Krugman gets it right again and explains it clearly!
Sid9
Op-Ed Columnist
Time to Leave
By PAUL KRUGMAN
Not long ago wise heads offered some advice to those of us who had argued
since 2003 that the Iraq war was sold on false pretenses: give it up. The
2004 election, they said, showed that we would never convince the American
people. They suggested that we stop talking about how we got into Iraq and
focus instead on what to do next.
It turns out that the wise heads were wrong. A solid majority of Americans
now believe that we were misled into war. And it is only now, when the
public has realized the truth about the past, that serious discussions about
where we are and where we're going are able to get a hearing.
Representative John Murtha's speech calling for a quick departure from Iraq
was full of passion, but it was also serious and specific in a way rarely
seen on the other side of the debate. President Bush and his apologists
speak in vague generalities about staying the course and finishing the job.
But Mr. Murtha spoke of mounting casualties and lagging recruiting, the
rising frequency of insurgent attacks, stagnant oil production and lack of
clean water.
Mr. Murtha - a much-decorated veteran who cares deeply about America's
fighting men and women - argued that our presence in Iraq is making things
worse, not better. Meanwhile, the war is destroying the military he loves.
And that's why he wants us out as soon as possible.
I'd add that the war is also destroying America's moral authority. When Mr.
Bush speaks of human rights, the world thinks of Abu Ghraib. (In his speech,
Mr. Murtha pointed out the obvious: torture at Abu Ghraib helped fuel the
insurgency.) When administration officials talk of spreading freedom, the
world thinks about the reality that much of Iraq is now ruled by theocrats
and their militias.
Some administration officials accused Mr. Murtha of undermining the troops
and giving comfort to the enemy. But that sort of thing no longer works, now
that the administration has lost the public's trust.
Instead, defenders of our current policy have had to make a substantive
argument: we can't leave Iraq now, because a civil war will break out after
we're gone. One is tempted to say that they should have thought about that
possibility back when they were cheerleading us into this war. But the real
question is this: When, exactly, would be a good time to leave Iraq?
The fact is that we're not going to stay in Iraq until we achieve victory,
whatever that means in this context. At most, we'll stay until the American
military can take no more.
Mr. Bush never asked the nation for the sacrifices - higher taxes, a bigger
military and, possibly, a revived draft - that might have made a long-term
commitment to Iraq possible. Instead, the war has been fought on borrowed
money and borrowed time. And time is running out. With some military units
on their third tour of duty in Iraq, the superb volunteer army that Mr. Bush
inherited is in increasing danger of facing a collapse in quality and morale
similar to the collapse of the officer corps in the early 1970's.
So the question isn't whether things will be ugly after American forces
leave Iraq. They probably will. The question, instead, is whether it makes
sense to keep the war going for another year or two, which is all the time
we realistically have.
Pessimists think that Iraq will fall into chaos whenever we leave. If so,
we're better off leaving sooner rather than later. As a Marine officer
quoted by James Fallows in the current Atlantic Monthly puts it, "We can
lose in Iraq and destroy our Army, or we can just lose."
And there's a good case to be made that our departure will actually improve
matters. As Mr. Murtha pointed out in his speech, the insurgency derives
much of its support from the perception that it's resisting a foreign
occupier. Once we're gone, the odds are that Iraqis, who don't have a
tradition of religious extremism, will turn on fanatical foreigners like
Zarqawi.
The only way to justify staying in Iraq is to make the case that stretching
the U.S. army to its breaking point will buy time for something good to
happen. I don't think you can make that case convincingly. So Mr. Murtha is
right: it's time to leave.
--
Rep.Murtha:
Our military has done everything that has been asked of them.
It is time to bring them home
Dana
news:vSbgf.46136$xK1....@bignews7.bellsouth.net...
> November 21, 2005
>
> Time to Leave
Congress says you are wrong.
Sid9
We'll be gone from Iraq before the next congressional election.
The Republicans will not allow Bush,Jr to keep our troops there.
Democrats wont have a say in it.
Democrats don't run the government or congress.
Dana
> Dana wrote:
> > "Sid9" <si...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> > news:vSbgf.46136$xK1....@bignews7.bellsouth.net...
> >> November 21, 2005
> >>
> >> Time to Leave
> >
> > Congress says you are wrong.
>
> We'll be gone from Iraq before the next congressional election.
Not likely. We are going to be in Iraq for quite some time. Even after the
insurgents have been all wiped out. Iraq will be what Germany was for us
during the cold war.
Hell we no longer need to be in Germany, so we can relocate those units to
the permanent bases we are building in Iraq.
Sid9
> "Sid9" <si...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> news:e2cgf.46143$xK1....@bignews7.bellsouth.net...
>> Dana wrote:
>>> "Sid9" <si...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
>>> news:vSbgf.46136$xK1....@bignews7.bellsouth.net...
>>>> November 21, 2005
>>>>
>>>> Time to Leave
>>>
>>> Congress says you are wrong.
>>
>> We'll be gone from Iraq before the next congressional election.
>
> Not likely. We are going to be in Iraq for quite some time. Even
> after the insurgents have been all wiped out. Iraq will be what
> Germany was for us during the cold war.
> Hell we no longer need to be in Germany, so we can relocate those
> units to the permanent bases we are building in Iraq.
Keep up the good work!.
Stick with Bush,Jr.
Promote him everywhere you can.
The rest of us appreciate it
(appreciate, on of Bush,Jr's favorite words)
c-bee1
"Dana" <wh...@whoya.com> wrote in message
news:11o2j46...@corp.supernews.com...
rofl Poor Dana swallows every republican hoax and begs for more!
c-bee1
You mean... Bush was LYING? Gosh!!! roflmao
Eyeball Kid
<si...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
It's a great idea, Sid, but Bush won't leave the oil behind. He'll hang
on to that oil at all costs. The neocon vision of domination of the
middle east is in the balance. The dream could burst. Bush won't have
it. And more, Cheney won't have it.
In essence, Bush is more an influence peddler than a politician,
although the two skill sets do overlap. The point is that he doesn't
possess the political acumen to reflect the public sentiment. When did
he ever do that since he's been in office? He's always followed the
expedient path to the next fear-based event. And when the public
expresses doubt and anger at him rather than fear of loss, he doesn't
know what do to except more of the same. So he's very much out of sync
with the people, which makes him even more vulnerable. That's what
we're seeing.
E. K.
--
"You can fool some of the people all of the time,
and those are the ones you want to concentrate on."
G.W. Bush, Gridiron Club dinner, Wash., D.C. March 2001
"The American Way of Life is not negotiable." Dick Cheney, 2001
"I even take the position that sexual orgies eliminate social tensions and
ought to be encouraged." Antonin Scalia, September 28, 2004
Free humor. Whenever you want. http://www.psmueller.com
Rich Travsky
>
> "Sid9" <si...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> news:e2cgf.46143$xK1....@bignews7.bellsouth.net...
> > Dana wrote:
> > > "Sid9" <si...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> > > news:vSbgf.46136$xK1....@bignews7.bellsouth.net...
> > >> November 21, 2005
> > >>
> > >> Time to Leave
> > >
> > > Congress says you are wrong.
> >
> > We'll be gone from Iraq before the next congressional election.
>
> Not likely. We are going to be in Iraq for quite some time. Even after the
> insurgents have been all wiped out. Iraq will be what Germany was for us
> during the cold war.
Iraq didn't attack us, Toilet Boy.
> Hell we no longer need to be in Germany, so we can relocate those units to
> the permanent bases we are building in Iraq.
Sez the coward who won't be doing anything to man them...
RT
FRANKIE
recriminations too late,...then take actions.
It was exactly the same mentality,the way Rich Travsky had that cause
9/11.It was the same type of stupidity of the way this most stupid FBI ,who
handle the Terrorist, that allow 9/11 to happen.
Moussaoui declared that he hadn't crashed into World Trade Centre yet,so FBI
cannot detained him.So FBI nodded..so 9/11 happen...so what?
The manager report to the FBI of the unusual behavior of Mossaoui,..which he
was interested in only take off lessons,never wanted to know about
landings,as he took Flight Training....further confirmations from French,he
was Al Qaedas' people...but USA FBI cannot detained him because he hadn't
commit any crimes in USA!
USA must have waited till they are being attacked by Iraq,..and then take
actions,and then cry over spill milk....is it????????
I remember a woman,who was badly bruised by her husband,pleaded with the
Judge for restraining order,and kept her husband lock up for good....but the
Judge said....although I know he is a bad apple and may cause harm to
you,but how can I lock him up for he hadn't commit any crimes yet?
(Most human are selfish and they don't bother with you,as there are so many
people..and you are insignificance!!)
Later,she was killed by the Husband,and the Judge then happily declared that
now he is at liberty to arrest the Husband who killed his wife and he had
committed a crime...what a happy stories...
Why should the Judge be overly concerned for her safety...and do you expect
the judge to be a kind and caring human being,as he daily saw so many
terrible cases before him,that already numb him?
The Policeman cannot act outside his duties,so do the Judge....this is the
same bureaucratic craps that led to openly defiant of Al qaedas attacking
USA,from Cole to many evil acts against USA interest in the World.
Frankie
"Rich Travsky" <" traRvEsky"@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
news:4387DFB4...@hotmMOVEail.com...
Daniel Jackson
runway or the entry or exit strip, and just...left!
No-one bothered to question or detain him.
If you or I would have done that, we would be in jail.
"FRANKIE" <pheb...@singnet.com.sg> wrote in message
news:dm8tmm$mhd$1...@reader01.singnet.com.sg...
Rev. 11D Meow
Is he a tear or wrist?
"Daniel Jackson" <Jackso...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:yIKdnaXi7vyPlBXe...@giganews.com...
Daniel Jackson
Tear as in cry, or tear as in Pit Bull?
Wrist...you are likening the network of enemies to a body, that like needs
brains, hands, etc?
"Rev. 11D Meow" <Ji...@Crack.Corn> wrote in message
news:54WdnYbX_4V2lBXe...@comcast.com...
Rev. 11D Meow
What about the guy in a wheelchair who hijacked that plane?
So much for HOMELAND SECURITY!!!
"Daniel Jackson" <Jackso...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:3LmdnSM21dp...@giganews.com...
Seethis Pass
altogether, It was America that was attacked and defeated on 9/11
America is the place where we should spread democracy and freedom.
Iraq?
We have to rebuild Iraq regardless of the wars outcome.
I'd prefer to pay Iraqi wages for that labor than Halliburton wages.
That employs Iraqis and saves America billions.
People who write the check that buys your food are not usually the
ones you'd want to kill. But Invaders get different logic.
Which option did bush go for, Employer or invader?
Terrorists,
You can't kill 'em all.
Killing them causes spontaneous reproduction.
Employees,
you don't have any reason to kill them. Get it?
Bush didn't.
___________________________________
When dad kills mom, rat dad off.
Get a new dad that doesn't kill family members.
Daniel Jackson
"Rev. 11D Meow" <Ji...@Crack.Corn> wrote in message
> You missed the question.
>
No I didnt.
I was confused by tear and wrist.
> What about the guy in a wheelchair who hijacked that plane?
>
> So much for HOMELAND SECURITY!!!
>
indeed
chicagofan
> Iraq didn't attack USA.USA must wait till they are being attack,and...
> recriminations too late,...then take actions.
>
> It was exactly the same mentality,the way Rich Travsky had that cause
> 9/11.It was the same type of stupidity of the way this most stupid FBI ,who
> handle the Terrorist, that allow 9/11 to happen.
BS...
> The Policeman cannot act outside his duties,so do the Judge....this is the
> same bureaucratic craps that led to openly defiant of Al qaedas attacking
> USA,from Cole to many evil acts against USA interest in the World.
>
> Frankie
They STILL weren't operating FROM IRAQ... UNTIL the U.S. invaded, disbanded
the Iraq army AND opened up the weapons arsenals and borders for all takers.
Aren't we smart?!!
bj
Rich Travsky
>
> Iraq didn't attack USA.USA must wait till they are being attack,and...
> recriminations too late,...then take actions.
Moussaoui was Moroccan, not Iraqi! HAHAHHAHAHAA
Observer
"Rich Travsky" <" traRvEsky"@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
> FRANKIE wrote:
> >
> > Iraq didn't attack USA.USA must wait till they are being attack,and...
> > recriminations too late,...then take actions.
>
> Moussaoui was Moroccan, not Iraqi! HAHAHHAHAHAA
You think FACTS will stop the Freak's continued
idiocy?
LOL.
FRANKIE
>
> Iraq didn't attack USA.USA must wait till they are being attack,and...
> recriminations too late,...then take actions.
Moussaoui was Moroccan, not Iraqi! HAHAHHAHAHAA
Frankie reply: Al Zarkawi is a Jordanian,not an Iraqi!
There was a definite link,that Iraq and Al Qaeda were trying to establish
relationship...9/11 Commission.
They have a common enemy,USA.
Proves: Al Qaeda is very active in Iraq TODAY.
"Rich Travsky" <" traRvEsky"@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
news:438A981A...@hotmMOVEail.com...
Rich Travsky
>
> FRANKIE wrote:
> >
> > Iraq didn't attack USA.USA must wait till they are being attack,and...
> > recriminations too late,...then take actions.
>
> Moussaoui was Moroccan, not Iraqi! HAHAHHAHAHAA
>
> Frankie reply: Al Zarkawi is a Jordanian,not an Iraqi!
And he also has nothing to do with 911.
> There was a definite link,that Iraq and Al Qaeda were trying to establish
> relationship...9/11 Commission.
No, the commission said NO collaborative relationship.
http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report_Ch2.htm
...
But to date we have seen no evidence that these or the earlier contacts ever
developed into a collaborative operational relationship. Nor have we seen
evidence indicating that Iraq cooperated with al Qaeda in developing or
carrying out any attacks against the United States.
...
Is there anything else you'd like to make a fool of yourself over?