In Iraq, Americans pull back and Iraqis celebrate
Yesterday, four U.S. troops were killed in an attack in Baghdad; their names have not yet been released.
Today, however, their comrades have all but withdrawn from Iraqi cities, leaving them to be patrolled by Iraqi forces under an agreement signed months ago by American and Iraqi officials. This has been proclaimed “National Sovereignty Day,” a holiday to celebrate the great Iraqi victory. Iraqi President Jalal Talabani, a Kurd, acknowledged in a speech that the day could not have happened without the help of the United States.
“While we celebrate this day, we express our thanks and gratitude to our friends in the coalition forces who faced risks and responsibilities and sustained casualties and damage while helping Iraq to get rid from the ugliest dictatorship and during the joint effort to impose security and stability,” Talabani said.
But Iraqi President Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, in a speech at a military parade deep inside the secure Green Zone, claimed that “the national united government succeeded in putting down the sectarian war that was threatening the unity and the sovereignty of Iraq.” According to the New York Times, Maliki “made no mention of the American military’s involvement in fighting here for the last six years.”
The U.S. troops still in Iraq — at last count roughly 130,000 — will continue to engage in combat. The four dead Monday will not be the last to give their lives. The deadline for withdrawal of American combat forces is Aug. 31, 2010, with total withdrawal set for Dec. 31, 2011.
“As the Iraqis stand up, we will stand down,” President Bush used to say. That seems a long time ago. But it’s time, past time, for the promise in those words to finally be realized.
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
149 comments Add your comment
Peadawg
June 30th, 2009
8:05 am
FIRST!!!
I Report :-) You Whine :-(
June 30th, 2009
8:07 am
Gosh, I wonder if a thoroughly defeated al Qaeda will take advantage of this milestone to try and discredit it.
And how much help will they get with their efforts from the state run US media?
in a speech at a military parade deep inside the secure Green Zone
Sneering at an ally, bookman?
DB, Gwinnettian
June 30th, 2009
8:11 am
Iraqi President Jalal Talabani
Iraqi President Nouri al-Maliki
umm…
Paul
June 30th, 2009
8:14 am
Good news. For those who want to delay (even though we have an agreement) – it’s similar to the F22 thread. A few billion will give only, what, another half dozen? Another six months or a year extension will give us what in the way of added security (not to mention more American deaths).
For those who take the position this is what Pres Obama wanted all along – nonsense. He always spoke of a ‘residual’ force, in the neighborhood of 30,000 troops. At least. His Secretary of State spoke of missions to be accomplished (similar to those performed by Pres Obama’s residual force) and those numbers were estimated in excess of 70,000.
So will Pres Obama or his advisors discuss what’s changed that we don’t need tens of thousands of troops remaining past 2011? Will he discuss how the missions of the residual force are no longer a concern? Nope. Will Obama supporters act as if this was the plan all along? Of course!
Paul
June 30th, 2009
8:16 am
Peadawg
Fourth! And four’s a higher number than one, so there!
FinnMcCool
June 30th, 2009
8:16 am
Yeah, we won the war! Conservatives won’t want to hear we won on Obama’s watch. Those Conservative girly men will not be happy.
FinnMcCool
June 30th, 2009
8:17 am
From the Wall Street Journal:
Wall Street Logs Best Quarter Since Credit Crisis Erupted
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124631742807170803.html#mod=todays_us_nonsub_money_and_investing
“ouch!” say the gloom and doom Republican losers.
TnGelding
June 30th, 2009
8:17 am
Let’s all sincerely wish them well and hope they don’t squander what has been accomplished with great sacrifice of American blood and treasure. May the troops that remain conduct themselves with honor and dignity and come home safely soon.
Copyleft
June 30th, 2009
8:17 am
Gee, the idea of letting the Iraqis run their own country seems to be going over really well.
Too bad we couldn’t have thought of it six years sooner….
TnGelding
June 30th, 2009
8:20 am
Paul
June 30th, 2009
8:16 am
Would you believe I missed Peadawg because of the non-entry?
Paul
June 30th, 2009
8:20 am
DB, Gwinnettian
Talabani’s the Pres, al-Maliki’s the Prime Minister.
Most Americans won’t know, those here likely translate it as “one of the top dudes of the Iraqi government.” Main point I took from it is the Kurd gives credit to the Americans. The Shiite plays for hometown political advantage.
TnGelding
June 30th, 2009
8:21 am
DB, Gwinnettian
June 30th, 2009
8:11 am
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidency_Council_of_Iraq
FinnMcCool
June 30th, 2009
8:22 am
TnGelding,
That’s asking a little much isn’t it? It will take another iron-handed leader to keep them from killing each other and so that will lead to another dictator.
Splitting up the country (don’t forget, it was Western powers that drew the original national boundaries of much of the Middle East early last century) is the only way to peace without US policeing the country indefinately.
Peadawg
June 30th, 2009
8:22 am
Let’s just hope they don’t screw it up over there!
Paul
June 30th, 2009
8:24 am
TNGelding
I’d believe most anything. I’m a trusting kind of guy –
FinnMcCool
How do you define ‘won’?
Copyleft
The thought was there but I don’t think the conditions were there six years ago. Heck, it was only two years ago, according to the party now in power, that the war was lost. Now it’s won? And even though Pres Obama is sitting in the White House, he’s done nothing different in Iraq than continue the policies of his predecessor.
AmVet
June 30th, 2009
8:24 am
Yes, a sad day for the chickenhawks.
Invade Iran!
Gandalf, the White! (!)
June 30th, 2009
8:26 am
Copyleft: I wish you would choose to quit make silly comments! Just saying what an idiot you are.
FinnMcCool
June 30th, 2009
8:27 am
Paul, I’m trying to needle the folks who thought there was actually anything to “win” by invading Iraq in the first place.
More on the lines in the sand drawn up by Britain and France that now cosntitutes the boundaries of Iraq and much of the Middle EAst:
During World War I the British and French divided Western Asia in the Sykes-Picot Agreement. The Treaty of Sèvres, which was ratified in the Treaty of Lausanne, led to the advent of modern Western Asia and Republic of Turkey. The League of Nations granted France mandates over Syria and Lebanon and granted the United Kingdom mandates over Iraq and Palestine (which then consisted of two autonomous regions: Palestine and Transjordan). Parts of the Ottoman Empire on the Arabian Peninsula became parts of what are today Saudi Arabia and Yemen.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq
TnGelding
June 30th, 2009
8:28 am
FinnMcCool
June 30th, 2009
8:22 am
I think you, I and Biden are the only ones that support that solution.
Paul
June 30th, 2009
8:24 am
Bush had basically already accepted and implemented Obama’s position.
DB, Gwinnettian
June 30th, 2009
8:30 am
Talabani’s the Pres, al-Maliki’s the Prime Minister.
well yeah, I pretty much I knew, although I tend to forget who’s who sometimes. I had to look it up to be sure.
Mostly I was being a nudge to Jay. I kid because I love.
Curious Observer
June 30th, 2009
8:35 am
Yes, we have succeeded by replacing one dictatorship posing as a democracy with another dictatorship posing as a democracy. And what does al Malaki do? He spits in our eyes, vaguely alluding to how our presence has “humiliated” Iraqis. This sock-puppet of a political coalition of Shiites would be long dead by now without the presence of American troops to prop him up. And what will we get in return for the tremendous sacrifice of blood and treasure we provided him in order to give this ingrate the opportunity to insult us? An eventual Iraqi-Iranian alliance that will prove to be yet another enemy of the West.
Do not be fooled by the masquerade of voting booths and ink-stained thumbs. Try to remember that Saddam governed with “elected” representatives too. Iraq has no respect for what we consider as democracy. We have gained nothing–not even a few barrels of oil–in exchange for more than 4,000 lives, tens of thousands of maimed servicemen, and tons of hundred dollar bills shipped in on pallets. The latest insult by al Malaki ought to drive that truth home.
Paul
June 30th, 2009
8:36 am
Finn McCool
And I’m trying to needle the folks who needle the folks!
TNGelding
[[Bush had basically already accepted and implemented Obama’s position.]]
Spinnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn
Which position was that? Pre-surge? Which he opposed? So Sen Reid’s pronouncement would likely have come to pass?
Or the position of an accelerated withdrawal, which Pres Bush did resist, but that was more over a timetable and criteria than over concept.
IF the surge had not happened and the country had collapsed into anarchy and butchery, and if American forces were still there in January and Pres Obama had completed a pullout, it would have been described as ‘Bush’s fault – just getting out.” But since conditions are okay (not to put too fine a point on it) it’s now “Obama’s plan.”
Dang, I love American domestic politics.
Seek and ye shall Find
June 30th, 2009
8:39 am
The Republicans have given us so many reasons for invading Iraq over the years that it can be best summed up as “We did it to ensure the survival of the universe” or something as equally absurd. I personally believe that the best reason for invading Iraq was to undo what we created in the first place.
Normal
June 30th, 2009
8:39 am
This is a start, but I will not be satisfied until our boys and girls are home where they belong. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, our presence there only delays the inevitable. We must get completely out and let the Iraqi’s deal with it.
————–
GANDALF:
wish you would choose to quit make silly comments!
———
Back at cha…Just sayin’…
Copyleft
June 30th, 2009
8:46 am
Paul: I’m not declaring victory. The only thing I care about is getting our troops OUT of Iraq ASAP.
It’s not possible to “win” an unjust war, no matter who’s in the Oval Office. America lost this the day we invaded. The fact that we waited to withdraw peacefully is just as shameful as withdrawing sooner and witnessing the collapse would’ve been.
Iraq remains a mistake and a blot on America’s history. No change there.
Paul
June 30th, 2009
8:46 am
Seek
[[I personally believe that the best reason for invading Iraq was to undo what we created in the first place.]]
What did ‘we’ create in ‘the first place’?
Normal
[[This is a start, but I will not be satisfied until our boys and girls are home where they belong. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, our presence there only delays the inevitable. We must get completely out and let the Iraqi’s deal with it.]]
Lessee, one down…. about 129 countries to go….
Wyld Byll Hyltnyr
June 30th, 2009
8:49 am
Jay, try to belittle it as you might, there is not one Iraqi who says, “Things were better off under Saddam, I wish we could go back.
Never before in the history of mankind, has one nation, the United States, undertaken and completed such a noble endeavor; to sacrifice its youth and treasure to free another nation from the bonds of tyranny. Well done US military, well done.
While the stooge, President Obumbler, opposed the winning card, the surge, he now awkwardly contorts to try to take credit for progress earned by the courage of our soldiers and, yes, President Bush.
G-d bless President Bush for his vision and courage in leading our nation to this great victory which has, at once crushed the loathsome Al Qaedi and founded a flourishing democracry in the Arab middle east. Let’s hope Obumbler does not screww the pooch and let Al Qaedi back in the game or our Iraqi allies fail.
Thank you President Bush and Vice President Cheney, the nation misses your intellect, wisdom, and sage leadership.
Paul
June 30th, 2009
8:52 am
Copyleft
[[It’s not possible to “win” an unjust war, no matter who’s in the Oval Office. ]]
Sure it is! Really! Of course, it depends upon how one defines ‘unjust’ as one person’s unjust is another person’s justice.
I guess it depends upon how we define ‘war’, too. Cause now we’ve come up with “peacekeeping operation’ and ‘humanitarian mission’ and all sorts of phrases. But they all use the American military carrying guns with air cover and such.
So I’m sure you can come up with just one or two examples of American military forces being used to correct something or respond to something we didn’t like. But that the other side thought was okay. Examples in which we…. won!
It seems Iraq engenders a bit of hyperbole. Understandable. I will offer that there are plenty of Americans to the opposite end of the left of the spectrum who say, if we knew then what we know now, we never would’ve gone in. But very, very few of those opposed at the outset (our Pres is one) took that position. I’ll say most of the opposition ginned up after the situation there went south and casualties rose. Then it became an American political game.
pat
June 30th, 2009
8:53 am
Good now we can concentrate on Afghanistan. Oh wait, didn’t obama say he wanted to negotiate with the taliban? Let me check the news on how that’s going….Oooooo, not good.
I disagreed with the Iraq war as much as any democrat, but you do realize that there was never an intention to stay there indefinitely? Right? Please tell me you knew that?
@@
June 30th, 2009
8:54 am
HAPPY BIRTHDAY THOMAS AND RW (THE ORIGINAL)!!!!!!!!!!
Normal
June 30th, 2009
8:54 am
PAUL: Lessee, one down…. about 129 countries to go….
—————-
Exactly! Ron Paul said, if he were President, he would bring them all home from Germany, Korea, Japan…everywhere…I’m all for that.
Normal
June 30th, 2009
8:55 am
Thank you President Bush and Vice President Cheney, the nation misses your intellect, wisdom, and sage leadership.
—————
WYLD: Sarcasm, right?
Normal
June 30th, 2009
8:59 am
PAT: but you do realize that there was never an intention to stay there indefinitely? Right? Please tell me you knew that?
—-
At least that was what they told us, then they started building forts with swimming pools that were costing us billions of dollars…Just sayin’ you don’t put a pool in your back yard, if you’re planning to move…know what I mean?
Wyld Byll Hyltnyr
June 30th, 2009
8:59 am
Normal June 30th, 2009
Sarcasm, no. Intellect, wisdom, historical perspective, and pride. Compared to much of history, the Iraq campaign has been a noble enterprise and a fabulous sucess. It is, above all, a great shame that the BDS addled, self-loathing among us cannot celebrate our nation’s great victory.
Seek and ye shall Find
June 30th, 2009
9:00 am
Paul,
“We” know the story of Saddam and Gomorrah and how the US helped Saddam by providing him with weapons and how we turned the other way when he turned his weapons on his own people, blah, blah blah. We know why Bush and his administration were so certain that Saddam had most of his weapons of mass destruction. It was all shipped from the states. I’m sure Cheney and Rumsfeld, for starters, could give you an earful. Then again, I’m sure that I’m not telling you anything that you have not already learned on your own, am I.
@@
June 30th, 2009
9:00 am
…and Iraq’s future will have a lot to do with U.S./Iranian negotiations, jay. How are those lookin’ right now?
Open-ended SOFA.
I Report :-) You Whine :-(
June 30th, 2009
9:04 am
The libs seem to have forgotten all about that little surge thingie.
And General Betrayus.
And this war is lost.
And now they want to claim that they won the war, hahahahahaha.
what stooges!
Wyld Byll Hyltnyr
June 30th, 2009
9:05 am
Why do Obumbler and the liberals yearn for the US troops to slink off in shame, when in fact our military has won a great victory and should march off with pride in a ticker-tape parade chocked full of pomp and circumstance.
Seek and ye shall Find
June 30th, 2009
9:06 am
Thank you President Bush and Vice President Cheney, the nation misses your intellect, wisdom, and sage leadership.
That’s more like an illness. A delusion. Not to worry though. He’s one of the shrinking minority — trying ever harder to stay farther to the right than his brethren. Remember, in the end, there can be only one, the one farthest to the right.
Normal
June 30th, 2009
9:09 am
WYLD: I’d be proud to give them a ticker tape parade, and thank them for their sacrifices, but let’s get them home so we can do it, ok?
pat
June 30th, 2009
9:10 am
Just an FYI, Bush was a social liberal. That is why the people on the right did not like him. If you really wanted to vote for the oppostite of Bush, you would have voted for more conservatism, not a giant shift to the left of Lenin.
AmVet
June 30th, 2009
9:12 am
Fixed the typos in that previous post:
Never before in the history of American presidents, has one man, George Walker Bush, undertaken and completed such a deceitful, deadly and inept endeavor; to sacrifice its youth and treasure needlessly to invade and occupy another nation from its own people for no good reason. You’ve done a heckuva job Bushie.
The GOP thanks President Bush for his stunning lack of vision and courage in leading our nation to this “greatest foreign policy blunder in modern history” which has, at once crushed the friendship of American allies and founded yet another floundering puppet-ocracry in the Arab middle east. Let’s hope the Uppity One continues to screww (sic) the pooch and gets more Americans killed on behalf of an ungrateful people in an occupied land.
To hell with you President Bush and Vice President Cheney, the nation celebrates your disgraceful fall from power and the ongoing hemorrhaging of your party and ideology.
I Report :-) You Whine :-(
June 30th, 2009
9:13 am
Passenger jet crashes in Indian Ocean; AIRBUS goes down in ‘rough’ weather…
You may not but I remember when the libs were sneering at Beoing, about how the EU built better airplanes.
I ain’t so sure about that.
@@
June 30th, 2009
9:15 am
Forgot to mention Russia
AND RUSSIA TOO, jay!
July 6th, Obama’s gonna meet with Medvedev and Putin to discuss U.S. concessions that will benefit His war in Afghanistan.
Wyld Byll Hyltnyr
June 30th, 2009
9:15 am
Seek and ye shall Find June 30th, 2009
Look at Obumbler’s deficit, projections of sky rocketing national debt, a healtcare debacle that is unfolding, electric bills set to double under cap and trade, siding with Chavez and the leftists in Honduras rather than taking the side of Freedom and liberty, pleasure trips at taxpayer expense to NYC and Paris, a cabinet full of people that won’t pay taxes, other ethical problems, and, yes, anyone with half a brain dearly misses President Bush and Vice President Cheney.
getalife
June 30th, 2009
9:18 am
The war of choice based on lies is finally over.
Another dark and tragic chapter of American history.
Turd Ferguson
June 30th, 2009
9:18 am
The Iraqi’s will squander their newly found freedom. There will be a topplin of this Iraqi govt and we will probably be revisiting Iraq within the next 10 years.
I hope not and personally think we should let them drown this time.
Bosch
June 30th, 2009
9:18 am
Today’s RW’s birthday? Happy Birthday werewolf.
So, does this mean we won? The wingnuts have to have a winner and a loser because everything is black and white with these guys. So who won? Did we? And if so – suck on it, Obama is Prez now! Hahahhahahahhahahahahahahhahahahahha!
Normal
June 30th, 2009
9:19 am
WYLD: anyone with half a brain dearly misses President Bush and Vice President Cheney.-
———–
Only half wits, you mean, right?
Normal
June 30th, 2009
9:21 am
Turd Ferguson
June 30th, 2009
9:18 am
The Iraqi’s will squander their newly found freedom. There will be a topplin of this Iraqi govt and we will probably be revisiting Iraq within the next 10 years.
I hope not and personally think we should let them drown this time.
————–
Well shut my mouth, sir…I actually agree with you on this one. Mark this day…Just sayin’
Matilda
June 30th, 2009
9:22 am
Pat at 9:10, TOO funny! Are you practicing that Star Wars mind thing? “These are not the droids you’re looking for. Bush was socially liberal. Go right, young man.” HAHAHA! Thanks for the morning chuckle!
Kamchak
June 30th, 2009
9:22 am
“…and yes, anyone with half a brain dearly misses President Bush and Vice President Cheney.”
I agree, completely. Those with only half a brain do miss Bush and Cheney.
Bosch
June 30th, 2009
9:23 am
National Sovreign Day – what a crock of excrement. I’m soooo glad the Iraqis are “free” now – but that’s not why we went in there.
Peadawg
June 30th, 2009
9:24 am
“The war of choice based on lies is finally over.”
No we get to deal w/ President Obama that got elected based on lies for the next 4 years (made God help us if it’s
Peadawg
June 30th, 2009
9:24 am
if it’s 8. The 8 and ) made a smiley face…oops
Bosch
June 30th, 2009
9:25 am
Matilda,
If you are going to reference the best movie ever made, at least get the reference right – it’s the Jedi Mind Trick. Geez.
T
June 30th, 2009
9:26 am
I still do not understand what we have won in Iraq. I don’t know what we have to win in Afgan. Maybe I’m slow. Have we won the war on ter’ror? I have yet to see Osoma hanging from a rope.
Bosch
June 30th, 2009
9:28 am
T,
We’ve won the right to see a country “free” and sovreign. Keep up dude.
Copyleft
June 30th, 2009
9:29 am
“I’ll say most of the opposition ginned up after the situation there went south and casualties rose.”
Not me… I was in the protest marches long before March ‘03. There was ZERO credible evidence that Iraq was a threat to the U.S. And as we now know, they weren’t.
By the way, a “just war” isn’t hard to define at all. In fact, the UN did that very thing several decades back–and the U.S. officially agreed to that definition!
For a war to be just, it must meet several clearly defined criteria.
The war can be waged only as a last resort, with all nonviolent options exhausted.
The war’s weapons must discriminate between combatants and noncombatants.
Its violence must be proportional to the injury we have suffered.
The attackers must have legitimate authority sanctioned by the society they profess to represent.
The peace it establishes must be a clear improvement over what exists.
Them’s the rules. Invading Iraq didn’t qualify.
Matilda
June 30th, 2009
9:30 am
Bosch, thanks! Morning caffeine has not yet fully activated all brain sectors.
Seek and ye shall Find
June 30th, 2009
9:33 am
Seek and ye shall Find June 30th, 2009
Look at Obumbler’s deficit, projections of sky rocketing national debt, a healtcare debacle that is unfolding, electric bills set to double under cap and trade, siding with Chavez and the leftists in Honduras rather than taking the side of Freedom and liberty, pleasure trips at taxpayer expense to NYC and Paris, a cabinet full of people that won’t pay taxes, other ethical problems, and, yes, anyone with half a brain dearly misses President Bush and Vice President Cheney.
Only if you are ready to get serious about looking at the truth behind what Bush and other Republicans have left us with. Then again, I won’t hold my breath. By the way, get a complete brain and you won’t miss those two at all.
Bosch
June 30th, 2009
9:34 am
Matida,
No problem.
DB, Gwinnettian
June 30th, 2009
9:35 am
there is not one Iraqi who says, “Things were better off under Saddam, I wish we could go back.
You know what’s awesome about Wyld? He’s actually spoken to every single Iraqi and he knows this to be a fact.
Wyld also recognizes the incredible, unrecognized business acumen of our great 43rd President, and will entertain you for hours about the man’s pre-political accomplishments if asked nicely.
T
June 30th, 2009
9:35 am
Oh, my bad. I am glad they are ‘free’ and sovreign. Good for them.
So, with the same kinda logic can we expect to gain a world free of male pattern baldness stem from the “war on poverty”?
Still don’t get it.
Bosch
June 30th, 2009
9:35 am
So, if, say, Jeb Bush ever becomes Presidnet (oh God help us), does that mean we’ll invade Iraq again?
shaggy
June 30th, 2009
9:36 am
Is this when they start throwing flowers to us?
Bosch
June 30th, 2009
9:37 am
T,
Of course. Still don’t get it? Good. That’s good.
Bosch
June 30th, 2009
9:38 am
When do they get to have the parade where they greet us as liberators? Is that tomorrow?
Kayaker 71
June 30th, 2009
9:39 am
History repeats itself. The movie “Lawrence of Arabia” gave a great account as to how major factions of the Arab world would not stick together in a spirit of national identity and civic pride. Lawrence handed them their country on a silver platter. What did they do with it? Blew each other up, stayed identified with their so called leaders who depend on a nation of sheep to follow their so called religion that preaches that everyone else is wrong and should die if Allah is not too important in their life. If it were not for the oil, we would not have “a thriving democracy in the middle of the Arab world”. They would just be another group of nomads wandering around in the sand box.
Expect a lot more killing before this is over, if it ever is.
Bosch
June 30th, 2009
9:39 am
Whoa. Serious pronoun confliction there @ 9:38. I apologize to all my former English teachers.
AmVet
June 30th, 2009
9:40 am
“I’ll say most of the opposition ginned up after the situation there went south and casualties rose.”
Paul, technically true, but absolutely misleading.
The chickenhawks bullied everyone they could into supporting that fiasco. Including all but 156 Democrats and SEVEN (???!!!) Republicans int he US Congress. And the evil liberal media was more than happy to take advantage of the impending debacle and enjoy skyrocketing ratings.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, out of eighty talking heads on ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN and (obviously) Faux News immediately following shock and awe, take a wild guess how many were opposed to the”invasion?
Two.
Us”War when its REQUIRED ONLY” types aren’t profitable enough, you see.
But make no mistake, there were plenty of Americans who could a) see that George and Dick was incompetent boobs in the first place and b) knew this was going to go really, really bad from the get go.
Sadly I, along with all of those other Americans, were correct…
Bosch
June 30th, 2009
9:40 am
Kayaker,
So why bother to begin with?
Seek and ye shall Find
June 30th, 2009
9:40 am
As long as we are into dealing with facts (well, some of us), how about a little look at some red-letter dates in history. A little reminder of some of our involvement over in Iraq over the years. You might just get a better understanding of why we are so hated by some.
Paul
June 30th, 2009
9:41 am
Copyleft
Well, you were sure ahead of the Democrats in Congress, that’s for sure! Those folks were cheering under Pres Clinton and cheering under Pres Bush. Until the first one said ‘oops…”
As far as a ‘just’ war – well, golly, if you want to go with recent history… ’cause it doesn’t take an examination of much of mankind’s history to come up with absolutely all kinds of examples of unjust guys winning their wars. Just ask the Native Americans/American Indians/Indians, who were doing it to each other before we got here.
And by those rules, can you think of one war since the UN that was just?
If not, and they happened anyway, does it really matter to the guy getting trampled that he’s morally correct while his family and friends are getting slaughtered?
So by the UN rules (a body made up of many decidedly unjust countries) we wouldn’t go to war if N Korea invaded the South?
We shouldn’t have gone to war in Kuwait? Iraq didn’t do anything to us.
Same in Bosnia. We suffered no injury.
See, what this leaves out of the equation is, the guys doing the stuff we don’t like don’t follow the UN rules. If they don’t, we still should, is that it?
DB, Gwinnettian
June 30th, 2009
9:41 am
Well shut my mouth, sir…I actually agree with you on this one.
Never underestimate the rapidity with which right wing trollboys will throw heathen brown people under the bus. They’ve moved on to the totally hawt Eye-ranian chicks now.
Is this when they start throwing flowers to us?
From George W. Bush Square, one presumes.
Seek and ye shall Find
June 30th, 2009
9:44 am
So, if, say, Jeb Bush ever becomes Presidnet (oh God help us), does that mean we’ll invade Iraq again?
That reminds me of a song.
Gawingnut
June 30th, 2009
9:45 am
Amvet:
Yes, a sad day for the chickenhawks.
Invade Iran.
Won’t have too. Just stand back & watch the Mossad take care of the barbarians.
Bosch
June 30th, 2009
9:46 am
Paul,
I hate it, but we can not fix all the woes of the world.
Joey
June 30th, 2009
9:46 am
Jay’s key paragraph: “As the Iraqis stand up, we will stand down,” President Bush used to say. That seems a long time ago. But it’s time, past time, for the promise in those words to finally be realized.
Jay seems convinced that Iraq and Iraqis are ready and able to stand alone. He is calling on Iraqis to live up to their promise. Never mind our promise to them. Others of you don’t care if Iraqis are ready or not; just dump them.
In US history I can recall only one time that we abandoned a nation in a manner similar (albeit not exactly the same) to what we are doing here. An what a terrible plague was brought upon the people of Viet Nam by that betrayal.
I am hoping that Iraq has obtained the strength and the will necessary to prevent a reversal of the freedom they have gained over the last few years. I hope.
Paul
June 30th, 2009
9:47 am
Y’know, Copyleft, by those criteria we had no right to invade Afghanistan. So it’s an unjust war, too. That Pres Obama is expanding.
Thoughts?
AmVet
“Technically true but absolutely misleading.”
I was referring to Congress. I think taken in that light, given the statements of the chickenhaw…. I mean, Democrats, it’s more than ‘technically’ true.
As far as being bullied: doesn’t say much for the integrity and courage of the Democratic leadership, does it?
GOP is gone
June 30th, 2009
9:50 am
Thanks for the deep laugh you gave me this morning Bylly. Wow, don’t let any facts stand in your way there. Like the fact that Al Qaeda was never in Iraq until the brilliant Bush and Cheney, the real decider, decided to invade another country with a lie as their fear tactic motive.
Just how long did it take you to interview EVERY Iraqi about Saddam anyway? You must be very hot and tired after your trip. You did get one thing right, Americans have been sacrificing its youth and treasure in many conflicts and the Military do what they do very well. THEY should be very proud, as should the rest of Americans, especially since they were never properly supported with troop numbers and equipment from the 3 stooges, B, C and Rummie.
I heard that over 30 big oil companies are bidding this week to get the right to drill in Iraq, a risky but profitable endeavor. Now that will be the real legacy of Iraq and what Cheney the decider had in mind all along.
mm
June 30th, 2009
9:50 am
Anyone who claims “victory” in Iraq is an idiot. We didn’t win anything. And neither did Iraq.
Bosch
June 30th, 2009
9:50 am
Joey is opening the door to blame Obama when the civil war picks back up in Iraq.
Nice try Joey. We don’t guy that crap.
Copyleft
June 30th, 2009
9:50 am
Paul: You may be surprised, but I agree. We don’t need to be in Afghanistan either… at least, not with soldiers.
Tracking down Osama and bringing him to justice is an intelligence problem, not a military one.
P.S. I agree with you on the courage of the Congressional Democrats. How I’d love to see them actually standing up to the Republican fools and actually instituting some LIBERAL policies instead of the usual special-interest pandering.
Bosch
June 30th, 2009
9:51 am
Excuse me, we don’t BUY that crap. Burp.
Paul
June 30th, 2009
9:52 am
Bosch 9:46
You got it.
But as one of those talking heads, ex military type and now author, on Fox News said in a book back in the 90s: we shouldn’t. But the difficulty in the coming years (which is now) will occur when power transfers to the party of feelings and empathy who sees videos of suffering and nastiness and wrongness and they will say, but we have to do something!!!
And it’ll be okay because we’re doing it for the right reasons and it’s not for oil or corporate profits and we know we’re really, really good!
Bosch
June 30th, 2009
9:52 am
“I heard that over 30 big oil companies are bidding this week to get the right to drill in Iraq, a risky but profitable endeavor. Now that will be the real legacy of Iraq and what Cheney the decider had in mind all along”
TESTIFY!!! And Amen.
Bosch
June 30th, 2009
9:53 am
Paul,
“but we have to do something”
No we don’t. Sometimes you have to let children face the consequences of their actions, it’s the only way they grow.
Copyleft
June 30th, 2009
9:54 am
Followup to Paul
“the guys doing the stuff we don’t like don’t follow the UN rules. If they don’t, we still should, is that it?”
YES! That’s it exactly. (Finally, he gets it!) It’s called “having principles.” And yes, it really DOES matter.
I know it’s easy to forget that such things as American ideals could actually matter, after eight years of seeing them trampled and ignored in favor of idiotic bravado… but principles are what separate the Good Guys from the Bad Guys. And that matters even when the Bad Guys have more firepower.
Bosch
June 30th, 2009
9:55 am
Paul,
And if we are the ones who always go in and fix the woes of the world, then why should the UN bother?
Paul
June 30th, 2009
9:58 am
Copyleft
Well, you are consistent. Thanks for the explanation.
I had no problem with taking down the Afg gov’t, even if it didn’t meet UN criteria. I have a big problem with what happened after we got done with that few weeks’ worth of operations.
I still have trouble with accepting the ‘intelligence’ idea. Maybe it’s definitions. Intel is, to me, information gathering and analysis. Satellites, info intercepts, people on the ground watching and hearing. But that’s as far as it goes. Then comes bringing in the people to act on the intel. If it’s a law case, it’s legal types. If you’re at war, it’s usually military. I think we now have a situation where it’s both, actually, as we see with this war against Islamic jihadists. And sometimes we just call in the guys most people don’t want to acknowledge and they take care of things.
GOP is gone
June 30th, 2009
10:04 am
I believe the KEY phrase is foriegn oil companies EXPELLED under Saddam.
Iraq’s first postwar oil bidding for oil contracts
By The Associated Press
Iraq is scheduled to open its first postwar bidding for oil service contracts on Monday. International oil companies were expelled by Saddam Hussein more than 30 years ago. The companies that qualified for the bidding, along with the fields and reserves, are compiled below.
UNITED STATES: Chevron, ConocoPhilips, Exxon Mobil, Hess Corp., Marathon International Petroleum Ltd., and Occidental Petroleum Corp.
United Kingdom: BP Group PLC.
Japan: Inpex Holdings Inc., Japex and Nippon Oil Corp.
Australia: BHP Billiton Ltd. and Woodside Petroleum Ltd.
China: China’s CNOOC Ltd., CNPC International Ltd., Sinochem International Co. Ltd., and Sinopec Shanghai Petrochemical co. Ltd.
Italy: Edison International SPA and Eni.
Russia: JSC Lukoil and JSC Gazprom Neft.
France: Total SA.
South Korea: Korea Gas Corp).
Spain: Repsol YPF SA.
Norway: StatoilHydro ASA.
Netherlands: Royal Dutch Shell.
Canada: Nexen Inc.
Denmark: Maersk.
India: ONGC Ltd.
Malaysia: Petronas Gas BHD.
Indonesia: PT Pertamina.
The six state-run oil firms that have been added are Turkish Petroleum Corporation (TPAO), Algeria’s Sonatrach, PetroVietnam, Angola’s Sonangol SA, Pakistan Petroleum Ltd., and Petroleum Authority of Thailand.
OIL AND GAS FIELDS
BASRA OIL FIELDS:
Rumaila: The field is made up of two separate fields; North and South Rumaila. Together they have an estimated of almost 17.8 billion barrels of oil in reserves. It currently produces slightly over 1 million barrels a day, and its production target is about 1.8 million barrels per day.
West Qurna Stage 1: It has estimated reserves of 8.6 billion barrels, and currently produces about 280,000 barrels a day. The production target is slightly over 600,000 barrels per day.
Zubair: It holds an estimated 4.1 billion barrels of oil. Its current production is about 230,000 barrels per day and its target production is slightly over 400,000 barrels per day.
MISSAN OIL FIELDS:
They are three adjacent fields offered as one group. Total daily production ranges from 100,000 to 110,000 barrels per day with target output at about 300,000 barrels per day.
Fauqa (or Fakkah): Almost 1.55 billion barrels of oil in reserves.
Buzurgan: About 612 million barrels of oil in reserves.
Abu Gharab: About 454 million barrels of oil in reserves.
KIRKUK OIL FIELDS:
Kirkuk: It has estimated reserves of almost 8 billion barrels. Current production is slightly over 400,000 barrels per day. Target production is about 625,000 barrels per day.
Bai Hassan: It has almost 2.4 billion barrels of oil in reserves. Current daily production is about 150,000 barrels per day. Target production is about 230,000 barrels per day.
GAS FIELDS:
Akkas Field in Anbar Province:Undeveloped. At least 2.15 trillion cubic feet of reserves and potential production of 500 million cubic feet per day.
Mansouria in Diyala Province: Undeveloped. An estimated 3.3 trillion cubic feet of reserves with production potential of 330 million cubic feet a day.
Source: Iraq’s Oil Ministry
Paul
June 30th, 2009
10:06 am
Bosch 9:55
They won’t, usually. Because many times, the UN power blocks of the human rights abusers and racists will block the very actions they tacitly endorse.
Copyleft 9:54
I like principles. I also like to see what happens to them when reality intrudes.
UN blocked action in Bosnia. We activated NATO. UN didn’t take effective action in Rwanda. They dithered.
Hold that thought, let’s return to S Korea. Your position is we shouldn’t intervene (treaty obligations notwithstanding) because N Korea would have started an unjust war and we can’t take part in one? Or is the follow on, N Korea may have started an unjust war, but we are justified in responding? If so, how? S Korea may be justified, but us?
See, this opens up the whole “THEY started the unjust war” idea. If that is the case, what principles guide our intervention? When do we intervene? Or, do we not?
So we act when it’s in our best interests. And Pres Obama will do the same as Pres Bush in that regard. It’s not about being ‘better than’ or ‘morally superior.’ It just is what it is.
Joey
June 30th, 2009
10:07 am
Once again Bosch is wrong in his interpretation of the words and Bosch’s assignment of the motives of a poster.
Paul
June 30th, 2009
10:07 am
Copyleft
The last paragraph of my last post was supposed to be the last paragraph of the response to Bosch.
AmVet
June 30th, 2009
10:10 am
Paul totally disingenuous.
156 out of 267 (58%) Democrats who voted against that clusterf&ck is at least respectable, IMHO. I presume MANY were politically forced into supporting those bungling lamebrains in the White House. Or in effect get railroaded out of Washington by the angry and bloodlusting neo-con mob. Who tried to do it anyway. I hated it and cqalled them spineless. But if they lived to fight another political day and in essence help get rid of those a’holes “across the aisle”, so be it.
But the 97.3% – of the lockstep, mindless sheep, goose stepping apparatchiks in the GOP?
Utterly, totally and completely disgraceful. And I will never forgive those sorry b@st@rds.
The only silver lining is that those very neo-conned chickenhawks have now lost 94% of the contested seats in the past two elections nationally – the White House, six out of six governorships and 56 out of 60 US Congressional races.
It’s a damn good start to eradicating that neo-con disease, and is some form of justice. And I salute all of the Americans who made those results possible.
But it will never bring those 4,325 Americans.
Duty calls. Later all…
Bosch
June 30th, 2009
10:12 am
Paul,
I see that, but what exactly is our best interest? I don’t think we know anymore.
Joey,
Bull excrement. You will be one of the first posters here blaming Obama when the civil war picks back up in Iraq.
TnGelding
June 30th, 2009
10:12 am
Paul
June 30th, 2009
8:36 am
http://www.juancole.com/2008/07/bush-accepts-time-horizon-for-us-troop.html
@@
June 30th, 2009
10:16 am
Paul:
This one’s for you from Stratfor.
The Big Picture! The upcoming showdown between Obama and Putin.
Taking bets….
J/K!
There’s a good reason why Putin sees Obama as weak. It’s because Obama talks too much.
Copyleft
June 30th, 2009
10:19 am
Paul: I like to see what happens to some people’s claims of being ‘principles’ when the chips are down too.
As it turns out, a heckuva lot of folks only TALK about their principles, but are too weak to back them up when push comes to shove. You know, like “We don’t torture… unless we’re really scared or angyr.” Those folks–armed or otherwise–are rightly despised as cowards.
The US government may always ACT according to pragmatic self-interest, but that doesn’t mean that the people should ever stop pushing for us to practice what we preach. (Or else get out of the preaching business.)
GOP is gone
June 30th, 2009
10:19 am
They don’t throw flowers, it is a desert. They throw shoes.
Paul
June 30th, 2009
10:19 am
AmVet?
Disingenuous? I thought I was specifically addressing not the half of Democrats who were not bullied, but the half who were. The half who voted to oppose were obviously not bullied. Many of those who voted for, later became some of the harshest critics when things went badly. That was my point.
TNGelding
Yes. And still, administration spokepersons referred to it as a goal to aspire to.
But really, it’s something Pres Obama inherited. The timetable for withdrawal. I still see major distinctions between Bush’s ‘conditions-based’ approach and Obama’s ‘timeline-based’ approach.
Joey
June 30th, 2009
10:20 am
Thanks Bosch. Your reaction is as expected.
Still, your conclusion is wrong, but your passion is real.
If nothing else that will get you posted on Jay’s blog.
Paul
June 30th, 2009
10:28 am
Copyleft 10:19
True enough. But I am leery of speaking in absolutes. Which is why I refer to “General Principles.” Principles that are generally true, but not necessarily in every condition.
Had the discussion here once before with someone. Idea of development of moral thought. It’s wrong to steal. Your child has a disease, you haven’t the money for the drug, would you steal the drug to save your child’s life?
Stealing’s wrong.
People get rather unsettled when such ideas are then transferred to world actions. The answer I still like the best to all this came from Bosch months back – “Sometimes we do it because we’re bigger and stronger and because we can.” Words to that effect.
Heck, I’ll even offer some people who reverse course on principles when the chips are down have MORE principles than people who stay the course.
That’s why I like ‘general’ principles. Absolutism, whether it’s religious dogma or political pronouncements, leaves me a tad uneasy.
FinnMcCool
June 30th, 2009
10:28 am
WYLD: anyone with half a brain dearly misses President Bush and Vice President Cheney.
That is well said, Wild Bill, well said indeed. I can not refute your claim.
FinnMcCool
June 30th, 2009
10:31 am
Seek, I believe the latest Republican reason for the invasion was to “Rid the world of unnecessary clutter and demolish the forces of the Klingdons in one fell swoop!”
We came, we saw, we swooped!
Paul
June 30th, 2009
10:31 am
Copyleft
Saw a Law and Order episode recently. Cop had responded to a vehicle accident. Car was mangled, person inside trapped. Car was on fire. Person was screaming horribly. Screaming and screaming and screaming. No other help was coming. Cop shot the person as the flesh continued to blister and char.
District Attorney charged the guy with homicide. He broke the law.
See the point?
JT
June 30th, 2009
10:32 am
Everyone is making it a republican or democrat issue. Rgardless of your party or views, let’s not forget our soldiers who bravely risked their lives and fought in the battle. Many of whom probably felt the same as all f you. Let’s give them a true hero’s welcome when they come home. Let them know that we really appreciate their sacrifice. And let us never forget those that gave their lives in Iraq. God Bless America.
Vietnam vet.
Copyleft
June 30th, 2009
10:32 am
Paul: Specific tactics can change depending on conditions or new information; no one’s claiming otherwise.
But underlying principles? They remain the same. If you don’t stick to them, you don’t really have any. You just have a collection of pretty words you use when it suits your convenience. And that sort of “moral flexibility” is seldom deserving of praise.
If you find that a statement such as “Killing is wrong” doesn’t suit every circumstance, it means you haven’t found the TRUE principle, just an approximation of it. It emphatically does NOT mean that killing under any and all circumstances is suddenly acceptable. See the difference?
getalife
June 30th, 2009
10:33 am
Big oil will finally put those record profits to work bidding against China for Iraq oil.
The corruption money will be flowing in Iraq.
Welcome to democracy Iraq.
Bosch
June 30th, 2009
10:33 am
Paul,
You are always gonna get screwed when you attempt to include morals into military actions, or anything else for that matter.
And, as you mentioned, I did write words to that effect, but I don’t necessarily agree with that. Sometimes the best answer to “why do/don’t we act is” – “well, hell, I don’t know!”
Half Brained American
June 30th, 2009
10:34 am
Me like George he a great Preznident! 4 ever.
also eet mor chikn.
FinnMcCool
June 30th, 2009
10:34 am
Don’t worry, I Report, liberals aren’t claiming victory. We aren’t confused and lying to ourselves that maybe, just maybe, there was actually something to win in Iraq in the first place.
You have a lot of Iraqi civilians dead, a lot of Americans dead, a whole country that needs rebuilding…. oh, and let’s not forget, a lot of very very very wealthy military contractors who are smiling all the way to the bank!
md
June 30th, 2009
10:39 am
“Follow UN principles even when the other side doesn’t”
It’s this type of bs that gets our boys killed on a daily basis. Making them fight with one hand behind their back and having to constantly think about the consequences of a court marshal if they make a wrong split second decision.
If that is one’s stance, then maybe you should try picking up a gun and deciding in a matter of milliseconds whether the other guy is really trying to kill you or not. Easy to do from a computer and keyboard, darn near impossible in real life. That poor fellow gets to choose between death and prison, instantaineously.
And the other side, they could care less what the UN says, and relly don’t care who gets killed.
Its war folks, not tiddly winks.
Matilda
June 30th, 2009
10:43 am
JT, nicely put. Thank you.
Copyleft
June 30th, 2009
10:45 am
MD: “Follow UN principles even when the other side doesn’t.
It’s this type of bs that gets our boys killed on a daily basis.”
Actually, MD, it’s this type of principle that separates the good guys from the bad guys. Which side do you want to be on?
Normal
June 30th, 2009
10:48 am
COPYLEFT: Your 10:19…You see with clear eyes, man…Just sayin’…
Normal
June 30th, 2009
10:51 am
JT: 10:32 I guarentee to you that I will do every thing possible to make it happen…As G-d as my witness…
Normal
June 30th, 2009
10:53 am
getalife
June 30th, 2009
10:33 am
Big oil will finally put those record profits to work bidding against China for Iraq oil.
The corruption money will be flowing in Iraq.
Welcome to democracy Iraq.
——————
GETALIFE: Wasn’t this what we were fightin’ for?
Seek and ye shall Find
June 30th, 2009
10:55 am
I wonder if Zapata Petroleum is also bidding.
Paul
June 30th, 2009
10:58 am
Copyleft 10:32
Sure I see the difference. Most of the questions I ask or the way I phrase it is because I’m trying to clarify the position you’ve taken.
But I was speaking of more than tactics. We talk about principles, but life does present us with situations where greater harm can result by adhering to the letter of the law, than by not.
I’m not saying those exceptions to the general happen often, not at all, but happen they do. And that’s the point I’m driving at. And they are likely going to be tough situations with tough calls. Like that Law and Order episode.
Your last paragraph – [[If you find that a statement such as “Killing is wrong” doesn’t suit every circumstance, it means you haven’t found the TRUE principle, just an approximation of it.]]
What is the ‘true principle?”
Our system of laws distinguishes types of killing: murder, premeditated, manslaughter, sanctioned by the state.
[[It emphatically does NOT mean that killing under any and all circumstances is suddenly acceptable.]] Of course it doesn’t mean that. But to go back to the ‘killing’ thing, I’m still a bit fuzzy on the ‘true principle’ meaning.
Sounds similar to what I described as a ‘general principle’ but I’m not positive.
Bosch 10:33
true, too!
getalife
June 30th, 2009
10:58 am
A war of choice based on lies to create wealth for cronies on the death of hundreds of thousands is the ultimate sin.
The cover ups can’t help them in eternity.
Tis a dark place they dwell.
Evil.
md
June 30th, 2009
10:59 am
“Actually, MD, it’s this type of principle that separates the good guys from the bad guys. Which side do you want to be on?”
If I’m over there fighting, I want to be on the alive side.
Maybe you should go over there and when you encounter an Iraqi/other in a dark alley, raise your hand and call “time out” to enquire whether they are a “good” guy or a “bad” guy. If your lucky they will be a “good” guy. If your not lucky, no more posts from you.
Normal
June 30th, 2009
11:01 am
Y”ALL: The talk about the UN got me to thinking…I know..That’s a dangerous thing to do, but…
When did it happen that we became the UN’s police? Why is it always mostly our soldiers cleaning up messes?
If we are going to be the police force of the UN, why not get paid for it? I propose something like this: UN: America, we need you to clean up the current mess is Somila. US: ok, we will do it for 100.00 dollars a day per soldier used, plus expenses, deal? This way we actually gain something and the soldiers do to…simple.
Bosch
June 30th, 2009
11:09 am
Normal @ 11:01 –
I like it! You should write a proposal to the DOD – get a couple millions for that.
Seek and ye shall Find
June 30th, 2009
11:11 am
In 1979, the year before he campaigned for the Republican nomination for president, Bush claimed a nuclear war was winnable. Ronald Reagan won the 1980 nomination and chose Bush as his running mate. As vice president, Bush cast three tie-breaking votes to renew chemical weapons production, supported sale of missiles to “terrorist” Iran and the illegal arming of the Nicaraguan contras and other paramilitary groups he called “freedom fighters. He also chaired The Presidential Task Force on Deregulation which, according to Mary Fricker in her book Inside Job, “set the tone” for bank deregulation which led to the savings and loan financial disaster of the 1980s.
That Bush family. You could always count on them to be there looking out for someone’s best interests.
md
June 30th, 2009
11:11 am
Normal,
Better idea – abolish the UN.
Its become the ultimate our side vs your side and even the “evil” empires get to vote. That would be like letting felons vote in our general elections.
It was a good idea in “principle” only. Not to mention we fund way more than our share and fight the battles.
Paul
June 30th, 2009
11:15 am
CopyLeft
I’ll even toss this out for consideration:
Much has been said, negatively, of Pres Bush. Some allege he wanted to torture. Some go so far as to say he enjoyed it. Some look at one technique (tactic?) and say it’s evidence he’s a torturer.
But consider this: he asked a question: does such and such constitute torture? Some say he did that only to cover his backside. Some say he forced the ‘right’ answer. But consider: could there not have been the acceptance of the principle and the law that the US does not torture? That he wanted to abide by the law, but the law does not describe techniques, so he sought clarification.
Now any time you ask a few lawyers to interpret something you’re going to get different opinions. Just look at the Supreme Court. So Pres Bush asked ‘what about this? Is it torture?’ and got back the answer, ‘no, it isn’t.’
Because he had to maintain the principle, before the world, that we do not torture. Which is why he adamantly maintained ‘we do not torture’ and why he absolutely refused to get into a discussion of ‘what about this? what about this?’
Before you dismiss this, consider: I have asked, even if one accepts waterboarding is torture, is listening to Eminem played loud for 12 hours torture? Is going without sleep for 30 hours torture? Because those were the other techniques included in the legal opinions.
And while people may disagree about different techniques or tactics, they can still say, as a principle, we do not torture.
RW-(the original)
June 30th, 2009
11:17 am
@@,
Thanks for the greeting! As always I proudly share the day with the great Thomas Sowell.
Bosch,
You as well….sort of.
Whether Obama gets any blame should sectarian violence break back out won’t have anything to do with his keeping Bush’s SOFA in force. It’ll be in how he responds and if that response is going to be his usual sit back and wait to see who prevails, then we may as well start evacuating our troops from the country itself, not just the cities.
Copyleft
June 30th, 2009
11:19 am
Paul: What I’m getting at is that the simplistic codes of the “Ten Commandments” style are not true ethical principles… they’re approximations.
“Thou shalt not kill,” for example, would prevent violence in self-defense, in war, the death penalty, suicide, euthanasia, and so forth. Ethically, those circumstances require some deeper digging.
What principle you (or anyone else) ultimately arrives at is up to them and their beliefs.
A pacifist, for example, would declare that even self-defense and war are insufficient grounds for killing by violent action: his true principle would be “Thou shalt not commit violent, intentional murder of a fellow human being under any circumstances.”
A soldier, on the other hand, could have the core principle of “I will not kill my fellow man except in defense of myself or my country.”
A doctor could decide, “I will preserve life whenever it can relieve, end, or reduce suffering” and therefore be okay with patient-assisted suicide or euthanasia.
All of these men have functioning core principles they can stick to. None of them are required to make “special case” exceptions.
When someone uses the phrase “whatever it takes” or “by any means necessary,” it means that the principles they CLAIM to hold are really subordinate to a more urgent and selfish instinct: fear. Their core principle is often a variant of “Keep me alive and safe, at any cost!”
Ethically, I don’t have much respect for that, given how many atrocities and abuses it has historically produced.
clyde
June 30th, 2009
11:23 am
In war it’s whether you win or lose,it’s not about how you play the game.
Seek and ye shall Find
June 30th, 2009
11:26 am
…This highly secret program was known as Project 908, and among the individuals earmarked to take power when disaster struck was Donald Rumsfeld. … There, for several days, he would be immured in artificial caverns, staring at electronic displays streaming data of disaster and confusion, sleeping on cots and subsisting on the most austere rations. …
Insofar as the COG games gave the illusion of reality, they taught Rumsfeld and his fellow players some dangerous lessons, particularly when the fall of the Soviet Union induced some changes in the usual scenarios. Although the exercises continued, still budgeted at over $200 million in the Clinton era, the vanished Soviets were now customarily replaced by terrorists. The terrorism envisaged however, was almost always state-sponsored. …
There were other changes, too. In earlier times the specialists selected to run the “shadow government” had been drawn from across the political spectrum, Democrats and Republicans alike. But now, down in the bunkers, Rumsfeld found himself in politically congenial company, the players’ roster being filled almost exclusively with Republican hawks. (Andrew Cockburn, Rumsfeld: His Rise, Fall, and Catastrophic Legacy, New York: Scribner, 2007, pp. 85-86, 88)
Those Republicans are a bunch of really sick puppies.
getalife
June 30th, 2009
11:28 am
“GETALIFE: Wasn’t this what we were fightin’ for?”
Ah, the why question.
Well, the oil is an open market in Iraq now.
Wealth has been created for w’s cronies .
The Iran allied Shiites contol Iraqi government.
Only w can answer the why question but he will lie.
So, the answer to the why question will never be known.
@@
June 30th, 2009
11:35 am
I must confess, jay, I don’t always read your columns in their entirety (embedded links). I just finished this one.
When I first read it I thought…makes sense to me. One Iraqi leader reflects back, the other looks forward instilling in the Iraqi people and their security forces a sense of accomplishment and confidence in their future. Democrats rarely bestow that on their voters so it’s easy to see why some would be offended. It’s a foreign concept. Anyhoo…
it’s no wonder the NYTs would salute him with a “‘butt’ Al Maliki”……..
The military parade in the Green Zone on Tuesday — at the official monument to the unknown soldier — was attended primarily by Iraqi reporters and dignitaries. The public could not reach it because of extensive security restricting access to the area. Several American news organizations were also barred, including two television news networks and The New York Times, on the grounds that they did not have the appropriate badges.
This seemed in part intended to signal that the Iraqi authorities were in charge. In the past most checkpoints were run jointly by Iraqis and Americans and if someone lacked the correct badge, an exception could be made.
In his speech, Mr. Maliki said the news media would encourage insurgent attacks if they questioned the ability of the security forces to handle the job.
The truth hurts.
~~~~~~~~~OO~~~~~~~~
You’re welcome RW.
~~~~~~~~OO~~~~~~~~~
Paul: Don’t know if you saw it but I left you a Friedman video on Previous 1.
md
June 30th, 2009
11:35 am
“Well, the oil is an open market in Iraq now.”
I always loved the “oil” argument. If it was all about the oil, wouldn’t we control the entire market considering we do have 130,000 troops on the ground. Why would we share the oil with countries that didn’t back us in the war and also with countries that don’t like us very much?
Common sense dictates it wasn’t “all about the oil”.
Jake
June 30th, 2009
11:36 am
It’s been a good week, Madoff got 150, Michael Jackson went to his just punishment, and the Iraqis have a self-sustaining democracy.
Jake
June 30th, 2009
11:37 am
md – I think it was mostly about the oil. Unfortunately that only meant keeping it flowing, not taking it for ourselves. but weak people, even with a Cheney behind them, can only do so much.
GOP is gone
June 30th, 2009
11:38 am
Damn, and all this time I thought it was tiddly winks
ken
June 30th, 2009
11:38 am
Jay, aren’t Americans being laid off by the thousands more important? You seem to conveniently forget our largest problem.
Paul
June 30th, 2009
11:38 am
Copyleft
[[All of these men have functioning core principles they can stick to. None of them are required to make “special case” exceptions.]]
There goes that absolute ‘none’ again. I’ll offer, and I’d be surprised if some ex-soldiers here would disagree, that “I will not kill my fellow man except in defense of myself or of my country” does not involve special case exceptions.
Maybe you mean anything a soldier does in war is covered. I don’t think you do. But soldiers, I understand, have all sorts of laws and rules and requirements that are written around ‘special case’ exceptions.
I noticed the pacifist principle was absolute. The soldier used the word ‘except.’ The doctor I didn’t get. Maybe it didn’t come out as you intended, but ‘preserve life “whenever it can relieve end or reduce suffering” maybe should have been “preserve life, but I will make a special exception if it will reduce suffering?”
And I will offer, in the case of the pacifist, if it’s a mother who’s out with her daughter and they get assaulted and her daughter begins to get killed while the mother has means at her disposal to permanently stop the criminal…well, you get the point. I’d have a hard time viewing that mother as a real moral person.
Your next to the last paragraph took it to an extreme. I don’t recall saying ‘whatever it takes.’ In fact, I said exceptions would be pretty darn rare. Just like with the soldier. Just like with the doctor. Maybe even with the pacifist mother.
@@
Thank you for the link – I have it open in another tab
GOP is gone
June 30th, 2009
11:39 am
No md, common sense tells you it is ALWAYS about the money.
md
June 30th, 2009
11:52 am
“No md, common sense tells you it is ALWAYS about the money.”
Then why share it with any other country?
RW-(the original)
June 30th, 2009
11:59 am
US: ok, we will do it for 100.00 dollars a day per soldier used, plus expenses, deal?
Considering the US currently pays 22% of the UN’s general costs and 26% of the UN “peacekeeping” budget all that idea would do is guarantee that the US would have to handle everything and we’d be paying ourselves to do it. Brilliant! /sarc
Off to the forest. Enjoy!
AmVet
June 30th, 2009
12:07 pm
Paul, you know me.
You know I hold those Democratic go-alongers-for-expediency as culpable as their more bellicose and even less rational GOP colleagues.
But the irrefutable fact is that this is, was and will always be a REPUBLICAN WAR.
They wanted it. They wailed for it. They lied to get it.
And they are paying the price for it…
socialism is da BOMB
June 30th, 2009
12:09 pm
@9:12am “TO hell with President Bush & Vice President Cheyney,the nation celebrates your disgraceful fall from power and the ongoing hemorrhaging of your party & idealogy”!!! And we the people(sheep) of the State celebrate the rise of Socialism and our Hero/God/King/Leader/etc…..We will follow…….We will follow…..
Paul
June 30th, 2009
12:11 pm
AmVet
Yes, you’ve been pretty darn consistent these many months. And you haven’t cut the go-along Dems any slack.
Unlike many who make all sorts of excuses for them.
Now, if they’ll just ask the same questions of this administration about Afg they asked of Bush about Iraq…………
Normal
June 30th, 2009
12:11 pm
AMVET: They wanted it. They wailed for it. They lied to get it.
And they are paying the price for it…
———–
Brother, if I have my way, they will pay the price for a long, long time.
Normal
June 30th, 2009
12:20 pm
Paul
June 30th, 2009
12:11 pm
—————–
Paul you are right about Afganistan and President Obama needs to end it successfully. The only way that will happen is if/when we get Bin Laden. As a poster said earlier, that is not a conventional military matter, it is an intellegence and S.O.G. matter.
If we get him, the rest of the terrorist organizations are going to know we mean business…finally. They will we fearful of us again.
Bin Laden is the key…
Atlanta Native
June 30th, 2009
12:21 pm
Jay,
Got nothin’ to disagree with you on this one.