Iraq: Who Has the Right Plan?
 

(Gotta get these non-football threads out of the way). I thought maybe instead of another political thread that harps on the past or that is designed simply to push one’s beliefs, maybe (just maybe) we could have an actual thread that intelligently discusses a topic relevant to the immediate (and long term) future.

With that in mind, the topic is Iraq. “When is it not?,” you ask. But this time, let’s not talk about who said what back in 2002. Let’s instead focus on each of the candidate’s plans for Iraq and who you think has the best plan moving forward. I've included some bullet points of the top candidate's plan along with links to more. Hopefully, this will lead to some good discussion. And we can all learn a little something.

(These are in no particular order)

[B]Barack Obama[/B]
-Goal of removing all combat brigades from Iraq by March 31, 2008 -- a date consistent with the bipartisan Iraq Study Group's expectations.
-The plan allows for a limited number of U.S. troops to remain in Iraq as basic force protection, to engage in counter-terrorism and to continue the training of Iraqi security forces.
- United States needs to move beyond Iraq and “refocus our attention on the broader Middle East.” Reverse the troop surge and redeploy U.S. troops to Afghanistan and other locations in phases. He favors more funds for U.S. military equipment like night-vision goggles and reinforced Humvees.
[url=http://www.barackobama.com/issues/iraq/]BarackObama.com | Plan to End the Iraq War[/url]

[B]Joe Biden[/B]
-Maintain a unified Iraq by federalizing it and giving Kurds, Shiites and Sunnis breathing room in their own regions.
-The central government would be responsible for common interests, like border security and the distribution of oil revenues. The plan would bind the Sunnis - who have no oil -- by guaranteeing them a proportionate share of oil revenues.
-Call on the U.S. military to withdraw most U.S. troops from Iraq by the end of 2007, with a residual force to keep Iraqis and their neighbors honest.
- It would increase economic aid but tie it to the protection of minority rights and the creation of a jobs program and seek funding from the oil-rich Gulf Arab states.
[url=http://www.joebiden.com/issues/?id=0009]Joe Biden for President | Issues[/url]

[B]Hillary Clinton[/B]
-Proposed, along with Senator Robert Byrd, legislation to end authority for the war in Iraq. The legislation will propose October 11, 2007 -- the five year anniversary of the original resolution authorizing the use of force in Iraq -- as the expiration date for that resolution.
-The President would be required to come to Congress to seek new authority.
-Cap on troop levels to January 1, 2007 levels.
- Opposes the establishment of permanent military bases in Iraq,
[url=http://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/iraq/]HillaryClinton.com - Issues - Ending the War in Iraq[/url]

[B]John Edwards[/B]
-Cap funding for the troops in Iraq at 100,000 troops to stop the surge and implement an immediate drawdown of 40-50,000 combat troops. Any troops beyond that level should be redeployed immediately.
-Prohibit funding to deploy any new troops to Iraq that do not meet real readiness standards and that have not been properly trained and equipped, so American tax dollars are used to train and equip our troops, instead of escalating the war.
-Require a complete withdrawal of combat troops in Iraq in 12 to 18 months without leaving behind any permanent U.S. military bases in Iraq.
[url=http://johnedwards.com/issues/iraq/]John Edwards for President-John Edwards' Plan To End The War In Iraq[/url]

[B]Bill Richardson[/B]
-Congress should immediately assert its constitutional authority and pass a resolution de-authorizing the war under Article I of the US Constitution and the War Powers Act.
-There should be no residual US forces left in Iraq. Most Iraqis, and most others in the region, believe that we are there for their oil, and this perception is exploited by Al Qaeda, other insurgents, and anti-American Shia groups.
-Redeploy some of our troops to Afghanistan to stop the resurgence of the Taliban. While all American troops in Iraq must be removed, we need to maintain a military presence in the region, in countries like Kuwait where they are welcome. We must always have the capacity to use air power, special forces and other means to strike Al Qaeda anywhere. We do not need American troops in Iraq to perform this essential task.
[url=http://www.richardsonforpresident.com/issues/iraq]Bill Richardson for President | Issues | Iraq[/url]

[B]Dennis Kucinich[/B]
-Complete withdrawal. Upon pulling out, Kucinich calls for an “international security and peacekeeping force to move in,” led by the United Nations.
-Turn all U.S. contracting business in Iraq over to the Iraqi government and call on the international community for more reconstruction aid.
-United States should fund a national reconciliation conference under the auspices of the United Nations.
[url=http://kucinich.us/]Redskins Warpath[/url]

[B]Mike Gravel[/B]
-Immediate and orderly withdrawal of all U.S. troops that will have them home within 60 days.
-Aggressive diplomacy to bring an end to the civil war that currently consumes Iraq.
-U.S. corporate withdrawal from Iraq and hand over reconstruction contracts to Iraqi businesses which will empower Iraqi nationals to reconstruct their own country.
[url=http://www.gravel2008.us/issues#war_in_iraq]The Issues | Gravel 2008[/url]

[B]Chris Dodd[/B]
-Redeployment of U.S. troops.
-May 2007 amendment that would implement a deadline for troop withdrawal within ten months and cut off funding by mid-2008.
[url=http://www.chrisdodd.com/issues/foreign_affairs]Chris Dodd for President | Chris Dodd for President[/url]

[B]John McCain[/B]
-One of the most outspoken proponents of Bush’s surge strategy, even arguing that the escalation does not go far enough.
-Supported the president’s efforts to increase the size of the U.S. standing military by 92,000 soldiers and Marines.
-Cautions that regional talks with Iran and Syria may not prove effective. “Our interests in Iraq diverge significantly from those of Damascus and Tehran, and this is unlikely to change under the current regimes,” he says.
-February 2007, coauthored resolution calling for Iraqi government to meet eleven benchmarks on issues of security, economic performance, and governance.
[url=http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/fdeb03a7-30b0-4ece-8e34-4c7ea83f11d8.htm]John McCain 2008 - John McCain for President[/url]

[B]Duncan Hunter[/B]
-Staunch supporter of war
-Supports troop surge
[url=http://www.gohunter08.com/index.asp]The Official Site of Duncan Hunter for US President in 2008[/url]

[B]Sam Brownback[/B]
-Maintains that “the region and the world are safer now that Saddam Hussein has been removed from power.”
-Does not support the troop surge. Instead, he has called for a strong diplomatic effort in the region
-Supports a “three-state, one-country solution” in Iraq.
[url=http://www.brownback.com/s/Home/tabid/127/Default.aspx]Brownback for President[/url]

[B]Tom Tancredo[/B]
-Opposes the troop surge and calls for disengagement to “let regional powers and Iraqi factions cooperate to forge a new balance of power” by November 2007.

[url=http://www.teamtancredo.com/tancredo_issues_index.asp]Tancredo for President - On The Issues[/url]
[B]Mike Huckabee[/B]
-Any timetable for troop withdrawal is “a mistake”
-Supports the surge effort
-Favors inviting Iraq’s neighbors to “become financially and militarily committed to stabilizing Iraq now rather than financially and militarily committed to widening the war later.”
[url=http://www.mikehuckabee.com/index.cfm?FuseAction=Issues.View&Issue_id=2]Mike Huckabee for President - Issues[/url]

[B]Tommy Thompson[/B]
-The Iraqi parliament should vote on whether they want us there. If they do, we have greater world standing to be there. If not, that sends a strong message to the United States on what it should do next in Iraq.
-The United States should work with Iraqis to support elections of leaders in each of the nation's 18 provinces to operate under a national government. A model much like states in the United States, this will give Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds their own pieces of Iraq.
-Encourage the Iraqi government to give every Iraqi a stake in the nation’s rich oil reserves. Oil revenues should be divided in thirds among the national government, the provincial governments and individual Iraq citizens. This is a proven model currently used in Alaska, where the citizens of that state receive annual royalties from oil production there.

[B]Rudy Giuliani[/B]
-Believes setting an artificial timetable for withdrawal from Iraq now would be a terrible mistake, because it would only embolden our enemies.
-Iraq is only one front in the larger war on terror, and failure there would lead to a broader and bloodier regional conflict in the near future. Building an accountable Iraq will assist in reducing the threat of terrorism.
-Supports troop surge plan, but says the plan needs some quantitative means by which to measure progress.
[url=http://www.joinrudy2008.com/index.php?section=2]JoinRudy2008 - Home[/url]

[B]Mitt Romney[/B]
-Supported efforts to include Iraq’s neighbors in security negotiations. He has pressed Arab governments in the region to do more to “support Iraq’s nascent government.”
-Favors the president’s surge strategy and opposes plans to pull out of Iraq in the near future or to carve up the country into three regions
[url=http://www.mittromney.com/]Mitt Romney for President 2008[/url]

[B]Ron Paul[/B]
-Cosponsored the Iraq War De-Escalation Act of 2007, which, if passed, would have stopped the troop surge in Iraq and begun redeployment of U.S. troops by May 1, 2007. That act was never voted on.
[url=http://www.ronpaul2008.com/issues/]Ron Paul 2008 › Issues[/url]

Re: Iraq: Who Has the Right Plan?
 

WHA HOOO! I like the Tommy Thompson guy. Reminds me of the Skins.They always look good on paper, but will they actually pan out.

Re: Iraq: Who Has the Right Plan?
 

President Bush has the right plan. You can lock this thread now.

Re: Iraq: Who Has the Right Plan?
 

[QUOTE=70Chip;332207]President Bush has the right plan. You can lock this thread now.[/QUOTE]

Ok, well thanks for the input. But this is geared more toward the 2008 Presidential candidates. So I guess you'd then say McCain or Giuliani?

Re: Iraq: Who Has the Right Plan?
 

[quote=SmootSmack;332209]Ok, well thanks for the input. But this is geared more toward the 2008 Presidential candidates. So I guess you'd then say McCain or Giuliani?[/quote]

Once Bush leaves ofice, Iraq will no longer be in the news much regardless of who follows him or what their plan is. Iraq will have served it's purpose at that point. Iraq is not really a problem to be solved as much as it is an issue to be exploited for the likes of Baraq Hussein Obama and Mrs. Clinton and one of them is sure to be elected. Iraq will be about as relevant as the moon landing by then.

Re: Iraq: Who Has the Right Plan?
 

Well, Obama has good intentions, but I doubt his would work, so I'll go with Guiliani, with Obama coming in 2nd.

very good research SS...I wasn't going to comment on it at first, but all the work you put into it meant I had to respect it with a comment.

Re: Iraq: Who Has the Right Plan?
 

[QUOTE=jsarno;332222]Well, Obama has good intentions, but I doubt his would work, so I'll go with Guiliani, with Obama coming in 2nd.

very good research SS...I wasn't going to comment on it at first, but all the work you put into it meant I had to respect it with a comment.[/QUOTE]

Well thanks. I could've just posted the links but who wants to keep clicking back and forth among links?

Hopefully this gives certain people (we all know who they are, of course) a better idea of how to start a thread, especially a political thread, with links and a relevant topic of discussion for everyone (except 70Chip I suppose).

I suppose as the months leading up to the election go on, we can cover other issues too.

Re: Iraq: Who Has the Right Plan?
 

[QUOTE=SmootSmack;332232]Well thanks. I could've just posted the links but who wants to keep clicking back and forth among links?

Hopefully this gives certain people (we all know who they are, of course) a better idea of how to start a thread, especially a political thread, with links and a relevant topic of discussion for everyone (except 70Chip I suppose).

I suppose as the months leading up to the election go on, we can cover other issues too.[/QUOTE]

We're still pretty far away though.
Like Richardson will be out quickly...if he's not I have serious questions about the future of our country.


I just don't think we can all of sudden back out, and I think that's what a lot of democrats think can happen. Like Obama says, there needs to be some that stay and see it out.

Not to try to redirect this thread, cause it deserves all it's attention...but what do all the candidates think about alternative fuels, in particular corn? The person that makes that a priority will have the best shot at my vote.

Re: Iraq: Who Has the Right Plan?
 

[QUOTE=jsarno;332234]We're still pretty far away though.
Like Richardson will be out quickly...if he's not I have serious questions about the future of our country.


I just don't think we can all of sudden back out, and I think that's what a lot of democrats think can happen. Like Obama says, there needs to be some that stay and see it out.

Not to try to redirect this thread, cause it deserves all it's attention...but what do all the candidates think about alternative fuels, in particular corn? The person that makes that a priority will have the best shot at my vote.[/QUOTE]

Start a new thread on alternative fuels. It could be a good topic of discussion. I'm going to bed soon so I don't have time to look stuff up right now. But as an overall topic, it could be good to discuss. Particularly, the impact that the demand for corn will have on its price and how that will affect the cost of other products that depend on corn.

But anyway, let's make that another thread. Go for it

As for Iraq, I think Biden's plan is intriguing. But his economic aid plans seems to go against my free-trade beliefs

Re: Iraq: Who Has the Right Plan?
 

[QUOTE=SmootSmack;332241]Start a new thread on alternative fuels. It could be a good topic of discussion. I'm going to bed soon so I don't have time to look stuff up right now. But as an overall topic, it could be good to discuss. Particularly, the impact that the demand for corn will have on its price and how that will affect the cost of other products that depend on corn.

But anyway, let's make that another thread. Go for it[/quote]

I agree. Maybe tomorrow...we'll see...we're still too far away IMO from serious talks about it.

[quote]As for Iraq, I think Biden's plan is intriguing. But his economic aid plans seems to go against my free-trade beliefs[/QUOTE]

I can see that.

Re: Iraq: Who Has the Right Plan?
 

Anyone that wants all our troops has the right idea. You have to understand the people you're dealing with and I can't say that the majority of Americans and the current administration understand the people it's dealing with.

Re: Iraq: Who Has the Right Plan?
 

I am not a proponent of setting any type of withdrawl date. Although I do want us out of there as soon as possible I also want us to leave it in the best condition possible. Setting a date is just too heavy handed and leaves no flexibility to react to what is actually happeneing. It also, quite obviously, is somewhat dumb to tell those your fighting when you plan to leave.

But as I said I want us out of there. I think a conglomeration of the ideas above may work.

First Thompson's up/down vote from the Iraqi parliament is a good idea fro the reasons he stated.

Biden's idea on the shaping of the government is smart but could be very difficult to execute. Worth a try though.

Obama's thoughts on troop levels are consistent with mine. I tend to not agree with Clinton. I think we should establish several permanent bases in Iraq. I think. I have some reservations on that but again if we execute it right it would be a boon going forward. But we do need to maintain a presense there.

Our main goals right now need to be getting Iraq's forces prepared to take the reigns and on going overboard in helping the civilians. We need to start engendering good will there. Do every single thing we can to make life better. That's where the up/down vote helps. If they vote no then we leave. Plain and simple. But with the caveat that we'll be back if it sprials back into a ottocracy.

Re: Iraq: Who Has the Right Plan?
 

[QUOTE=70Chip;332212]Once Bush leaves ofice, Iraq will no longer be in the news much regardless of who follows him or what their plan is. Iraq will have served it's purpose at that point. Iraq is not really a problem to be solved as much as it is an issue to be exploited for the likes of Baraq Hussein Obama and Mrs. Clinton and one of them is sure to be elected. Iraq will be about as relevant as the moon landing by then.[/QUOTE]

I would say Obama seems pretty level headed on this. He has attacked the other Den candidates for voting for the war because he has the luxury of not having to have made that vote. He hasn't been beligerent about it though and it clearly is just a poltiical tool at this point. When you look at his plans he seems to realize that just because he doesn't agree with the war doesn't mean he can advocate simply washing our hands of it.

Re: Iraq: Who Has the Right Plan?
 

I guess by now most of you know which candidate I'm supporting, but before I get to Senator Obama, I think it's important to point out that the Dems are pretty much united on the fact that we need to get out of Iraq within a year or so, and the differences that exist between them are in the details and can be worked out.

That being said, I think Obama and Hillary may disagree on how to approach the middle east in general and, perhaps, on foreign policy for that matter. The latter more than anything is why I favor Obama's plan over the other candidates.

Senator Obama has promised, within the first year of his administration, to reach out to countries such as Iran, Syra, North Korea, China and a few others that he mentioned during last night's debate, bring them to the table and discuss issues that are causing international turmoil and dividing us as nations. He actually gave kudos to both Ronald Reagan and JFK for being pro-active in this regard. I don't think any plan can be sustainable or achieveable, for that matter, until Syria and Iran are involved.

Senator Clinton, on the other hand, bristled at the notion of sitting down with foreign heads so early in her administration for reasons she cited as political "propoganda." That's certainly her prerogative, but I think the problem is much bigger and complex than simply getting our troops out of Iraq.

Re: Iraq: Who Has the Right Plan?
 

Well i am for obama too but in that question clinton came off as way more experienced than obama did. She said that she would have to have someone look into the meetings so they would be on her terms basically.

Re: Iraq: Who Has the Right Plan?
 

On a semi-side note. One thing I've heard rumors of is that Hillary, if elected, would make Bill Secretary of State. Say what you will about Clinton, personally I thought he was an excellent president. Bill Clinton as Sec. of State would do wonders from our currently destroyed foreign relations.

Re: Iraq: Who Has the Right Plan?
 

[QUOTE=BigSKINBauer;332333]Well i am for obama too but in that question clinton came off as way more experienced than obama did. [B]She said that she would have to have someone look into the meetings so they would be on her terms basically.[/B][/QUOTE]

So she dodged the question then? I think the problem that I have with a lot of the Dems is that they all seem so indignant that Iraq has become such an unpopular war, after they voted for it in the first place. The only viable candidate who didn't is Obama and he also seems like he has the most levelheaded approach to the U.S.'s withdraw from Iraq.

Hillary says she won't apologize for voting for the war and I don't think she should. That's the right move, otherwise, she's just going to look soft. The problem I have, though, is that I don't like her plan of setting a date ahead of the bipartisan Iraq study group's expectations...what was the group assembled for if no one intends to listen to it?

I, personally, don't think we should have gone in in the first place. However, the fact that argument's done because now the troops are there and there's nothing we can do about it. At this point, the best case scenario would probably be some sort of phased withdraw and I think the study group proposed some of the best ideas.

Re: Iraq: Who Has the Right Plan?
 

[QUOTE=Daseal;332345]On a semi-side note. One thing I've heard rumors of is that Hillary, if elected, would make Bill Secretary of State. Say what you will about Clinton, personally I thought he was an excellent president. [B]Bill Clinton as Sec. of State would do wonders from our currently destroyed foreign relations.[/B][/QUOTE]

That's a great point. Also, what I think would be a great move for both of them would be for Obama to join her as the VP. Personally, I favor Obama and will probably not vote for Hillary, however, polls show her having a commanding lead and that does not bode will for Obama. At this point, I think it would beneficial to each side for Obama to be "on deck" as the VP. It would quash all of the "he doesn't have enough experience talk," and if Hillary's (potential) presidency went well, he would probably be heavily favored to win the nomination in 2016.

Re: Iraq: Who Has the Right Plan?
 

I've heard she is looking to make him an ambassador of goodwill or something like that. Not a Cabinet position. Cynics say what she really wants is to give him some "made-up" job just to keep him out of Washington. Not unlike when President Lisa Simpson gave Bart some BS job to keep him away from the White House.

Re: Iraq: Who Has the Right Plan?
 

Although I stand to the left on most issues, I certainly do not on Iraq for seveal reasons.

#1. The Dems Are Political Cowards [I]When It Comes to Iraq[/I]
Aside from Kucinich, I think the Democratic candidates are cowards.
They do not want to push for "victory" (if victory is indeed even possible) because the public would oppose continuing the surge. They do not want to withdraw immediately, because that would lend credence to the perception that Democrats are wusses. Instead, they opt for plans that leave our troops out to die for a cause that the candidates themselves have all but abandoned. I disagree with Kucinich, but at least I respect him for having political courage.

#2. The Dems Reasons For Leaving Iraq Are Ironic
I often hear the Democratic candidates saying, "our troops should not be involved in Iraq's sectarian civil strife," or "our troops have done their job, but the Iraqis have not, and it is time to withdraw our troops from Iraq's civil war." These very same candidates argue that we need to get involved in Darfur, are likely glad that we intervened in Kosovo and Bosnia, and probably wish that we had gotten involved in Rwanda. On that count, the Dem candidates are full of it, dumb, or both.

Until I hear a decent plan from someone else, I will continue to support McCain or Rudy when it comes to Iraq.

Re: Iraq: Who Has the Right Plan?
 

[quote=Sheriff Gonna Getcha;332382]Although I stand to the left on most issues, I certainly do not on Iraq for seveal reasons.

#1. The Dems Are Political Cowards [I]When It Comes to Iraq[/I]
Aside from Kucinich, I think the Democratic candidates are cowards.
They do not want to push for "victory" (if victory is indeed even possible) because the public would oppose continuing the surge. They do not want to withdraw immediately, because that would lend credence to the perception that Democrats are wusses. Instead, they opt for plans that leave our troops out to die for a cause that the candidates themselves have all but abandoned. I disagree with Kucinich, but at least I respect him for having political courage.

#2. The Dems Reasons For Leaving Iraq Are Ironic
I often hear the Democratic candidates saying, "our troops should not be involved in Iraq's sectarian civil strife," or "our troops have done their job, but the Iraqis have not, and it is time to withdraw our troops from Iraq's civil war." These very same candidates argue that we need to get involved in Darfur, are likely glad that we intervened in Kosovo and Bosnia, and probably wish that we had gotten involved in Rwanda. On that count, the Dem candidates are full of it, dumb, or both.

Until I hear a decent plan from someone else, I will continue to support McCain or Rudy when it comes to Iraq.[/quote]
Pretty much agree with you all the way on this one.

Since Vietnam, Democrats haven't really been able to shake the wuss stigma. Iraq certainly re-enforced that one.

Also, props to SS on the thread. It's been a while since we've had some well thought out threads like this one.

Re: Iraq: Who Has the Right Plan?
 

[quote=Daseal;332345]On a semi-side note. One thing I've heard rumors of is that Hillary, if elected, would make Bill Secretary of State. Say what you will about Clinton, personally I thought he was an excellent president. Bill Clinton as Sec. of State would do wonders from our currently destroyed foreign relations.[/quote]

Like he did wonders by selling the Chinese secrets for DNC donations or how he helped North Korea get their nuclear programs started? Oh yeah, and there's those bin Laden and Hussein guys he dealt with too.

He had his 8 years, let's move on before he can do MORE damage to our nation.

Re: Iraq: Who Has the Right Plan?
 

I find it interesting that there is anyone who would listen to the plan of a politician (Republican or Democrat) who was in favor of invading Iraq in the first place, and then trying to tell us what will happen if we leave prematurely.

Why should we believe anything that pro-Iraq war people are saying when they've been wrong about EVERYTHING from the start?

Ron Paul was right from the get-go. His plan is to get the hell out. I like that idea best.

Re: Iraq: Who Has the Right Plan?
 

[QUOTE=Beemnseven;332489]I find it interesting that there is anyone who would listen to the plan of a politician (Republican or Democrat) who was in favor of invading Iraq in the first place, and then trying to tell us what will happen if we leave prematurely.

Why should we believe anything that pro-Iraq war people are saying when they've been wrong about EVERYTHING from the start?[/QUOTE]

Then you pretty much need to discount everything the Dem candidates (save Kucinich) say about Iraq.

Re: Iraq: Who Has the Right Plan?
 

[quote=Buster;332468]Like he did wonders by selling the Chinese secrets for DNC donations or how he helped North Korea get their nuclear programs started? Oh yeah, and there's those bin Laden and Hussein guys he dealt with too.

[B]He[/B] had his 8 years, let's move on before he can do MORE damage to our nation.[/quote]
he cant possibly do more damage then this president has resided over. and smooty, great work. and thanks for putting the effort into it. i guess I'm along the lines of Mr Edwards. a gradual with drawl, with money still available to the troops that remain. but i cant believe the American public isn't in an uproar over the mini vacation the Iraqi Parliament was just on. 3 weeks because " its too hot?" what about our boys sleeping in the desert? president bush should be outraged over this, and not a peep from the white house

Re: Iraq: Who Has the Right Plan?
 

[quote=dmek25;332530]he cant possibly do more damage then this president has resided over. and smooty, great work. and thanks for putting the effort into it. i guess I'm along the lines of Mr Edwards. a gradual with drawl, with money still available to the troops that remain. but i cant believe the American public isn't in an uproar over the mini vacation the Iraqi Parliament was just on. 3 weeks because " its too hot?" what about our boys sleeping in the desert? president bush should be outraged over this, and not a peep from the white house[/quote]

Does no one realize that our Congress takes the whole month of August off every year? And the reason they started doing this was because Washington in August is too hot? I agree, the Iraqis need to work harder but the point is somewhat diluted coming from supporters of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid who have done sqaudoosh for the last 6 months and are about to fly off in their government jets to Nantucket or Cape Cod or Bohemian Grove or wherever they go to do whatever it is they do.

Re: Iraq: Who Has the Right Plan?
 

[quote=70Chip;332541]Does no one realize that our Congress takes the whole month of August off every year? And the reason they started doing this was because Washington in August is too hot? I agree, the Iraqis need to work harder but the point is somewhat diluted coming from supporters of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid who have done sqaudoosh for the last 6 months and are about to fly off in their government jets to Nantucket or Cape Cod or Bohemian Grove or wherever they go to do whatever it is they do.[/quote]
what makes a legitimate point diluted? if its something you don't agree with? right now, it should be all about the Iraqi government taking care of THEIR country, and getting our soldiers out of harms way. was it agreed upon they would go on vacation? if it was, our boys should have been granted alittle hiatus, too. the Iraqi Parliament holds their sessions indoors, in air conditioning. meanwhile, our troops suffer in 100 degree heat. who cares who made the point? and i can guarantee you, when our congress takes their break, old W. will be sitting in Crawford, at the ranch, vacationing right along with them

Re: Iraq: Who Has the Right Plan?
 

[quote=dmek25;332558]what makes a legitimate point diluted? if its something you don't agree with? right now, it should be all about the Iraqi government taking care of THEIR country, and getting our soldiers out of harms way. was it agreed upon they would go on vacation? if it was, our boys should have been granted alittle hiatus, too. the Iraqi Parliament holds their sessions indoors, in air conditioning. meanwhile, our troops suffer in 100 degree heat. who cares who made the point? and i can guarantee you, when our congress takes their break, old W. will be sitting in Crawford, at the ranch, vacationing right along with them[/quote]

Hypocrisy dilutes it. For Democrats, who have done almost nothing legislatively and are about to take a month long vacation, to criticize Iraqis for doing the same thing looks a little silly. Reid and Pelosi could stay in town and work. One would think they would feel compelled to do so based on the constant and hysterical claims they make about the danger posed to the Republic by George Bush. They won't though. Again, I think the criticism is valid but I just don't want to hear it from anyone in our congress because they haven't accomplished a whole lot lately either.

Re: Iraq: Who Has the Right Plan?
 

[quote=70Chip;332541]Does no one realize that our Congress takes the whole month of August off every year? And the reason they started doing this was because Washington in August is too hot? I agree, the Iraqis need to work harder but the point is somewhat diluted coming from supporters of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid who have done sqaudoosh for the last 6 months and are about to fly off in their government jets to Nantucket or Cape Cod or Bohemian Grove or wherever they go to do whatever it is they do.[/quote]

I can understand the Iraqi government taking 2 week of vacation, but 4 weeks? To the naked eye it seems politically motivated to whale on the Iraqis for taking that much time off. From a principle standpoint, however, the Iraqi government shouldn't take that much time off. We're taking about people tasked/entrusted with rebuilding their country. Sure, the US congress is taking 5 weeks of vacation but they have the luxury to do so. It's not like our officials are taking a vacation in the middle of 9/11, which is practically what the Iraqi government would be doing.

As for Pelosi and Reid, they are not the ones [URL="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/05/AR2006120501342_pf.html"]bitching[/URL] and [URL="http://www.rawstory.com/news/2007/GOP_leadership_bristles_at_fiveday_Capitol_0122.html"]moaning[/URL] about working more hours.

Re: Iraq: Who Has the Right Plan?
 

what a shame. they have to work 5 days a week. and thanks for the back up, saden

Re: Iraq: Who Has the Right Plan?
 

So now you guys want us to jump all over them for their work schedule? I am sure that would go over well around the world. For people who complain about how bad a job Bush has done internationally to suggest that we have any right to pass judgement on how their government schedules vacations shows a complete lack of reason. Doing things like that would be overtly empirical to me. We should not be in the business of running their country. That is what we are trying to get out of. I thought it was what you guys wanted too. More than anybody.

By the way, I do agree they should not be taking sucuh vacations but I certainly don't see how the Whitehouse is supposed to call them out on it without it looking like America butting in again. Disappointed? Yes. But that's it.

Re: Iraq: Who Has the Right Plan?
 

[QUOTE=70Chip;332571]Hypocrisy dilutes it. [B]For Democrats, who have done almost nothing legislatively[/B] and are about to take a month long vacation, to criticize Iraqis for doing the same thing looks a little silly. Reid and Pelosi could stay in town and work. One would think they would feel compelled to do so based on the constant and hysterical claims they make about the danger posed to the Republic by George Bush. They won't though. Again, I think the criticism is valid but I just don't want to hear it from anyone in our congress [B]because they haven't accomplished a whole lot lately either.[/B][/QUOTE]

Since the Dems are in charge, one would think that's a good thing.

Re: Iraq: Who Has the Right Plan?
 

[QUOTE=FRPLG;332701]So now you guys want us to jump all over them for their work schedule? I am sure that would go over well around the world. For people who complain about how bad a job Bush has done internationally to suggest that we have any right to pass judgement on how their government schedules vacations shows a complete lack of reason. Doing things like that would be overtly empirical to me. We should not be in the business of running their country. That is what we are trying to get out of. I thought it was what you guys wanted too. More than anybody.

By the way, I do agree they should not be taking sucuh vacations but I certainly don't see how the Whitehouse is supposed to call them out on it without it looking like America butting in again. Disappointed? Yes. But that's it.[/QUOTE]

Well, since we, the American Taxpayers are footing the bill for this -- to the tune of $12 billion a month -- I think Congress has every right to DEMAND answers on progress in Iraq, and to question the wisdom of taking a month-long vacation while their nation is in peril.

Congress is the body of government most directly answerable to the people, and it's the people's money we're talking about here. You're damn right I have a problem with the Iraqi government slacking off when it's my money being used to fund this bullshit exercise.

Re: Iraq: Who Has the Right Plan?
 

I have a problem with it too but one argument I keep hearing from lots of people(not you) is that Bush has destroyed our standing around the world with his ham handed foreign relations and diplomacy. When the same people come back and say that the Whitehouse needs to be something about this situation they are directly contradicting themselves on this point. People can't say "Don't interfer around the world and cost us respect" and then in the next senetence say "president bush should be outraged over this, and not a peep from the white house". It's actions like those peeps from the Whitehouse that supposedly has cost us such standing in the world. Again, I am not saying I agree with that stance. I am just pointing out the hypocrisy of it.

Re: Iraq: Who Has the Right Plan?
 

If you ask anyone in any type of leadership in the military they will tell you that setting a time table is only telling your enemy what you are doing. When someone comes out and says we have to set a time table they either are looking for votes or have no clue as what goes on durn battle. I also get a kick of the people who complain that we have no exit strategy like if we did we would announce it to the world. That would be a great idea.

Re: Iraq: Who Has the Right Plan?
 

[QUOTE=firstdown;332727]If you ask anyone in any type of leadership in the military they will tell you that setting a time table is only telling your enemy what you are doing. When someone comes out and says we have to set a time table they either are looking for votes or have no clue as what goes on durn battle. I also get a kick of the people who complain that we have no exit strategy like if we did we would announce it to the world. That would be a great idea.[/QUOTE]

But this operation is not an ordinary military exercise. It's not like broadcasting to the Nazis when you plan to move from the Ardennes Forest to Berlin.

If everything is fantastic, the surge is working, and everything's coming up roses like the pro-war crowd is frantically trying to tell us, then there should be no problem setting a date for withdrawal because the Iraqi government should be able to smoothly assume control, and provide adequate security once we leave.

The neo-cons tell us that the media is painting an inaccurate picture of the war, that they "never tell us the good news" from Iraq. But if things are going so well, why will Iraq collapse into an Apocalyptic nightmare the moment we're gone?

Re: Iraq: Who Has the Right Plan?
 

I absolutely agree with dmek, saden, and beems about the Iraqi Parliment. They should be working day and night to resolve their differences. We have the right to make such demands as we are pretty much facilitating their very existence. Finally, there is really no comparison to our Congress. If we were in the midst of a civil war or insurgency and our Congress wanted to take that long off, I'd be more than annoyed.

Re: Iraq: Who Has the Right Plan?
 

[quote=firstdown;332727]If you ask anyone in any type of leadership in the military they will tell you that setting a time table is only telling your enemy what you are doing. When someone comes out and says we have to set a time table they either are looking for votes or have no clue as what goes on durn battle. I also get a kick of the people who complain that we have no exit strategy like if we did we would announce it to the world. That would be a great idea.[/quote]

Psst, it's no secret that the US would eventually go home. Also, when we start heading home it won't take a genius to deduce we're leaving. We're not going to sneak out of Iraq. Finally, we have done it in the past (Nixon and Vietnam).

Re: Iraq: Who Has the Right Plan?
 

[quote=saden1;332772]Psst, it's no secret that the US would eventually go home. Also, when we start heading home it won't take a genius to deduce we're going leaving. We're not going sneak out of Iraq. Finally, we have done it in the past (Nixon and Vietnam).[/quote]

Yeah, I don't get the whole "don't announce the timeline" thing either. To be frank, it really baffles me. Exactly how are going to get all those troops and civilians out without anyone noticing?

Besides, we're going to set a timeline one day, right?

Re: Iraq: Who Has the Right Plan?
 

I think the thought is more along the lines of not setting a date before we reach a point where we can leave. What happens if we say we're leaving in May '08? The insurgents could lay back and wait until we're gone and then unleash holy hell. If we wait until the situation is firmly under control then we can then say we're leaving in 3 months or whatever.