Iraq Vote in the House

[laurence]

17 Repubs crossed party lines, the Senate will vote on it tomorrow - or try to anyway. Repubs say it's dead on arrival at the Senate.

Question for those who are old enough to remember: While many have derided this as a meaningless vote, it feels like it means something to me, like this represents a gathering of momentum. Do you agree and was there a moment during the Vietnam era that felt the same? Tet Offensive?

 

[sgeeeee]

17 Repubs crossed party lines . . .

I find the 180 who voted against the resolution more amazing. According to all the polls I've seen, this is likely to cost them dearly during their re-election bids. They have to be already hearing the sound bytes of their opponent going into elections. It makes me wonder how the Party kept that many in line.

 

[kowski]

Personally I'm in favor of following the Presidents recomendation. Congress has many things they could be doing instead. Balance budget, Social Security, Outsourcing of all our jobs, Illeagle immigrants. But no they grandstand this situation. Politics seems to be more a game of pointing your finger at the other guy and tell all that he is doing wrong instead of comming up with real solutions for real problems.

 

[Nords]

It makes me wonder how the Party kept that many in line.

"Representative, how are the defense contractors doing in your district?"

 

[REWahoo]

Question for those who are old enough to remember: While many have derided this as a meaningless vote, it feels like it means something to me, like this represents a gathering of momentum. Do you agree and was there a moment during the Vietnam era that felt the same?

Yep. The day I got my "Greetings" letter from Uncle Sam.

 

[eridanus]

Personally I'm in favor of following the Presidents recomendation. Congress has many things they could be doing instead. Balance budget, Social Security, Outsourcing of all our jobs, Illeagle immigrants.

The war in Iraq seems serious enough to discuss in Congress.

 

[FinanceDude]

Personally I'm in favor of following the Presidents recomendation. Congress has many things they could be doing instead. Balance budget, Social Security, Outsourcing of all our jobs, Illeagle immigrants. But no they grandstand this situation. Politics seems to be more a game of pointing your finger at the other guy and tell all that he is doing wrong instead of comming up with real solutions for real problems.

Maybe the independent audit that showed $9 billion was misappropriated didn't help??

 

[laurence]

I thought long and hard about clicking "post" to start this thread, I didn't want to start a flame war (really!), I just am a fan of history, and I always wonder if a moment is something that will be remembered. I was already working for a defense contractor when 9/11 happened. They turned the main auditorium into a viewing room with the overhead projectors feeding live t.v. coverage. Then we learned that 3 of our employees were killed in the attack on the Pentagon. We all knew everything had changed.

 

[samclem]

Not inspiring. "We want to quit, regardless of the cost to others or our kids" is not a vote that America will be proud of in the future. Luckily, it has no tangible impact. The appropriations bills will have, and Murtha has already spilled the beans on the game plan to undermine chances for our success: Attach so many riders and conditions (mandated max tour lengths, mandated time home, mandated training and equipment levels) that continuing the fight will become impractical, and US casualties will either increase or we'll be forced to leavethe fight is impractical. It is tremendously cynical.

Lawrence, your ref to Tet is appropriate. A tremendous defeat for North Vietnam/the VC that was portrayed as a huge success in the US media. There's a lot of that going on. We hear about every bombing. Did anybody hear that Iraq prodced more wheat last year than any time in the nation's history?

 

[sgeeeee]

Not inspiring. "We want to quit, regardless of the cost to others or our kids" is not a vote that America will be proud of in the future. . .

As opposed to, "We want to continue, regardless of the cost to others or our kids"?

I don't really understand where you are coming from. This invasion is a disaster. We are not "winning" anything that I can see. And no one seems able to explain how doing more of the same is going to produce a better result.

 

[laurence]

More wheat, huh? Hmmm, you are right, that didn't get circulated. The fact that school attendance for children has dropped from 70% to 30% did, and the fact that there are 2 million internally displaced/refugees. I don't think I'll buy that Iraq is anything other than a complete mess.

I referenced the Tet Offensive because while the body count was (as always) in our favor, it served it's political purpose. I mean, the VC did not really think they could hold the U.S. embassy in Saigon, for example, they just knew it would play great on film. Not liking the rules of the game doesn't make it not so. Not liking that Americans have no stomache for long, drawn out wars doesn't make it not so. This is the reality we are faced with, so decisions have to be made in the light of reality. I have coworkers who go around to this day saying, "But we WON the Tet Offensive!" and totally not understanding that's beside the point.

In 2005, Cheney said we were seeing the last death throes of the insurgency, about every six months for the last 4 years we've been told it's just about to end. That was a huge mistake. The only slim hope for not having Iraq revert to a dictatorship after an ethnic bloodletting is for us to be there another decade, possibly longer, with many more troops than we have there now. No one is willing to do that, so what do we gain with half measures, like 20k troops to attempt to quell millions of Iraqis?

 

[USK Coastie]

This reminds me too much of the coverage of the fall of Sigon in April 1975. We were watching it on the TV on the mess dack of the CG Cutter I was on. A lot of pissed off service people that day mainly about how the politicians had let down the country for the sake of political expediency (votes).

If the Dems would at least come up with a plan other than other than "let's re enact the scene of the last helo off the roof of the Sigon Embasy" I might listen to their BS. However not ONE of the clowns that voted for this "resolution" Dems or Repubs has the courage to say to the public and the president "I have a plan to win this war and bring the troops home." All they can come up with is, lets cut and run just as we did in Vietnam by cutting off funding of the Vietnamese Goverment.

What will these clowns do when we get in a knock down fight with Iran or North Korea or some such. We could take 50,000 casualties in one day in the right circumstances. (NUC). Will they be as risk averse then as now, or will they posture for the cameras and demand thet we "do something"? Then again if flight 94 had not gone down in PA but instead hit the White house or the Capitol Building maybe they'd have a back bone.

If you're going vote to spill the blood of our finest citizens in war, then at least have the courage to allow them to win the war. Stop being PC and kick *ss

I wonder what they'll say if we do pull out and 6 - 7 million lives are lost in the ensuing violence? Oh I know," its Bush's fault".

 

[laurence]

My friend is running a blog from the camp he's at in Iraq, he says the soldiers moral is just fine, and that they do believe in what they are doing.

I haven't seen a principled stand on the Iraq issue by either side since before the war ( I would say those who voted against it when everybody was beating the war drum - including me - could be counted ). I was for the war, I didn't want another 9/11, this time with a Nuke or with Chemical weapson. I watched Colin Powell's speech to the U.N. from end to end, and bought it completely. That the whole thing ended up being untrue probably damaged us for a long time to come, USK Coastie talks about Iran and N. Korea. Notice how skeptical people are of our intelligence on Iran's involvement? Fool me once....but only now even if Iran is trying to kill troops, there is no will to confront them because no one believes our intelligence anymore...

 

[laurence]

I love the headlines:

MSNBC: THE HOUSE CALLS FOR A CHANGE IN DIRECTION

(well, the majority of the house anyway)

FOX NEWS: DEMS: IRAQ IS DEFEAT

( wonder if the were upset they couldn't figure out how to get the words, "Democrat" and "Defeat" closer together)

No bias in the media folks, move along.

 

[sgeeeee]

. . . However not ONE of the clowns that voted for this "resolution" Dems or Repubs has the courage to say to the public and the president "I have a plan to win this war and bring the troops home." . . .

But I think the point you are missing is that most people now realize that our invasion unleashed a civil war that doesn't involve us except as referee. The referee can't win. It makes no sense to continue to give up lives to referee Iraq. What could possibly happen over there at this point that would make us a winner?

 

[JohnEyles]

What will these clowns do when we get in a knock down fight with Iran or North Korea or some such.

I wonder what they'll say if we do pull out and 6 - 7 million lives are lost in the ensuing violence? Oh I know," its Bush's fault".

You've put you finger squarely on the two biggest reasons why the invasion of Iraq
is the worst foreign policy decision in US history.

We CAN'T get in a knock-down fight with Iran and North Korea, two countries that
probably (certainly, in the case of the latter) pose a greater threat to the US than
Iraq EVER did. We can't because this Iraq debacle has completely over extended
our military, and because Bush has completely squandered US credibilty, so that
the world simply laughs when Bush says "Iran has nukes" etc.

And yes, many lives WILL be lost in Iraq when we finally withdraw. So I agree
with you that maybe it's worth giving it one more try. But who can blame the
Congress for responding to the will of the people and saying "enough is enough ?"

And yes, it IS Bush's fault.

 

[JohnEyles]

My friend is running a blog from the camp he's at in Iraq, he says the soldiers moral is just fine, and that they do believe in what they are doing.

I guess we can all quote the soldiers in Iraq to support whatever our position is.

Me, I sat next to an Army sergeant on a flight recently, who had been in Baghdad
for a year, driving around looking for IEDs and then providing security for the bomb
squad. I asked him what we should do, and he said give the Iraqis an ultimatum,
we will be GONE by, say, January of 2008, so you better start getting your sh*t
together.

He admitted that not all soldiers there would agree with him, but a substantial number do.

 

[laurence]

Certainly, they all have their own opinions, I just mean guys are lounging around listening to Jefferson Airplane and smoking joints while talking about fragging their CO.

I just don't see an endgame, other than partitioning the country.

 

[Brat]

The sectarian violence is spreading. There was a car bomb in Iran today.

 

[USK Coastie]

Maybe the Sunnis are taken' it to the source. Would be kinda interesting if Iran got a taste of what they have been formenting for 30 years or so.

 

[Brat]

Maybe the Sunnis are taken' it to the source. Would be kinda interesting if Iran got a taste of what they have been formenting for 30 years or so.

Yup.. As we have learned sometimes once you start a fire it is tough to contain.

 

[bosco]

partition the country.

It's going to happen sooner or later. These groups can't live together, won't live together. Might as well do it sooner before more are killed.

Yes, I know, Turkey won't like it. Tough.

Big problem is the southern sector will be Shiite, and likely aligned with, if not a puppet to Iran. Something Bush and his geniuses might have considered before they opened Pandora's box. Too late to unring the bell.

 

[samclem]

Do folks chirping "partion" know what they are talking about? What they should say is "I support ethnic cleansing." The limited amont of ethnic partitioning/forced displacement/bloodshed going on in Baghdad today among the most tragic aspect of the war--so these people think it should be the official policy? Not just fr Baghdad, but everywhere in the country. And what makes anyone think the violence will stop once the partition takes place--they'll just be pseudo states with designs on the resources of each other and with scores to settle. Creating two new theocracies and a Kurdish state on Turkey's border instead of one (certainly imperfect) representative republic is not an improvement, it is a disaster.

Is there any price to be paid by those politicians who are voting to run? I don't think it is likely If the present course proves effective (despite the best efforts of some to undermine all key aspects of it), I think these folsk will be able to jump back and claim they always supported a good plan. If Iraq ends in an all out ethnic bloodbath (and it is NOT today--it is not anything close to many exampes history provides), these politicians will blame President Bush.

As incredible and unpalatable as it sounds, I think there's reason to suspect some people inside the beltway want a failure in Iraq, and are doing what they can to achieve it. I hope I'm wrong on this. Read up on Murtha's "slow bleed" plan--it's amazing.

 

[eridanus]

Any of the war supporters have a plan? Other than a "troop surge," that is.

To reiterate sgeeee, what would make us a "winner" in this war?

What event or events would mean a defeat? Or do we keep drawing the line farther and farther out to ensure that we never "lose?"

 

[Nords]

Any of the war supporters have a plan? Other than a "troop surge," that is.

Yeah-- let's assign a few Rangers/SF to help with the usual troop-training & civic-affairs duties. Contract some more out to Blackwater et al. And then let's send everybody else home.

While we're at it, let's do the same in Afghanistan. Let the Arab League decide how they want to handle the port visits and the basing rights.

To reiterate sgeeee, what would make us a "winner" in this war?

"Sovereignty's been restored to Iraq-- yippee! Remember to vote early, vote often, and vote Republican!!"

What event or events would mean a defeat? Or do we keep drawing the line farther and farther out to ensure that we never "lose?"

I don't think that prolonging the status quo is going to give us many opportunities to make good things happen.

And just wait until the contractors from the Mexico fence project submit their proposal for another fence along the Syrian border...