Isn't this an invasion?

We are at least making it LOOK LIKE we are getting ready to invade a foreign country. It isn't an invasion yet though...

This "war fever" that Dubya and his minions have elevated to a national pastime cannot succeed much longer. We must make our intentions in Iraq very clear or we risk having any allies at all.

The latest build-up in Iraq heightens the "fever." Meanwhile, Dubya hides behind this mirage of war mongering to cover up his do-nothing presidency. The American people are gullible enough to take Dubya's lead and run with it. So many of them think he is a real patriot.

Dumya's accusations are now gonna backfire. He says Saddams has several weeks, not months. For what, I ask? c.i.

Hell he said absolutely nothing sensible during the campaign and yet people voted for him. Now he presents no evidence that Saddam colluded with Bin Ladin [9/11]and again people believe him.

You can fool some of the people all of the time and all of the people some of the time, but you can't fool all of the people all of the time.

This from the chairman of the Cato Institute, hardly a liberal voice:

President Bush is now between Iraq and a hard place. He can get out of it if he is courageous enough to "risk peace." The problem is convincing him to take that step...

Their most recent case for this war is that the United States would "lose face" if, after threatening Iraq with regime change and deploying a large force to the Middle East, we do not now invade Iraq and replace its current regime. So the case for this war seems to have come down to preserving "face," a sad commentary on the decision process that led to this outcome.

In other words, President Bush now faces a choice between initiating a war for which there is only lukewarm domestic and meager foreign support and repudiating a major focus of U.S. foreign policy over the past year.

No Exit Strategy?

Empire building!!!!!!!!!!

PDiddie

I fear that Bush would rather lose lives than lose "face." Remember he is compassionate.

As fishin's said: when - then it will be an invasion.
(And that's the reason, why some easily can refer to the Mongol invasion... .)

It's curious to me, tho, that many still do not want to have a war with Iraq even if proven with hard evidence that they have WMD's. c.i.

c.i.

I do not believe that is the case. Most people are against an invasion of Iraq because we do not have that hard evidence. Not only in the US but around the world.

au, Germany for one already stated they will not support a war with Iraq no matter what is found. Some on this forum has already declared their pacifist positions on Iraq. I've also read articles in the Editorials about some people's position on the Iraq question. I'm sure there are many more people, including those "human shields" who are in Iraq today to stop any war with Iraq. c.i.

au says:



Way back in September or so Wolfowitz had already said that Bush said, he can't back down now. Yeap, you be right!

That word "compassionate" used in the same sentence as GWBush turns my stomach. c.i.

Although I am a democrat, there's a lot about this whole Iraqi story that has bothered me. Saddam Hussein is a very bad man. But I don't think anyone can ever say with any certainty what someone else is thinking. During the war between Iraq and Iran, very awful things were done by both sides, including gassing and poisoning of civilians. But the information we have been deliberately fed about that aspect is that Iraq gassed its own people. Studies that have been around since the 90's have questioned the total validity of this assertion. We have been told that Hussein has weapons of mass destruction, which I believe is probably the case today for many, many nations. There are good reasons for getting rid of him, although to point to his restrictive regime while ignoring others even more restrictive is a bit much.

What bothers me is the how and the why. What is the point of talking publicly, constantly about this without any action? And why would it be such a good thing for us to go into another country, remove both its leaders and its way of life, and replace them with others cast in our mode? What makes us so special? As it happens, I do believe in my country and its way of life, for me.

If we are sincere, compassionately caring about this situation, then why not try to effect a regime change and let the Iraqis develop at their own speed?

So - to an invasion. The overwhelming mass of people and arms we have gathered at the very edge of Iraq means we win this battle. We invade.

Below is a link to an article by George Friedman, founder and chairman of Stratfor Weekly, a reasarch and analysis organization serving business. It raises a lot of interesting questions. Prime among them is asking about the necessity for mis-leading the people, and the harm that can result from this.

To give you an idea of how much there is to worry about in this world, the state of Michael Jackson's face is awful to contemplate. I can even give you a link to that, if you want.


http://www.northjersey.com/page.php?qstr=eXJpcnk3ZjcxN2Y3dnFlZUVFeXkxNCZmZ2JlbDdmN3ZxZWVFRXl5NjMzNTkyOA==

mamaj - the state of GWB brain is even more awful!

mama, That article's primary thesis of strategy is fine for talking points, but it still falls short of what happens to real lives that will be sacrificed in war. We all understand the cat and mouse game both sides are playing, but that will not play for much longer, because GWBush's credibility is at stake. He will definitely strike, and initiate this war with Iraq. We'll see how much resolve the hawks have when the body bags begins to arrive at home. c.i.

Some thought should also be given to the fact that we really don't have a willing coalition. Mostly we are buying them. Read tonight that we have promised Turkey 4 billion (I think) in aid and debt relief because we need their bases. And we've done the same in other cases. And the agency at the U.N. charged with getting the donations for re-building a country have said they need 37 million to start - and so far nobody's contributed a cent.

Credibility, I believe, is going to be a bigger problem than appears now. Once we're in Iraq - what then? The rep from the Iraqi National Congress (Chalabi?) has said he wants to go in there, and has indicated he will not take kindly to the U.S. being in the way. This was not what the U.S. expected. Looks like Russia is taking a hard look at the deals it negotiated with Iraq concerning the oil. If we do not succeed - once we're there with our thousands - in making Iraq a viable country, a democracy, what then?

It just goes to show how much $$$$ has influence in this cockeyed world. Damn the ethics and humanity, but give me the bucks..... c.i.

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm, <sigh>