I never cared about the politics. I think the whole thing

[Joe for Clark]

is dirty - dems a little less so than the gop - I suppose that is why I am a dem. Neither have clean hands here, though. But the war - that was another thing. Nice kids were going to die - and that is a fact. Trusting kids.

In the begining, it was about Afghanistan - and I agreed - that war had to happen. But it was twisted into a war in Iraq - that from its outset, was wrong. I even encouraged one of my kids to go after 9/11- I trusted the country to do the right thing, fight the right war. That didn't happen. So I was wrong. I trusted the wrong people to do the right thing.

Right now, careers - 20,30 year military careers will be broken if this falls apart in Iraq - so we know, there is going to be a great fight coming - they do NOT want to be the losers. Not that they are, but it is how they will be seen - they know that. The commanders will be seen that way - right or wrong. They will try the best can right now.

We are mobilizing maybe 60,000 kids to go there and fight now - and this was announced and all that. It doesn't say, what units we are moving into place - American units - from relatively inactive areas to deal with the matter in addition. We are.

I hope they pull this out - I really do - I doubt it, but you know, I would hate to be an Iraqi insurrgent right now, too.

I also think, B*sh has so lost control of this - Maybe that is the saddest thing of all. How did an American president manage to sink so low??

If by some miracle those guys do pull our country out of the fire here - make no mistake, they would have done this on their own. Personally, I am not holding my breath. On the other hand, those are American kids out there - and they really are that good.

Joe

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

1. What would constitute "pulling our country out of the fire"?

I'm curious as to event or set of events would meet this condition.

[Joe for Clark]

2. An ability to withdraw without "losing".

That is the best that could have ever been hoped for.

Joe

[DemReadingDU]

3. such a scary time

I have read about the 20,000 additional troops being sent back to Baghdad. Why? Additional troops mean more troops will be wounded/dead. For what? So Bush can 'win'? At what cost to our country? This makes no sense to me.

[Joe for Clark]

5. Its so scary - and it could really blow up.

We put on notice about 57,000 guys to go back. They are going. It was a pretty sweeping call up, all of the 2nd division - and at least brigades from almost all divisions. 57,000 guys, that is almost three full divisions. They said in the PR that some were going to rotate out other units - I don't believe it - maybe some are, I doubt most are. And any units that could or should be rotated back are one stop loss away from going home any way - not like the army hasn't been holding kids back alot lately from going home. And that the not the only thing.

From the day B*sh started this "stupid war" - it was not winnable, not by us. What could we win??
SO he put the military in a position they cannot win, but could certainly lose. This whole mess cost our country dearly in so many ways.

I think it is safe to say, to the extent the military is trying to create a condition so that they may be able to withdraw without it being looked at as a loss - they will not be doing it for our president.



Joe

[MadMaddie]

4. Joe I agree with everything you say...but I look at history

and look at Vietnam.....

We had damn fine soldiers with 20+ year careers....we had LBJ and Nixon who did not want to end the war...

What we did have was "The Fall of Saigon"....The US didn't pull our troops out when we could have and we could have saved face....

we were forced out and to me that is worse than deciding to start drawing down our troops...until all of them are out...

If the Dems don't push the issue we will be forced out of Iraq and that will be an even bigger defeat then Vietnam...

[Joe for Clark]

7. I don't disagree with you - I didn't just vote dem this time,

at least for me, I went all out - in the hope they would stop this soon.

When we pulled out of Viet Nam the war wasn't lost then - the ARVN put up a fight for some months after we left. The congress "turned-off" funding for them, not the US troops - that finished it. When Saigon fell, we were just defending our embassy - and I remember that day in 1975 like it was yesterday.

Not to be so philisophical - but, I think Viet Nam was the wrong war but for a good cause. This in stark contrast to Iraq, the wrong war and for the dumbest reasoning I have ever heard.

There is a reality check in all this for us - I believe the vast majority of our military, in one way or another, were finagled into this stupid war. They have careers on the line - they didn't start it, they (largely) thought it was just as dumb as we do. But if they can't manage to get out without appearing to do so with their tails between there legs, their careers are over. Not fair- but it is the way it is.

The truth is also, if they can pull this out - it may indeed be the fastest way out. That is what I want - fastest way to the exit.

And I'd say this - it is not impossible to come up with a way to exit quickly and not be seen as a loser. They can think outside the box, may indeed be forced to, to at least save their own careers. If it is possible, our kids could do it - I am not saying it is - but if anybody can, they can.

Joe

[Joe for Clark]

10. I have to add, cause I got lost in my own b-shit,

There very good soldiers that went to Viet Nam - some of the finest the country ever produced. They had about the worst leadership you could imagine (pre-B*sh).

Joe

[MadMaddie]

18. Ahh...I knew where you were going..you are so right about the

poor leadership....

[LSK]

6. Vietnam

When we left there, what EXACTLY did we lose? What EXACTLY did they loose???

Iraq was lost in the 1st few months we were there. Disbanding their army and bringing in tons of contractors sealed our fate and that was in 2003. Garner might have actually succeeded, but he wasnt "Pentagon" enough and when Bremer came in, all was lost.

Nothing can win this. And even if we "win" or "lose" - what EXACTLY did we gain???

[Joe for Clark]

8. Oh, I think this is a lot worse than Viet Nam.

Maybe not measured in our dead, yet - And it was lost the day it started, I think.

We can "win" - if we find a way to get out without appearing to lose - that is the best we can do!

I fully agree with you about General Garner - He is a good man, I think. Bremer should be remembered in history with contempt.

Joe

[LSK]

9. ok, if it appears we "lose" what does that mean???

What happens then??? Nevermind that the whole world already knows that we "lost".

:shrug:

[Joe for Clark]

11. Besides the destruction of the careers of many of our

Officers?

There is the other matter - the United States has had an aura of invincibilty surrounding us. It has protected us at times. An illusion that to pick on the United States meant taking on our "invincible" military - I think that stopped many actions that would have otherwise happened. Probably protected us from a real cold war show-down.

It is just like the Wizard of Oz - B*sh just pulled down the curtain and showed the real wizard, in a way. That is his biggest sin of all. And he never understood that there was always a greater power than even the wizard - us. Such a foolish man.

Joe

[LSK]

12. destructions of careers vs destruction of whole lives

Tough choice there. Also, can you tell me why thousands of officer careers would be ruined?

As far as invincibility, it did not prevent 9/11 nor previous terrorist attacks.

As far as the cold war is concerned, having a stockpile of nukes prevents all countries from attacking us. This still holds true today.

In addition, when we "lost" in Vietnam, who attacked us then because wouldnt we have been deemed "not invincible"???

Your arguments just are not making any sense to me.

[Joe for Clark]

13. LSK -

I know you mean well - and there is some truth in what you say - But you can't seriously tell me Viet Nam didn't traumatically impact our forces - That we had some degree of luck in surviving the USSR.

There is no force ever invented that can defend anyone against a terrorist action.

And the greatest truth is - right now, the only force the counts is on the ground and the only "truth" is going come out of the next tactial movement there. That is the reality, unfortunately.

Joe

[LSK]

14. last night I heard some units are going on their 5th tour in Iraq

You cant tell me that THAT isnt traumatically impacting our forces???

I still have no clear and specific description on how our "losing" Iraq has on our military forces. Its ok thou, our President has not given any specifics either besides the abstract and questionable theory that "losing" emboldens our enemies.

:shrug:

[Joe for Clark]

15. The Marines count tours in 6 month allotments.

Army is 12 months. That is the difference.

How losing impacts our military - Well, we aren't Russia, we don't take them out and execute them for losing, I suppose. But they are not going to be promoted - there records will have the stain of Iraq for as long as they can stay in the service. I am the son of military combat officers - I understand one thing for sure - In the begining of the movie Patton (and none of my family liked him that served under him) he said one thing true - that America does not condone a loser. That may not be true in some fields - but it sure is in the military. If you don't understand what I said, I do not know how to make it any plainer - The officer corps will fight for reputation - that is all they have.

It does not make it right - it is the reality. My kid is just an NCO - he gets caught in this.
A lot of kids will get caught in it. But it is happening. I do hope they pull it off - cause I think that may be the fastest way to stop this whole nonsense.

Joe

[LSK]

16. so anyone in the military gets their record updated with "lost Iraq"?

Does it literally go on the record or is it just some unwritten stain?

I dont know how this works exactly. I have no military experience. My Grandfather fought the Japanese in WWII but he has been dead for years. That is my only connection to the military.

So we probably are coming from 2 different perspectives.

[Joe for Clark]

17. Literally true. In color ,too.

I think there has been three?? ribbons out now from the war. Troy has at least two. You wear them on dress uniforms. It is not just something in your 201 file - you wear the damn colors in public.

Maybe we have two different perspectives - I think that is a good thing. The more perspective we put on a situation the more truth comes out. That can only be good.

Your grandfather fought in the Pacific in WWII - he instantly goes on my great person list. You should be very proud of him.

Joe