NationStates Jolt Archive

This has probably been done before, but I can't find any recent threads on it so...

When do you think Bush will pull American troops out of Iraq? Or do you think we'll have to wait until the next president.


*a poll is on the way*

This has probably been done before, but I can't find any recent threads on it so...

When do you think Bush will pull American troops out of Iraq? Or do you think we'll have to wait until the next president.


*a poll is on the way*

Numbers might be (considerably?) lowered under Bush, but I'd be surprised if the US pulled out of Iraq altogether _at all_. As an occupying~peacekeeping force though, out under the next president.

Probably could easily turn into a true occupation instead of the de facto control there is now.

They should leave NOW. There's been an election, so what more does Bush want?

They should leave NOW. There's been an election, so what more does Bush want?

hmmm, how about a reasonable chance for the peaceful Shi'a and Kurds to escape slaughter at the hands of the terrorists/insurgents?

"Here, guys, way to go with your vote... we're leaving now because Europe thinks we should... good luck with security and everything..."

hmmm, how about a reasonable chance for the peaceful Shi'a and Kurds to escape slaughter at the hands of the terrorists/insurgents?

"Here, guys, way to go with your vote... we're leaving now because Europe thinks we should... good luck with security and everything..."

That's the job of the UN, not the US.

They should leave when the Iraqi's can control there own country. Until then leaving early can destablize a startup democracy. Things like this take time. Some times lots of time.

That's the job of the UN, not the US.

The UN, hahaha... that's a good one.

hmmm, how about a reasonable chance for the peaceful Shi'a and Kurds to escape slaughter at the hands of the terrorists/insurgents?

"Here, guys, way to go with your vote... we're leaving now because Europe thinks we should... good luck with security and everything..."

I think you're ascribing too much compassion to the thinking. They'd leave it they could, but A) their job of neutering the local threat posed in the Iraq area isn't done yet B) it would look awful if they left and even more folk started getting blown up, as you say - be clear, they don't care about the people in of themselves, but the effect their deaths would have.

They should leave when the Iraqi's can control there own country. Until then leaving early can destablize a startup democracy. Things like this take time. Some times lots of time.

Correct.

That's the job of the UN, not the US.

BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAAAHAAAAHAAAAHAAAAHAAAAHAAAAHAAAAHAAA

:p :rolleyes: :upyours:

The UN, hahaha... that's a good one.

The UN would be more capable if the US would cooperate.

The UN would be more capable if the US would cooperate.


The UN is a corrupt piece of garbage. How would they do a better job than the US?

The UN would be more capable if the US would cooperate.

And I thought Rowan Atkinson was a hoot. Move over Rowan, Terrorist Cakes is in da house.

Is it the US's fault that the UN was responsible for one of the largest frauds in history? Is it the US's fault that UN "peacekeepers" and officials have been organising child prostitution, and rape? Is it the US's fault that the UN ran from Iraq at the first sign of trouble?

The UN has no legitimate role in Iraq, or on Earth for that matter.

The UN would be more capable if the US would cooperate.

Yeah right, when has the world started listening to the UN.

I find it unfortunate, but I expect the bulk of US troops to leave sometime next year. However, it is always possible that there may be a Germany-style troop presence, with a few large bases here and there, but no real acsess outside of them. Even some elements of the insurgency are open to that idea.

The UN huh? Well, they did do a bang-up job in Srebrenica, might as well give em another shot.:rolleyes:

The troops are coming home in time for another presidential election. Just in time to win the house and presidency again.

Not until they kick us out. There'll be bases littered there.

Of course there will be bases there, we need a good platform to invade Iran or Syria

The troops are coming home in time for another presidential election. Just in time to win the house and presidency again.

You know the military votes overwhelmingly GOP right?

Hence why they will be coming home at that time. Republicans can easily say they planned it out right, had a strategy to get in and out. Makes sense. Plus I believe my self to be a centrist, with a plan which they executed so well and cleverly I would probably vote for them with the “Middle America”

And I thought Rowan Atkinson was a hoot. Move over Rowan, Terrorist Cakes is in da house.

Is it the US's fault that the UN was responsible for one of the largest frauds in history? Is it the US's fault that UN "peacekeepers" and officials have been organising child prostitution, and rape? Is it the US's fault that the UN ran from Iraq at the first sign of trouble?

The UN has no legitimate role in Iraq, or on Earth for that matter.

I believe that the US was partly responsible for the slaughter in Rwanda, as it deliberately ignored Dallaire's request that american peacekeepers be deployed in the area.
The bottom line is: The US cares when oil is involved, which is why they jumped at the oppertunity to invade Iraq, yet balked at the troubles of those in Rwanda, among other places.

The sad bottom line is that every war was fought mainly for some economic gain. I don’t think that’s an issue of a good or bad, its just the way it is. I think thought that both the Iraqi people and the American people benefit from the removal of Saddam. The Republicans probably benefited the most, again not a good or bad thing, just the way it is and worked out.

I believe that the US was partly responsible for the slaughter in Rwanda, as it deliberately ignored Dallaire's request that american peacekeepers be deployed in the area.
The bottom line is: The US cares when oil is involved, which is why they jumped at the oppertunity to invade Iraq, yet balked at the troubles of those in Rwanda, among other places.

What is the difference between American peacekeepers and Belgian or Canadian Peacekeepers? Are'nt Canadians and Belgians trained to shoot?

Talk about damned if you, damned if you don't. Maybe we just thought about giving the "world police" thing a rest and see if you simpletons could handle things yourselves. What a tragic answer we got. Why the hell it is our fault if some backwater natives get a little restless? Do you want us as the World Police Force or not?

I believe that the US was partly responsible for the slaughter in Rwanda, as it deliberately ignored Dallaire's request that american peacekeepers be deployed in the area.
The bottom line is: The US cares when oil is involved, which is why they jumped at the oppertunity to invade Iraq, yet balked at the troubles of those in Rwanda, among other places.


I officially name you the post jester.

But would like to point out *cough* Bosnia *cough*.

What is the difference between American peacekeepers and Belgian or Canadian Peacekeepers? Are'nt Canadians and Belgians trained to shoot?

Talk about damned if you, damned if you don't. Maybe we just thought about giving the "world police" thing a rest and see if you simpletons could handle things yourselves. What a tragic answer we got.

Difference between Canadians and Americans...Let's see, um, maybe, like the US has 10 times as many people. And more money. And more military supplies.

And, as for the simpleton comment, my IQ is in the 99th percentile of all Canadians in my age range. So I'm assuming you're a super-genius, or something of the sort.

Difference between Canadians and Americans...Let's see, um, maybe, like the US has 10 times as many people. And more money. And more military supplies.


Well gee. Maybe you should write your MP or whomever and suggest reviving your eviscerated armed forces. Because America does what it is in America's interests, which fortunately for you is often the same as yours. But sometimes they aren't the same, and you and the Euros should learn to handle things on your own if you want to accomplish something.

Well gee. Maybe you should write your MP or whomever and suggest reviving your eviscerated armed forces. Because America does what it is in America's interests, which fortunately for you is often the same as yours. But sometimes they aren't the same, and you and the Euros should learn to handle things on your own if you want to accomplish something.

Actually, I'm interested in dissolving Canada's military, in the interests of Pacifism. But that's another issue, and I must go now, so you may all resume insulting my intelligence. :)

The UN would be more capable if the US would cooperate.

Ah. So If only america would provide troops and equipment to the UN, then back off and let someone else sacrifice young american troops for the greater glory of the UN.... LetMeThinkAboutItNO.

I might have some issues with american foreign policy, but under no means should countries like libya have a say in what hill a volunteer soldier from another county should die on.

Actually, I'm interested in dissolving Canada's military, in the interests of Pacifism.

Well that's fine for you. But don't expect us do your fighting for you, or intervene in other nations' problems for you.

It's amazing how different people's perception of the UN is outside of the US where they are held in utmost contept. As for the question, I think we'll start the pullout in '06 and finish up around '08 unless we see another rise in terrorism over there. Hopefully the Israelis will take care of Iran while we're in control of Iraqi airspace and that could effect the pullout.

The truest fact of the matter is this:

Our president isnt very bright. In fact, he's like 6 IQ points from being legally retarded. The other night he made a public confession that the so called "facts" he used to get a war in the first place "werent quite true". So, he used lies to get us there, lies to keep us there. Did you know that there is the greatest military suicide rate during this war then in any other previous one in history? Did you know that though the military claims not to have a body count, the number is somewhere between 100 thousand and 150 thousand american lives that have been killed, or maimed in some way? Thats a massive chunk of my generation. And it makes me /sick/.

Now dont get me wrong. I do support our troops, i have dear friends that are over there and i fear for their lives every day. But i've never supported the war in Iraq....we went to Afganistan for a reason, to fight terrorism. But ol' Georgie boy...or, more acuately (sp), the people pulling his strings, used that as an in to attack Iraq with falsehoods and guns. And if this war had gone better, why its all there in his partys plans, plain as day. They were planning on setting up /permament/ bases in Iraq, and using them to attack Iran, Syria and North Korea. But things didnt go as planned.

I'm all for fighting terrorism, but right now, i'm ashamed of our goverment. Our name has been drug through the mud (not to mention the sand)...and there is nothing, save impeachment, thats ever gonna fix that. :headbang:

I'm all for fighting terrorism, but right now, i'm ashamed of our goverment. Our name has been drug through the mud (not to mention the sand)...and there is nothing, save impeachment, thats ever gonna fix that. :headbang:
Well... your tourists do get spat on a lot more than they used to, that's true...

Well... your tourists do get spat on a lot more than they used to, that's true...

Oh i'm not surprised. My roomates and I are gonna be moving soon...i'd personally love to move right out of the country. ...its embaressing...:(

So, he used lies to get us there, lies to keep us there. Did you know that there is the greatest military suicide rate during this war then in any other previous one in history?



What lies? And don't say WMD's. Anyone that says there were no WMD's is either a liar or doesn't know what over a ton of enriched uranium can do. Did you also know there is the highest re-enlistment rate of any war in history?

Oh i'm not surprised. My roomates and I are gonna be moving soon...i'd personally love to move right out of the country. ...its embaressing...:(

Naw, gotta work against the crappness from within, girl! If all the good folk left, you'll only _ever_ have idiots in charge :)

What lies? And don't say WMD's. Anyone that says there were no WMD's is either a liar or doesn't know what over a ton of enriched uranium can do.
Run a nuclear power plant?

For starters that number you have there is nowhere near the real figures. The closest thing to that is the total number of Dead Iraqi's, which is about 20,000. Also if this number is true, the total number of troops in Iraq is around 150 thousand. That would mean two thirds in total are casualties, which makes absolutely no sense. These numbers by the way came from the BBC, which if anything has a neutral to anti-American bias. Also your numbers of total casualties don’t even compare to that of http://www.antiwar.com/casualties/ . That has obvious bias. In addition it’s a .com riddled with advertisements and grammar issues.
If your going to make an argument make sure you use the right sources.

Run a nuclear power plant?

Just like Iran right?:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

well i was listening to Berny at 2 am...thats where the number came from, probably heard wrong *laughs* Being sleepy does that.

As for the inlist rate? Its sorta sad, but then I've never been terribly supportive of war and death and being overwhemlingly controled by the government. Being raised by old flower children does that to a girl... :p

Oh i'm not surprised. My roomates and I are gonna be moving soon...i'd personally love to move right out of the country. ...its embaressing...:(

kalif if you wanna leave the country hurry up and do so... i dont mean to insult but if your gonna twist facts and throw mud with no reason to back up than your part of the reason people hate us

kalif if you wanna leave the country hurry up and do so... i dont mean to insult but if your gonna twist facts and throw mud with no reason to back up than your part of the reason people hate us

No, people hate you because your govt. sends in the army into other nations, torture people, and have a president who needs one of those Thinking-Brain dogs; they just 'don't like' the fact he and his lot do the lying!

As for the inlist rate? Its sorta sad, but then I've never been terribly supportive of war and death and being overwhemlingly controled by the government. Being raised by old flower children does that to a girl... :p

The truth is the troops, those that see what's going on in Iraq first hand overwhemingly support the war. Maybe it's time to ask, "Why?"

The truth is the troops, those that see what's going on in Iraq first hand overwhemingly support the war. Maybe it's time to ask, "Why?"
It's their job?

Run a nuclear power plant?

Power plants are generally run on plutonium because its safer. if u say your going to run a power plant on uranium youre either hiding the fact you want to make weapons or youre just stupid not to mention plutoniums cheaper... hence the suspicion

Elgesh']No, people hate you because your govt. sends in the army into other nations, torture people, and have a president who needs one of those Thinking-Brain dogs; they just 'don't like' the fact he and his lot do the lying!

1. lieing on what?
2. toruring has been or is beeing investigating people have or will be brought to justice,
3. all the "facts" and i use the term loosely, that say bush is stupid comes from left wing biased web sites.
4. government has always lied to people...its nothing new.. imagine if people new everything the government did...ud have chaos.

1. lieing on what?
2. toruring has been or is beeing investigating people have or will be brought to justice,
3. all the "facts" and i use the term loosely, that say bush is stupid comes from left wing biased web sites.
4. government has always lied to people...its nothing new.. imagine if people new everything the government did...ud have chaos.

Relevance?

I was replying to your post regarding 'why foreign people hate Americans'. I wasn't saying it was _justified_, I was saying what the basis for the hatred was.

Elgesh']Relevance?

I was replying to your post regarding 'why foreign people hate Americans'. I wasn't saying it was _justified_, I was saying what the basis for the hatred was.


well then theyre being irrational stupid people(yes thats generalized please dont take offense people)

Just like Iran right?:rolleyes: :rolleyes:
Well, no. To my knowledge Iraq's facilities were destroyed a long time ago, Iran's are happily working away.

Power plants are generally run on plutonium because its safer. if u say your going to run a power plant on uranium youre either hiding the fact you want to make weapons or youre just stupid not to mention plutoniums cheaper... hence the suspicion
Depends on the type. Plus, getting Plutonium is not easy either. Particularly if you want to preserve some sort of independence, it might be better to use enriched Uranium than to have to buy Plutonium from overseas Breeder Reactors.
And besides, it's easier to make a nuke with Plutonium than with Uranium. You need much less of it.

Fact of the matter is that the existence of enriched Uranium doesn't in itself mean anything, particularly since you didn't mention how highly enriched it was.

well then theyre being irrational stupid people(yes thats generalized please dont take offense people)

You know, the US govt. could fix a lot of its probs with better PR. At the moment, the way folk around the world are reacting to American actions, it could be argued that the US govt. is making the world less safe for Americans every day.

Sure, capture a couple of terrorist suspects. Whoo-hoo. But the appalling publicity over torture, secret jails, occupation, corruption etc. just generates more angry young men and women.

Similarly, unilateral action, and popular opinion polls results in even western states looking askance at the US, limiting future diplomatic options.

The boy Bush was dealt a bum hand, becoming president at this moment in time, but I don't think he's played his cards right.

Elgesh']

The boy Bush was dealt a bum hand, becoming president at this moment in time, but I don't think he's played his cards right.


Hindsight is 20/20. It is difficult to say what I would have done in his position. I do know that I would rather have him in office than Al Gore. Supreme court did something right back then.

Hindsight is 20/20. It is difficult to say what I would have done in his position. I do know that I would rather have him in office than Al Gore. Supreme court did something right back then.

I supported Bush all the way in Afghanistan. Iraq though... it was so unneccessary, solved nothing, and creates new problems daily.

Hindsight might be 20/20, but an administration without _any_ foresight...? One wonders.

id also rather have him the Jon Kerry

Elgesh']I supported Bush all the way in Afghanistan. Iraq though... it was so unneccessary, solved nothing, and creates new problems daily.

Hindsight might be 20/20, but an administration without _any_ foresight...? One wonders.

solved nothing?? a murderor no longer oppresses the people of Iraq, a new election just happened TODAY, police numbers are increasing and theyre being well trained.. new problems are created by the far left of this country who have dead walled bush at everycorner and ive heard people actually say they were right in sabotaging Bush. even though theyre sabotage gets people killed. they said its worth it to get america out...and i dont understand how its worth it for people to die to get an army out but not worth it for an entire Country of people to be free

When my not-yet-born grandchildren graduate from college, the troops might be gone.

This has probably been done before, but I can't find any recent threads on it so...

When do you think Bush will pull American troops out of Iraq? Or do you think we'll have to wait until the next president.

If I recall correctly, the disengagement process is already underway. I remember a British general saying that six months was not an unreasonable time for complete withdrawal, assuming that things don't escalate wildly in that time.

Since we have followed Nixon's Vietnamization plan so far, and the Pres is not one to change a policy, the obvious answer is we'll pull down enough to return Reps to congress, then we'll bleed on until the next Pres election. Then we'll pull down enough for a Rep to win in 08. Then we'll bleed until either the '10 congressional elections or the people demand a pull out.

When do you think Bush will pull American troops out of Iraq? Or do you think we'll have to wait until the next president.
Bush might pull back some troops but I think the majority will stay for a long time due to the following factors.

1. The US has built 14 "enduring" bases. What is the sense of having "enduring" bases if there are no troops to man them.

2. As long as there is precious crude in Iraq, the US will stay to guard it for the Iraqis. :rolleyes:

3. The US will need to stay in Iraq to protect her from invasion by Iranian forces, and the ongoing war with insurgents and terrorists.

4. Location, location, location.

There are still around 70,000 US soliders in Germany still, when do they leave?

People are really really impatient these days, makes you wonder how people endured six years of real war during World War Two. How about we let the experts in the military decide when the troops can leave? War shouldn't be run by politicans, that has a nasty habit of causing unnecessary deaths.

Bush might pull back some troops but I think the majority will stay for a long time due to the following factors.

1. The US has built 14 "enduring" bases. What is the sense of having "enduring" bases if there are no troops to man them.

2. As long as there is precious crude in Iraq, the US will stay to guard it for the Iraqis. :rolleyes:

3. The US will need to stay in Iraq to protect her from invasion by Iranian forces, and the ongoing war with insurgents and terrorists.

4. Location, location, location.

I wanna know why we aren't looting their oil supply. Seriously. I'm sick of paying $2.30/gallon, and every already thinks that's why we're there, so what do we have to lose? Oil is a valuable strategic rescource. Wars have been fought over stuff way more stupid.

...I'm sick of paying $2.30/gallon...
Wanna know what it costs in Europe?

EDIT: At the moment, I come to $5.57/gallon.

I wanna know why we aren't looting their oil supply. Seriously. I'm sick of paying $2.30/gallon, and every already thinks that's why we're there, so what do we have to lose? Oil is a valuable strategic rescource. Wars have been fought over stuff way more stupid.
The oil barons don't want to create a glut of oil on the market causing prices to plummet along with share value. Do you really think the oil barons give a damn what you are paying at the pump?

A careful balance of supply and demand should keep the oil barons in coin for quite a few years to come.

The oil barons don't want to create a glut of oil on the market causing prices to plummet along with share value. Do you really think the oil barons give a damn what you are paying at the pump?

A careful balance of supply and demand should keep the oil barons in coin for quite a few years to come.

And delay the end of fossil fuels as a power source.

And delay the end of fossil fuels as a power source.
To the oil barons, it is the only game in town unfortunately. The US and western society should be heavily gearing up for alternative fuel sources but alas too many are stuck in their old ways. Big gas guzzling cars, monster trucks and way too many emissions.

To the oil barons, it is the only game in town unfortunately. The US and western society should be heavily gearing up for alternative fuel sources but alas too many are stuck in their old ways. Big gas guzzling cars, monster trucks and way too many emissions.

The only other useful energy source is nuclear, but those greeners won't let anyone make new ones, or, heaven forbid, make safer ones.

The only other useful energy source is nuclear, but those greeners won't let anyone make new ones, or, heaven forbid, make safer ones.

I would love to drive a car powered by a nuclear reactor, especially if I was the only person to have it. Everyone would get out of my way....

I would love to drive a car powered by a nuclear reactor, especially if I was the only person to have it. Everyone would get out of my way....

You can do that right now by mounting a dozer blade on the front of your car.

You can do that right now by mounting a dozer blade on the front of your car.

Thats not as fun as having a reactor powering your car. Of course only I would be allowed to have one, just imagine road rage incidents involving nuclear powered cars...