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. The Macker says:

    Gil and other doubters,

    • Reasons for Iraqi War:
    1) Repeatedly violated UN resolutions- The now exposed “Oil For Food” scam proves the UN was so badly compromised that we had no other choice

    2) WMD’s- Had programs and intention. Might have had weapons. See :

    3) Humanitarian- Stated from the beginning and proven valid

    4) Al Quaida connection – Not a stated reason but now proven

    5) Regular attacks on our planes- Indisputable

    • Bush never said there was an “imminent” danger but as Hitchens said, there was an “enduring” danger.

  2. gil says:


    None of that on my site. Final warning, and I don\’t care who started it. I have ended it.

  3. kathie says:


  4. gil says:


    The reasons to start a war can be many Meker. Any Idiot can start one as a matter of fact. If you are trying to justify starting a war on violating UN resolutions we would be at war with half the world. If the reason was WMD’s I know that you people can take no WMD’s for an answer, but there were none. If you are so informed as you are can you please name a commission sent by the Bush administration that found them? Where were they? What were they?.

    Furthermore if as you said the reason for the war was to stop WMD’s from beeing used, how on this earth can you come up with the logic that attacking a mad man with WMD’s will stop him from using them?
    You people are just brilliant. I am going to punch some one to stop him from punching me back!! OH my god!! I just have no words.

    The UN badly compromised? No other choice? What about giving the darn inspectors IN THE GROUND and free to operate a will a chance to do their job? What is our choice now in Iran? Iran is about to get nuclear weapons, why not go to war with them also.

    Hell Iran meets all your BS standards to start a war. So what gives. And while we are at it why not Syria, again they meet your BS reasons for starting wars. Let’s just not be hypocrites here and understand that your reasons only apply to Iraq. Why? because your god Bush decided to go to war with Iraq, and now he is deciding NOT to go to war with Iran, and Syria, and North Korea inspite of much graver violations.

    As rice used to say you don’t want a mush room cloud be the smoking gun” remember? So what happend to you guys? I see an Iranian made mushroom claud in our futures if you don’t stop the BS in Iraq and get on with our REAL problems.

    One final thing. Who in the hell is Roy Robinson, and Jerrimitas? Why don’t you suggest the google the three comissions sent by Bush? They are GOVERNMENT commissions

  5. Terrye says:


    I stopped listening to you because you are an obnoxious little fool. Good bye.

  6. gil says:


    OH, you are so sweet!!

    I am really sorry to spoil your little Right Wing town hall meeting. I know, I know, you all get together in the evenings and blame Clinton for everithing. Bush only inherited the problem.
    Has it ever occurred to you guys that the reason you seem to be stuck in Iraq with “stay the course” is because you don’t listen to other people views?
    Republicans like yes man too much. That is why you don’t grow.
    I would say that by now after three and a half years of the same one of you may have the audacity to ask…. Hey is there a better way to end this?….. But no, lets just follow Bush blindly, and attack his attackers as traitors.
    I mean Bush has so far demonstarted to be right so many times. I don’t want to repeat myself, but I left a long long list of WRONG PREDICTIONS IN IRAQ. So why should he have any credibility left?

  7. Terrye says:


    Let\’s not have personal flame wars here. Step away for a while if people get to you.


  8. gil says:


    You don’t want to get insulted about your mother and heritage don’t start insulting in the first place. Or as they say don’t jump into the fire if you can’t take the heat.

    I need you to understand one thing before I live you all to continue with your little Republican town hall meeting.

    If in the future we get attacked with WMD’s from Iran, Syria or North Korea it will be because we had all our resources and focus in Iraq. That is thanks to your stuborness in following an Idiot to the abiss. You will blame Clinton for it I am shure.

    We did our part in Iraq, the rest is up to the people of Iraq. We are not baby sitters. The longer we saty there the more our real enemies will go stronger and challenge us as they are now. In asking for more time you don’t seem to grasp what time is costing us in money, lives, international prestige and influence, and in the overextension of our Army. The fact is time is growing short. The fact is time is a commodity you are about to run out of. I would call it a reckoning of your many mistakes.

    Bush has his legacy invested in Iraq, and he of course can’t afford to bring back the troops now. But Republicans need to understand that they do have other choices. Remember that you are Americans first and Partisans second. As a party you ignore this at your peril.

    Finally, for the third time. If you Republicans as you say want us to win in Iraq, then TAKE THE HARD CHOICES. Call for the draft, raise taxes, increase our troop deployment in Iraq, start giving Iran something to worry about. You will not however because your own people will not support it. You want to win a war fighting it half- assed with Reserves in their third tour of duty, with PR and with saliva. As I said Commit or Quit.

    The Arabs see trough you like silk in the bright sun, that is why they will waith you out…. After all, they live there and have, and like nothing better to do than to kill Americans. You don’t believe me ask the Israelis about their “friends” the Arabs. How long have they been fighting them?

    Fact is you Republicans gave them your best shot and they are still standing. That is the sad reality that all your empty bravado can’t hide.

    Next time you start a war remember that the WE needs to be ALL OF US, IN FOR THE SACRIFICE AND FOR THE COMMITMENT. Or your little war is going to go bad. That much I can assure you.

    Next time listen to the people that really know how to fight terrorism and follow them. I assure you is not Bush, or the Neo-Cons.

  9. kathie says:

    THE “WE” AGREED TO THE WAR TWO TIMES, THAT IS THE ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES OF THIS COUNTRY. WHEN THEY NEEDED A POLITICAL ISSUE THEY THOUGHT THAT TO PULL THE TROOPS OUT WOULD BE A GOOD ONE. THE ”WE” MADE A COMMITMENT TO THE IRAQI PEOPLE. THE “WE” IS THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA GIL. IF THAT COMMITMENT SAYS NOTHING WHEN THE GOING GETS TOUGH THEN WHO WILL EVER BELIEVE US AGAIN. “WE” HAVE HAD THIS DISCUSSION IN THE 60’S “WE” LEFT MILLIONS DEAD. DO “WE” WANT TO REPEAT IT AGAIN. You say our recourses are in Iraq. Would you send those recourses to Iran, S Korea or Syria? How messy do you think that would get. I don’t believe you would send our the military any place because the international community would never support the use of force. Look at Lebanon. Big on stopping hostilities, no back up. This is the world we live in. The west is all talk the east is all killing. I have not seen one solution that you have offered that could work for this country. Raise taxes–really, when lowering taxes has increased revenue. Sinking the economy will not help. The draft–we saw how that worked in the 60’s. Giving Iran something to worry about, like what. They are worried because they don’t know what we will do next. This is not a Bush war, “WE’, the people of this country sent the troops. If you want them out then cut the funding. PATIENCE GIL.

  10. zardoz says:

    Personally, I’m with the Iraqi empire builders on this one. The Founding Fathers would have loved nothing more than our latest exploit in building the American Freedom Sphere to spread their doctrine of liberty around the world. I say, let’s mortgage our grandchildrens’ future (at $200 million a day) to teach the Muslim world the value of representative electoral democracy. Because nothing–not fighting poverty, rebuilding our roads and bridges, eradicating slums, providing affordable medical coverage or encouraging education–comes close to generating the kind of pride we feel when we teach foreign people how to think like us.

    I also want to thank the posters on this blog for doing their duty by pointing out the lack of patriotism of the Left. Although helping the cause by joining the military or doing missionary work in Baghdad is clearly an inconvenience, spreading the Founding Ideals of the Republic here is almost as high a service to freedom.

    Sic transit potentia.

  11. Terrye says:


    You are right.

  12. MerlinOS2 says:


    I believe I said a few days ago in another post it would get worse before November when commenting on another poster.

    With regret, it seems I am being proved correct.

  13. gil says:


    The WE I make reference to, is not what you imply. You did not get what I tried (Three times now) to convey to your side. God!! Now I understand why you people never learn…. That’s because you don’t listen!!

    Here it goes again for the THIRD TIME.

    When Bush tell us that WE he is exagerating at best and flat out lying at worst. Why? Because WE the people are not fighting a war in Iraq. Are you in Iraq Kathie?, are you paying more taxes because of this war Kathie?, are you in any way shape or form sacrificing on this war Kathie?. So why you, and your felow Republicans include yourselves in the WE thing?

    Lets get real here. WE is the INSIGNIFICANT portion of a Americans that are actually fighting. And a portion of people that found themselves in Iraq almost by accident while serving in the Reserves. That is the real WE. The WE does not include America Kathie WAKE UP!! It would if you guys would have the guts to put your ass on the line as it used to be in the times of Viet Nam with a draft.

    Taxes are to pay for wars. Your remark that increases in Revenues as a result of a 3 % GDP expansion will pay for the war is so ridiculos, and ignorant that I simply have to refrain myself to call it what it deserves. Let’s just live it at this…. Give us evidence of ANY WAR IN THE HISTORY OF MANKIND that has ever been paid by “Economic Expansion” during the conduct of that war, and I let you have the point. By the way Kathie why do you think our deficits keep on going up? and who do you think is going to pay for it? ” WE ” or our kids? If it is WE as you claim then why the deficits? if WE are paying why is the deficit up Kathie?

    To your point of Viet Nam.

    I guess it is true. People like you Republicans don’t learn from mistakes. If there is anithing that our experience in Viet Nam showed us is that we can not continue to fight a war when the nation gets divided. Don’t blame the opposition on this one Kathie, don’t be so naive. Blame our leaders. A good leader by definition is the one that people follows because they find his/her ideas worthy of sacrifice. If 1/2 or more of the population is not willing any more (65% at present polling are against Bush in Iraq) then it’s leadership that we lack. Last I checked 65% of our country’s polulation are NOT in the Democratic party or are they? (Is 50% at most) …. You can’t blame the Democrats on this one Kathie sorry.

    To your comment that the WE made a commitment to the people of Iraq. Let me remind you that our representatives made a commitment to 1) The war will be paid with Iraq’s oil, 2) Our troops will only be there several months, 3) The main reason Iraq is a clear and present danger and therefore requires an immediate invasion is Saddam has with a doubt STOCK PILES of WMD’s and a NUCLEAR PROGRAM.

    The WE in our Representatives Voted for THAT. Not for what we have NOW. You need a refresher course in recent History Kathie.

    WE will only be true if we had a mandatory draft. That way we ensure ourselves that the WE means ALL OF US . I tought I clearly indicated that we are fighting with RESERVES, as if in with don’t have enough troops.

    Just like in Viet Nam your only solution is keep the course and continue fighting. To what end Kathie?.

    A long time ago some one gave a very good piece of advice;
    There is a time to try, and a time to understand that the trying did not work and try something different. I am all open for a solution, but if your solution is “stay the course” then you and every Republican will see us at the polls because staying the course IS PROVEN to not have worked.

    What you want is a suicide pact Kathie. I, and 65% (And polls have an upward trend for months) are not crazy or ready to buy your “stay the course” B.S. any longer.

  14. gil says:


    Sorry, I forgot to answer your point of ;

    “You say our resources are in Iraq . Would you send those resources to Iran, Korea, and Syria? How messy do you think that would get?”

    Again, Kathy you reed, but don’t understand my point. Maibe is my fault.

    Again, Fourth Time.

    In the run up to your little war, Bush and the Neo- Con Republicans used the “Pre-Emtive Policy or Doctrine” as another of their justifications for the war. The Pre-Emtive Policy is simply the radical new notion after 9-11, Bush reserved to himself the right to attack any country that he felt was a danger to our National Security.

    Iraq was of course the original example of his new policy.That is to say we went to war with Iraq not because they attacked us, but because we felt a clear and present danger to our security. Presto!! The Idiot starts a war!!

    Now, we have a darn CLEAR and very much PRESENT danger in Iran, and North Korea about to get REAL Nuclear weapons or already having them (North Korea) and Bush’s Policy or Doctrine of Pre-vention is where?……. I tell you where ……… In a file at the While House that reads ;

    “Bull Shit to be used when convenient”

    It is not my idea Kathie to go agains Iran, North Korea, or Syria. I am not nuts. It is YOUR Prebention Doctrine taken to its ultimate consecuences if we are to realy apply it . It is your Pre-Emption Policy used at the wrong time, and against the wrong government that is what it is.

    After all a “Doctrine” or “Policy” by definition is a new set of rules to be applied without exception. Or else you call it what it was, a Bull Shit excuse. ….. As the Iranians most be saying to Bush just about now…… Pre-Empt this Ass Hole!!………

    You make my point with your remark ” How messy do you think that would get?”. Very Kathy that is the answer. That is why we can’t afford any longer to do what really needed to be done (Stop Iran) , because your Idiot President decided to shoot the wrong guy, and ended shooting himself in the foot.