Unless you're a US based gouger who sells for $3 a gallon)

The Iraqi police and military now numbers in the tens of thousands. They are the ones currently doing the bulk of the fighting.

As to that unexploded ordinance, my god Robert, you are right. I mean, just the other day I saw this footage of these kids playing catch with hand grenades in the burnt out hulk of a Bradley. I mean, it's everywhere. NOT!

Robert, it's a combat zone. Of course there are unexploded shells. They still find them all over Europe and the Pacific. Just recently they found 1 of over 100! 'lost' atomic bombs off the US coast, missing for 45+ years.

As to the beheadings...so what?
Let them kill 1 guy a day. It still means that the other 25,000+ foreign workers in the country are working, earning a very high wage, and making progress. Yes, it's a crime, but we lose more than that a day to car accidents in any major city here. Outside of the shock value, it is a meaningless statistic.

As to what I argue for...remember, I argued for the napalming of Columbia to stop the cocaine cartels.

Robert, argue with facts, not the sensationalized sound bytes from Fox or CNN or some ultra-whatever campus rag where the editors think it's all about oil or otherwise haven't yet adapted to the real world and being apart from 'mommy'. Your post is lacking any quantifiable evidence, and is the same sort of 'scare em' sensationalism that I expect from my local news rag, or the Bush Administration. Apologies if this is rude, but I tire of having my intelligence insulted.

 

[RandomPhantom700]

Robert, argue with facts, not the sensationalized sound bytes from Fox or CNN or some ultra-whatever campus rag where the editors think it's all about oil or otherwise haven't yet adapted to the real world and being apart from 'mommy'. Your post is lacking any quantifiable evidence, and is the same sort of 'scare em' sensationalism that I expect from my local news rag, or the Bush Administration. Apologies if this is rude, but I tire of having my intelligence insulted.

:bow:

 

[hardheadjarhead]

Apologies if this is rude, but I tire of having my intelligence insulted.

As you should be. He does have a habit of doing that every so often, doesn't he?

That said, and back to the topic...a part of me wants Bush to win this so we can see whether this administration can pull it off. I don't believe they can, and my inner sadist wants to be able to tell Republicans "I told you so."

Here are the complications we currently face, and that the administration did not--apparently--anticipate:

The Sunni/Shia rivalry. Two Sunni clerics were killed this week...the country is on the verge of civil war:

http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0922/p06s01-woiq.html

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/world/9722069.htm?1c

One result, it says, could be Iraq's fragmentation into a Kurdish north, Sunni center and Shiite south.

The situation there is incredibly complex. There are tensions between the three major factions in the country--Kurd, Shia, and Sunni--and the interplay between the major powers attempting to pull their strings. Riyadh and Teheran are jostling for power as they have for a quarter of a century. The U.S. is stuck in the middle and increasinly set adrift and alone insofar as support. There is the complication of foreign fighters thrown in the mix as well.

Great Britain announced this week that it was reducing the numbers of troops deployed in Iraq...right when they're needed most.

As it now stands free elections can NOT be held due to security concerns.

We have NEVER been in a situation like this. I can not recall any situation analgous to it...post-war Europe doesn't suffice as an example. There is no precedent for what we've done, and none for what we ought to do. The administration states limply what it plans to do, but offers no cogent tactics for doing it.

How long do you think it will take, Kaith? How long should we allow this nation building effort? How much shall we pay for it in lives and treasure?


Regards,


Steve

 

[rmcrobertson]

I didn't insult your intelligence, Kaith. I insulted your grasp of reality, if you must be insulted by what I wrote--and as long as we're on the topic, let me assure you that I blow off around 99% of the mean-spirited, pointless insult I read on this Forum. By actual measurement.

I am unlikely to be convinced that I was wrong to question your grasp of reality in this case, when you follow up a claim that, "Iran is mostly intact," with the remark that, "2/3 of the country is rebuilding."

Sorry, but I don't actually watch Fox or CNN very often, since I don't have cable. But really--this, "so what if there're a couple beheadings a day," argument...you're joking, right?

I see, too, that it remains easier to jump down my silly throat than to a) accept what's actually going on; b) consider its implications--especially since I note that you were so busy chewing me out, that you altogether avoided so much as noticing my question about building an Empire with one garrisoned state after another.

Ridiculous? Really? We got troops in Korea, troops in Bosnia, we're running governments in Afghanistan and Iraq--and we got Presidential advisors getting on the air and announcing that this is just Act II n a five-act play titled, "World War IV."

What would you call it?

But as I've said before, I hope you're right. I really do. So does Ripley.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Steve,

How long do you think it will take, Kaith? How long should we allow this nation building effort? How much shall we pay for it in lives and treasure?

My opinion...How long?
As long as it takes. I'd guess 3-5 years. Which was the timetable that I've seen the military had had at one point to truely stabilyze the country.

I will estimate that the final butchers bill will be 15,000 dead, 60,000 wounded/maimed.


No, I do not like it. But regardless of 'why', we can not pull out with the job half finished. Unless the situation becomes hopeless.
It has not. Somalia is hopeless. Iraq still has hope.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

I didn't insult your intelligence, Kaith. I insulted your grasp of reality, if you must be insulted by what I wrote--and as long as we're on the topic, let me assure you that I blow off around 99% of the mean-spirited, pointless insult I read on this Forum. By actual measurement.

Robert,
My grasp of reality is admitedly one on shakey legs. However, in this case, my ability to search out facts, cross reference them, seek out upto date as well as historic information, and stick to an issue without wandering into emotional and sensational pieces of disinformation is not.

I am unlikely to be convinced that I was wrong to question your grasp of reality in this case, when you follow up a claim that, "Iran is mostly intact," with the remark that, "2/3 of the country is rebuilding."

Actually, I said Iraq. Thats a little bit west of Iran for those using maps.
2/3 is more than 1/2 therefore 2/3 is a majority, or a 'mostly' in this argument.

Sorry, but I don't actually watch Fox or CNN very often, since I don't have cable. But really--this, "so what if there're a couple beheadings a day," argument...you're joking, right?

No, I am not.

In the US:
42,000+ die annually due to car accidents
20,000+ die due to illness
15,000+ are murdered
120+ die in airline accidents (not counting 9/11)
90+ are killed by lightning

Statistically speaking, they have a much greater risk from accident or illness, as opposed to some insane fanatic.
Considering that one source (the CBC) places the tally of foriegn aid workers in Iraq at 30,000, even with the high rate of 1 death per day (on average) that is still incredibly low, compared with other statistics.

Another source (year 2000 stats)
>LEADING_CAUSES_OF_DEATH_in_the_USA_in_2000,_________
>unless_year_marked_otherwise._______________________
>____________________________________________________
>Total_deaths_______________________________2,403,351
>____________________________________________________
>1.__Heart_Disease____________________________710,760
>2.__Cancer___________________________________553,091
>3.__Stroke___________________________________167,661
>4.__Chronic_Lower_Respiratory_Disease________122,009
>5.__Adverse_Drug_Reactions_1994______________106,000*
>______from_legal_drugs_at_doses_____________________
>______used_for_prevention,__________________________
>______diagnosis,_or_therapy.________________________
>6.__Accidents_________________________________97,900
>7.__Diabetes__________________________________69,301
>8.__Pneumonia,_influenza______________________65,313
>9.__Alzheimer's Disease_______________________44,536
>10._Nephritis,_nephrotic_syndrome,_nephrosis__35,525
>11._Septicemia________________________________30,680
>12._Suicide___________________________________29,350
>....________________________________________________
>____Homicide__________________________________16,765
>____HIV/AIDS__________________________________14,478

So, now please tell me, is 1,000 deaths in a year that big a deal, considering?

U.S. deaths in Iraq


http://www.cleveland.com/news/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/news/1094815807327430.xml


Friday, September 10, 2004

As of Thursday, 1,005 members of the U.S. military have died since the beginning of military operations in Iraq in March 2003, according to the Defense Department. Of those, 759 died as a result of hostile action and 246 died of other causes. The figures include three military civilians.



​

and a bit more recent

http://www.nynewsday.com/news/nationworld/wire/sns-ap-iraq-us-deaths,0,1172040.story?coll=sns-ap-nationworld-headlines


By The Associated Press

September 21, 2004, 5:18 PM EDT


As of Tuesday, Sept. 21, 2004, 1,037 members of the U.S. military have died since the beginning of the Iraq war in March 2003, according to the Defense Department. Of those, 787 died as a result of hostile action and 250 died of non-hostile causes. The figures include three military civilians.

The British military has reported 65 deaths; Italy, 19; Poland, 13; Spain, 11; Bulgaria, six; Ukraine, eight; Slovakia, three; Thailand, two; the Netherlands, two; and Denmark, El Salvador, Estonia, Hungary and Latvia have reported one death each.



​

I see, too, that it remains easier to jump down my silly throat than to a) accept what's actually going on; b) consider its implications--especially since I note that you were so busy chewing me out, that you altogether avoided so much as noticing my question about building an Empire with one garrisoned state after another.

A- I didn't 'jump down your throat', I refuted your sensationalistic and uneducated 'rable rouser' comments with verifiable and quantifiable data.

B- I did consider the implications, or rather those worth considering. Those were of course those that were based in a solid foundation, not just 'soundbytes' and 'sensationalism'.

As to the "Empire", what of it?
We have bases all over the world. We garrison Japan, have major bases in Germany, had some in Saudi Arabia (source of much of the tension), as well as a dozen other countries easily. These are just 2 more added to the collection, a collection that started in the 1940's, and has been added to by both parties.

Ridiculous? Really? We got troops in Korea, troops in Bosnia, we're running governments in Afghanistan and Iraq--and we got Presidential advisors getting on the air and announcing that this is just Act II n a five-act play titled, "World War IV."

What would you call it?

Situation Normal All Fouled Up.

But as I've said before, I hope you're right. I really do. So does Ripley.

Yeah, I liked Aliens too.



Here are 2 URLs.
Enjoy.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/
http://www.worldmessenger.20m.com

Added: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/

 

[rmcrobertson]

"I didn't 'jump down your throat', I refuted your sensationalistic and uneducated 'rable rouser' comments with verifiable and quantifiable data.

B- I did consider the implications, or rather those worth considering. Those were of course those that were based in a solid foundation, not just 'soundbytes' and 'sensationalism'."

Well, I see that you've chosen the correct avatar after all. Thank goodness you explained your point without slipping into the evils of, say, insulting my intelligence.

See, if I say that most of the country is a mess--and you say no, that's not true, it's just that two-thirds of the country is rebuilding...this is agreement. But it's just TEN ration points for a BIG, BIG, half-ounce BAR OF CHOCOLATE!!!

Incidentally--in your Big List O' Stats of Death....I didn't seem to see "Decapitations By Groups of Lunatics," even once.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Once again you manage to hit the wrong points.

Well, I see that you've chosen the correct avatar after all. Thank goodness you explained your point without slipping into the evils of, say, insulting my intelligence.

Yes. I've often said I feel somewhat 'related' to Molarri II.

See, if I say that most of the country is a mess--and you say no, that's not true, it's just that two-thirds of the country is rebuilding...this is agreement. But it's just TEN ration points for a BIG, BIG, half-ounce BAR OF CHOCOLATE!!!

ok..........

Incidentally--in your Big List O' Stats of Death....I didn't seem to see "Decapitations By Groups of Lunatics," even once.

That would be "Homicide". That whole we didn't break down the accidentals into 'sliped in shower' or 'choked on own arrogence' thing.
But you knew that.

 

[Phoenix44]

Wait, I'm puzzled. Occupation? Reconstruction? Restoration?

This is NOT like Europe AFTER WWII. Guys, we're still at war, and likely will be for months to years. You can't REconstruct anything while it's still actively DEstructing. In fact, funds that were appropriated for reconstruction have been re-appropriated for "security"--in other words, war.

The situation is worsening. The death toll is increasing. (And our own MartialTalk colleagues are flippantly comparing the military death toll to car accidents! Give me a break!) There are dozens of cities completely controlled by so-called "insurgents" (an amusing name for citizens of their own country) where neither Americans nor Iraqi "police" can even go. The only way to control these areas would be to completely destroy the cities. Kidnapping and murder of Westerners is becoming so common the press barely reports it anymore. We have barely--if at all--begun to train Iraqis to maintain order in their own country. The "democratic election" which was promised by the end of the year is highly unlikely, and if there was a democratic election, it's doubtful the new government would be acceptable to the Bush administration. The interim president is viewed as a US puppet--he may as well have a target printed on his forehead.

The only people who think everything's going just swimmingly seem to be Bush and Cheney. And Cheney's making big bucks off the deal.

 

[Flatlander]

=============
Mod. Note.
Please, keep the conversation polite and respectful.

That goes for everybody. We don't require insults to debate an issue.


-Dan Bowman-
-MT Moderator-
=============

That goes for everybody. We don't require insults to debate an issue.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Phoenix,
Good points.

Let me assure you, I am not making the comparison flippantly. My point is simply that you and I have a greater chance of being in a car accident, than one of our soldiers have of being shot. In fact, the media and some others will wave around this magic 1,000 figure as if it is a major milestone. They fail to tell you the full story.

1,037 US soldiers have died as of 9/21/04
787 died as a result of hostile action
250 died of non-hostile causes, including vehicle accidents, 4 of those in September alone.

Trust me, I am in no way making light of these deaths.


You mention dozens of cities controled by insurgents. Please Name them.

Kidnappings are on the upswing again, but the main targets are Iraqis, not US.

http://www.strategypage.com/fyeo/qndguide/default.asp?target=Iraq
September 21, 2004: Anti-government terrorists have increased their use of hostage taking, and attempts at extortion, to destroy the government. Over 130 foreigners have been taken so far, and yesterday, one of the two American civilians held was killed and beheaded. Iraqis are being beheaded as well, especially in an attempt to demoralize Iraqi security forces. For a month or so, terrorists gave up murdering, and especially beheading, hostages. This was because of the negative reaction of the world media, especially the Moslem media, to beheadings, and the murder of hostages. The terrorists have gone back to kidnapping and tried to compensate by making more "noble" demands. For example, several groups of kidnappers have demanded that the coalition release all its female prisoners. This has backfired, as the only female prisoners are two senior members of Saddam's government. The terrorists have ignored this fact, and demanded the release of imaginary female prisoners. Increasingly, the terrorists are quietly switching their demands to money, and quietly taking the cash and releasing the foreigners (who bring in a lot more money than Iraqis.) But the Iraqis continue to bear the brunt of the kidnapping efforts. The Sunni Arab gangs are particularly bad, because they can take their victims to places like Fallujah, where there are no Iraqi police. The Shia gangs are taking a beating, and the only Kurdish group that is causing problems is the Ansar al Islam (a small group of pro al Qaeda Kurds), which receives support, and sanctuary, from Iran.

There are over 60,000 Iraqis now engaged in the fight for control of their country from the 'hard liners', many of whom aren't even Iraqi. The US has moved into a supporting role, however at times must lead the way. The Iraqis aren't quite 'there' yet.

Saddam emptied the prisons before he went into hiding. The borders were left open. Every fanatic in the regions got a 1 way 'jihad' ticket to Iraq. It's a bloody mess, no pun intended. But what the media reports, is often not the complete picture. Remember, sensationalism sells, peace doesn't. That is why the top blood doner in your city isn't front page news, but some congressman getting caught flashing is.

September 20, 2004: The reality is that most of the violence in Iraq comes from a minority of the Sunni Arab minority who are willing to kill because they either want a religious dictatorship (like the one next door in Iran, except with Sunni clerics in charge), or from members of the Baath Party that was, until recently, led by Saddam Hussein. Now you would think that this bunch of cutthroats, whose favorite tactics are kidnapping or threatening unarmed civilians, would be widely reviled. Nope. They are the underdogs, and have been labeled in the media as "insurgents." Since many countries, and their media, opposed the removal of Saddam Hussein from power, the "insurgents" get favorable press. Very favorable press. Iraq's problem with it's armed anti-democracy groups is described as "widespread unrest," despite the fact that it is confined to that third of the country (most of it desert) that is dominated by the Sunni Arab minority (about 20 percent of the population). The Baath Party and Islamic radical leaders can read, and make the most of their status as "freedom fighters." OK, that last tag isn't used very often, as even most journalists gag at so describing two groups so openly dedicated to restoring dictatorship. The anti-government forces and Islamic radicals keep their agendas out of the press as much as possible. Instead, they go on about wanting to "drive out the occupiers." Opinion polls of the entire population consistently state that the majority want the foreign troops to stay until the Sunni Arab gunmen are put down. American policy is to get out as soon as the Iraqi majority has a large enough security force to deal with the remnants of the old dictatorship, and their new allies from al Qaeda and other Islamic radical groups. But this isn't news. That most of Iraq is at peace isn't news. That the reconstruction of Iraq has brought a better life to the majority of Iraqis isn't news. That the anti-government forces have no chance of prevailing isn't news. That American troops have fought a spectacularly successful military campaign (check the historical record for details) isn't news. That the Iraqi "insurgents" are mainly war criminals, gangsters and terrorists isn't news. What is news are headlines that have been consistently wrong since before the war began. What is news is what news directors feel will generate the greatest fear, uncertainty and doubt among their audience. That's what gets people's attention. That's the way the news business has always been. The mass media news business is only some 150 years old, and early on, competitive editors realized that the colorful lie was more profitable than the drab truth. There are those who quickly realized that they could use this fact of life to their advantage. So today, dictators and terrorist organizations hire publicists to get themselves the most useful (if not truthful) portrayal in the media. When it comes to mass violence, playing the press is just another weapon. It worked for Saddam, it's working for his bloody minded supporters, who are still willing to kill for Saddams ideals. But now they are "insurgents" and "freedom fighters." After they are defeated, they will go back to being thugs. And the media will march on, secure in the knowledge that selective amnesia is their friend.

No argument though on Cheney though.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Dan - Message Received. Will watch the 'personalization'.

:asian:

 

[Makalakumu]

Phoenix,
Good points.

Let me assure you, I am not making the comparison flippantly. My point is simply that you and I have a greater chance of being in a car accident, than one of our soldiers have of being shot. In fact, the media and some others will wave around this magic 1,000 figure as if it is a major milestone. They fail to tell you the full story.

1,037 US soldiers have died as of 9/21/04
787 died as a result of hostile action
250 died of non-hostile causes, including vehicle accidents, 4 of those in September alone.

Trust me, I am in no way making light of these deaths.

I think your comparisons are not taking into account the total pools that you are comparing. Nationwide, we are a country of 275,000,000. In Iraq, there are only a 150,000 or so. Therefore, the casualty rate = (casualty / population) in Iraq is much higher then the examples in which you are comparing it.

Crunch a few numbers...

upnorthkyosa

 

[Flatlander]

I think your comparisons are not taking into account the total pools that you are comparing. Nationwide, we are a country of 275,000,000. In Iraq, there are only a 150,000 or so. Therefore, the casualty rate = (casualty / population) in Iraq is much higher then the examples in which you are comparing it.

Crunch a few numbers...

upnorthkyosa

Upnorth, sorry to correct, but this site claims the 2004 population to be over 27 million.

 

[hardheadjarhead]

Good point...the odds of a soldier getting popped in Iraq ARE far greater than the odds Kaith faces on the road here. T'is a matter of proportion.

Currently Fallujah, Ramadi, Talafar and Baqouba are under insurgent control. We just got Samarra back. What this report fails to mention is that we're fighting for the major cities...the smaller towns have no US troops. You'll recall last month rebels controlled the shrine in Najaf. Sadr City, a neighborhood in Baghdad, is now hotly contested.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2004-09-09-samarra_x.htm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3640146.stm


This third article has a picture of a terrorist in a hospital after having been injured by US forces:

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/World/Iraq/2004/09/08/620726-ap.html


Regards,


Steve

 

[loki09789]

Good point...the odds of a soldier getting popped in Iraq ARE far greater than the odds Kaith faces on the road here. T'is a matter of proportion.

Currently Fallujah, Ramadi, Talafar and Baqouba are under insurgent control. We just got Samarra back. What this report fails to mention is that we're fighting for the major cities...the smaller towns have no US troops. You'll recall last month rebels controlled the shrine in Najaf. Sadr City, a neighborhood in Baghdad, is now hotly contested.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2004-09-09-samarra_x.htm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3640146.stm


This third article has a picture of a terrorist in a hospital after having been injured by US forces:

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/World/Iraq/2004/09/08/620726-ap.html


Regards,


Steve

What about 'zones' or how ever they are gridding the operational theater so that units know where their left and right 'limits' are for patrols and actions. In the smaller towns and 'bush' there must be some kind of patrolling going on, either with ground mobile or air mobile (even predator RV type devices or satellites) assets. Even with the amount of troops in country, there are bound to be holes in the wire.

In a desert, more than any other evironment I would think, that controlling the built up areas (like in the old Arabian nights tales with control of Oasis' and such) and resource 'hubs' is a good way of choking out insurgencies in a long term plan. Can't say it is going to give immediate gratification though.

 

[hardheadjarhead]

According to Bob Novak, Bush is going to get us out within a year after the election:

http://www.suntimes.com/output/novak/cst-edt-novak20.html

This might be hype to placate those on the right that are against the war.

If true, then I give Iraq about three months before it erupts. It isn't a quagmire. Its a volcano.


Regards,


Steve

 

[michaeledward]

Pat Buchanan was making the same arguement on WBUR last evening; 'any rational examination of Iraq is bad and needs to change.' I see no reason to believe that President Bush has the capability of a 'rational examination' Mr. Buchanan hopes for.

Are they just spinning these possibilities to attempt to draw votes from the Dean camp? I think so.

I think giving Iraq 3 months before a complete meltdown is optimistic.

Every Day, it looks more and more like my man Dennis Kucinich was right.

Mike

 

[RandomPhantom700]

Dean camp? As in Howard Dean? I didn't even know that, after the Democratic runnings disaster, he was even still in the game.