EUCLID said this in post #14 : Actually, I found out that Plan B is to pull back and let the Sunnis and Shiites kill each other; kind of like letting the fire burn out rather than fight it.
So really plan B is admitting that you can't control Iraq and you are leaving.
So really plan B is admitting that you can't control Iraq and you are leaving.
When Bush admitted that he was wrong... that should have been what he said next. Sure, we're sending more, and more troops. Maybe we're making a pinch of a difference there... even if we are sending home our people in body bags for someone else's war. But, in the end... these terrorists, or religious zealots, and groups, will do as someone mentioned earlier in this thread. They will vacate the area, and just sit and wait this out. Once the US departs, they will go right back to killing each other.
We need to not send more troops... but pull out and let these people figure it out.
:::>^..^<::: ~*~The Journey is more important than the end or the start~*~ :::>^..^<:::
If Bush can't do diplomacy and talk to those who have influence and power in the region - as the Baker report suggested - then it doesn't leave him with a lot of options but to go to this plan B.
What do you think of Bush's plan A - 20,000 more troops - which to me is just bandaging over the gash until Bush can leave office? These new troops are for no-one's benefit but Bush's inability to admit defeat.
I think he needs to send 20,000 troops to congress because that is where the biggest battle will be fought.
Seriously, I don't know what to expect from sending 20,000 more troops to Iraq. I think it makes more difference what you do with the troops rather than how many there are. I really have no idea how this war is being fought. Watching the network news in the U.S., I can only conclude that the entire country of Iraq is composed of people wandering around among smashed and smoking vehicles. That is as deep as the news goes here.
I am not convinced that Bush is sending the extra troops only for his own benefit. If the extra troops solve all the problems, then Bush's overall position will be vindicated. If it does not work, he will be much worsely repudiated than he would have been if he just kept going with the status quo. So it seems like he is taking a big gamble. If he was worried about covering his butt for his legacy, the far safer course would have been to just take the advice of the Iraq study group, so if it results in a worse problem, he can just blame it on the ISG.
I can tell you this: If I were the Iraqi insurgents, I would be dusting off my own plan B to show the world that 20,000 more opposing troops will not solve the problem. Get ready for some really big expolsions.
EUCLID said this in post #19 : I can tell you this: If I were the Iraqi insurgents, I would be dusting off my own plan B to show the world that 20,000 more opposing troops will not solve the problem. Get ready for some really big expolsions.
You know what... I completely agree with you, 100% here. If I were an insurgent in Iraqi, I would be doing exactly that as well.
:::>^..^<::: ~*~The Journey is more important than the end or the start~*~ :::>^..^<:::
01-12-2007 03:42 PM
