Is the next democratic president in (hopefully) 04 screwed? RE: Iraq

What's going to happen with Iraq? The next democratic president will have to deal with this mess in 04. By then what if casualties have increased to 100 a week? How will he handle Iraq?

One thing is for sure - the media will be eating him alive and calling for impeachment.

I do hope that ALL the presidential candidates have Iraq plans and should present them ASAP to the voters. How are we going to get out of this mess?

Headlines "EVERYTHING IN IRAQ IS OK! BUSH WINNING IN MOST STATES! DEMOCRATS HATE SOLDIERS!"

The second the democrat is announced to win

"ALL HELL BREAKING LOOSE IN IRAQ! 20 SOLDIERS KILLED TODAY! PRESIDENT FAILING NATION! CALLS FOR IMPEACHMENT"

I think I get your meaning, but it took me a couple of times.

I think that the next president need only set concrete timetables for Iraqi self-rule, and stick to it. After all, if we're serious about Iraqi self-rule and if we're not out to steal their oil, then extracting ourselves shouldn't be the toughest thing in the world. It will still take a long time and a lot of money, but it's doable.

but your premise is sound. Whoever is the CIC in 05 is gonna be faced with a huge pile of dogshit I have no idea who if anyone can clean it up. My optimism has gone the way of my 401k.
:-(

I actually hope we don't prematurely withdraw forces before establishing some form of infrastructure. The last thing the Middle East region needs is another fundamentalist theocracy. I hold a firm belief that money breeds stability, and by destroying Iraq, and Afghanistan's economies we will probably be eating bitter fruit in a few years. Unfortunately the United States took a very ill-advised course of action, but now we have to clean up our mess. Hopefully reconstruction won't involve installing another puppet regime that will incense Iran, Syria,and Jordan. These countries will need a popular government that their people will fall behind, otherwise they may toppled by mujahdeen forces from neighboring countries. As it stands any government we help establish won't be very popular with the locals, legitimate or not.

The next president will have to stay the course and take the popularity hit.

What do you think about the Liberia thing Trek234?

I think going in to Liberia under UN mandate along with other nations based purely on motives of helping the people is a good idea so long as we are in fact wanted and a help in Liberia.

There are two problems though...

First problem is Bush. I don't believe for a second he gives a damn about any humanitarian interest, and as a result I question putting a US force under his command in Liberia. For this reason I think the US should at least hold off until 04 when a sane president comes to power.

Second problem though will likely exist after 04 - and this I am not entirely sure about - Iraq. Obviously we have devoted a great deal of our military resources to Iraq and various other places in the world at this time. I have heard some people via news sources say we are already seriously stretched and that it would be ill advised to commit forces to any other operations while we are so stretched. Because of this I could see how it may be a good idea to hold off committing forces to Liberia until we can evacuate Iraq just in case something unexpected happens that requires forces elsewhere.

If however the second point not true then the point is moot and it would seem to me like a good idea after 04 to assist in Liberia.

over,and over and over and over. It seemed to work for Bush

and see how Eisenhower handled Korea, post war recession, and a number of other things he inherited. There are a number of parallels between 1952 and 2004

I'm certainly not Eisenhower's biggest fan, nor do I have major complaints about FDR or Truman, but I'm getting to like Ike more and more.

Around the time Ike was elected, Truman expressed grave doubts about generals in the White House, thinking perhaps more about Grant and Jackson than Ike. Ike, however, proved that the right general knows the horrors of war, and knows both how to avoid unnecessary ones and fight the necessary ones with the least damage. The right general also knows the limits of military power, and that it can never replace justice and diplomacy. The right general has also seen enough of the dark side to appreciate what a country like ours can and should be.

I'm thinking Clark just might be the right general.

I would ask the U.N. to help transition our exit from Iraq ASAP. I think a Democratic president who had campaigned on getting us out with the help of the U.N. would get that help from the U.N.

Actually, I think the U.N. would be eager to help an honest President because it would restore their credibility.

The Dem will just pull all of the troops out of Iraq.

re Iraq, the economy, the environment, international relations, Afghanistan.......

So screwed anyone running for President should be certified insane at the outset.

A Dem Pres with a Pub congress is going to be the end of us.