Randi says troops need to stay in Iraq

[laura888]

A caller just accused Randi of following the Democratic party line. This party line is one upheld by Hillary and others (not Ted Kennedy) which says that the U.S. needs to stay in Iraq.

The caller is right and I now have my doubts about Randi.

She said, "we broke it, we need to fix it, or it will become another Afghanistan."

Pure BS.

[Freddie Stubbs]

1. The question is

Do we think that the UN would do a better job at fixing it? I'm not to sure of that.

[Jacobin]

3. More westerners 'fixing' their country?

I'm sure that would go over like another lead balloon

[laura888]

4. how are we trying to fix it?

why not just pay them millions in reparations?

Also, the caller brought up the fact that if we said that there would be a bloodbath if we pulled out of Vietnam.

how is this any different?

[FreedomAngel82]

13. Yep

On one hand I do see their point. Our country destroyed their's and Bush has never cleaned up anything in his life. I would like to help them but the sooner we get out the sooner they can start rebuilding. What about sending people over to help them? Would that work? But the longer we stay the more blood will run.

[Horse with no Name]

146. That's my vote

Reparations and get the hell out and let them have their country back.

On edit: IF, and only IF, help is needed and requested from the Iraqi's, the UN should send the relief efforts in--funded by the US.
We haven't just broken their country--we have decimated it and it's people. Our country isn't worthy of a chance to make it better.

[paulk]

153. Iraq isn't Vietnam?

There's one difference....

[Telly Savalas]

167. Considering that our idea of fixing our own country is to reelect Bush...

I'm not sure we have the competence or moral authority to try to fix other countries. I'm not sure how the UN could be doing any worse.

[Jacobin]

2. Following down the path of LBJ

We sure broke it but it is crystal clear that we CANNOT fix it.

It's there own fucking country and they want us gone. Clue phone ringing for miss Randi blow-hard.

[Roxy66]

5. Oh..PLease..She said now that we have destroyed their country , we

cant just cut and run..."Sorry your country is in shambles...and the terrorists are here now..but we're outa here!!!"

[laura888]

6. what she meant was...

...we can't just leave our shiney new military bases that we created.

WE NEED TO LEAVE NOW

to stay because of the poor Iraqis is pure arrogance.

[Sterling]

51. the terrorists

Who the fuck are "the terrorists"?

[laura888]

80. Terrorists = Freedom Fighters?

Can you legitimately say that many of these "terrorists" are not just extreme nationalists who want the invading presence out of their land?

If you're not sure, then perhaps we should not be there at all?

[quinnox]

7. I'm not a fan but I heard she was a strong supporter of Kerry

and his policies (such as this one). Good for her

[laura888]

9. at what point do we leave?

and please tell me how we're trying to fix it?

[quinnox]

11. those are difficult questions

Eventually when Iraq is ready then they can make a general withdrawal, leaving behind a small force possibly.

Your questions are best put to the policy makers such as Kerry and the Democratic leadership

[laura888]

17. amazing

there's koolaid on our side as well!

[Jacobin]

52. That sweet taste of goodness and righteousness

is too intoxicating for some to stay away from.

It springs from a desire to do the right thing, but unfortunately I agree with the majority of Iraqis who say that they have had quite enough of our 'help' thank you very much

[laura888]

78. The majority of Iraqis say "please leave."

nuff said!

[K-W]

107. ignore

[LynneSin]

8. She has a valid point - let me expand

If I came to your house in all of a rage making false claims of what you did and then went on to pillage your home to tatters, wouldn't I be responsible if we found out that basically I was wrong and the claims I made about you were untrue?

We screwed up that country - we need to fix it. However, what we really need to do is go to the UN and admit that we were wrong and please help us. Until we do that we're stuck there with our own troops. Every single industrialized nation would benefit from a safe Iraq with oil flowing out of those wells, but not one of those countries are willing to help an arrogant asshole cowboy who started a war on false claims.

We could get more troops, but by appointing Bolton as UN ambassador you can be rest assured we aren't going to do anything to ask for help

[laura888]

10. No. Thousands of Iraqis just told us by demonstrating...

...that they want us out.

If we really believe in democracy (and not just democracy for "civilized" white people), we'd get out now.

[Freddie Stubbs]

16. Iraq does have an elected government now

Our Iraq's elected leaders asking us to leave?

[laura888]

18. You were right when you said:

"Our" Iraq's elected leaders.

Those elected leaders are probably as legit as those in place in Afghanistan.

C'mon now - let these folks be grown-ups.

[Sterling]

55. Freudian slip? "Our Iraq's elected leaders asking us to leave?"

Of course Our Iraq leaders want us to stay silly.

[Sterling]

54. If I came to your house

"If I came to your house in all of a rage making false claims of what you did and then went on to pillage your home to tatters, wouldn't I be responsible if we found out that basically I was wrong and the claims I made about you were untrue?"

If you did this I would never stop until you and every one you were associated were dead.

You don't ask the burglar to stay and protect your home after he robs it. At least I would not.

[thebigidea]

104. but who doesn't love a friendly, supportive rapist?

the kind of rapist that sticks around to hand you moist towelettes and band-aids if needed. The kind of rapist who drives you home, imposes a curfew, and molests your children too.

Hmm. These metaphors seem to be imploding in on themselves.

[LynneSin]

164. But remember, US went to a house that was practically defenseless...

...I mean, we all knew they had no WMDs and Weapons Inspectors made sure their army was pretty much non-existant. So basically this is like me going to grandma's house where she had absolutely no way of defending herself.

Of course the word would get out that I beat up granny & destroyed her house and I'm pretty sure the neighbors would gang up to defend her!

[leesa]

144. It is impossible for us to "fix it" when WE are the problem

We need to get the hell out and we need to pay MASSIVE reparations. WE are the bad guys, we cannot possibly fix it by staying there.

[tuvor]

12. You can't un-break Iraq.

Give their country back to them. (Of course, that'll never happen as long as there's oil there.) Isn't that what they were demanding in Toppled-Saddam Square just a couple of days ago?

[laura888]

14. Exactly. They were also asking that their prisoners that we are holding..

...at Abu Gharib be released.

Tell me - will these prisoners ever be released while we remain there?
Many of them are innocent.

How can this be a good thing?

[FreedomAngel82]

15. Yes

I agree. At first I was for staying to help rebuild too but then I thought more about it and it's just like Vietnam. Once we left didn't they fix everything?

[laura888]

19. kick!

[KG]

20. and how many soldiers should die protecting halliburtons janitorial

service?

i'd rather my nephew not stop a bullet so dick cheney can make more money.

the 'we broke it we fix it' meme is a steaming pile of horseshit.

[laura888]

22. Exactly! Hence my respect for Randi...

...has just nose-dived.

Wake up - Air America IS about the party line.

[KG]

28. lets be straight up about this -

those that support continued US presence in iraq to 'fix it', whatever the fuck that means, are pro-occupation and pro-war.

[donheld]

Bullshit!

Those of us who are wanting to "fix it" are anything but pro-war/occupation. I feel we have to do something to mend what we tore up. I think to cut and run would be most cowardly. We must admit to our wrong doing. No we cannot expect Bushie/Halliburton and the other cronies to fix it. That's why we say regime change begins at home. If you want to, you can say this is misguided, but it definitely is NOT pro-war/occupation.

[Quixote1818]

157. Thank You!

Finaly someone speaking with their head and their heart.

[quinnox]

30. I'd rather hear the Dem party line

than the republicans any day

[laura888]

34. As far as Iraq goes, I see NO DIFFERENCE...

...between the Dems or Republicans.

Do you?

[Sterling]

Sounds the same to me.

I can't tell a bit of difference.

[donheld]

115. I'd rather hear some truth and some independent thought

than any "party line" at all.

[Individualist]

24. Hear, hear!

The PNACers have no intention of fixing it - not when they invaded, not now, and not ever.

[laura888]

26. thank you!

there ain't no fixin' going on!

[journalist3072]

21. I see Randi's point

I've struggled with the debate over whether to stay in Iraq or leave myself, but I see Randi's point.

I did not support the invasion of Iraq. We were lied to about the need to go to war, and I think Buh is a war criminal.

Now all of that said, I think we do need to stay in Iraq. We broke it, we own it. I think that now that we have gone in there and ripped that country to shreds, we have an obligation to stay and help fix it.

This may seem like a poor excuse for an example, but let's say you are at a friend's house, and you spill grape juice on the carpet. You wouldn't just leave it there, or let your friend clean it up. You made the mess, you clean it up.

[laura888]

25. ...and continue to imprison your friend's family?

Remember: as long as we stay in Iraq, we will hold "potential" terrorists at Abu Gharib.

[journalist3072]

31. I know what you're saying, and I agree with you

Again, I've struggled over this. I just think that we have a moral obligation to help rebuild that country. And it's questionable whether we will actually do that.

But I think the just and moral thing to do is to re-build that country, and help the Iraqis rebuild their lives, since we've gone in and bombed the heck out of that place.

[laura888]

35. Re-build with our soldiers?

With guns?

Sorry- I think the Iraqis might get confused. Are we trying to rebuild? Or kill them?

[journalist3072]

96. From my own perspective

I think we should be trying to rebuild...meaning re-build hospitals, schools, churches, roads, highways, etc. We've blown that place to smithereens practically.

Now whether we will actually do that or not is another story. I'm just saying I think that's the moral obligation we have---to help restore the services (healthcare, etc) that existed before we bombed the heck out of them.

[laura888]

98. The official war ended almost 2 years ago.

If we were serious about rebuilding, we would be sending over as many engineers as soldiers.

[journalist3072]

103. Again, I agree w/ you & see your point

I'm not sure whether we will ever meet our obligation and help rebuild their infrastructure and services. I'm just saying that I think that's exactly the obligation we have.

[laura888]

112. Obligation = actual reality?

I just don't see any evidence that:

1) they want us to be there
2) we're rebuilding their infrastructure because we know what's best for them

If you have any evidence to the contrary, please share!

[journalist3072]

118. No.....

The Iraqis definitely don't want us there. They want us out, and I can understand that. We haven't done justice to them.

Everything that is happening in Iraq today, is a result of poor planning. The Bushies were in such a rush to go to war, based on a lie.

I'm only saying that if we were truly the decent and compassionate country that Bushie claims we are, we would have helped rebuild Iraq's infrastructure, and done a lot more to restore the services they had pre-war.

[n2mark]

117. We tore the country apart, we can't leave it in shambles

My feeling is is, if you make a mess, you clean it up. We pay the price for our stupidity.

[journalist3072]

120. Thank you!

That's exactly the point I'm trying to make, but you've articulated it better than I.

[laura888]

121. Easy to say and sounds noble...

...but in reality, does a victim of a crime really want the criminal to think for him?

How can Iraqis ever believe our efforts are noble?

And the real question is ARE they noble?

[quinnox]

27. makes sense

It would be rude to leave the mess on your neighbors carpet.

[laura888]

32. please give a concrete example of how we're...

...cleaning up that carpet.

[Sterling]

64. The person that pissed on the rug in the first place.....

should not be trusted to do the cleaning.
If you think we should fund the rebuilding that is logical but in no way should we be allowed to supervise and certainly not profit from the project given we lied to start the war.

[KG]

33. going to point a gun at them while cleaning it up?

might want to ask those neighbors what they think, they might just want you to take your gun and leave, and they'll clean it up themselves.

[thebigidea]

36. its pretty arrogant to think we can "own" another country

... just because Colin Powell says it, doesn't mean its true. When did he start getting credibility?

[journalist3072]

100. Some clarification

I did not mean to imply that we "own" Iraq. I don't think we should be making Iraq the 51st state or anything like that.

What I meant by ownership is taking responsibility for our (bad) actions there.

When I make a mistake, I try to the best of my ability to take ownership and fix it. That's what I mean. I'm talking about fixing what we messed up.

[Sterling]

62. "we own it" I can't begin to tell you how dumb that is.

We do not OWN Iraq. Iraq will eventually convince your type of this and you will see tens of thousands if not more maimed Americans as living proof of this hard lesson over the next few decades.

[thebigidea]

75. exactly - god, that phrase makes my blood boil. The pomposity!

The total pigheaded 19th century arrogance of it - that we can waddle around and own entire civilizations...

hiya, by the way. Been meaning to chat, but i've been in a big poverty hole due to the debt brought on by the exhausting '04 campaign...

[journalist3072]

93. Let me explain

When I say "We broke it, we own it" I mean we own the mess we made. We need to take ownership of the fact that we've made a bloody mess out of Iraq. I did not mean to imply that we "own" Iraq as if Iraq should become our 51st state!

I believe in trying to take ownership when I make a mistake. And that's the point I'm making with Iraq. But I don't mean we own Iraq.

[laura888]

95. If we fix it, we retain ownership.

Only by handing it over, do we give up our ownership.

[n2mark]

123. We don't own it

but we made a mess, a real mess. If someone walked in my house and destroyed it you know damn well someone is going to pay the price, not me, those responsible.

[n2mark]

124. And I don't care who

they damn well better fix it.

[n2mark]

125. If they don't want to fix it

someone better make a decision who is responsible to fix it.

[uhhuh]

158. Here's a more accurate illustration using your example

You go to a guy's house that you have been talking shit about for many years. You throw a bottle of grape juice through his window and climb in after it.

You tell him your going to clean it up, but you go to his fridge and take a sandwich. You then go lock his little sister in a closet, shoot his dad, and get to work cleaning out his wallet.

He tells you to get the fuck out, and you say I can't leave yet, I haven't cleaned up the juice yet, while you proceed to punch him in the face.

I think that's much more accurate.

[laura888]

161. Absolutely BRILLIANT!

Absolutely a better illustration!

[B Calm]

162. You hit the nail on the head. Hope Randi's reading this thread!

[bpilgrim]

23. thats why she gets paid the BIG BUCKS

i bet she said she was the first one who thought of it as well ;->

peace

[laura888]

29. hmmm...

please explain

[bpilgrim]

38. she's a dem

so she's tow'n the party line on this one as are most.

peace

[laura888]

39. gotcha

I guess I'm no longer a dem

[bpilgrim]

43. no

you aren't like most, is all... probably why you hang here ;->

peace

[Sterling]

65. Maybe you are not.

I have no idea what I am these days. I sure don't relate to anything any big time pols are pushing these days.

[sandnsea]

37. Not Ted Kennedy???

I swear people have selective hearing. He said we need a date certain timeline to withdraw troops, he did NOT say we need an immediate withdrawal. How does that make some Democrats supporting staying IN Iraq and Ted Kennedy not??

Do people just not think past the end of their nose??

[laura888]

41. not the main issue

do people not understand the important points of the issue?

[sandnsea]

71. That is the issue

Pulling out of Iraq. Nobody has a plan to pull out of Iraq immediately, despite what they say on the subject. That's the issue. A credible leader cannot criticize others for "staying in Iraq", while they pretend to be supporting pulling out. When you look at the details of any of these so-called pulling out plans, they're exactly the same as the majority of the Democrat's Iraq plans. That has been true since before we ever went into Iraq.

[laura888]

76. I see. Maybe you are way, way ahead of me.

Are any leaders, in your opinion, for a legitimate Iraq pull-out?

[sandnsea]

91. Not really

There could be some that I'm not aware of. But every time I read the plan of somebody who supposedly supports pulling out, it's just another version of elections, reconstruction, international help and Iraqi security. The difference to me has been in sincerity and implementation. There are Democrats who I do not trust on Iraq, and Democrats I do trust. Consistency and honesty has been key for me, and there aren't a whole hell of alot of them that have been both.

That's just the way I see it, at the moment. I wish we could find the language that could differentiate "stay the course" from a way out, while not abandoning the Iraqis either. I don't know when withdrawal at any consequence comes, I really don't. But I certainly understand the views of those who think we're just going to make things worse by staying. Maybe they're right. But I don't see anybody proposing an option that minimizes the risk to the Iraqi's in case they're wrong.

[Quixote1818]

40. It's too early to leave. Pulling out now would be a disaster!!!!

Much as I hate us being their we have to at least try to make sure the Iraq security forces are ready to defend their new government. If we left right away the insurgency would come back to life in a huge way and over throw the new government for sure. Then we would be back to what we started with. The new government will likely be an improvement over what we had before. Pulling out now would be a complete disaster.

Was the war worth it? NO!

We have wasted a lot of lives and money in Iraq but we have to salvage what little gains we have made. Randi is exactly right!

[laura888]

42. Tell me - where is the insurgency in Afghanistan?

Where our troop levels are much lower than in Iraq?

Why don't we worry about insurgents there?

Could it be because insurgents are fueled by our presence?

[Quixote1818]

47. Their is an insurgency in Afghanistan but that is a shell of a country

with very few people. Having a presence in Afghanistan compared to Iraq is like having a presence in Rhode Island as compared to California. Sure our presence fuels the insurgents but if we pulled out and were out of the way you absolutely cant tell me the Sunni's wouldn't see a HUGE opportunity to take back control of the country.

[laura888]

48. then you'd have the same situation as in...

...Saudi Arabia.

And that doesn't seem to be so bad, does it?

[Quixote1818]

60. Like I said, we loose either way but

I would rather have a Saudi type of government than Saddams old friends back in charge. It's kind of like "Do you want to lose all your limbs or just one?"

[thebigidea]

46. so the whole war and the occupation ISN'T a disaster?

why the sudden fear of disaster? we've embraced it thus far. I'm sure the Iraqis will somehow be able to deal with rejection, humiliation, and disaster of our withdrawal if we ever intended to do so.

[Quixote1818]

53. We are damed if we do and we are damed if we don't in Iraq

The whole things is fucked up but in my opinion we have more to loose if we don't make sure the Country become 95% stable with a somewhat moderate government. We loose either way but by pulling out now we risk loosing EVERYTHING!!! We need to at least make sure the Iraq security forces are trained and can protect the new gov. before we leave.

[thebigidea]

57. "loosing EVERYTHING!!!" ? Like what, our permanent bases?

what exactly do we lose?

Excuse me, "loose."

This isn't a damn board game, thousands are being butchered by our collective madness.

What the fuck is 95% stable? What the fuck is "somewhat moderate"?

So we're giving them democracy, but it has to be a certain kind of democracy before we leave?

That isn't exactly very, uh, democratic, now is it?

[Quixote1818]

67. If we pull out now the number of deaths would EXPLODE again!

Civil war would certainly break out and all hell would break loose. The area would become totally unstable and then we would end up with what we had before. If you don't see that you are kidding yourself. We have to hurry the fuck up and get the security forces ready and then get the hell out!

[laura888]

69. Question: who do all the Iraqis hate the most?

What inspires their violence?

[Quixote1818]

77. It's a mix of Saddam's party loosing control and the American presence

The loosing party has nothing to lose and everything to gain by keeping the insurgency going. With us out of the way the Sunnies would have nothing really to stop them from taking back control of the country. If you don't see that then you are reading too much fringe left wing propaganda. It's a mix not just our presence. Look, if the amount of violence were at the levels they were two months ago I would probably agree with you and actually two months ago I felt the same way as you do but the insurgency is dying down dramatically in recent weeks. At this point we have to try to carry through.

This site shows how the amount of American deaths is way down in recent weeks.

http://icasualties.org/oif/

[thebigidea]

72. all hell hasn't broken already? the current death toll is acceptable?

the area isn't totally unstable now?

journalists can't leave their hotels, entire towns are out of our control, the roads are deathtraps, our soldiers are moving targets, kidnapping happen constantly, rotting bodies are found every few minutes.

yeah, god forbid we make a wrong move and all this good stuff comes to an end. its heaven on fucking earth there now, thanks to our stability.

"We have to hurry the fuck up and get the security forces ready and then get the hell out! "

you're kidding yourself if you actually believe that's what Bush is planning on doing.

[Quixote1818]

79. Deaths are down dramaticaly in recent weeks

Like I said in another post, if the amount of violence was what it was two months ago I would be with you 100% but the violence seems to be going down. At this point we have to carry through. http://icasualties.org/oif/

[laura888]

82. "carry through" to what?

At what point do the Iraqis stop hating us for invading them for no reason?

[thebigidea]

85. yeah, its just so much better now that the golden shower of democracy...

... rained down on those poor people.

I guess i'm through arguing, i'm not much of a fan of the Bill Kristol school of "things are great now, no honestly."

mark my words, though - a year from now you'll be saying the same thing. a year from now, the same excuses about training Iraqi security will be offered.

what the fuck do they need, anyway? A goddamn doctorate in Medieval History?

[laura888]

87. Exactly! What exactly are the measures for success?

No insurgents attacking American bases?

How F**ed up is that?

[Quixote1818]

97. So you don't care if things start to turn around????

Who said things are great in Iraq now? The question now is WHAT will leave Iraq in worse shape? Anyone who claims to know what is best at this point is just another opinion. Both sides have valid arguments and my opinion on pulling out or staying has changed in the last two weeks based on a falling US death toll. If deaths dropped down to zero for the next month would everyone be saying we should go then and risk a huge Civil war and the Sunni's taking back control? Absolutely NOT! We have to keep an eye on what is going on in the country and not just have a blind ideology. If in a month or six months things get worse again I absolutly agree we should then pull out. But the important thing is based on NEW positive information if we have an opportunity to turn things around, why risk everything falling apart by pulling out just when things start to look like they are getting better??? I hate Bush too but if Iraq starts to turn around I am not going to be for a policy that based on NEW information goes against common sense just because I hate Bush. You have to be willing to change your mind based on new information. Too many fringe liberals are too stubborn to do this.

[thebigidea]

105. as opposed to fringe neocons n' neoimperialists, eh?

and don't you dare try to turn this around. suddenly i'm the bad guy who's against progress, liberty, freedom, and life.

Goddamn me and all the fringe types like me who led us into this wonderful smorgasbord of progress that is Iraq!

its all my fault!

o woe is me!

woe!

the only thing fringe here is the delusion that the USA has any business pre-emptively invading countries in the Middle East.


"Anyone who claims to know what is best at this point is just another opinion."

silly me, but I tend to favor the opinions of those who speak Arabic and actually know something about the region before I rush to embrace the asanine theories of Paul Wolfowitz.

And pardon me if I don't buy the "turning around" stuff.... considering its, what - the 5th time in the past few years we've heard it?

[Quixote1818]

126. What's going on in Iraq is complicated and different throughout the

country. In the north and south things are much better, in the Sunni triangle little progress has been made. You talk in sweeping generalizations like you only listen to one point of view. I refuse to get caught up in a narrow view of a complicated issue. A month ago you and I were in the same camp but based on the dropping death toll I simply believe we need to try to stick it out a little longer. I may be 100% wrong but ALL I have to work with is the current information at hand. I am willing to change based on new information. I get the feeling many people would not change their mind no matter what.

Does that make the war worth it? Absolutely NOT!!!! But why not salvage something if we can? That is the ONLY important question at this point. Could I be wrong absolutly but all I have is my ability to reason and look at the avalable facts.

[thebigidea]

130. yes, we're all horribly closeminded.

and your ability to swallow the current PR line about Iraq shows how open to new ideas you are. New ideas conveniently put out by Tom Friedman, the Weekly Standard, and the Heritage Foundation. Pat yourself on the back, freethinker!

[Quixote1818]

134. At least I am willing to admit I could be wrong

Not something I have seen you do yet.

[acmavm]

44. No matter how much 'fixing' we ever try to do, there will never come a

time when the Iraqis turn to us and say 'Even though you killed my family, destroyed my mosque, obliterated the history of my country I forgive you because you rebuilt the sewage system and the roads and the water treatment plant that you destroyed as well. No hard feelings. Oh, and by the way, thank you for doing the work yourselves. We had no skilled tradesmen, no skilled architects, no craftsmen, no one capable to restore our infrastructure. Hell, I just don't know what we'd have done without your brilliant expertise and the way you commandeered our country. And the money you dumped into those 14 military bases while malnutrition in our children skyrocketed, well what can I say. Thank you, thank you, and thank you."

Do you really think we're they're ever going to be happy to have us there?

[laura888]

45. thank you!

You said it WELL!

[FreedomAngel82]

58. Ha

Yeah right. They proved to us this past weekend they don't want us there. And not just in a city. The whole freakin country. I've thought about this too and at first I was for staying and rebuilding but then I thought about it some more and it's just like with Vietnam. We have to get out now or we'll be there for years. They already have military bases being prepared there!!!

[laura888]

61. Prepared? I believe we started building the day after we got in power.

The Bush plan is to stay, and the dems are going along with it.

and so is Randi.

(said with a broken heart)

[Malva Zebrina]

49. There are times when I do not agree with Randi

she does a good job on her show of educating the people and her heart is definately the heart of a liberal. I am a fan of the Randi show. On this particular item, I do not agree with her.

I simply do not think that a continued presence of troops in Iraq will accomplish anything at all. In fact, the working out between the Iraqi's according to their culture and traditions, would be the best for the people.

They hate our presence there. and that is understandable. I just cannot go along with the notion that " while we are there now, we may as well do all we can to help" Uh UH but that is only validating Bush's invasion or validating the IWR. We made a huge mistake, but now that we are there........

uh huh

There is violence every single day and there is death every single day. Our military presence there will not quell that. We cannot rebuild or replace the treasures that were looted. We cannot expect a country or a people to rebuild themself, while our military, one which they hate, one which has murdered and tortured their families, is there.

The only reason our military is there is to protect the corporate investments made since we invaded.

The best thing we can do, is pull out and let the Iraqi people determine for themself, how they will cope and redeem their country.

[laura888]

50. your one sentence held so much truth, that I must repeat it:

"The only reason our military is there is to protect the corporate investments made since we invaded."

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

56. About as logical as keeping cancer cells around to fix what they broke.

Besides, "killing is fun".

[Carolab]

59. I like Randi but she's wrong about this.

It's up to the IRAQIS. They want us to leave.

[LoZoccolo]

63. You know, you can disagree with someone on something.

You don't have to start having "doubts" about them. It might make you feel good, but it's really pretty useless if not detrimental to your state of mind.

[laura888]

66. hmmm.... no

This is THE central issue.

Should we remain in the country that we wrongfully invaded?

I can't think of a better reason to reverse my opinion on Randi.

[Sterling]

70. So we should always hold our initial opinion about someone or something?

Randi trades on her opinions. When a person stops relating to what she says I think they are entitled to question the level of respect they give her as a pundit.

[LoZoccolo]

74. No.

Not at all.

[Sterling]

127. My take is that that is what is going on.

People are reassessing their level of respect for Randi's views. Understandable. I think it is more important to be true to your own beliefs rather than engage in bandwagon jumping or hero worship.

[LoZoccolo]

128. On one issue?

A practical one rather than an ideological one at that?

[laura888]

133. this is more than a "practical" issue

Do you belive that Iraqis have the ability to determine what's best for their country?

Anyone who says "no, the united states knows what's best for them," is no better than a colonialist.

[LoZoccolo]

137. Yes.

I do.

It's still a practical issue.

[Carolab]

152. I agree with you.

People who advocate staying there are negating the Iraqis' wishes. They are also not thinking about this situation as if the roles were reversed. Would YOU like Iraqis to come to the US, depose Bush, kill 100,000 innocents, wreck our homes and villages, cut off our infrastructure, erect permanent forward-advancing military bases to stage more war across our boundaries? NO! We should pay them reparations and round up the war criminals in this administration who started this mess in the first place for prosecution, and LEAVE them to figure out their own country.

[laura888]

163. Sounds like common sense to me

I guess those Iraqis are just not like us...

[seabeyond]

68. she concludes differently than you

a lot of people have valid arguements in the we broke it, we fix it. there would be a lot more lives lost if we left. who knows what the mess is going to create in internal war and total chaos, more than even now

there is also the valid arguement, we shouldnt have gone in the first place, because the enivitable would be this mess, here it is,. we cant fix it. how many more lives. we will leave eventually with a mess. better now than 5 years from now

i dont have the answer. i think both are equally strong

[laura888]

73. Because we don't know any more than the Iraqis...

...what gives us any authority to determine their fates?

[Quixote1818]

89. We have to watch what is going on in the country

Anyone who claims to know what is best at this point is just another opinion. Both sides have valid arguments and my opinion on pulling out or staying has changed in the last two weeks based on a falling US death toll. If deaths dropped down to zero for the next month would everyone be saying we should go then and risk a huge Civil war and the Sunni's taking back control? Absolutely NOT! We have to keep an eye on what is going on in the country and not just have a blind ideology. Does that make the war worth it? Probably not but if we have an opportunity to turn things around why risk everything falling apart??? That makes no sense.

[laura888]

94. Do we know what's best more than the Iraqis?

If the answer is "no"....then we need to leave...

How tragic if we chose the wrong fate for them!

[seabeyond]

90. that is one of the arguements to leave i feel, not yours

but in yours.

"what gives us any authority to determine their fates?"

this is what will insure we feel is the arrogance to feel we can determine their fate. that is why this hasnt worked from day one. we are trying to determine, and we cannot do that. at all. will fail. hands down

now if we allowed them to truly determine and we were solely there to insure safety, being pro iraqi instead of killing and torturing and abusing, if we werent stealing their oil, if we were allowing them to build their own business instead of allowing our business in to do the work, leaving iraqi's unemployed, yada yada yada

but we are going to fail absolutely with the presumption we can determine their fate

[bpilgrim]

81. Don't be fooled by the spin on Iraq

The US is failing - and hatred of the occupation greater than ever

Jonathan Steele
Wednesday April 13, 2005
The Guardian

Saddam Hussein's effigy was pulled down again in Baghdad's Firdos Square at the weekend. But unlike the made-for-TV event when US troops first entered the Iraqi capital, the toppling of Saddam on the occupation's second anniversary was different.

Instead of being done by US marines with a few dozen Iraqi bystanders, 300,000 Iraqis were on hand. They threw down effigies of Bush and Blair as well as the old dictator, at a rally that did not celebrate liberation but called for the immediate departure of foreign troops.

more...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,1458237,00.html

peace

[laura888]

84. This is what makes me sad: Randi is one of the spinners...

...is no one NOT tainted?

[BeachBuckeye]

140. The Guy James Show

Has railed against this war even before it started. We NEVER had any business going in there and NOTHING HAS CHANGED!!

I believe the right thing to do would be to start a mass exodus of U.S. troops from that god-forsaken region tonight! Not one more American life should be sacrificed in the name of "fixing it".

I am a yellow-dog Democrat and will remain so till the day I die but I will NEVER tow the Party line when it is so obviously wrong.

To Hell with George Bush and everyone else who got us involved in this mess. And that INCLUDES some Democrats.

"We broke it we gotta fix it" my ass!!

[laura888]

141. Can we get him on Air America? n/t

[quinnox]

154. just for your info

That is Guy James himself, "BeachBuckeye"

[tishaLA]

168. That Show also said

a former poster from here didn't have to explain herself--twice--when revelations about how she worked for the republican party under the guise of veteran issues became apparent. That poster slandered liberals and got a free pass for it on the radio show. In fact, she got a sympathetic ear. So pardon me while I ruminate on who enables those who break things.

[applegrove]

83. I agree that you have to wait until there is stability. Stability would

happen 10 times faster if US troops were replaced with UN troops. You know.. when the troop levels get down to less than 50 thousand?

That way the insurgents would have to dial it down. With the US planning on bases in Iraq.. there is a change the insurgents will never die down.

The Bush WH know this better than anyone. The strength of the insurgency is that they claim to be fighting occupation.

What horrors if it never ends.

[laura888]

86. So...occupation = insurgency...

...this is the grand plan?

[thebigidea]

88. ah, the intricacies of Rummy's "victory strategy"

[laura888]

92. I believe you are right...Rummy DOES like those insurgents...

...for keeping this occupation going.

If only Randi would state the obvious!

[applegrove]

145. Rummy needs some insurgents. Not as many as he has now because

This is a Mexican standoff.

I was hoping there would be peace.

[Randi_Listener]

99. Two fucking words: Marshall Plan

[bpilgrim]

102. ah, permanent occupation

i don't like that plan

peace

[Randi_Listener]

111. It's not fucking permanent.

The plan was for all of fucking Europe and the shit worked like a motherfucking charm.

[bpilgrim]

138. Japan and Germany remain occupied to this very day

or do you mean just 6 or so decades :shrug:

peace

[Randi_Listener]

148. Hardly fucking occupied.

A few bases doesn't make the shit an occupation. Marshall law and totalitarian control by a foreign fucking power would be an occupation.

[bpilgrim]

166. oh, only partially occupied, permanently

gotcha

peace

[Kellanved]

169. The occupation of Germany ended in 1990

The occupation forces left Germany in 1994. The US troops remaining in Germany are not occupying forces.

peace

[laura888]

106. ummm... no. Were there 20,000+ Japanese demanding...

...that the U.S leave Japan in the 1940s?

Also, did we build 14 american military bases in Japan right after we bombed them?

Things are wildly different.

If you can't see that, you're deluded.

[Randi_Listener]

109. A Marshall Plan aaproach would fucking work.

It's not being done in Iraq. If they used the fucking plan the way it's supposed to be instituted, the goddamn shit would be much better than it is now.

[laura888]

113. Please explain how its supposed to work.

I'm all ears...

[Randi_Listener]

116. A REAL effort to rebuild Iraq instead of just the motherfucking oil fields

Restart the godadmn power grids, water purification, sanitation, and fucking health services and the people will start to turn against insurgency. The US military will take a strict defensive fucking position. This will take much more money until oil sales can contribute to the fucking effort.

The way this is being done now is ass fucking backwards.

[laura888]

119. Perhaps the people ARE the insurgency?

For every active insurgent, there are 100 "non-acting" Iraqis who do not act on their hatred of the occupation because they either do no believe in violence or are more interested in survival than the cause.

I'd bet on it.

[Quixote1818]

129. So by leaving and then letting the country fall into Civil war

don't you think that would turn the rest of the Iraq people against us? Right now the north and the south are doing very well. If we leave then the whole country goes to hell in a hand basket then not only do the Iraq people who already hate us hate us but the ones who like us will then hate us. The whole thing is a fucked up situation but the ONLY important thing is trying to salvage some kind of success out of this fucking mess. The Iraq people in the north and the south who don't hate us and are are happy about getting rid of Saddam would end up the big loser's if we pull out. We have to make sure they are protected.

[laura888]

131. Iraqi Self-determination

I think you believe in it...but this is not what the current crop of dems or repubs believe in.

If they really believed in reconstruction, we would have as many engineers as soldiers in Iraq.

[Quixote1818]

136. You could have a point

That is not something I can determine with full confidence at this point. Their is too much conflicting information. I don't trust too many people when it comes to the Iraq peoples best interests or ours for that matter. Power corrupts, we all know that for sure.

[Randi_Listener]

151. The solution is not a retreat from Iraq.

Quite the goddamn contrary. More troops and construction efforts are needed. A retreat invites Iraq to become Afghanistan Taliban part II.

[Lilith Velkor]

150. If this isn't a civil war already, what the fuck is it?

All we're doing is occasionally getting hit in the crossfire. Oh yeah, and terrorizing them too.

No, we need to go. They need us like I need a case of the crabs.

[Quixote1818]

155. Look, I was with you a month ago but it appears things are getting

better now as deaths are down dramatically this month. We have to see if we can help Iraq salvage some kind of stability. 99% of the fighting is in the Sunni triangle. If we leave that could spread all over the country again. It's a risk but the risks are higher if we pull out. The choice is to stay, train the Iraq forces so they can defend themselves then see if the attacks keep declining. Hopefully Iraq will have a more moderate Gov. Or we do your option, pull out and risk loosing EVERYTHING!!! If attacks go back up in a month or two then I am back with you but for now we have to see if this trend of less and less attacks continues. It's a no brainier based on the dramatic drop in attacks. To pull out now would be ignoring the current facts!

[Jacobin]

110. Perhaps this warrants more than two words?

Germany was bombed to smithereens and in an extremely important difference, those left in power at the end of the war actually SURRENDERED.

No one has surrendered in IraqNam. The war goes on and is now a guerilla war which we will never ever finish or win.

[Randi_Listener]

114. The fucking Iraqi people haven't been taken care of.

Once the US military reestablishes the infrastructure of Iraq.... Hearts and goddamn minds will follow.

[laura888]

122. Please provide an example of where the military...

...is rebuilding the infrastructure.

[Randi_Listener]

149. They fucking aren't.

That's the goddamn problem.

[chlamor]

135. Civil War BS is excuse for continued occupation-Pure Propaganda

The US 'Troops' will pull "back" to permanent bases with many leaving to other resource rich areas which need "stabilizing", particularly Africa, some will come home and the violence will continue in Iraq due to savage economic conditions created by earlier British occupation-US sanctions-Ongoing US slaughter and infrastrucure demolition. The US will fuel and fund region to destabilize to provide excuse for continued occupation and most, including many on the left, will buy the Big Lie.



One of the most insidious aspects of the U.S. occupation of Iraq, or of any hostile military occupation for that matter, is that it forces every citizen in the country under occupation to make the wrenching choice between collaboration and resistance. Although 70 percent of Iraqi civilian casualties are inflicted directly by U.S. forces, according to a recent Iraqi Health Ministry report (Miami Herald, 9/25/04)*, there are also daily acts of violence committed by Iraqis against other Iraqis. The question is whether these are essentially a by-product of our military occupation, or whether they are the expression of a latent competition for power between Sunni and Shia ethnic groups that would erupt into civil war if the occupation were to end now.

I have reviewed 113 such acts of violence described in the international press between the 1st and 25th of January. Of these, 55 were directed at the armed forces of the "interim government" (army, national guard, police or Ministry of Interior "special forces"), 25 were election-related, aimed at candidates, election workers or polling places, 16 targeted interim government officials, 12 were against local employees of the occupation forces, and the victims were not identified in the remaining five cases. Not one incident was reported as a case of straightforward ethnic violence. Even the bombing of a Shia mosque in Baghdad was clearly election-related, as one of the survivors noted that people in the neighborhood had just received threatening letters urging them not to vote.

<snip>

In 1922, it was the Shia who boycotted Iraq's first election, designed by the British to produce a Constituent Assembly that would support the British mandate. Since then, the history of Iraq has had more than its share of tragedy, but one thing that has never happened is a civil war between Sunnis and Shiites. Many Sunnis were privileged under Ottoman rule, and others who had fought in the Sharifian forces with the British against the Turks formed the officer corps of the Iraqi Army and a new privileged class under King Faisal. The Shiite, however, were prominent in opposition parties during the monarchy and were well represented in the republic that was formed after the military coup of 1958.

The Shiite also occupied a majority of leadership positions in the Baath Party before it came to power in 1963, and continued to be represented at all levels in proportion to their numbers in the population and to hold a majority on the Revolutionary Command Council until the first Gulf War. When Iran invaded Iraq in 1982, its army was turned back by a mainly Shiite Iraqi force under a Shiite general. The Shiite then supplied 75 percent of the lower ranks throughout the war without a widespread mutiny in spite of intense Iranian propaganda appeals to their Shiite brothers to join their Islamic Revolution. The disastrous U.S.-inspired Shiite revolt in 1991 led to a reduction of their role in government, and the surviving leaders of the revolt now view their central mistake to have been their failure to involve Sunnis and Kurds in the uprising, which was politically motivated against the Hussein regime rather than ethnic in character. Shiite leaders today seem determined not to make a similar mistake, and they put together multi-ethnic slates of candidates for the election.

<snip>

Americans have been led to believe that the persistent failures of U.S. military ventures in the "Third World" have been attributable to a lack of commitment of either money, blood or political will, and that, given sufficient investment of these commodities, there are no limits to American power. Fortunately or unfortunately, this is myth, not history. In reality, it is in the countries where the United States has made its most extensive commitments that it has experienced its greatest failures, from China in the 1940s to Korea, Lebanon (twice), Cuba, Vietnam, Angola, Iran, Somalia and now Iraq. In each case, policy has been formulated around myths of democracy and American power in place of accurate analyses of resources and interests relative to the history, politics and culture of the country in question, even though such analyses were always readily available. The result has been that popular movements in all these countries have frustrated American ambitions and won military and political victories in spite of huge economic and military imbalances in favor of the United States (Confronting the Third World, Gabriel Kolko, 1988). The only exceptions to this record of failure during the past half-century have been in small countries in the Caribbean basin that already had quasi-colonial relationships with the United States.

http://www.onlinejournal.com/Commentary/020505Davies/020505davies.html


?x=x&a=52607155&b=editorial_emea&t=1

[laura888]

139. Wow! Thanks for an informed post!

Those who look at violence and not the reasons for the violence are only seeing half the story.

[UdoKier]

101. I disagree with her, but she's entitled to her opinion.

She hasn't hesitated to criticize Clinton on some occasions. She is not a party lackey.

[K-W]

108. Send the bull back into the China shop to fix it.... GREAT IDEA eom

[spanone]

132. Dear Randi, there is NO fix. Bring the kids home. NOW.

[haele]

142. Depends on what "fixing it" means...

There's a lot of options that those two words can cover. Like Randi, I believe that "we broke it, we fix it..." but that never meant troops and bases. I may not believe in fixing it the same way she might, but we both see that we have a responsibility to try and mitigate the damage we did.

There's a whole international forum out there with lots of groups that specialize in reconstruction. There's a network amongst the countries in that region, because they all know that instability in a country that shares your border causes instability in your own.

That the Shrub and his cronies are willfully mishandling the situation and treating Iraq like their own private playground does not change that the fact that we are culpable for the misery that is now Iraq, and the longer we wait to fix the problem - one way or another - the worse it will be for everyone involved.

Haele

[leesa]

143. If we stay it will be worse than a thousand Afghanistans

[seabeyond]

147. laura888 i think what we might consider

is when a fellow democrat disagrees with us, it doesnt automatically mean dismissing them. i dont think you will ever get millions of people to agree on all points. there are many things i believe that a number of people here have been sure to share with me they disagree adamently. we arent going to find our perfect person. what we can embrace are the smart and the honest and those with integrity. and htat is going to mean compromise

randi spent time in military. i am sure she is seeing it from a different perspective than you and i. i can respect that, whether i agree or not. much of what she says is right on with what i feel. that i like, wink

[Quixote1818]

156. Well said!

I agree with Randi on this but admit I could be wrong however it amazing how many people are sure I am full of shit and they are 100% right. I don't like to see people as arrogant as George Bush on our own side. These are complicated issues that need to be weighed out carefully not decided upon based on emotion. Ultimately no one knows what the best thing for us to do is but it's important to consider that good or bad could come either way.

[nolabels]

159. Sounds like the battered wife syndrome to me

Taking more abuse by anyone because of fear of something even worse could take place is where it starts. A Year from now things will be even worse for American troops over there. If real anarchy doesn't develop over there first and force them out anyway, that is.

Them people living in and around Iraq have no respect for the US. We never gave them any reason for such a thing..........

This is more a debate about saving face than saving any lives. A US occupation and culture has not worked yet in ANY Country in that part of the world. Why would anyone figure now was a good time to start?

April 13, 2005
Anti-Occupation Protests Spread Across Iraq

By TRACI CARL
Associated Press
April 13, 2005

Iraqis are increasingly calling on U.S. forces to leave their troubled nation, emboldened by a newly elected parliament and the growing presence of their blue-uniformed police forces - even though the new Iraqi leaders say it's too early to talk about a U.S. pullout.

The calls gained momentum when Shiite and Sunni religious clerics called for protests to mark the two-year anniversary of Baghdad's fall, prompting four days of demonstrations across the country.

Tens of thousands of mostly Shiite protesters, largely followers of militant cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, filled central Baghdad's streets Saturday, holding the largest anti-American protest since the invasion. Demonstrations have continued, all echoing the same demand: It's time for U.S. troops to leave.
(snip)
http://www.occupationwatch.org/headlines/archives/2005/04/antioccupation.html

[B Calm]

160. I like Randi, but to stay in this dysfunctional screw up

is bull crap.

[nonconformist]

165. I usually like Randi and I think she takes a lot of undeserved flack

But she's dead wrong about this.

The more time passes, the more I'm sure we aren't going to be able to "fix" it. THEY have to fix it. Damn shame it happened at all, but our presence there is just encouraging insurgent attacks and delaying what might be an inevitable civil war at this point.

And who in their right mind thinks that Bush can freaking *fix* ANYTHING? His entire life, everything he's touched has turned to shit.