Reply
Thu 15 Apr, 2004 07:31 am
This question is primarily aimed at those who are critical of the current actions being taken with regard to Iraq. Others are welcome to participate too, of course. I for one did not favor the invasion at all. I consider it was an act of lunacy. I wish we could get out of there altogether. But, since we have destroyed so much of that nation (government, infrastructure, security, jobs, etc.) I feel we are obligated to straighten enough of our mess up to allow Iraqis to chart their own destiny, even if it is not overly warm to America. This would I think involve allowing a more legitemate group of people than the ones Washington has chosen, to guide the structure of a new government. I would work to get others involved in the process by giving them a say in making important decisions. I would work to get our troops out of highly populated areas, so that Iraqis could begin to perform their own security functions. I would count on keeping a sizeable force in that country for five to ten years as we monitor and thwart terrorists. Much of what I think is irrelevant, because I don't have the depth of perception it requires to handle Iraq. My main contention is, neither does Bush. Let's get somebody else (Kerry) to work on it. Kerry could not possibly be as error prone as the current administration.
Problem is with the statement "even if it isn't warm to America". bush inc. will never allow Iraq to operate without them pulling the strings in the background.
Ed, you are correct, only someone unencumbered by the Bush baggage can make the decisions which will rescue us and our forces from the ever-deepening hole and insanity of Iraq.
Without this change, thousands more will die and the American people will face the threat of further terrorism at home and overseas.
Okay, you guys, but, what do we do over the next year, say? Get out? Try to ease the pain we've caused?