Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

IN THE LAST 7 DAYS

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-04-07 03:52 PM
Original message
IN THE LAST 7 DAYS

It's been one week since Memorial Day, the day that we set aside on our US calendar to honor the dead heroes who served in our country's military.

In the last 7 days, we've added 37 more names to the list according to the Iraq Casualties website. Here's the detail for May and June. From May 28th until June 3rd, 37 more families have or are about to receive the dreaded visit from military officers informing them that their lives are irrevocably altered.

The NY Times notes that:

At least 15 American servicemen were killed in the first three days of June, a pace that exceeds the daily fatality rate in May, when 127 troops were killed. May was the deadliest month since the invasion of Falluja in November 2004.

<…>

The biggest killers are roadside bombs, responsible for four of every five American deaths in combat during the past three months. That trend has continued in the past few days, according to the military.

Now combine that news with this information from a NY Times article titled "Commanders Say Push in Baghdad Is Short of Goal":

Three months after the start of the Baghdad security plan that has added thousands of American and Iraqi troops to the capital, they control fewer than one-third of the city’s neighborhoods, far short of the initial goal for the operation, according to some commanders and an internal military assessment...

Now add in this bit of insight from Walter Pincus of the Washington Post:

On Aug. 13, 2002, the CIA completed a classified, six-page intelligence analysis that described the worst scenarios that could arise after a U.S.-led removal of Saddam Hussein: anarchy and territorial breakup in Iraq, a surge of global terrorism, and a deepening of Islamic antipathy toward the United States.

Titled "The Perfect Storm: Planning for Negative Consequences of Invading Iraq," the paper, written seven months before the war began, also speculated about al-Qaeda operatives taking "advantage of a destabilized Iraq to establish secure safe havens from which they can continue their operations," according to a report about prewar intelligence recently released by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence.

The report said the CIA paper also cautioned about outcomes such as declining European confidence in U.S. leadership, Hussein's survival and retreat with regime loyalists, Iran working to install a friendly regime "tolerant of Iranian policies," Afghanistan tipping into civil strife because U.S. forces were not replaced by United Nations peacekeepers and troops from other countries, and violent demonstrations in Pakistan because of its support of Washington.

When the deliberate mismanagement of our involvement in Iraq has led to such grim circumstances after 5 years of our troops risking all, one has to ask, what are we doing there? What are we accomplishing?

There are so many ways to answer those questions.

Handwringing won't help. Giving up in despair won't help.

I think that (John Kerry) summed it up well when he said:

I think it was a mistake to make the decision to go to Iraq, Wolf. But now that you are in Iraq, you don't want to compound that by making matters worse by not implementing a sensible way to strengthen the region as you depart...

Every soldier who has decided to serve is a patriot. And they deserve our gratitude for their sense of duty and for the courage with which they've served. And the way to honor the sacrifice that they have made, despite the mistakes of Rumsfeld, Cheney, the president, the mistakes of Paul Bremer, the mistakes of the military themselves, and they'd tell you that.

The way to honor that sacrifice is to get the policy right now. And the way you get it right now is by creating this new security arrangement, having the diplomacy necessary to get the Sunnis and Shias to settle the differences of a civil war. None of us signed up to send our troops to a civil war. Not even the military said they want to plunk their troops down in the middle of a civil war.

In fact, Donald Rumsfeld said if it became a civil war, we shouldn't be there. So it's time to face reality. The president isn't. We are.

But here's the deal. How do we change what's going on?

As (Kerry) said in his diary on dailykos

I’m not going to ask for patience, because the truth is big policy changes like this are only achieved by impatient people – in huge numbers.

more



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC