So, now that people are actually discussing leaving Iraq, who wants to do what?

Murtha: Withdraw over next 6 months.
Bidden: Slow withdrawl
Clinton: No exit plan (see, told you she's a Republican in Democrat's clothing)
Bush: Plan? What plan?

I read the title as "Cantatus Interruptus" and wondered what I had done now. I sort of like the ring to that, maybe I'll adapt it as my surname in the next MMOG I play. :lmao:

I liked the phrase too. :D Gives a whole new level of meaning to "withdrawl method". :p

its funny because now the iraqi interim government wants the US to leave very soon now =p

Yeah, didn't they just pass a new resolution saying something that dissenting is not illegal as long as they don't target the infastructure or civilians? So blowing our troops up isn't considered a crime?

I used to think we couldn't leave until the country was stable but now I think the country can't be stable with us there. It'll probably be civil war either way, so we might as well just leave.

Aren't there lots of Americans jumping up and down yelling "Yay, the Iraqi government wants us to leave, Hurrah" ? Get the Iraqis to suggest a timetable, and then get out as soon as you can. Oh... and don't expect the Iraqis to be thankful either.

Then the U.S. can get on with important domestic issues.

Yes Panamah.. they declared that killing americans wouldnt be considered terrorism.

I only just heard this this morning, so I don't think there's much reaction yet, at least that I've heard. I think everyone will wait to comment until John Stewart has his say. :p

I think the UK troops will be leaving by the end of next year, or those are the recent hints anyway. I'd image the US troops would stay an extra year.

I'd love to plant a big wet one on Murtha, let me tell ya.

I'm snoozin' today. Totally missed this:
Iraqi Leaders Call for Pullout Timetable

By SALAH NASRAWI
The Associated Press
Tuesday, November 22, 2005; 12:06 PM

CAIRO, Egypt -- Iraqi leaders at a reconciliation conference reached out to the Sunni Arab community by calling for a timetable for the withdrawal of U.S.-led forces and saying the country's opposition had a "legitimate right" of resistance.

Or at least, I missed the call for a withdrawl.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/22/AR2005112200256.html

Cool! We're all in agreement then! Lets go. Buh-bye! Nice invading you.

Cool! We're all in agreement then! Lets go. Buh-bye! Nice invading you.

I love that.

its funny because now the iraqi interim government wants the US to leave very soon now =p

And here I figured Pan was making a sexual reference =P

Well, there are a lot of similarities...

I think Bush was a premature with Mission Accomplished.
Didn't Cheney say the insurgency was in their last gasps a while back?
Wasn't Murtha condemed for encouraging an early withdrawl?

So what you're saying is we need a giant national sized Viagra

Naw, I don't think we need to stiffen our resolve. I just think we need to admit that Iraq has to finish by themselves. We can get their electricity on to power the political apparatus so they can be satisfied. But they have to come together on their own.

Its just like Naked News (http://www.nakednews.com/), only literary!

:nerd:

'nuff said.

I used to think we couldn't leave until the country was stable but now I think the country can't be stable with us there. It'll probably be civil war either way, so we might as well just leave."Stability" and "X" (where X = the name of any Middle Eastern country) = oxymoron

So what you're saying is we need a giant national sized Viagra

According to my email at work, you can get it for cheap now, so might as well. Or would that fall under "Nationalized Health Care" and therefore not be politic?

Jordan was pretty stable, until about a week ago.

"Stability" and "X" (where X = the name of any Middle Eastern country) = oxymoron

Israel is stable, internally.

Its just those ****ing Arabs trying to blow us up.

Israel has their own agenda when it comes to the world, and threaten the US with revealing all its secrets/lethal force if we dont go along with it. We comply because they have Nukes that we gave em years ago.

Am I anti-semetic? Maybe. But I also beleive israel is corrupt as hell.

And in today's news:
Rice Says Iraq Troop Levels May Draw Down http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051123/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/us_iraq

Israel is stable, internally.

Its just those ****ing Arabs trying to blow us up.

Your freudian slip is showing. :p

Israel is stable, internally.

Its just those ****ing Arabs trying to blow us up.Then it's not stable, is it? :p

The Middle East hasn't been stable for THOUSANDS of years.

The Middle East hasn't been stable for THOUSANDS of years.

When the middle east was the only literate place in the world I'm sure they were writing exactly the same thing about everyone else.

hehe the middle east was unstable back in bible days.... back when it was Persia

Israel has their own agenda when it comes to the world, and threaten the US with revealing all its secrets/lethal force if we dont go along with it. We comply because they have Nukes that we gave em years ago.

Am I anti-semetic? Maybe. But I also beleive israel is corrupt as hell.

That's because you're an ignorant ultra-liberal who swallows what the Arabs feed you hook like and sinker.

1) Of course Israel has its own agenda. Its a very simply agenda. Survival.
2) Israel has used threat of nuclear power to compel the US once. In the 73 war, when it was estimated that Israel could hold off the Arabs for about 12 more hours before Jerusalem and Tel Aviv were overrun. Israel let it be known to Nixon that before the Arabs could wipe the Jews into the sea (at they promised to do), they would use nuclear weapons against Cairo, Damascus, Amman, Baghdad, and Moscow (because the USSR was arming your Arab buddies). Israel simply wanted replacement parts for their fighters and munitions.
3) The US didn't give Israel nuclear weapons. Israel developed them on their own with South Africa(Hi...maybe you didn't notice how many of the minds behind the first nuclear weapons were Jewish?). South Africa obtained the uranium...(though there is a bit of lore about Israel stealing about 400 tons from France =D), Israel provided the know how.
4) The US doesn't support Israel because Israel threatens them. The US supports Israel because Israel was its only friend in the region until the fall of the Soviet Union (when suddenly all the Arabs wanted to be friendly with the US...or at least get US weapons). The US supports Israel because its the only Democracy in the region. The US supports Israel because Israel doesn't sponsor terrorists to blow up our people or hijack our planes. The US supports Israel because its a bastion of Western ideals in a sea of barbarism and corruption.

Let me ask you this...where would you feel safer, as an American, visiting? Israel or Syria (or Jordan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, etc)?

No Israeli has ever kidnapped and beheaded an American. No Israeli has ever hijacked our planes. No Israeli has ever blown up our envoys, embassies, ships, or skycrapers.

hehe the middle east was unstable back in bible days.... back when it was Persia

Nah. Compared to barbarian tribes who raided each other every week they were the height of stability. Really!

Your freudian slip is showing. :p

Not a slip.

I consider Israel to be 'us', 'we', 'me'.

Its the one place on the planet where all I have to do is show up and they'll take me in with a smile and welcome me home.

When the middle east was the only literate place in the world I'm sure they were writing exactly the same thing about everyone else.

It hasn't been the only literate place in the world in 6 thousand years...

hehe the middle east was unstable back in bible days.... back when it was Persia

Which bible days? During the era of the old testament, it wasn't Persia. It was Assyria, Israel, Babylon, Egypt. During the era when the old testament was written down, it was Babylonian and Persian (Turkey and Iran). Then it was Selucid Greek for a while. Then it was Israel, Judah, Selucid Egypt, Saracean (I think) Babylon, and some others. Then it was Roman during the New Testament Era. Then it became Ottoman pretty much until WWI. Then it was French and British through WWII.

Ya, I got a laugh about the Jewish nuke thing too.

I don't see a good solution to our situation in Iraq at this point. It seems to me that withdrawing our troops would lead to civil war and thousands more deaths. However, I don't think the US can stabilize the region without a significant increase in troops to stem the flow of insurgents into Iraq. I don't think a massive troop increase is possible in the current political climate which basically leaves two options. Maintain the current personnel commitment which is enough to prevent civil war, but not much else; or pull out entirely and let Iraq sort itself out. Neither is particularly attractive to me.

The recent attacks on civilians by the insurgents could be a huge opportunity. It seems that Iraqis are, in the short term, more tolerant of the foreign presence. If we haven't burned too many bridges, now might be chance to try to secure some international forces to help keep Iraq secure. I think Europe might be open to the idea of keeping Iraq from descending into a long civil war. At least I hope that Europe would care.

If we haven't burned too many bridges, now might be chance to try to secure some international forces to help keep Iraq secure.

Everyone who has troops in Iraq wants them out. Nobody wants to put new troops in. NATO is taking over some of the US operations in Afghanistan and I think that's as much help as you'll get for now.

I think that the U.S. is in a no-win situation in Iraq. A gradual withdrawal is probably the best of the worst. Hope that Iraq turns into a post-war Vietnam with a small and benign presence on the world stage. Pray that it doesn't turn into a civil war, especially one that spills over Iraq's borders. You can't control Iraq militarily without the support of Iraqis. Iraq is not post-war Europe, which mostly welcomed a U.S. presence.