Republicans: Is "Victory" in Iraq Possible? Please Explain Fully.

[Brassmask]

I've tried to stay out of this in hopes that "republicans" would actually invest the time to come up with something like I tried to do in domer's other thread.

I'm disappointed but not surprised that such an investment has not been made and does not appear forthcoming.

Here are my observations on this thread and its subject.  It appears to me that those on the right have no intention of going on the record as to what they believe should now be happening in Iraq to decrease the number of deaths that are occurring every day and bring the Iraq invasion to a close.  The responces to this thread have pretty much held to what could be boiled down to "stay the course".  Amid posts of clever dismissive snark and vague excuses for plans like "disarm the militias" (something that our military hasn't been able to do in 3 years) and the unattainable "create a government that can stand on its own" there are successful attempts to change the subject to whether or not Iraq is like WWII or VietNam and/or if domer is a fan of JFK.

Those on the right feel more comfortable attacking those who ask valid questions of them.  Those on the right feel the subject must be changed.  Those on the right don't want to figure out the mess they have actively supported for years even to the point of being unwilling to even entertain the idea that a change of plan is in order or that Bush has made a mistake.  I imagine they fear that even an inkling of that type of thought would be a slippery slope for them.

The world is telling Bush to pursue something other than "victory" and there is a small representation of that 21% of Americans who believe that Bush is doing a fine job of handling the war right here in this forum.  I find this utterly outrageous.  Now, even now, as chaos reigns in Iraq we are being told that "This is no time to get all wobbly."  It is no wonder that Bush is rejecting the world's offerings of new courses when he knows that out here in America there are a small number of people who have followed him down his rabbit hole of delusions and still swill his slop of solipsistic horseshit.

The act of calling the "opposition" "wobbly" is dated and immaterial.  I imagine those using this tactic would fall into fits of giggles if someone imitated Clara Peller by crying out "where's the beef?!"

[Amianthus]

I'm disappointed but not surprised that such an investment has not been made and does not appear forthcoming.

Guess you missed this post.

Of course, it was immediately followed by liberal deriding of the contents.

Which has been the pattern for a number of years.

[BT]

Brass,

I believe i answered Domer's question.

I believe i did it in two sentences.

Victory as defined by me would be a dismantling of the Saddam regime, already done, and the installation of a democratically elected Iraqi government capable of administering the country's affairs, in all that that entails.... partially done.

You then go on changing the theme of the thread from defining acceptable victory to one of designing a way to minimize causalties. And then decrying that no one responded to a query that was not asked. What do they call that? False premise, strawman?

You then make some nebulous claim that the world wants Bush to follow some plan other than "victory", so i am assuming you want Bush to engineer defeat.  Am i correct in my reading of your words?

I stand by my charge that the American people have failed the gut check. Domer has defined the overall conflict as defeating or at the minimum reigning in violent radical Islam. That front is currently in Iraq, aided and abetted by folks in Syria, Iran and other Middle East countries.  And as the battle drags on more and more people have turned against the war, going wobbly, blaming Bush but never arguing against the general worthiness of the conflict. In effect they are capitulating to car bombers.

As i have also stated, there is a new congress being sworn in in January. They were elected because they successfully politicized the Iraq War. Now they must either deliver on their promises or redefine their promises to save political face. How Nixonian.

And yes, their action or inaction will have repercussions for years to come. .

[Brassmask]

Whatever.

[BT]

Whatever.

Exactly

[Brassmask]

Whatever.

Exactly

I just realized that the radical islam thing was hyped and is not viewed as a serious threat by the people of the US anymore or at least that Iraq is not part of that problem.

[BT]

I just realized that the radical islam thing was hyped and is not viewed as a serious threat by the people of the US anymore or at least that Iraq is not part of that problem.

So you have no problem capitulating to car bombers. Which brings us full circle to my wobbly charge.

Thanks for making my case.

[sirs]

So you have no problem capitulating to car bombers. Which brings us full circle to my wobbly charge.   Thanks for making my case.

He's been good at that, lately     

[Brassmask]

I just realized that the radical islam thing was hyped and is not viewed as a serious threat by the people of the US anymore or at least that Iraq is not part of that problem.

So you have no problem capitulating to car bombers. Which brings us full circle to my wobbly charge.

Thanks for making my case.

Seeing as how we have been killing Iraqis 24-7 for nearly four years and never stemmed let alone stopped them from happening nearly EVERY FUCKING DAY and increasing in number constantly, then I have to think that we're not going about stopping or stemming car bombings and we have to do something besides kill people.

If using my eyes and my mind and being willing to admit that what we're doing is NEVER going to acheive our goal of stopping and/or stemming car bombings in Iraq and our actions are actually doing the opposite of what we want is "wobbly" then call me the wobbliest sumbitch on the block.

Yeah, I'm making your case but it doesn't mean you're right in the least.

[BT]

Yeah, I'm making your case but it doesn't mean you're right in the least.

You confuse the goal with the methods used to achieve the goal.

[domer]

The core of the debate, for me, is whether, at this point, victory as envisioned by BT is even possible -- remembering that the Iraqis have to work out their own problems over which we have but limited, if any, control -- and whether the costs of that victory would not prove too much: an outcome which actually sets us back seriously in the main fight with violent, radical Islam.

[domer]

Any takers on the central problem, stated immediately above, that must be addressed by the mature, responsible and wise among us. THAT's what the debate is about, or mostly is about, not the smokescreen horseshit that usually passes for thought here.

[BT]

The core of the debate, for me, is whether, at this point, victory as envisioned by BT is even possible -- remembering that the Iraqis have to work out their own problems over which we have but limited, if any, control -- and whether the costs of that victory would not prove too much: an outcome which actually sets us back seriously in the main fight with violent, radical Islam.

Of course the Iraqi's have to work out their own problems, the aid we can provide is to lend stability to the democratically elected government until such time as they are able to stand on their own. I believe we are doing just that.

And i believe we need to be a bit more aggressive in neutralizing those who don't want to see the democratically elected government succeed.

[Plane]

Any takers on the central problem, stated immediately above, that must be addressed by the mature, responsible and wise among us. THAT's what the debate is about, or mostly is about, not the smokescreen horseshit that usually passes for thought here.

Are you going to perceive wisdom in an opinion that you can't agree with?

[domer]

Forget it. Can anyone point in the direction of a better club?