******* Democrats

[RoninLB]

last night on C-span was a policy discussion on what the answer is to Israel's prob. All 5 options were ng in part. Then the speaker offered #6.

Hold Syria responsible for any prob happening after Israel cleans up the mess. He said that holding Syria responsible has happened before and it worked when they had to toss out the brain behind a terrorist bombing.

Then Iran can't do its dirty deeds because Syria has the only access.

[Moneyguy1]

Thestey are both plenty smart, Rick, just have different ideas than many of us. Their ideas are not "right" or "wrong", just people looking at the problem from a diffeent perspective.

We have created a mess. We have put thousands of our finest in harm's way, and some ask "For What?" (I have no clear answer to this). Why we are there is no longer relevant. How we conclude the circus is our most urgent problem. Should other nations be involved? You bet. I am tired of saving Europe's a$$ economically and militarily. About time they sacrificed to assure they will HAVE a future.

We are a Suprepower. We won WW II. We saw the fall of the USSR. In both, the reason for collapse was due in large part to economic collapse. Think we can continue to shore up the ROW economically before we fall into ruin? How many domestic problems would $300 billion solve? Other posters have commented "screw the rest of the world". So, the question of our involvement becomes irrelevant simply because, alhough many of those posting with that sentiment are those who eschew the position of "We are there to establish a democracy", which sounds like nation building to me. So, yes.... We are there. No, we probably should not be. No, we cannot leave at the present time. Yes, we should extracate ourselve at the first viable opportunity and resolve to let the folks over there clean up after themselves in the future.

So, still no simple yes or no.

Did I miss something?

[Nathans_Dad]

No, I think you are just putting a bunch of variables that occur after the fact into the original question.

The original question is a binary one. Either we pull out now or we do not. If we have one boot on the ground then we have not pulled out.

Once people answer the original question then they can have a discussion about where we go from here.

Tech: Ok, my bad, I will put you squarely in the pull out now group...

[Rodeo]

Originally posted by Rodeo
***Why do you insist we continue to help a government aligned with Iran, Syria, Hezbollah and Hamas? This is not a joking matter. Why?

You have all be avoiding the answer for months now, i guess I should not be surprised that you continue to do so.

Eleven Americans dead this week in Iraq.

Keep making your "kingmaker" jokes. Our men and women will continue to die fighting not against the enemy, but for them.

[Nathans_Dad]

KINGMAKER!!

(you asked for it...)

[hardflex]

yuk yuk

you need to move along there, Rick, Rodeo won.....

[Nathans_Dad]

Dang it!! And here I thought I was ahead heading into the 2 minute warning.

Thanks for the tip.

[Moneyguy1]

Rick

Binary?

That could be (forgive me for the "ad hominum" attack) construed as a simplistic solution.

There are multiple variables involved and all must be worked into the equation.

Hardly.

Th

[Nathans_Dad]

No it isn't a solution at all. It is the beginning of a discussion of a solution.

You just want to throw all the variables in at once and then throw up your hands and say "What a mess". The key to unraveling any problem is to boil it down to a simple core question and answer that first. Then you can proceed to the next question in the line. You can't make sense out of a jumbled ball of string unless you follow one thread at a time.

[Rodeo]

Anytime you're ready ... the question awaits.

Originally posted by Rodeo
***Why do you insist we continue to help a government aligned with Iran, Syria, Hezbollah and Hamas? This is not a joking matter. Why?

[Moneyguy1]

Rick:

Did I say that? Did I say "give up and come home?"

Occam's Razor doesn't work well in geopolitical situations.

Identify the variables.
Examine each variable for relevance.
Concentrate on those with the most impact on the problem.

And for God's sake, get rid of the "Stay the course" rhetoric, since the course has never been fully defined!! "Victory" is only a word. Political victory? Social Victory? Economic Victory? Military Victory? Which one? How is each defined? If more than one, in what order and which is most important? These are questions for the diplomats, not the military. Where ARE the diplomats?

Sorry, Rick, our goals may be the same, but our approaches are quite different. I see multiple problems, multiple opportunities, multiple possible solutions and outcomes.

Perhaps I think too much, but my world is a complex place with no simple answers, no matter how much I may wish this were not the case.

[Nathans_Dad]

1). I have never said "Stay the course". That's Rodeo's favorite line (besides....well....you know).

2). I disagree that breaking complex problems down into components and talking about each component "doesn't work" in geopolitical situations. It works in every other complex situation.

To Rodeo:

Why should we help the Iraqi government? We should help them because they are the duly elected government of Iraq and they are VASTLY preferable to the people who would take over the country were we to leave. As long as there is democracy in Iraq, there is a chance for slow remodeling of that government. Again, I think to expect a people who have known nothing but oppression and Sharia law, who's information has been filtered through a totalitarian government for decades and who's main source of knowledge is the teachings of their radical Imams to create a western style democracy right off the bat isn't realistic. I think that if democracy takes hold in Iraq (admittedly a big IF), then it will slowly evolve just like the Western world has slowly evolved. If we leave now, you allow the radicals to take over the country. Are radicals currently in positions of power in the Iraqi government? Yes, but one of the basic tenets of democracy is you can remove those who don't govern the way you want them to. I look at it like a patient in the ICU in critical condition. Things are bad, but you have to either pull the plug and allow the patient to die or give them time to heal. I don't think Iraq needs Dr. Kevorkian just yet.

[Rodeo]

Originally posted by Nathans_Dad
Why should we help the Iraqi government? We should help them because they are the duly elected government of Iraq and they are VASTLY preferable to the people who would take over the country were we to leave.

If that were true I might agree with you, but I don't think it is. i think its pure specuation on your part.

If the Sunnis re-gained power in Iraq, the Iran/Hezbollah/Hamas connection to Iraqi government would be broken. At the very least, we would know that we were not building another Iran.

[Rodeo]

Originally posted by Nathans_Dad
***I think that if democracy takes hold in Iraq (admittedly a big IF), then it will slowly evolve just like the Western world has slowly evolved.***

Then you should support billions in aid and American soldiers protecting the Hamas government. Are you in favor of that?

Why not?

[Rodeo]

Originally posted by Nathans_Dad
I look at it like a patient in the ICU in critical condition. Things are bad, but you have to either pull the plug and allow the patient to die or give them time to heal. I don't think Iraq needs Dr. Kevorkian just yet.

When the patient gets better, is he going to team up with the healthier patients and attack you? Burn down the hospital?

We know where this patient is going when he gets well.

Right for your neck.

[techweenie]

Originally posted by Nathans_Dad


Why should we help the Iraqi government? We should help them because they are the duly elected government of Iraq and they are VASTLY preferable to the people who would take over the country were we to leave. As long as there is democracy in Iraq, there is a chance for slow remodeling of that government. Again, I think to expect a people who have known nothing but oppression and Sharia law, who's information has been filtered through a totalitarian government for decades and who's main source of knowledge is the teachings of their radical Imams to create a western style democracy right off the bat isn't realistic. I think that if democracy takes hold in Iraq (admittedly a big IF), then it will slowly evolve just like the Western world has slowly evolved. If we leave now, you allow the radicals to take over the country. Are radicals currently in positions of power in the Iraqi government? Yes, but one of the basic tenets of democracy is you can remove those who don't govern the way you want them to. I look at it like a patient in the ICU in critical condition. Things are bad, but you have to either pull the plug and allow the patient to die or give them time to heal. I don't think Iraq needs Dr. Kevorkian just yet.

Interesting. Now susbstitute "Lebanese" for Iraqi and "Lebanon" for Iraq. Because Dr. Kevorkian is at work in Lebanon right now.

[Rodeo]

And to borrow an analogy from "The Perfect Storm," if Lebanon is the juvenile delinquent of the family, trying to change its ways, Iraq is the older brother that has already served two strecthes in the joint and is headed back for a third.

Much of Lebanon is moderate and pro-western. Iraq is ruled by repressive Shiia that enforce religious laws at gunpoint.

Which patient do you want to save?

[Nathans_Dad]

Yes, Lebanon and the Lebanese people are currently feeling the ill effects of their past actions.

Rodeo, the error in your position is that you have already assigned the government of Iraq as terrorists. You see them as no different than Hamas or Hezbollah. You see them as no different than the insurgent terrorists currently in Iraq. I do. I have not seen the elected government of Iraq behead innocent people, launch missiles into towns or blow themselves up in busy markets. I see them standing up and fighting the insurgency in Iraq, trying to bring peace to their nation. I see their Prime Minister talking with American legislators and diplomats about how to make things better.

You seem to think you KNOW how the Iraqi government will turn out. Maybe you will be right, maybe you won't. The difference between us is that I am willing to give them a chance.

[hardflex]

and then just cut off any aid if they don't elect the right government. ;-/

[techweenie]

Originally posted by hardflex
and then just cut off any aid if they don't elect the right government. ;-/

Good policy. Let's start with Israel.