Seems some people are confused about how the world works and how they want it to work. Utopians are so funny.

"The SECONDARY objective is to establish a democratic regime."

True. But you still can't call the whole mission a complete succes until all the goals are completed. Although you can call it a fair success on the fact that the troops completed the primary objective.

"But personally, I could care less if the Iraqi's have a democracy or not."

Neither do I. Though I think our President sure puts alot more weight on the objective then you or I do.

The only way anyone can believe that the U.S. led coalition has failed in Iraq is if you believe that any loss of troops in a battle means the coalition lost the battle. The only way the coalition can truly lose, is if we allow the terrorists and opposition deny the Iraqi people the freedom to choose a new government.

The mesaure of Iraq will be the type of government that develops. If it allows radical factions to operate and is another anti West leaning country WE LOST!

It's always amusing to watch the left try to re-define what success is. And they wonder why they're so despised by so many. The primary objective in Iraq was to remove Saddam. The SECONDARY objective is to establish a democratic regime. But personally, I could care less if the Iraqi's have a democracy or not. I just wanted Saddam's regime removed. If someone else causes trouble, we can take them out too.

So at this point if Iran is successful in exploding a nuclear device and we need to go in there, we have the manpower to do so? We pull out of Iraq and go into Iran and cause another undermanned expedition that leaves the country in anarchy as we are completing our military objectives. Reserve and guard units have been skeletonized by the regular army to fill out their units. The regular army has had all but one division rotate to Afghanistan and Iraq already. We have around 170,000 troops already commited to those countries and to pull them out would leave those countries to rally around the only other power there, the insurgents and the terrorists.

COL Gene, something tells me that, as far as you were concerned, as soon as Prs. Bush put his name to the idea, WE LOST! ;~D

So at this point if Iran is successful in exploding a nuclear device and we need to go in there, we have the manpower to do so?

What makes you think we're not already fighting Iran (Syria, and other terrorist sponsoring nations also)? There is a lot at stake for terrorist nations (especially the Jihadist types) in Iraq. To think that they are merely sitting around rooting for "their" side would be grossly naive.

What makes you think we're not already fighting Iran (Syria, and other terrorist sponsoring nations also)? There is a lot at stake for terrorist nations (especially the Jihadist types) in Iraq. To think that they are merely sitting around rooting for "their" side would be grossly naive.

Not true. Iran and Iraq didn't get along.

Iran and Iraq didn't get along.

Not wholly true. The Sunnis and Iran don't get along, but there is evidence of at least tacit support from Iran for Shi'ite rebels. It's not open, but it's roughly on a level with CIA support for Afghani mujahideen during the Soviet occupation, although it seems to be far less influential.

Hopefully the Iraqi's will be able to have a peaceful, democratic government. But if they fail that, it's not our loss, it's theirs.

No no no Draginol. Wrong answer !

Wow, for America to fail in this regard would have catestrophic consequences. Would the Middle East ever forgive the USA ? Failure to establish democracy in Iraq rather than to leave it to collapse into chaos would give every terrorist the reason they need to continue attacking the USA - and that includes on home soil....and believe me it only takes one or two to slip through the checks and controls to cause significant human carnage.

Regardless of anyones opinion on the legitimacy of the US invasion of Iraq, Democracy has to prevail and the Bush administration should concentrate its efforts on securing world support for that cause alone. I think he is trying to acheive that gaol but to what end he will succeed I don't know.

I sincerely hope he does, I shudder to think of the consquences if he does not !

d3adz0mbie says

This is the nature of Arabic politics, it is the perversion of the Islamic faith and this is why 14yr old boys strap explosives to their bodies and blow up civilians.

You don't think that lives have been reduced to a point that the value of life no longer carries the will to live to old age ?

You see, place people in an environment of destruction, fear and despair and death no longer seems as tragic and shocking - death becomes part of your life rather than life becoming part of your life.

Suicide bombers are a result of desperation. Resolve the points of conflict and take away the reason for war and you resolve the pool of willing suicide bombers - age irrelevant !

Christianity, Islam and any faith for that matter is not bourne out of hate and violence. It is us that has created the environment for such hate and despair to erupt, not any religion. But using the fundamental principles of either Christianity or Islam, we can succeed in stopping the hate, stopping the war and stopping the killing.

when you have a flat tire and your goal is tire change, i dont believe anyone would feel youd succeeded in that goal if you simply removed the old tire or if, having removed the old tire, you attempted to drive around on the rim for a while.

how does one succeed at regime change--and there's no question that was the goal (ill be happy to provide the quotes)--by merely removing the previous regime and not replacing it? 

"Religion has no place in government, but is rather a deeply private matter."

while this is true, remeber that bush was elected more or less by the so-called bible belt, and he keeps talking about the christian god as watching over the american people and so on. hmm, have he not allso stated that he have gotten direction from god on how to deal with diffrent problems? i dont know whats more sceary, a president that claims to be talking to god, or a dictator that is guided by greed...

Parated2K

I have agreed with Bush when his policies are sound. I agreed with the road map in the Middle East and the six part talks with North Korea. I do know that Iraq was not a danger to the US and had nothing to do with the radicals in the moslem world. We created more enemies by going into Iraq than we made friends. Almost every assumption that Bush had about the Iraq War were totally wrong. No WMD; WE were not received as liberators- We are now the evil force; we needed two time the force levels that Bush sent (even tough Generals Franks and Schoomaker told Bush it would take 300,000-400,000); we have spent about 4 times more then his cost estimates; we should be down to about 30,000 troops and are at 150,000 and increasing and the Iraq oil revenue was to pay the majority of the cost - where is that money?

What I said is that IF the government that results after we leave Iraq is anti West, we have lost BIG TIME!

how does one succeed at regime change--and there's no question that was the goal (ill be happy to provide the quotes)--by merely removing the previous regime and not replacing it?

Sometimes one must put his money where his mouth is. If you say you'll do X, then you must do X.

There are numerous ways to contain, destroy, etc. an enemy.

Clandestine missions (the soon to be talked about Newsweek story characterizes them as death squads) which seek to destroy the insurgency by targeting & neutralizing high level operatives is one such way. Clearly, as far as the old regime goes, cutting off the hydra's head is not enough.