Do you agree the recommendations of the Iraq study group are the best way forward?

I strongly believe the recommendations of the ISG are the BEST way forward. Democrats ought to embrace the recommendations, and will be foolish if they undermine them by complaining that they don't include an exact timeline for withdrawl.

Americans respect bi-partisanship. If Republicans and Democrats do nothing the next two years but bicker over timelines, increasing the troops, partitioning, and a plethora of other approaches, it will do nothing to solve the problem. The recommendations of this comission may or may not solve the problem, but I firmly believe they are only hope of avoiding catastrophic failure.

Democrats on the far left need to understand that immediate withdrawl or a set date for withdrawl is never going to happen with this administration. It would be wonderful if the administration followed all the recommendations of the ISG, but the only way the will happen is if Democrats and patriotic Republicans UNITE in pushing the administration to implement the recommendations in their entirety.

The American people will respect the Democrat Party if the Democrat Party respects the bi-partisan findings of the study group, and leads the way forward in a statesmanlike, non-partisan manner. If we complain because the report doesn't go far enough to withdraw the troops sooner, it will accomplish no more than McCain's call to increase the number of troops.

The Democratic Party has been handed a gift with this report. Will we be wise enough to accept the gift? If we don't embrace the work of this commission Americans will see only partisanship, not statesmanship.

And they will hold us accountable.

get out of iraq now!!

the people have spoken..i don't give a rats ass what jim baker and hamilton say..everyone on that committe is a whore!

not one was anti war..not one represent me..i represent me..and i voted "bring them home'..and so did the vast majority on Nov 7th

and if the dems didn't hear that call loud and clear..then i will vote to remove each and everyone that does not heed the peoples voice!

fly

You are be entitled to your beliefs, but opinion polls show what the American people voted for was a realistic assesment of the situation that withdraws the troops as soon as possible without leaving the region in chaos.

The Iraqis don't want us out now, either. They understand what the consequences of immediate withdrawl would be to their families.

"but opinion polls show what the American people voted for was a realistic assesment of the situation that withdraws the troops as soon as possible without leaving the region in chaos"

Go ahead and prove that.

"Do you think the United States can win or cannot win the war in Iraq?" Half sample, MoE ± 4.
Can Win/ Cannot Win/Unsure
% % %
11/17-19/06

54 43 3


"Do you think the U.S. should keep military troops in Iraq until the situation has stabilized, or do you think the U.S. should bring its troops home as soon as possible?"

Keep Troops Bring Home Unsure
% % %
11/9-12/06 46 48 6

Regardless of what you think about the original decision to use military force in Iraq, do you now believe that the United States will definitely succeed, probably succeed, probably fail, or definitely fail in achieving its goals in Iraq?" N=757 (Form 2)


Definitely
Succeed Probably
Succeed Probably
Fail Definitely
Fail Unsure
% % % % %
11/9-12/06 12 41 28 13 6

"Do you think George W. Bush has a clear plan for bringing the situation in Iraq to a successful conclusion, or don't you think so?"Has a
Clear Plan / Doesn't Have a Clear Plan/ Unsure
% % %
11/9-12/06 19 74 7

http://www.pollingreport.com/iraq.htm

The Democrats need to UNITE behind a CLEAR PLAN in order to win the confidence of the American people. Americans are split on the idea of withdrawing before the situation has stablized, but are clear they still think success is possible with a clear plan. We need to provide the opportunity for even a small degree of success while there is still time. It's our duty.

"Do you think the U.S. should keep military troops in Iraq until the situation has stabilized, or do you think the U.S. should bring its troops home as soon as possible?"

"Keep Troops Bring Home Unsure
% % %
11/9-12/06 46 48 6 "

Did you read your own material?

Keep troops in Iraq: 46%
Bring them home ASAP: 48%

Did you read your own material?

edit: I would be interested to hear your comments on the other questions which were asked of the respondents.

"opinion polls show what the American people voted for was a realistic assesment of the situation that withdraws the troops as soon as possible without leaving the region in chaos"

And the evidence you presented, after stating that another poster was flat wrong, supported the poster's position, not yours. Your link does not substantiate your position at all. Of course you want to look at other questions in that poll, because the one relevant to this little discussion here does not back up your assertion.

The people voted to get us out of Iraq. Now. Not two years from now.

You said, "The people voted for us to get out of Iraq. Now."

November 12, 2006
Twenty-eight percent (28%) of America’s voters want U.S. troops brought home from Iraq immediately.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/Political%20Tracking/Dailies/iraqTroopStrategy.htm

Now, I'm really outta here....out to look for a less blindly partisan site to discuss the issues.

"Do you think the U.S. should keep military troops in Iraq until the situation has stabilized, or do you think the U.S. should bring its troops home as soon as possible?"

"Keep Troops Bring Home Unsure
% % %
11/9-12/06 46 48 6 "

Did you read your own material?

Keep troops in Iraq: 46%
Bring them home ASAP: 48%

Did you read your own material?

And by all means do come back when you have grown up a bit.

You did not merely repost my material, you said: "The people voted for us to get out of Iraq. Now."

Show me the evidence for that statement. Or perhaps you have none and the "stupidity" part of your username is apt?

"Do you think the U.S. should keep military troops in Iraq until the situation has stabilized, or do you think the U.S. should bring its troops home as soon as possible?"

Keep Troops Bring Home Unsure
% % %
11/9-12/06 46 48 6

Putting asside the fact this is a statistical tie, "bring the troops home as soon as possible" does not necessarily mean "immediate withdrawl," as evidenced by the poll I posted upthread showing only 28% favor immediate withdrawl.

And certainly, the Iraqi people and governement do not wish us to withdraw immediately.

That is all for now. I have better things to do than continue this discussion with you, but I'm not going to let your distortions go unanswered.

The first question is one where the question is phrased in such a way that the respondant knows the "right" answer. I support Kerry/Feingold - and I agree with the authors' statements that it is a plan to suceed. So, this both puts me in the group of wanting a very quick change in the functions of the troops - making them immediately safer, a near term withdrawal and most importantly (as Kerry, Clark, Biden etc have all said) a political solution. Even people backing Murtha's plan to pull the trrops out of Iraq asap to other locations would NOT label their choice as failure. So, the small % of people voting this way are stunninly honest and extremely pessimistic about both political and military efforts.

The last question is a negative vote of confidence on GWB.

As to your op question, I think that the ISG proposal moves the ball enormously. I think that those of us that want more - such as a date or who disagree on other issues need to both praise the fact that the discussion has moved significantly and to politely make the case for things we differ on.

Nothing is gaining by rejecting it outright because, by where we stand, it is not perfect - but we should still speak of where we differ. We can do this even while advocating Bush accept the main tenets of the plan. It is head and shoulders better than where Bush is now and where McCain and Lieberman are. The reality is that this could be a face saving plan for Bush - which he could contrast with Kerry/Feingold/Murtha to say he hasn't given in. (The fact is it does show that nearly every body now is closer to Kerry than Bush - and I hope there are many Bush voters wishing they had gone with the Democrat.)

Is not winning 61%

Withdraw some or all troops 61%

Will not win 56%

Like Vietnam 58%

http://www.pollingreport.com/iraq.htm

"Do you think the United States can win or cannot win the war in Iraq?" Half sample, MoE ± 4.
Can Win/ Cannot Win/Unsure
% % %
11/17-19/06

54 43 3

http://www.pollingreport.com/iraq.htm

Polls Show Voters Favor Change of Iraq Strategy, Prefer Democrats

With the midterm elections less than a week away, polls show that voters support a change of U.S. strategy in Iraq and favor Democrats on a generic ballot.

ANDREW KOHUT: Sixty-one percent, "Change strategy"; 27 percent, "Removal of troops."

Now, when you break up that 61 percent, you don't really find much of a consensus. You have about as many people saying, "Take the troops out slowly," as say about 25 percent, "Take the troops out all at once." You even get 16 percent in this very poll saying, "We need more troops."

So what people are voting for is, "We want a different strategy. We want something different." But there is no real conviction about what that difference should be, except that the

Democrats are seen as more likely to provide "get troops out of there" more quickly than the Republicans.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/politics/july-dec06/polls_11-02.html

And another poll from Maryland University found similar results:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/26/AR2006092601721.html

It is stall the course until 1-20-09.

Some things can't be fixed.

We still have a chance to make the situation better. The Iraqi people do not want us to withdraw before their country is stablilized, and the American people do not want catastrophic failure and believe that is still avoidable.

It won't happen with the partisanship in exhibit on the thread so far, however. It won't happen with partisanship form the other side, either.

So what? The Iraqi people overwhelmingly want our asses out of there. I am not suggesting we not help. I am saying that our use of armed force has been a disaster and ought to stop, that it does not help.

Nothing new was presented in the ISG. Everything they mentioned could easily have been done by a compentant administration. We don't have one, so I think we should just get out and lick our wounds.

and in reality, America can't either. We can just get out, but that would most likely lead to a greater catastrophe.

Why delay the inevitable?

The Iraq study group reccomendation will amount to hunker in the bunker until dimson's term as pResident is over. After that the remnants of the US ground forces will be allowed a forced retreat while the Air Force commits genocide.

Vietnamization didn't work in Vietnam. In Iraq we are already starting at a much worse situation than 1970 Vietnam. We are LOSING TWO WARS!!! What part of that is not clear?

I've had enough of this place. Thinking Democrats outnumber the extremists, I have faith in that.

Good-Bye DU.

See ya.

When I hear somebody declaring their "patriotism" I personally check my wallet. Despite the fact that they acknowledge there is a problem with the current situation in Iraq their proposal for a solution is largely more of the same. Training Iraqi troops has got us nowhere. We don't trust them enough to give them armor, aircraft or artillary. Would you give Iraqi government troops anti-tank missiles? Not likely. But they plan on using them as a solution. Insanity.

did to our youth!!
and i would differ with your opinion..i am a thinking democrat..and hardly an extremist!

assuming people are extremists is not justified.

i could equally say you are an extremist!! but i won't..........

i want our troops home..now...not 2 years from now when 3000 more are dead..or thousands more maimed for life...

this is not good enough for me..we heard the same shit about vietnam...and the list of names grew and grew and grew...

first it was strangers who died..then it was the kid down the street..then it was your next door neighbor..then it was your brother...

fuck no.. never again we said...and yet here we are and people like you want to give this lying, murdering administration more time to fuck up even more??

no thanks ..i have seen and lived through this dance already!!


i want the troops home now...when 61 % of the iraqi's say it is ok to attack and kill our troops..that is enough for me..i want our kids home..no more excuses..no more bullshit..

do a background check on Hamilton..baker has represented the fuckers who killed my co-workers on 9/11 ..he was partly responsible for stealing an election in this nation ..and destroying our democracy..and now you want to give him the benefit of fixing this war..fuck no i say..hell fuck no!!

it seems to me you need to do a back ground check on all who were on this committee...every single one of them supported this illegal war of aggression...

so i would not want to call you an extremist..nor would i want to judge your knowledge of the people involved..i can not assume anything about you or what you know or do not know..so please do not assume about others!

and all the talking in the world will never justify to me another young person dying for this criminal war!

this war was for oil..and a twisted ideaology..for a mentally ill nut case who thinks he can play at being a leader...that is what this is , and always was!

how many have to die for lies??????????

before we are responsible for our government's crimes against humanity??????????

fly

Here, read this!
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/12/7/18592/1665

Please check out this kos Diary, which provides a full overview and links to a dozen or more transcripts.

Wes Clark and Iraq:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/12/7/18592/1665

eom

No.

We would tell them to ge the hell out of our sovereign nation, and we would shoot their asses as they leave.

We won the day Saddam's regime fell;
we won when elections took place under international
supervision with 70%+ of voters turning out (beats all
US turnouts in national elections) risking their lives;
we won when Iraqi's agreed upon and passed a constitution
which guarantees rights to Kurds, Sunni's and Shia;
and we won when the Iraqi's formed a goverment of their own.

But our win is not complete until the insurgency related
violence is stopped, and it becomes safe to conduct business
in Iraq and most important the democratically elected
government becomes stable.

That final step in "winning" can not be done by US Military.
It has to be done by the IRAQI'S themselves. Therefore I am
in complete agreement with the ISG report that a phased
withdrawal of American troops along with political dialog
with Iran and Syria is the best move at this time.

The right to no electricity? For no water? The right to die? The right to be tortured?

spiritual leader, the hon. mr. Hakim who visited US last week. His interview
was shown on the Jim Leherer News Hour this evening. You
will learn what Iraqi's are thinking.

Stunning in its massive disconnect from reality.

I'm just wondering why, if things are going so well in Iraq and we have already won, the country appears to be in total chaos, its nominal government in collapse, its infrastructure non-functional; why it has no army, why there is no security, why militias both foreign and domestic, organized and unofficial, are the only authority? Who are all of these insurgents when the Iraqis so clearly support their government of the green zone?

Why do something like 70% of the Iraqis want us out immmediately?

"and it becomes safe to conduct business
in Iraq" - yes that is the most important measure of our victory, isn't it? And what business would that be? What is it that Iraq has to trade that would be worth the sacrifice in blood and treasure that we have already spent and that you propose we continue to spend?

Have you looked at any of the images coming out of Iraq lately? If that is what "winning" looks like I would hate to see what losing looks like.

This war was LOST a long time ago and no amount of spin will change that.

I agree with most of the ISG recommendations in principle, however for me at least, they are simply too little, too late. Some of these ideas have been put forth over the last two years by various individuals (i.e. John Kerry) without being considered or even listened to by Bush. Given what should be fairly obvious to everybody except for his +/-30% "base/cult worshippers" by now, Bush and his tightly knit "cabal" live in their own alternate reality where their reality is the ONLY reality and anybody that thinks or says differently is viewed by them simply as an "enemy" that has to be swiftly and mercilessly destroyed. Therefore, I am NOT holding out any hope that Bush has any plans to radically alter his Iraq policies on his own. I fear that he will (somehow) attempt to continue to "stay the course" through 2008 unless either the Democrats act to cut his (purse) strings to prevent bottomless funding of this occupation and/or the GOP launches a massive revolt against Bush, which may well happen given how badly they got stung in the midterms, ostensibly for their largely uncritical and incurious position on Iraq, and how their continued support for Bush's policies on Iraq could harm their chances for 2008 (not that that wouldn't be a good thing for us politically but we really owe it our troops to do whatever we can do NOW to get them out of there ASAP). I believe that both Democrats AND Republicans need to somehow wrest control of Iraq policy away from Bush and get us moving on a new "course." Our troops deserve no less from our elected representatives. Bush has made it clear that nobody will change his mind about what needs to be done in Iraq so we MUST insist that our elected representatives step in and take charge.

and I think we should oblige him!

His stonewalled arrogance, his refusal to give even an inch... he is literally saying to the rest of us "bring it on"! Let's do it!

Cheney's recent talk about invading Iran in spite of public opinion seems to me to be equally irresponsible and rash. Invading Iran would almost certainly be the last nail in their coffin. I have basically started viewing Bush & Cheney as a couple of little kids recklessly fooling around with a loaded gun that some responsible adult needs to step in and take away from them.

One of the most important pieces is the focus on diplomacy.
If we simply pull out abruptly, without concern for the aftermath, we are selfishly trying to cut our own losses without regard for what follows.
I agree that we need to work on a diplomatic solution and work on those relationships so that more people are engaged.
I think we should not be afraid to admit that Baker could be a part of a decent idea. As they go, these recommendations are much closer to what I would hope for than anything I have heard from anyone else.

It was done independently of our own (democratic) leadership.

Why can't we also come up with our own ideas, such as stopping the bullshit and beginning to get our troops out of Iraq NOW?

Such a move is not really an opposition to the ISG report.

the ISG is repackaged stay the course with no plan for solving the biggest problems. Who in the bush cabal is going to lead what will have to be the most incredible diplomatic effort in history? The State Department had no one who is the least capable of bringing Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, the Palestinians and the Israelis into accord on Iraq. Condi?

Meanwhile, they suggest that 1200 more (or so) American soldiers and another few hundred thousand Iraqis should die before we start moving troops out.

Americans want us OUT of Iraq. Iraqis want us OUT of Iraq. Our presence there is illegal and is the proximal cause of much of the violence.

US out of Iraq NOW. That is the only way forward.

But you're all on board with "bipartisanship" with the Iraq Study Group. How is voting to confirm Gates bad - when it represents a bipartisan repudiation of Rumsfeld's failure - but endorsing the ISG is somehow great? Maybe I'd care more if your reasoning had any sort of consistency, but it seems you'll take whatever position enables you to either support Clark or attack his potential opponents at the same time.

I did comment on senators who give blank checks for war, nominations, or anything else.

The OP stated in that thread:

John Kerry said he didn't want to "look back" at Gates' earlier actions. He wanted to "look forward."

I never said I against confirming Gates, but we ought to at least have a hearing, don't you think? There is NOTHING partisan about a fair hearing when an individual is to be confirmed so such high office! It's the job of the Congress, it has nothing to do with partisanship!

CONGRESS NEEDS TO DO THEIR JOB!

it does bring up the diplomacy thing front and center, and as many feel, might be the way to stability. I thought a better way would have been to recommend the Iraqi army take the central role right now, but we might have units in place for preventing any 'coup' attempts. This would be centered in Baghdad and allow us to re-deploy many troops out of Iraq. I still believe under all this, is some on that group are still wanting to control that oil somehow, and want us to keep some of those huge 'permanent' bases that they forgot to mention. The other big thing they never seemed to mention are those state dept polls that show over 70% of the Iraqis want us out now!

The only thing they seemed to get right was diplomacy with Syria and Iran. Partial withdrawal immediately total withdrawal within a year end of story.