Aug 21 2006

Failure Is Not An Option In Iraq

Published by at 9:14 am under All General Discussions,Iraq

RCP notes a great piece in the WaPo which takes all the quitters to task for giving up on Iraq while the Iraqis themselves are still fighting and dying for their future.

As the debate on Iraq rages on, we hear more and more voices that call for throwing in the towel and leaving the mess to Iraqis to sort out. A new and unexpected proponent of this argument is Thomas Friedman of the New York Times, who said in a recent column that it’s time for “Plan B.” Only a few months before, he was arguing that it would be time for the United States to pack up and go only “when we don’t see Iraqis taking the risk to build a progressive Iraq.” Now, under the weight of bad news from Baghdad, he seems ready to abandon those very same brave men and women fighting valiantly to establish peace and justice in Iraq. I am an admirer of Friedman, who is generally thoughtful, well informed and supportive, but in this case he and many like him have gone dangerously off-track.

Anyone who knows squat about history knows America’s revolution was actually years of failures and setbacks and doubts before we finally found a way to break through the malaise and win – with help from steadfast allies (before the French went all French on us). Thank God the Americans who built this incredible country were not the kind who have control of the media and left-leaning parties today. There would be a true King George ruling us if today’s handwringers and quitters (who are not even on the front line doing anything!) were the voices of the continent over 200 years ago.

But we are where we are, and there is a future for all our children to secure. Plan B, advocated by Friedman and others, is to abandon the region to religious fanatics and Baathist terrorists. It is nothing but a declaration of defeat dressed up to look like a vision for the future.

The left has been calling for surrender since May of 2003 – remember what birthed the Plame Game? The left has been trying to avoid fixing the ME. And with every call to cut and run they have given the terrorist hope that if they just try a little longer American’s will whimp out. The truth is the effort to release the pressure from Saddam’s reign and burnout the resistance to democracy was always going to take time. I have yet to see anything outside my moderate ‘downside’ predictions from 2003. My ‘red alert’ scenarios were regional armies taking control of cities and provinces. An indicator to give up the ghost would be a Sunni or Shia army taking over Baghdad and keeping US soldiers and Iraq Goverment units out. The media is scraping to find small indicators of a civil war when anyone thinking seriously could envision what a real civil war is like.

Instead of these kinds of obvious signs, we see thousands of Shia brave the streets and encounter deadly snipers to demonstrate their will and intent to face down the insurgents. We saw two things on display in this cowardly act on civilians. We saw armed thugs shoot unarmed people. And we saw brave citizens stand up to the most frightening situation as they became literal “fish in a barrel”, easy targets for blood thirsty animals. How can Americans runaway from a simple position of political support in the face bad press when these people are facing down truly frightening conditions to achieve the democracy they want? Where is the honor in running away now?

34 responses so far

34 Responses to “Failure Is Not An Option In Iraq”

  1. rabbit162 says:

    I agree with Friedman. Stabilizing Iraq should not be our job. Soon a new strongman will arise and that’s the way stability will be restored.

  2. gil says:

    Dear Mr. Strata.

    At it again.

    If all right wingers are so brave why don’t you CALL OUT FOR A DRAFT !! I am tired of listening to B.S. ‘s like you call any one that happens to point out the stupidity of the precent policy in Iraq as quitters.

    NO ONE IS QUITTING Mr. Wise ass. For the record what the Democrats are trying to do is to get our policy straight and to have an ending at the mess you Right Wingers started.

    The only thing you idiots on the right have to offer is name calling. I want to see results not more Bull shit excuses. America wants to see some answers not more name calling from the people that raightfully demands them. Last I check we all pay taxes, and want to know why after 4 years and counting, the only thing we have to show for this war is Idiots like you calling Democrats names.

    Didn’t you and your moron right winger friends in Government predicted the war to last a few months, and cost 60 billion dollars. Did you not say that it was going to spread trough the Middle East. Did Right Wingers did not justify the war in Iraq by inventing the “Preemtion Policy”? What then of Iran now, where is your Preention policy now? . And you still pretend that you people have any credibility left.

    What is your solution this time Mr. Genious. I mean you people have such a track record of accomplishment that I can’t waith to hear your solution!! Oh yes, …… Stay the course while not calling for draft,and not raising taxes. I guess you think that your war is going to be fought by Mexicans, and pay for with Right Wing saliva.

    The left is not calling for surrender don’t be a liar. The left, the right (George Wills for example) and the center are calling for REAL solutions not bull shit like the one you are trowing in this blog. If you get your head out of Bush’s ass and get some fresh air you may realize that your country already left you behind in Iraq. The argument today is how to disengage our troops from what has become a civil war with our soldiers in the middle baby sitting it.

    All your bravado, and name calling rings hallow, and old. No draft, no tax increase…… But “WE” are in a war. Who’s “WE” ; Certainly not you, or Rush. Certainly not the millions of Right Wingers fighting wars from their lazy boy!! What a buch of coward Bull Shiters you people are.

  3. opinionsarefree says:

    Gil said,

    “The only thing you idiots on the right have to offer is name calling.”

    Then it said,

    “Mr. Wise ass…Idiots like you…,moron right winger friends …Mr. Genious “(I think he meant GeniUs),…”get your head out of Bush’s ass ,…What a buch of coward Bull Shiters you people are.”

    So it is not only wrong and illiterate, it is also a hypocrite.

  4. Barbara says:


    No one is forcing you to come to this site. You do it of your own free will. If you don’t like what is being said, don’t come.


    I don’t understand why all these right wingers are throwing in the towel about Iraq. Nothing has really changed. Civilians are still being killed. And actually fewer of our soldiers are being killed. Don’t they understand that Iran will come in and take over if we leave? That’s all we need, a bigger and stronger Iran. They already have part of the shias on their side.

    Oh, and our founding fathers had their own left…the Tories. And it was life or death with them in the picture.

  5. Terrye says:

    I never did care for Friedman and I assumed he would wuss out as soon as he thought wussing out would work for his career.

    I think that is what this is, people are making decisions based on what they think is best for their careers. Iraq is old, time to move on to the next big thing. Whatever that might be. But that is not how things work. It took the US a half century to defeat communism as a global force and there are still idiots like Chavez out there. To think a country like Iraq could be remade in three years in unserious. But the truth is they know Bush will not do it, so it is easy to demand it.

    Gil, I agree with Barbara. Go find some lefty site and root for AlQaida.

    I am sure people are tried of the reports on the evening news. After all when Saddam was in power and he would put 13,000 children in one mass grave the media just kind or sort of pretended not to hear or see anything and they spoke little or nothing of it. Maybe they are the ones we should be calling Chimp and not Bush.

    I had thought that after the US abandoned her allies in South East Asia and so many died that surely we would never do that again. I guess I underestimated the power of the Gils.

  6. gil says:

    Opinionsarefree and barbara.

    In response:

    Opinionsarefree. You want to have a civil discusion about Iraq fine, but please don’t expect the name calling from the right to generate flowers from the Center or the Left. I of course understand that my name calling is as bad as Ajstrata, but then again I am the one RESPONDING to his Bull Shit. You care for an intelligent exchange of views your are welcomed to try. I promise to be on my best behavior. Just plese don’t start with the Democrats are cowards because they question Bush’s policies in Iraq.
    As for the wrong , illiterate, and hypocrite person that I am….. Try to argument your issues, and let’s find out who the moron is Mr. Opinionsarecheap.

    Barbara & Terrye. With respect, I blog whenver, and wherever I want. This is a free country. If I like or not what’s on the blog is irrelevant. By the way Terrye, not supporting Bush and his policies does not mean I support Al-Quaida. I know is hard for people with your low IQ level to understand the difference between disagreeing about policies and supporting terrorism, so I’ll have to go slow with you;
    I- d-o- n-o-t s-u-p-p-o-r-t t-e-r-r-o-r-i-s-m. Get it? If you don’t we can try again.

  7. kathie says:

    I think baby sitting in Iraq is a good thing.

  8. kathie says:

    One of the ideas for Iraq that the Dems through out was to have a regional conference, and invite countries in the region to support the newly emerging democracy. Maybe we should invite Iran, they would be really good at supporting democracy. What other countries in the region want to support democracy—–such a good idea dems. Words are useless when they are only a political tool. I say baby sit, better then cutting and running. Conference—you think that Lebanon is going well–another French strategy. I say baby sit.

  9. gil says:


    Adding to my previous response to your comments, I forgot to remind you that Nixon was the one that took us out of Viet Nam. He did so with the full support of Republicans. Therefore there’s a lot of Gil’s in your camp I am afraid.

    Saddam was a monster, as many other dictators around the world. That is no excuse for us to remain bugged down in a war of CHOICE. You Republicans need to either commit to a REAL war, or get out.

    You continue to pretend that the current situation is some how magically going to get any better by PR, damn the evidence to the contrary. You want to win as you say? Then COMMIT like man, and stop passing the buck and avoiding the hard decitions. So I call your bluff. The following is clear to all: 1) W e don’t have enough troops to do the job OBVIOUSLY, 2) If we are in a long war as you and your party keeps on repeating then we MOST DEPEND ON THE REGULAR ARMY not on the reserves, or in other words you need a draft, 3) We will need more money to pay for all these little wars of yours , as in higher taxes. So why don’t you call for it? Such patriots that you are….. Let me guess, because that’s when you will loose the support of your felow right wingers? Darn right you will!! Don’t blame the Democrats.

    Republicans control power up and down, victory is not yours because you went to war half assed , believing on pipe dreams, and armed with saliva and PR. Is not Democrats “demoralising the troops with their calls of pull out” is more like Arabs seeing trough your Bull Shit.

    Your side keeps claiming that we are at war… But who is the WE?


    Why don’t Right Wingers put some beef to their Patriotic calls and start asking for the return of the draft, and tax increases so that WE pay for the war and not our kids. WE needs to become ALL. Then you’ll have a real war that WE are fighting. Right now what you really have is make pretend rent-a -patriot Bull shit comming from your side…. And you call me a hypocrit!!

    We try your idiotic approach to problem soving. No WMD’s, no relation Saddam/Al-Quaida, no Democracy, no Iraq paying for the war with it’s oil, no, a few months and we are out, no flowers for the liberators, no spread of Democracy in the Middle East, no we will stop Iran, North Korea, and Syria, no prevention policy (where is that BS policy now? with Iran at the brink of producing REAL nuclear weapons) . Is time you recognise that Republicans at the very least are lowsy prognosticators of future events, and at worst are unpatriotically irresponsible. If one is to question patritiotism mine is where the decition making is DEMONSTRABLY proven to benefit our . By that meassure your side has failed misserably.

  10. Terrye says:


    You idiot. Nixon did not take us out of Viet Nam. Congress did when they cut the funding. I remember… I was a hippie back then, on your side of the aisle. However, I grew up. I think I began to grow up when my fellow lefties were talking up the Khmer Rouge and I just could not get past the mounds of skulls in the Killing Fields.

    BTW, this maybe a free country, but the site is AJ’s.

  11. gil says:


    Our soldiers are NOT baby sitters. They diserve better than that.

    If our role has become to baby sit Mad Mullas in Iraq then it is your party the one in trouble not the Democrats.

    Democracy in the region ironically was supposed to be the result of our invasion of Iraq. You are right no one supports it.

    Don’t blame the Democrats for trying to solve YOUR MESS tough …. After all the Democrats , the French, the Russians, and just about EVERY ONE in the world WARNED you Republicans of the stupidity of your idea of invading Iraq. No Monday arm chair general on this one, your party was warned repeatedly of the consecuences.

    Is funny you mention Iran. Iran used to be facing a Saddam bluffing WMD’s + a U.S.A. at full military strenght + a U.S.A. with full international credentials and credibility + U.S.A. / Europe alliance intact . If Iran is today about to get nuclear weapons in front of your Republican macho man party’s nose is simply because after Iraq, we don’t have any of the advantages we used to enjoy prior to your Idiot president comming to power and overplaying his hand after 9/11.

    If we have another 9/11 with a real mush room cloud (Remember Condi Rice? “You don’t want a mush room cloud be the smoking gun”). OK, this time is for real, and where is Condi? and where are the right wingers?, and where is your so called prevention policy?

    As for your comment of the French in Lebanon. That policy was supported by Condy Rice(U.S.A) and the UN . This is not a “French Strategy” . Please research a bit more the subject before you comment.

  12. Terrye says:

    BTW, they did find WMD in Iraq and programs too, but that is not the point. I remember Clinton saying those weapons were there and Zinni even saying that Iraq was our number one threat and then when it looked like that might not be a popular stand they completely contradicted themselves.

    Well my dear, Tenet was a Demcorat. Slam dunk Tenet got his job through Al Gore and he would have been saying the same things about Iraq to Gore if he had won.

    Then of course there is the there are not enought troops, bring all the troops home stand that is silly on its face. One big fat conradictory self serving dicator loving load of crap.

    make up your minds.

  13. Terrye says:

    Don’t blame the Demcorats? I remember watching TV when Bill Clinton came on with Daschle at his side. he had just signed the iraqi Liberation Act. He guaranteed his listeners that if Saddam was not removed from power the time would come when he would use those weapons of mass destruction he undoubtedly had.

  14. gil says:


    To much LSD for you. I am afraid that’s not good for your memory and IQ.

    I don’t care if a pink elephant talk to you back then in the rice fields. Nixon sent Henry Kissinger to Negociate a” pull out with honor”.

    Let me refresh what’s left of your memory. In January 1972 Richard Nixon announces to the world that Henry Kissinger has been secretly negociating with the North Vietnamese. Nixon announces an eight point peace plan to be discussed in Paris. Hanoy’s rejects Nixon’s peace proposal. Nixon by the way is NOT CONGRESS , and Kissinger WORKED FOR NIXON.

    In April of 1972 Paris peace talks again resume with NIXON’s full support. In July again the Paris peace talks resume after they go nowhere in April. In May of ’72 the U.S. Headquarters in Viet Nam are unilaterally CLOSED. In August 1972 the last U.S. troops live Viet Nam. NIXON as the Commander in Chief is the one with the power to send his Secretary of State to negociate on belhaf of the U.S.A. Congress is part of the picture of course, but last I checked the Secretary of State works for the President and implements his/hers Foreign policies.

    Like I said too much LSD for you pall. ….. You created your own history while talking to that pink Hippo.

  15. kathie says:

    Gil I thought you would like our troops to baby sit–What endeavour would you commit our troops too? I’m sure you like the blue hats—–all they do is baby sit. The French watered down our resolution and promised to head the troops and send in a bunch-Of course it was a joke. As to Iran, our troops sitting in Iraq is a counter balance, baby sitting or fighting. If Iran goes nuclear thank Jimmy Carter. They have been working on it for 20 years. PS you sound like such a jerk when you use diminutive words to describe the President of the United States. You must feel more at home at Move On

  16. The Macker says:

    The Left can’t seem to grasp that opposing the War in a time of war has the deleterious effect of supporting the enemy because it gives them hope that we will tire and give up. Viet Cong Gen Giap said that was what kept them going. Further, it hurts our morale.

    The MSM has been dumbing the public down for 40 years. Most on the left have too much misinformation to even sort out.

  17. gil says:


    Please direct us to Iraq’s WMD’s , because you would be doing better than all the people that went at the request of Bush to look for them. You don’t watch the news much do you?

    “Clinton believed there were WMD’s” , yes and so did I, and the entire world, and that is why NO ONE started a war in the Middle East, the source of 70 % of the wotld’s oil reserves with the entire Western economies hanging in the balance… Until Bush of course.

    Going to war to stop a mad man from using them was not something that rational people contemplated at any time…. Until Bush and the Republicans of course. It works like this. If I go to war to “prevent” a mad man from using WMD’s I will be provoking what I am trying to prevent….. I know that this logic is to much for you, but try and follow…. Therefore, I better have my intel in top shape, or waith until I do, BEFORE commiting my troops to their deads, and the Western Economies to utter ruin.

    Clinton did not start a war, and the rest of the world did not either even if they believed that Saddam had WMD’s simply because they were not as Stupid as you Right Wingers are!! Your (and ours) worst nightmere would have been that you and the Right Wingers were right you moron!! What do you think a mad man with Nuclear Weapons does when attacked? spit at the attackers, and hide the weapos for a future confrontation?

    Like I said too much LSD for you. And Bush ….. We all know what acohol, and drugs does to your neurons.

  18. Terrye says:


    Nixon ran on peace with honor, but the truth is when the Democratic Congress cut funding for South EAst Asia it meant that not only was the war over, the support for the locals was over. How old are you 24? I remember when it happened. It was not 1972 either.

    And don\’t spoil it for john Kerry, he is convinced that he ended the war and is proud of it. I remember him on the Dick Cavett Show telling Dick that we were the problem and if we ran away a couple of thousand people might die, but over all the fighting would end because we were the only thing driving the war. He was wrong. the commies were just misunderstood.

    After the signing of the peace treaty The North Vietnamese did not wait long to before resuming operations. Congress made no attempt to uphold the peace terms of 1972 in so far as they guaranteed the South Vietnamese regime against overthrow.Early in 1975 American aid to Saigon came to an end. At the same time communist forces in Cambodia were destroyuing another regime earlier supported by the US.

    Congress [the Democrats] prevented the sending of any more military aid or finacial help. finit. They abandoned those people to the reeducation camps and the open sea. And they were proud of it so don\’t take their victory away from them.

    Terrye, no getting down and dirty here please. Keep it civil – AJStrata

  19. Terrye says:


    Well… not only have weapons been found, [Gee I know they are old so they do not count,] but there is growing evidence in Saddam’s own papers that some weapons were moved. I tell you what, you tell me what happened to the weapons that the UN said were there and were never accounted for. Where are they? If Saddam had complied we would know the answer to that question.

    Better yet, go read the resolution that authorized the use of force and make note of all the justifications accepted by Congressional Democrats for that war. There was a lot more to it than weapons and until it worked for them poltically to abandon their previous statements those reasons were compelling enough for them to vote for war.

    Clinton created a situation where war was almost inevitable. He bombed Baghdad in 1998 and he made the removal of Saddam Hussein from power a national policy. And ofcourse he was part of the oil for food program that actually backfired and helped sustain Saddam to the detriment of his people. Clinton kept our planes in the air patrolling the no fly zones over Iraq. So much for sovereignty. But Saudia Arabia wanted the base closed and that meant the no fly zones could not be maintained and Saddam had made it plain that he intended to go right back to what he was doing. So where does that leave us?

    It leaves us with a bunch of UN loving transnationals that refuse to enforce UN resolutions. And you know what? If none of that was worth going to war for then Clinton should have turned Saddam loose before Bush ever came to office. Instead he dunped the whole thing in Bush’s lap with his man Zinni telling Bush that Saddam was our number one threat. Not Osama.

  20. lurker9876 says:

    Terrye, the “old WMDs” discovered and declassified (as part of a bigger classified report) showed that Saddam outright lied to UN inspectors.

    Google Roy Robison and Jveritas and you’ll find more evidence of WMDs or seeking of WMDs by Saddam along with efforts to get the sanctions lifted so that he can resume his WMD programs.