|
Note: This is a Text only archive. Go directly to the real forum.
Bush - Wants to Stay in Iraq for 50 years....
- Click HERE to go to the original thread with graphics
banner
| Bush - Wants to Stay in Iraq for 50 years....
- Click HERE to go to the original thread with graphics
|
| Reverend Tyler |
http://www.reuters.com/article/poli...30?pageNumber=1
Quote: By Steve Holland
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President George W. Bush would like to see a lengthy U.S. troop presence in Iraq like the one in South Korea to provide stability but not in a frontline combat role, the White House said on Wednesday.
The United States has had thousands of U.S. troops in South Korea to guard against a North Korean invasion for 50 years.
Democrats in control of the U.S. Congress have been pressing Bush to agree to a timetable for pulling troops from Iraq, an idea firmly opposed by the president.
White House spokesman Tony Snow said Bush would like to see a U.S. role in Iraq ultimately similar to that in South Korea in which "you get to a point in the future where you want it to be a purely support model."
"The Korean model is one in which the United States provides a security presence, but you've had the development of a successful democracy in South Korea over a period of years, and, therefore, the United States is there as a force of stability," Snow told reporters.
Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid of Nevada said in a statement he believes it is time for Bush to "recognize the reality on the ground in Iraq," that U.S. troops are mired in an Iraqi civil war and a change in course is urgently needed.
"Democrats know that Americans demand realistic plans, not more White House rhetoric, rosy predictions and best-case scenarios. Our troops and the American people deserve better," Reid said.
Iraq's neighbors have raised concerns about the possibility of the United States maintaining permanent bases in Iraq, and some U.S. lawmakers have said they think the Iraqi insurgency may have been fueled by perceptions the United States wants a permanent presence in the country
Washington has consistently denied wanting permanent bases in Iraq.
Snow said U.S. bases in Iraq would not necessarily be permanent because they would be there at the invitation of the host government and "the person who has done the invitation has the right to withdraw the invitation."
"I think the point he's (Bush) trying to make is that the situation in Iraq, and indeed, the larger war on terror, are things that are going to take a long time. But it is not always going to require an up-front combat presence," Snow said.
"The president has always said that ultimately you want to be handing primary responsibility off to the Iraqis," he said.
"You provide the so-called over-the-horizon support that is necessary from time to time to come to the assistance of Iraqis but you do not want the United States forever in the front."
|
Of course all us liberal moonbats were just having our tin foil hats a little too tight thinking Bush wanted to stay in Iraq permanently. |
|
|
| Oz |
| Hey - VTW - are you towing the line now? This is a 180 from everything you've stated "Bush wants" |
|
|
| Luther |
| Of course, he wants successful expansion of the empire, not a failed attempt. |
|
|
| Reverend Tyler |
| so yeah...not a big deal? It certainly flies in the face of everything they've said so far... |
|
|
| SaintJimmy |
| I thought those permanent bases they were building were just temporary permanent bases. |
|
|
| Oz |
| hm, and noone swooping in to defend this? again, VTW? |
|
|
| ArivacaCharlie |
| Fuckin' Bush. It's probably a christian plan to launch us all into the apocolypse. Well, fuck 'em all. |
|
|
| tom sizemore |
| IT WILL NEVER BE A REALITY....THE ISLAMIC THEOCRACY THAT WILL EVENTUALLY TAKE OVER FROM THE PUPPET REGIME WILL KICK OUT ALL THE AMERICANS.......... |
|
|
| sternowitz |
| I said this last year, they are building a billion dollar plus embassy, what do you think they are going to pick up and go. Even if the Iraqi govt said today to leave, we wouldn't. We need to control the oil. No ifs ands or buts |
|
|
| WillowGlen |
Quote: Originally posted by sternowitz
I said this last year, they are building a billion dollar plus embassy, what do you think they are going to pick up and go. Even if the Iraqi govt said today to leave, we wouldn't. We need to control the oil. No ifs ands or buts |
Of course they will pick up and go. The money is in the blind no bid contracts he gave his cronies for BUILDING the bases and embassy. After they bleed all the tax money they can out of the american people they could care less what happens to them. But if they do stay he would need another way to keep his indentured servants in the National Guard prisoner over there since the stop loss act only keeps them in slavery until 2031. |
|
|
| VacateTheWord |
Quote: Originally posted by Oz
Hey - VTW - are you towing the line now? This is a 180 from everything you've stated "Bush wants" |
Well, I don't see how this is different from what the President has stated he wanted - Iraqis to "stand up" and take over the job of securing their country.
The concept of a small force in Iraq to act as a deterrent against outside forces (i.e. Iran) from moving in is not unrealistic. It's going to take time for the Iraqis to get to the point where they can defend themselves, both from Al Qaeda and foreign threats such as Iran.
And the article pointed out an important aspect of all this - this would happen as long as the government of Iraq asked us to do it. As the President recently said during a press conference, we are there at the request of the Iraqi government (despite the "occupation" label used by elements on the left).
The President has stated repeatedly that if the government were to ask us to leave, we would. Is this likely to happen - given the current state of affairs, no chance. They know that if we were to start leaving soon (as the Democrats have stated they want) then Al Qaeda would wait until our troops were out of Baghdad and they would start crawling over the walls of the Green Zone looking to wipe out the elected government and take over the country.
As for the "180" that the President is doing, he is merely changing strategy as conditions on the ground have changed. Given the apparent infiltration of insurgents in the ranks of the military and police, he is facing the reality that it's going to take a long time to get the Iraqi security forces where they should be. And again, this is all contingent on the invitation of the Iraqi government, as it is today. |
|
|
| VacateTheWord |
As for the title of this thread, the President never said he "wants to stay in Iraq for 50 years."
That's a lie. |
|
|
| Oz |
Quote: Originally posted by VacateTheWord
Well, I don't see how this is different from what the President has stated he wanted - Iraqis to "stand up" and take over the job of securing their country.
The concept of a small force in Iraq to act as a deterrent against outside forces (i.e. Iran) from moving in is not unrealistic. It's going to take time for the Iraqis to get to the point where they can defend themselves, both from Al Qaeda and foreign threats such as Iran.
And the article pointed out an important aspect of all this - this would happen as long as the government of Iraq asked us to do it. As the President recently said during a press conference, we are there at the request of the Iraqi government (despite the "occupation" label used by elements on the left).
The President has stated repeatedly that if the government were to ask us to leave, we would. Is this likely to happen - given the current state of affairs, no chance. They know that if we were to start leaving soon (as the Democrats have stated they want) then Al Qaeda would wait until our troops were out of Baghdad and they would start crawling over the walls of the Green Zone looking to wipe out the elected government and take over the country.
As for the "180" that the President is doing, he is merely changing strategy as conditions on the ground have changed. Given the apparent infiltration of insurgents in the ranks of the military and police, he is facing the reality that it's going to take a long time to get the Iraqi security forces where they should be. And again, this is all contingent on the invitation of the Iraqi government, as it is today. |
:headspin: |
|
|
| Reverend Tyler |
Quote: Originally posted by VacateTheWord
As for the title of this thread, the President never said he "wants to stay in Iraq for 50 years."
That's a lie. |
You're right...we havent left South Korea yet, so he could envision it being much longer than just 50 years. Remember he also said it was a mistake to leave Vietnam/
| Quote: The President has stated repeatedly that if the government were to ask us to leave, we would. |
And I so completely believe him, he is a very honest man. |
|
|
| Oz |
| here's another one..... |
|
|
| VacateTheWord |
Quote: Originally posted by Oz
here's another one..... |
So what's the question? "
"headspin" is a comment, not a question.
If you want me to answer for my statements, then you need to ask a question. Perhaps you can avoid being a hypocrite and do the same?
Seems to me you attacked how I made a living, and I responded by asking you what you do for a living - if you think what I do is so bad, then what do you do that is so better?
Again, Go. |
|
|
| Oz |
Quote: Originally posted by VacateTheWord
So what's the question? "
"headspin" is a comment, not a question.
If you want me to answer for my statements, then you need to ask a question. Perhaps you can avoid being a hypocrite and do the same?
Seems to me you attacked how I made a living, and I responded by asking you what you do for a living - if you think what I do is so bad, then what do you do that is so better?
Again, Go. |
You sway in the wind more than an Iraqi dissident - its hilarious |
|
|
| VacateTheWord |
Quote: Originally posted by Oz
You sway in the wind more than an Iraqi dissident - its hilarious |
So you can't even back up one assertion when called out.
I answered to three - you can spin the facts all you want beyond that.
Bottom line - you rely on your liberal talking points to get you through, nothing more. Fair enough. From now on I'll have a few good laughs at your baseless assertions. Don't forget your daily update from "The Daily Kos" now! |
|
|
| Oz |
Quote: Originally posted by VacateTheWord
So you can't even back up one assertion when called out.
I answered to three - you can spin the facts all you want beyond that.
Bottom line - you rely on your liberal talking points to get you through, nothing more. Fair enough. From now on I'll have a few good laughs at your baseless assertions. Don't forget your daily update from "The Daily Kos" now! |
:lol: god I love when you post :lol: - what did I even assert?! :lol: |
|
|
| zimmie |
| South Korea, Germany...........100K troops still stationed there from the last two Democrat wars....when they coming home?.....who are we protecting there after 50/60 years? |
|
|
| Oz |
Quote: Originally posted by zimmie
South Korea, Germany...........100K troops still stationed there from the last two Democrat wars....when they coming home?.....who are we protecting there after 50/60 years? |
so you agree we shouldn't be there either |
|
|
| zimmie |
Quote: Originally posted by Oz
so you agree we shouldn't be there either |
obviously Democrats and Republicans alike for the last 50 years feel our interests there (Korea and Germany) are worthy of maintaining a presence.
Why should there be any questions as to why we would maintain a presence in Iraq?
Of course we will, and should. |
|
|
| harley-davidson |
Quote: Why should there be any questions as to why we would maintain a presence in Iraq?
Of course we will, and should. |
Come and listen to a story about a man named Jed( Exxon/Mobile )
A poor mountaineer, barely kept his family fed,
Then one day he was shootin at some IRAQI'S,
And up through the ground came a bubblin' crude.
Oil that is, black gold, Texas tea.
Well the first thing you know ol' Jed's a millionaire,
Kinfolk said Jed move away from there
Said Californy is the place you ought to be
So they loaded up the truck and moved to Beverly.
Hills, that is.
Swimmin pools, movie stars. |
|
|
| Oz |
Quote: Originally posted by zimmie
obviously Democrats and Republicans alike for the last 50 years feel our interests there (Korea and Germany) are worthy of maintaining a presence.
Why should there be any questions as to why we would maintain a presence in Iraq?
Of course we will, and should. |
a fan of imperialism we have here |
|
|
|
|
|
