So: if you do believe we can win in Iraq, let’s hear what you mean by “win” and how you think we can do it, and let’s hear it in clear and compelling declarative sentences. “Stay the course” isn’t enough. What Bush is doing now obviously isn’t working, so what would you do that’s significantly different?
Conversely, if you don’t believe we can win in Iraq, and you’re only suggesting we stay there because you can’t stand the thought of “looking weak,” then your moral compass needs some serious adjustment.
He has really hit the nail on the head.
I haven’t actually heard a definitive explanation of what “winning” in Iraq is for months… and I don’t think I’ve *ever* heard a concrete and detailed “plan” of how to do it besides “the Iraqi people will have elections and write a constitution”. That’s nice talk… but as we have seen over the past 2 years, it’s not quite enough.
And of course.. we knew this before, but for some reason the US Administration chose not to listen to us, or it’s own State Department.
The State Department officials, who had been discussing the issues with top military officers at the Central Command, noted that the military was reluctant “to take on ‘policing’ roles” in Iraq after the overthrow of Saddam Hussein. The three officials warned that “a failure to address short-term public security and humanitarian assistance concerns could result in serious human rights abuses which would undermine an otherwise successful military campaign, and our reputation internationally.“
It’s as if no one was listening.
So again, I ask. If you don’t believe the US must set a timetable to withdraw ALL of it’s forces in Iraq within the next year, then what, pray-tell is your strategy.