Ideas for ending the Iraq War.

[nate45]

We have an informed above average group here, lets toss around some ideas for getting out of the mid-east.

I say we take everything that belongs to us and bring it home and next year instead of giving Israel a $150 billion and Egypt a over $2 billion we give them nothing. Zip, nada.

We tell Iran and Pakistan and all the rest if they attack us or Israel we'll nuke them off the face of the earth. The threat of that kept the Soviets at bay for 50 years.

We secure our own borders.

We continue to kill al Qaeda and other terrorists where ever we find them, only we only look for them here in America.

In short we retire from being the worlds policeman.

Will we be safe? Do you know any retired cops whose house you want to break into while their home?

 

[clem]

And, get us out of the United Nations!

Remove it from our country!

 

[SamHouston]

We continue to kill al Qaeda and other terrorists where ever we find them, only we only look for them here in America.

So, when Al Qaeda has established training camps in Cuba or Juaraz Mexico we sit back and let them recruit from the Mexican Mafia or Colombia Cratels ? Do we let them store exposives across from El Paso Texas state line to smuggle in the US? We can't stop drugs, how do we stop explosives?

The wars of the future will not be with Russians or Germans and fought on battlefields. The next wars will be be in neighborhoods with explosives strapped on people, in trunks of cars and can happen in either the middle east or Oklahome City.

 

[Arabia]

Nate,

Your assumption that the terrorist, and other problems will go away if we leave the world stage is at best naive, and at worst dishonest with reality. Do you have any historical reference that you can use to justify your belief that ignoring the problem will make it go away? Some how I have a nagging suspicion that you really don't have a problem with terrorist, because as some of my liberal friends say. "One mans terrorist is another's freedom fighter". All I can say is I am glad you are not in any position of power or we would probably be in WWIV with your understanding of world affairs.

To add:
[/QUOTE]We tell Iran and Pakistan and all the rest if they attack us or Israel we'll nuke them off the face of the earth. The threat of that kept the Soviets at bay for 50 years.[/QUOTE]

Wow, my head hurts after reading some of your comments.

 

[TwoXForr]

Somewhere in the terrorist headquarter in the middle east.

"Abdulla, the Americans have said that if anyone attacks the Great Satan or thier pawns the Zionist, they will use nuclear weapons on our homelands."

"Yes, Mohommand I saw the same broadcast on CNN"

"Quickly Abdulla, take down a memo and send it to all cells, all of our radical clerics, all suicide bomber schools."

"Yes sir, I will just use the e-mail list allfanatics@terrorists.com, what shall the memo say?"

"Stop the violence, stop at once, my mother must be safe from the American Nukes."

We tell Iran and Pakistan and all the rest if they attack us or Israel we'll nuke them off the face of the earth.

Yeah that will work.

 

[dresden8]

We tell Iran and Pakistan and all the rest if they attack us or Israel we'll nuke them off the face of the earth. The threat of that kept the Soviets at bay for 50 years

The problems is, who would you nuke? On 9/11 the US was attacked by Saudi's, so Iraq paid the price. Go figure.

There's enough nut-jobs running around who would gladly see their own (or somebody else's) country nuked to kick off the whole armageddon thing.

And don't forget what the Israeli's are capable of..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Liberty_incident

Even if you accept that it was accidental, if that ship was sunk you can rest assured that it would be Egypt paying the price, not Israel.

 

[USAFNoDak]

I'd prefer something more along these lines. President Bush or someone in the admins hierarchy goes to the Iraqi head man and says this; "Look, we can't stay here forever. You absolutely must get your house in order and start to provide your own security and PDQ. We are leaving within 2 years, but we won't tell you when the exact time is. That way, the terrorists, the insurgents, and the Baath/Saddam loyalists can't just lay low and wait for us to leave. Also, you better not let this leak, because if you do, they will wait up to two years, if they know that's what we told you, and when we leave, if you aren't ready, you know they will attack to try and disrupt your nation and overthrow your government. At that point in time, you will have to rely on people like the United Nations, the Soviets or the Chinese to come and help you. Do you really want to depend on any of those people to maintain security here while protecting your freedoms, as we have? You better think twice about that. We'll help you while we're here, but you have to know we are already making extraction plans. We'd like that to go peacefully and have you ready to buck up with enough security to defend yourselves. That will be entirely up to you, when the time comes. I'd suggest you get very busy, and very soon."

 

[Republicrat]

This is all under the presumption that those in charge WANT to end the war.

When it's costing American taxpayers trillions of dollars, much of which is being funneled into no-bid contracts for companies that sell $500 toilet seats I don't see any reason why those in charge would want to end it.

Let's face it, the Dems have said "impeachment is off the table" and also that they "won't commit to an exit timetable" so basically, there's no compelling reason to pull out.

You might also want to read planning documents by various political strategists that talk about WANTING to sow sectarian violence and then to break up the country into 3 parts....exactly what is now being suggested.

In other words, if you're one of our "leaders" and if you're not an average citizen or a soldier in the field- the war is going great for you.

Unfortunately, our troops are serving multiple tours of duty, not being given the supplies they need and then are denied care when they return. All this, by the same politicians supporting the "war". So please, don't use the "support the troops" line as some sort of moral shield.

 

[JaserST4]

You might also want to read planning documents by various political strategists that talk about WANTING to sow sectarian violence and then to break up the country into 3 parts....exactly what is now being suggested.

In other words, if you're one of our "leaders" and if you're not an average citizen or a soldier in the field- the war is going great for you.

That's sick. Which political strategist would you be referring to? Al Franken? Do you ever listen to sane people?

 

[RedneckFur]

I like the way you think, Nate, but dont you think its about time we let Israel handle its on affairs? Its a wealthy and powerful county now. It can handle its own enemies, and doesnt need its neighbors threatend with our nukes. Thats would only cause other problems we'd have to deal with later.

 

[mountainclmbr]

The problems is, who would you nuke? On 9/11 the US was attacked by Saudi's, so Iraq paid the price. Go figure.

But, AQ wants to destroy the Saudi Government too. They have done numerous bombings in Saudi Arabia.

 

[wyocarp]

The same way we ended the problem with Japan is the surest way.

 

[BoringAccountant]

Arabia wrote:

Wow, my head hurts after reading some of your comments.

Why even bother posting then, go take some advil and take a nap. Seems to me the part you missed about Nates post was this...

lets toss around some ideas for getting out of the mid-east.

meaning, lets not all just bash Nate's idea, but maybe we can offer up some additional ones. Wow, just wow that you would respond to a post that way.

As far as my idea to end it...

I think first and foremost we need to understand that we are not just going to drift off into isolationism as easily as one would hope, I for one would love to, but that just does not seem possible after decades of being a world power with the ability to help others in time of need...a World Police, yea sort of, if you want to call it that, but anyway.

To get out of Iraq, I think first we should secure our borders here, without a doubt. Second, I think we should have a steady decrease of troops over there, but not something that should be broadcast or anything, just a steady decline of troops. How steady...maybe complete withdrawal in 2 years of all reservists, and a decline over 3 years of all others. Now of course we will need to maintain a presence there, much like our bases elsewhere, Okinawa, or Kuwait, but not a permanent duty station, but I think some group should stay behind, not for operations or anything, but just one of those just in case things. Lastly, with the foreign poilcy aspect of it, we need to decrease our dependence on the middle east for oil first or we will always be there. Then the second we can remove our faces from the Saudi's asses we should remove ourselves from the UN and NAFTA.

 

[JaserST4]

Only thing I agree with is dropping foreign aid for everyone. As far as waiting for the terrorists to get here, it didn't seem to work out so well on 9/11.

 

[Arabia]

Sorry I can't even believe people take this Nate person seriously. Many posts this person makes is filled with inflammatory rhetoric or ignorant statements probably designed to get a stir out of people. Which makes me believe he either a troll or a very hateful person. Just stating we should nuke countries or certain peoples because they don't do what we want them to do is one of the most ignorant comments I have seen on this site. He has made similar statements in the past which where equally offensive. Sorry, all people are doing here is giving this person a bully pulpit to spread their hate of non Americans.

 

[Hawg]

The quickest way to end a war is to lose it. Which is what we'll be doing if we pull out. If we lose it over there we will just have to fight it again here. Which do you prefer?

 

[nate45]

I like the way you think, Nate, but dont you think its about time we let Israel handle its on affairs? Its a wealthy and powerful county now. It can handle its own enemies, and doesnt need its neighbors threatend with our nukes. Thats would only cause other problems we'd have to deal with later.

Yes I do and yes it can and even if it can't why are we handling their problems. I just threw 'and Israel' in, because some would say I was anti Israel. Which isn't exactly true.

To get out of Iraq, I think first we should secure our borders here, without a doubt. Second, I think we should have a steady decrease of troops over there, but not something that should be broadcast or anything, just a steady decline of troops. How steady...maybe complete withdrawal in 2 years of all reservists, and a decline over 3 years of all others. Now of course we will need to maintain a presence there, much like our bases elsewhere, Okinawa, or Kuwait, but not a permanent duty station, but I think some group should stay behind, not for operations or anything, but just one of those just in case things. Lastly, with the foreign poilcy aspect of it, we need to decrease our dependence on the middle east for oil first or we will always be there. Then the second we can remove our faces from the Saudi's asses we should remove ourselves from the UN and NAFTA.

That sounds very good BA. Pat Buchanan had the idea that we should withdraw from the UN and tell them to all pack up and get out of New York and send 10,000 Marines to help them.

Of course my ideas in the OP are largely unworkable and of course al Qaeda dosen't have a country we can nuke, but Iran does.

 

[nate45]

The quickest way to end a war is to lose it. Which is what we'll be doing if we pull out. If we lose it over there we will just have to fight it again here. Which do you prefer?

Your sentiments aren't lost on me Hawg, but could you define 'lose' and 'win' in Iraq. What is the critera for victory?

 

[publius42]

The Iraq war ended years ago. We're now building the second largest airport in the world and a super-embassy complex. The nation building will take a long, long time, it seems.

 

[Forwardassist]

The first order of business to end this costly war is to elect a person sympathetic to actually pulling out of Iraq. Everything else we mention is just idle talk. Right now there is only one candidate, well two if you count Ron Paul that were against the war from the start and want out ASAP. Electing McCain will just result in more death, and drain on our economy.