[DesertBear2]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Raphael', '
')Sorry but to me it looks as though THEY are following a script called scripture.

[zoidberg]

Raphael, I have no idea what your saying.

If you can repeat without religous metaphors perhaps I can better reply.

In Summary, Kissinger is old, and not relevant. However I would seriously, seriously not take his words at face value. If he says its unwinnable, does he mean with current strategies only? Does he mean to cut out the democracy bullshit and get Saddam II in there with well armed death squads? For all we know this maybe a secret phrase advocating genocide in Iraq.

It could be a hint to throw the Saudis to the wolves.

If thats the case, maybe I'm being too hard on the old boy. Saddam II would seem to be the proper course. Maybe 2 Saddams because for all the BIG help the Turks have been maybe its time Kurdistan got its shot. I'm sure Barzani or Talabani would jump at the chance to become King.

The Shiites, of course, have a date with an Apache gunship.

Edit: and their leaders in the current gov't should probably be dumped in the middle of Anbar province. Their bones would never be found.

[rogerhb]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Raphael', 'T')he collective unconscious THEY are the sheeple and seagulliables.

[DesertBear2]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('zoidberg', 'S')addam II would seem to be the proper course.

[Battle_Scarred_Galactico]

would leave the US without credibility of any type on the world stage.


That gives the impression they have some at the momment, and that it matters.

[rogerhb]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('DesertBear2', 'H')ow does he explain turning the Iraqi people over to another Satan?

[zoidberg]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('DesertBear2', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('zoidberg', 'S')addam II would seem to be the proper course.

[Revi]

I think we ought to cut our losses. If you are in a hole the first thing to do is to stop digging. If we could shrink our energy needs here in the US we could do without the oil from the Middle East. We might even be able to transition into a new energy economy. We could certainly give ourselves some room to move. As it is, we risk losing access to the resource anyway. If we retreat to bases and let Iraq simmer we will just be prolonging the inevitable. Best to back off now and hand the place back to the UN. We'll probably stay in there waiting for a "victory", however. Just like Vietnam.

[DesertBear2]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Revi', ' ')If we could shrink our energy needs here in the US we could do without the oil from the Middle East. We might even be able to transition into a new energy economy.

[kam30en]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'N')EOPO: kam is one confused zionist....

[rogerhb]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('kam30en', 'I')'ll go to Israel. Yes, I have a homeland

[Revi]

"Because the US consumer has been pampered and manipulated to the point of blissful ignorance and cannot imagine a personal sacrifice for energy independence or any other theoretical cause. He is long accustomed to carefree rambles along shelf after shelf of consumer goodies from Asian slave factories. Or to absentmindedly "extracting equity" from their residence to fuel a new buying binge. Or to imagining himself grandly driving that 400hp SUV to the Rocky Mountains some year. It will all turn out right in the end because it always has before..... " Desert Bear 2

I am afraid that I agree completely, after seeing the coverage of the hordes of holiday shoppers in their SUV's out spending the last of their soon to be worthless dollars. I always figure that those people who are driving the SUV's and spending are the reason for the war. They want war. Otherwise their easy credit life goes poof. It's not looking good for the new year. 2 million adjustable rate mortgages go up 25% as of January first. Ouch! I agree with your assessment of the LNG fix. It isn't going to work.

Kam, don't be so sure about Israel. Watch The Kingdom of Heaven a few times. The Crusaders had been in Jerusalem 100 years when the movie begins. I think you would like it there, however. You need to see the real thing, be on the edge a bit to understand the whole war thing. You may feel very differently after a year or two over there. It may be the most interesting place on the planet. Visit it soon, especially if you have people to stay with. It seems to be a little calmer lately.

[max_power29]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('kam30en', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'N')EOPO: kam is one confused zionist....

[Doly]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('kam30en', '
')And your a confused hitler junkie.

[Zardoz]

We knew this, but now it's official:

Anbar Picture Grows Clearer, and Bleaker

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')he U.S. military is no longer able to defeat a bloody insurgency in western Iraq or counter al-Qaeda's rising popularity there, according to newly disclosed details from a classified Marine Corps intelligence report that set off debate in recent months about the military's mission in Anbar province.

...Between al-Qaeda's violence, Iran's influence and an expected U.S. drawdown, "the social and political situation has deteriorated to a point" that U.S. and Iraqi troops "are no longer capable of militarily defeating the insurgency in al-Anbar," the assessment found. In Anbar province alone, at least 90 U.S. troops have died since Sept. 1.

...Read as a complete assessment, it paints a stark portrait of a failed province and of the country's Sunnis -- once dominant under Saddam Hussein -- now desperate, fearful and impoverished. They have been increasingly abandoned by religious and political leaders who have been assassinated or who have fled to neighboring countries. And unlike Iraq's Shiite majority, or Kurdish groups in the north, the Sunnis are without oil and other natural resources. The report notes that illicit oil trading is providing millions of dollars to al-Qaeda while "official profits appear to feed Shiite cronyism in Baghdad."

[Eli]

Yeah that sucks.

Basically the worst case scenario that could happen in Iraq is coming true. (please no posts about how this was all planned from the get go to go bad)

There were three plans put forth on what to do in Iraq recently, go big (send in hundreds of thousands of more troops which would require the draft) go long or get out.

The wind is blowing towards the go long strategy which initially calls for more troops then a steady draw down but over many many years.

We will see what happens, but if things continue to get worse there the only sensible thing will be an immediate bug out.

Civil wars are very bad for modern armies, you basically have to fight both sides in this case. This worse than Vietnam for the US in Vietnam we had the South and the Vietcong to the North. Two sides, we were on the blue team in the South and the North was the red team.

In Iraq we have three teams and we really don't want to be on any of them.

[Zardoz]

BushCo's pressure be damned. NBC is calling a spade a spade:

NBC to use `civil war' to describe Iraq

Kofi Annan is, too:

Iraq 'on the brink of civil war'

Our "leadership" will resist this as long as possible, of course, but not calling the mess a civil war is like Fox News refusing to use the term "suicide bomber".

[Zardoz]

Hmmmm.... :

As Iraq Deteriorates, Iraqis Get More Blame - U.S. Officials, Lawmakers Change Tone

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')his marks a shift in tone from earlier debate about the responsibility of the United States to restore order after the 2003 invasion, and it seemed to gain currency in October, when sectarian violence surged. Some see the talk of blame as the beginning of the end of U.S. involvement.