Dang , a two-fer day

[Plane]

We can take a basic recruit, get them through basic training and basic infantryman's school in what, less than a year? We have had over five years now to get an Iraqi army trained and in the field to take responsibility for their own defense. This after the dumbass move of firing pretty much their entire army and sending them home to start with. Still, they've had plenty of time to get their own troops on the ground and up to speed. Sure, I know they're getting there, they're finally starting to lead their own patrols, take control of their own AO's, but these are things they should have done two or three years ago. We could have then told the Iraqi government, as I and others said then, all right, we're training you, we're equipping you, we're getting your army on the ground for you, but in X months time, we are pulling our troops out of the field and turning the day to day operations over to you. Now note that our troops are going to have to take time to get their gear together, cleaned up and inventoried, they're not all going to get on a plane that same day and come home. If the Iraqis ran into problems and asked for help, we could have sent reinforcements out to help them out. If they didn't run into problems they couldn't handle, we could begin bringing troops home.

Oh that is an easy one , every month the Army trains a coupple of hundred recruits , then next month a cupple of hundred more ,The US recruits are ready to fight after four or five months of training , but this is done sequentially to small groups. In Iraq we need thousands to be trained in groups small enough to fit the facility availible. It does not follow that training a recruit takeing two months or so means that you can train an Army in two months , you would need an army of trainers to do that.

The point, however, is, and remains, despite your efforts to sidetrack me, that this administration has taken the line that anyone who speaks out for setting such a timeline is somehow in favor of aiding the enemy.

What do you mean "somehow"?
How can you make a time table , publish it, and not help the enemy?

[hnumpah]

Read for content.

...in X months time, we are pulling our troops out of the field and turning the day to day operations over to you. Now note that our troops are going to have to take time to get their gear together, cleaned up and inventoried, they're not all going to get on a plane that same day and come home. If the Iraqis ran into problems and asked for help, we could have sent reinforcements out to help them out. If they didn't run into problems they couldn't handle, we could begin bringing troops home.

I really hate repeating  myself.

[Plane]

Many posters on this board were against any kind of cut and run time table.

And I recall accusations of the same sort I heard from the administration, even when others tried to explain, just as I just did, that we did not mean to just say hey, in six months we're outta here.

I think that might happen soon. The opponent in Iraq , insurgent and Al Queda both seem to be growing weaker , when they are certifiably weaker than the Iriqui armed forces the reason for us to be there will change , co-incident with the swearing in of President Obama I recon.

Will peacefull bases remain for the purpose of force projection ?

Or would we rather leave ?

[Plane]

Read for content.

...in X months time, we are pulling our troops out of the field and turning the day to day operations over to you. Now note that our troops are going to have to take time to get their gear together, cleaned up and inventoried, they're not all going to get on a plane that same day and come home. If the Iraqis ran into problems and asked for help, we could have sent reinforcements out to help them out. If they didn't run into problems they couldn't handle, we could begin bringing troops home.

I really hate repeating  myself.

  I wonder why you did?

If we are staying untill we can leave the Iriquis handleing it , that is what President Bush repeatedly has said we would do.

If you want a deadline , you want it for what?

If failure is unavoidable there isn't a reason to wait around for a deadline , as soon as it is clear that success isn't possible we need to leave without fanfare.

As long as we are still trying to succed we need to avoid things that work against success , like timetables that are obeyed without refrence to the situation.

[hnumpah]

If we are staying untill we can leave the Iriquis handleing it , that is what President Bush repeatedly has said we would do.

If we had given them a deadline early on, they might have gotten off their butts and prepared sooner to take over defense of their own country, rather than relying on us to do the dirty work for them for so long.

I answered your query about providing an example of the administration using name calling against those who opposed their policies. That is the last you will get from me on this thread, since you and BT seem determined to change the course of the discussion into areas we have already covered, and I refuse to be drawn further into that.

[Plane]

If we are staying untill we can leave the Iriquis handleing it , that is what President Bush repeatedly has said we would do.

If we had given them a deadline early on, they might have gotten off their butts and prepared sooner to take over defense of their own country, rather than relying on us to do the dirty work for them for so long.

I answered your query about providing an example of the administration using name calling against those who opposed their policies. That is the last you will get from me on this thread, since you and BT seem determined to change the course of the discussion into areas we have already covered, and I refuse to be drawn further into that.

As you please , don't feel compelled.

I think a deadline would have had a bigger effect on recruiting Al Quieda operatives than recruiting Police trainees.

[sirs]

The point, however, is, and remains, despite your efforts to sidetrack me, that this administration has taken the line that anyone who speaks out for setting such a timeline is somehow in favor of aiding the enemy.

Not quite......that such an advocating mindset happens to help the enemy doesn't equate to a mindset of supporting the enemy.  That's a leap on your part, I'm afraid to say

[Plane]

The point, however, is, and remains, despite your efforts to sidetrack me, that this administration has taken the line that anyone who speaks out for setting such a timeline is somehow in favor of aiding the enemy.

Not quite......that such an advocating mindset that happens to help the enemy doesn't equate to a mindset of supporting the enemy.  That's a leap on your part, I'm afraid to say

You mean that they might mean to be patriotic , but through a mistake advocate giveing a timetable to an enemy?

[sirs]

Shocker, isn't it

[Lanya]

The only way we can really avoid giving a timetable for leaving is to never leave. 
Otherwise, they can look at how long it takes to move X number of troops/vehicles/etc. and figure out a rough timetable.

[BT]

The only way we can really avoid giving a timetable for leaving is to never leave.
Otherwise, they can look at how long it takes to move X number of troops/vehicles/etc. and figure out a rough timetable.

There is a difference between a date certain and a conditions met exit strategy.

[sirs]

BINGO.  It's the difference between setting a withdrawl timetable based on the conditions on the ground vs some artificial timetable by Political Bureaucrats in DC, that didn't want to be there, in the 1st place