Thursday, January 22, 2009
From the new Whitehouse.gov:
...Under the Obama-Biden plan, a residual force will remain in Iraq and in the region to conduct targeted counter-terrorism missions against al Qaeda in Iraq and protect American diplomatic and civilian personnel. They will not build permanent bases in Iraq, but will continue efforts to train and support the Iraqi security forces as long as Iraqi leaders move toward political reconciliation and away from sectarianism...
So we'll continue to be there as long as "necessary," and Americans will continue to die there, but our commitment will be small. So we're going to keep a minimal, light, low-footprint, force there. Does that sound familiar? I thought that was the big problem over the past few years. But look at it this way, at least it'll be easy to pull out -- or at least off the front-pages -- the moment things get tough again and we find the need to cut and run.
We don't build big bases to help KBR's stock, or because Republicans like to play with military toys, we do it because that's what long-term strategy calls for, and we do it because we sacrificed lives and treasure to get to the point of being able to do so.
Obama is now continuing the Bush policy, but he's handcuffed our options by his pandering to the "Iraq is a disaster, we need to pull out NOW"-wing of the left mainstream of the party who declared Iraq lost and an unrecoverable mess in the face of the evidence.
Crittenden: Everything Old
...Wow. Man of action. Dramatic shift from the Bush policy of dragging the thing out as long as possible, I guess. Good thing Bush ended the Iraq war and had the exit plans and Afghanistan review in the works. That should make it easier...
Obama: "I woulda done it differently...now that it's done."
This is one of the reasons why we shouldn't have gotten in Iraq in the first place. It was a can of worms. And now we're stuck there, bogged down. Whose brilliant idea was this? Oh, and add in Afghanistan into the bargain. Do they have democracy there? More like chaos, and whatever they have will fall apart the minute we leave. Geez, are we going to act as an occupation force for more countries? Iran, anyone?
63+ years after the end of WW2, the US still has bases in Europe.
The US also still has forces in Korea.
So far so good.
The US being somewhere in the Middle East for a long time is not farfetched, and probably a good idea as long as Islamofascism is on the rise.
Commenter #1 - Joanne does not know her history and has failed to investigate Islam.
Baghdad was the first seat of the Islamic caliphate, and by denying the Muslims that historical reference point, Bush has actually, without knowing it, destroyed any Islamic hopes of re-invigorating that Caliphate.
Foolish Joanne...won't you grow up and start thinking like an adult?