[Rhodes22-list] Reply to Bob, Brad, Wally (political, terrorism, etc.)

[TN Rhodey]

Brad,

Nope....I am not stuck on anything I think you lost track of the thread. . I
asked what conclusions could be drawn from Ed's post....I posted my
conclusions and asked Ed for his. The article made no mention of Iraq and
the thread was not about an Iraq solution. The whole point of the article
was Afghanistan. I was surprised Ed posted because it seemed to support my
position. I think his intent was to show the terrorists are still strong. I
totally agree as our tactics have been a disaster. I realize you and Ed
still think this war was the right thing to do. I have felt it was the wrong
thing from the start. I guess if anything I am just as much stuck on being
right as you are stuck on being wrong.

Now if you are asking me how to exit Iraq......well cleaning up a (our) mess
is not easy but we need to make some hard decisions. We already set up
elections.....how about having their leaders (or a public vote) vote to
decide if they want us to stay and draw up some conditions and/or plan. If
we are agreeable we stay....if not we leave. I realize help has been
requested but a public vote from the Sunnis, Shias, and Kurds is
needed.Wemake it clear that any single attack on what ever force we
leave behind
results in immediate exit and cut off all aid. The first attack should take
only a couple of hours and then we pull out. We can blame the whole thing on
Iraq. Mission accomplished.

We then keep a force handy in Saudi, Kuwait, or Turkey (will anyone have
us?) standing ready to address Iran. Before we do anything stupid like
attack Iran we need to exhaust every diplomatic means possible. It surprises
me how little time our key leaders actually spend seeking a diplomatic
solution. You would think Rice would be working around the clock trying to
use diplomacy.

I know my plan is full of holes but we got to do something. More of the same
isn't going to cut it.

Wally




On 7/7/07, Brad Haslett <flybrad at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Wally,
>
> You're right, it isn't rocket science.  Iran is the real enemy and isn't
> going away.  Iran is sandwiched between Iraq and Afghanastan  If we pull
> out
> of Iraq now (despite our recent gains) Iran will fill the vacuum.  You're
> stuck on "who shot John?"  It doesn't matter if Bush was right to go into
> Iraq, that is where we are now.  We have to ask ourselves, what will
> happen
> if we leave prematurely?  I could never figure out in business school why
> the concept of "sunk costs" was so difficult for some students to grasp.
> This is no different.  Get your emotions and politics out of the reasoning
> process and look at the current situation for what it is, not what could
> have been or what you would have liked it to have been.  If the election
> were today and Billary or that Irish guy O'bama took office tomorrow,
> they'd
> probably decide to stick around the Middle East a bit longer after the
> first
> security briefing, given the alternatives.
>
> Solve the world's problems for awhile. This morning, I've got to train an
> over 60 S/O on international flight operations who just left the MD-11 as
> a
> Captain flying all over the world.  This should be fun!
>
> Brad
>
> On 7/7/07, TN Rhodey <tnrhodey at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > You mention the last attack killed over 3,000. Please note that none of
> > the
> > attackers were from Iraq. Your post makes very little sense to me. It is
> > really quite simple. The Taliban supported Bin laden and allowed him to
> > hide
> > out in Afghanastan. Bin Laden and other Saudis attacked us. We were
> right
> > to
> > attack Afghanastan and go after Bin laden. Iraq was contained and not
> > posing
> > a threat to anyone other than themselves. Alas our Commander in Chief
> was
> > dead set on going to war in Iraq so we lost focus in Afghanastan and
> > attack
> > Iraq. As your post pointed out the terrorists are now taking advantage
> of
> > this and are trying to re-establish the Taliban.  This isn't rocket
> > science.
> >
> > Wally
> >
> >
> >
> > On 7/7/07, Tootle <ekroposki at charter.net> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Guys:
> > >
> > > Mike Abdullah said, "The problems today are caused not by true Islam
> but
> > > by
> > > the wacko Saudi Wahabi sect/cult of death."
> > >
> > > What goes for education today in Pakistan and that entire area is
> > > indoctrination into that cult controlled by 'Mullahs'.  They have and
> > are
> > > continuing to create zombies that they send out to kill infidels
> > > (westerners).
> > >
> > > In support of Bob's and Wally's position that Bush screwed up, is the
> > fact
> > > that the general population's education level is estimated at less
> than
> > > our
> > > 4th grade level.  This yields large numbers who have difficulty with
> > > higher
> > > level reasoning, problem analysis, and recognizing the best solution.
> > (MBA
> > > type skills)
> > >
> > > What is interesting in this problem of lack of civilized reasoning
> > extends
> > > to those with what westerners call higher education.  This was
> > illustrated
> > > recently with medical doctors carrying out car bombings in England.
> > >
> > > It should be noted that you both fall back on the ability of U. S.
> > marines
> > > or military.  However, where are all such marines or military supposed
> > to
> > > come from?  Do you think that the influx of immigrants will be of the
> > same
> > > caliber and mind set as you know?  A few yes, but I question that the
> > > number
> > > needed is available.  While in the mountains in that part of the world
> > > some
> > > over 50 still participate in military activity, how many of you are
> able
> > > to
> > > do so.
> > >
> > > The argument was put forth that we will be attacked again, and that
> > > outrage
> > > will conquer our attackers.  I think that Bush's unpopular approach of
> > > going
> > > after potential attackers now is a better way.  First, out military
> gets
> > a
> > > real feel for the adversary today.  Second, we have a military with
> > > current
> > > skills.  Third, there is the legitimate possibility that such action
> > might
> > > prevent the upcoming attack that you would allow.
> > >
> > > The Iraq war was necessary because Saddam bin Hussein at-Takriti paid
> > > suicide bombers.  While at the time they were directed toward Israel,
> > > there
> > > was a potential they could be sent elsewhere.   Saddam used poison
> > gases.
> > > What was going to stop him from supplying suicide bombers with such
> > > weapons?
> > >
> > > We are using the current war to learn, train and keep the wolves at
> bay.
> > > Peacenik and appeasement arguments fail to appreciate the islamofasist
> > and
> > > their 'cult of death'.  The last attack killed over 3,000.  How many
> of
> > > your
> > > neighbors are you willing to allow to be killed in the next attack?
> > >
> > > Ed K
> > > Greenville, SC, USA
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > View this message in context:
> > >
> >
> http://www.nabble.com/Reply-to-Bob%2C-Brad%2C-Wally-%28political%2C-terrorism%2C-etc.%29-tf4040147.html#a11477851
> > > Sent from the Rhodes 22 mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> > >
> > > __________________________________________________
> > > Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
> > __________________________________________________
> > Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
> >
> __________________________________________________
> Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
>