The surge is working! We stay. The surge isn't working! We stay.

Olberman: The point of the war is to make sure there is a war.

Versus the liberal strategy of pre-surge "We are losing, we must retreat" to post-surge "We are winning, we must retreat?"

To quote the late Jim Morrison:
"they've got the guns, We've got the numbers"
"nobody here gets out alive""
Bullet strikes the helmet's head, and war is over for the Unknown Soldier"

Stay the course.

Mm, yeah, that's how I see the conservative strategy, too.

I'd quote Pete Seeger: "We were neck deep in the Big Muddy, and the big fool says to press on."

There can be no "win" when you shouldn't have been there in the first place: you are one of the bad guys. Nothing that could happen in the next five years could equal the slaughter of the last five.

I heard a guy across town was going to burn down my house. I called the cops, but they didn't believe he wanted to burn my house down. So I went over and beat him up, and burned down most of his house.

Then I found out he wasn't planning to burn down my house. And his kids were mad and kicked my shins, so I decided to beat him up some more, and burn down the rest of his house. He and his kids and neighbors wanted me to leave, but I could see that was not in his best interest.

His neighbors didn't like it that I came from across town and beat him up, and they wanted me to stop. So I started laying plans to burn down their houses, too.

Pretty soon, I'll win. I'll be proud of my sacrifice. I wonder if my house is still there.

Good one, Masbury...and N2-soon...Oh, what's the use even talkin to you.

Then don't. But it won't change the fact that the democrats only have one strategy. Violence is up? Cut and run. Violence is down? Cut and run. Iraqi army not building up fast enough? Cut and run. Iraqi army taking over many of the front line combat positions? Cut and run. Iraqi government isn't making enough progress? Cut and run. Iraqi government is making more progress than the democrat US congress? Cut and run.

Olberman isn't all that interested in facts. The point is, what happens if we leave? We don't know what will happen, for sure, if we stay. But we do know what will happen if we leave. Look at Korea. Look at Eastern Europe. The only reason the North Koreans did not run rough shod over the South is because of our 50 year presence there. The same could be said about us setting up camp to discourage Soviet expansion in eastern Europe.

If we leave Iraq, indeed if we leave the middle east, Syria, Iran, Hamas, Hezbolla and what is left of Al Queda will be the ones left with the guns and they will all be pointed at Israel and those in favor of democracy .

Look at Vietnam, that was suppose to be the whole linchpin in the Domino Theory that would result in the whole world turning communist. Now they make our shirts.

Once again in typical ridiculous conservative fashion
Iraq = Soviet Union

McCain just got through saying that if we developed oil independence we would never have to fight another war in the Middle East. So spare us the we are saving the world rhetoric. We are protecting our oil supplies.

I hate it when our oil gets beneath their sand.

Korea? Bad analogy, thee is no 1 million man army waiting to take over Iraq. Same thing with NATO/Warsaw Pact confrontation.

And N2, when if ever will the U.S. leave?

Depends on the situation on the ground and the desires of the government of Iraq. When are we going to pull our troops out of Germany and Japan?

Forces in Germany have been reduced significantly, and the U.S. has treaties with both nations which give them power to send the U.S. packing any time they want (although forces in Germany the few that remain, are under the NATO/OTAN structure). Iraq does not have that choice since the current "goverment" is an American proxy that depends on the U.S. to sustain them. The Iraqi people want the U.S. gone, but puppets must do what their masters tell them.

Again, the situations are not comparable.

Indeed, the people of Iraq want the US to make an organized withdrawal. The government of Iraq - propped up by guess who - is less eager.

We are a foreign occupier to all Iraqis, and a negotiated withdrawal, bringing in the people Bush won't talk to, is the region's only hope.

We are a large part of the problem, and peace is dependent upon our getting out of the way. To call that "cut and run" is to distort the intent altogether. We back out, Iraq stands up. It is their fight, not ours.

SS's argument leaves out even more points:
1) by far the most formidable, best armed, and almost only nuclear power in the region is Israel
2) The Sunni world is not going to give up Iraq to the Iranians and their cohorts. Iran, though large, is dwarfed by the Sunni world all around them.
3) Almost no one is suggesting just walking out the door. Major pressure needs to be brought all around: on the Iraqis, to get with it. On the Iranians, to sit down with the Saudis and all the other neighbors and work out how this is going to work. As long as the US dominates, nobody has to do anything.
We're the nanny army.

n2sooners, An argument could be made that pressure from those advocating 'cutting and running' is holding the administration's and the Iraqi government's feet to the fire as far as getting their act together and achieving some progress. Otherwise, we know how government can drag it's feet.
masbury, have you been to Iraq? I have 3 family members in Iraq and I also keep very close tabs on the situation. Nothing you describe is in the ballpark of what I understand circumstance to be. I'd like to hear you expound more on your points.

Why is it that Amerikans always think that military solutions are the best? We are duped into perpetual war by the profiteers waving the flag, yellin' "freedom" and laughing while they get rich on war.
The only reason we stay in Iraq is to make sure the Big 4 or 5 Oil corporations secure their foothold. And then we'll stay to protect them...perpetual war for profit. Jeebus--Wake UP!!!

We need to come up with a word that decribes the people that are propagating this. I know many AmeriKans that do not want associated with those in charge.
These people stopped representing our intrests a very long time ago.

How 'bout "war-monger"? Those who sell war for profit, wrapped in patriotism and called freedom and democracy building. Where do all those billions of $$ go anyway? They don't just dissolve in the fog of war(altho it might seem so)...somebody is getting rich...oh, yeah...Cheney's buddies, the defense contractors who are represented by ex- congressmen and senators, K-street hacks that buy influence. Lockheed, G.E., and a hundred others. What a racket...get rich on death and destruction and call it Apple Pie!

no million man army?
just look around. syria, iran, lebanon....
how do you count them?

Why is it that Amerikans always think that military solutions are the best?

If you'll pardon the use of a Bible verse: "Where your treasure is, there your heart will be also."

kenstipe, good question - I hope you're following the blog of the University of Michigan's Middle East scholar, Dr. Juan Cole. His excellent blog is Informed Comment. I know of no one who has as exceptional a grasp of the entire region as does he.

Iran does not have he capability to invade Iraq or strike at Israel. Lebanon is an ally of the U.S. (nominally) and Syrian forces are under equipped and have no intention of starting a war with Israel (having lost the last four) or go into Iraq (they already have to many troubles with Iraqi refuges as it is, plus the last time Syria fought Iraqi forces, it did so as part of the U.S. lead coalition in 90-91).

Again, no Fulda Gap, no 38th parallel, no expansionist China. The Syrians even lost control of the Golan Heights in 73, its more likely that Merkavas can roll into Damascus than T-72s to Tel Aviv.