Here's a plan

freedomlover · #31 (**permalink**) 01-11-2007, 03:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rob

Freedomlover, well at least you tried to come up with a plan and I commend you for that.

I think that we are going to have go in with the additional troops and become a force to be reckoned with. For instance have the Iraqi goverment anounce a curfew. If people are out after that time without legimate reason, then they will be dealt with. Until we can control the violence we really can't add to their infrastructre. They need running water and power restosred across the country. Show the people that the insurgents are stalling the good life for the average joe and let them raise up with us.

Thanks Rob. and I agree the the people of Iraq need to start helping with their own defence. As for the infrastructure, I also agree that it is hard to do with all the violence going on. However, this is my fear. The Iraqi's will become terribly desparate, the different factions will start making promises about helping them, and because of their desparation, they will believe this & turn on us. If this has not already started happening, then I think this is a very good possibility in the near future.

nathanbforrest45 · #32 (**permalink**) 01-11-2007, 03:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deadshot

Your not either and you seem to want you opinion heard. If we're just going to let the ones who are or were there speak then we need to shut down this forum.

My guess is 95% or better were not and are not there.

Every voice deserves to be heard.

I meant his country is not there. He claims he is in Italy, is he Italian or just another dweeb who has left his country?

freedomlover · #33 (**permalink**) 01-11-2007, 04:27 PM

Perhaps I should Have added in my plan what is not acceptible to me and why.
1. Partial pull out of our troops. This will leave the troops over there in even more danger.
2. Complete pull out. # 1-a pull out will not complete the objective (obviously)
#2. The people of the US live in relative safety. With the exception of 9/11 and OkC bombing, we have had very little terrorist attacks on our land. A pull out will embolden our enemies. It will also further alienate us from other countries, including some that are now our allies. A regional war will break out in the Mid-East and in the end we will end up back over there, in an even worse position than we are now.

nathanbforrest45 · #34 (**permalink**) 01-11-2007, 04:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TRT14

I got a plan, too: Pull the hell out!

In your plan is it perfectly acceptable to leave the country in chaos? Would it be acceptable to have Iraq taken over by Iran or Syria? That would be the outcome of our pulling out now. I guess it would be alright to just leave the Iraqi people to fend for themselves at this point.

Good plan

Kix · #35 (**permalink**) 01-11-2007, 05:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deadshot

Ah, but here's the rub, when a Radical Islamic regime DID control a government, the Taliban in Afghanistan, they were quarrantined from the world and when we did attack we pushed them out of power in months, WITH THE HELP FROM THEIR OWN PEOPLE!!!!

So, we've won that war and there is no more fighting going on in Afghanistan in an effort for that same Radical Islamic regime to regain control again? If that's the case, why don't we hear about the need for an immediate pull out from Afghanistan like we're hearing we need in Iraq?

Quote:

So while you and I disagree about whether Radical Islam is on the march, I do have evidence of what happens to a country with a radical Islamic regime. It goes south fast.

Who do you think it was that's swept through so much of Africa and slaughtered so many people (Rwanda, Congo, Darfur)? You wouldn't call that Radical Islam on the march? If you don't, I believe the survivors of their genocide would wholeheartedly disagree with you. Not to mention the families of Radical Islamic genocide in countries and during times in history that just don't seem to get talked about anymore.

Kix · #36 (**permalink**) 01-11-2007, 05:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by freedomlover

Perhaps I should Have added in my plan what is not acceptible to me and why.
1. Partial pull out of our troops. This will leave the troops over there in even more danger.
2. Complete pull out. # 1-a pull out will not complete the objective (obviously)
#2. The people of the US live in relative safety. With the exception of 9/11 and OkC bombing, we have had very little terrorist attacks on our land. A pull out will embolden our enemies. It will also further alienate us from other countries, including some that are now our allies. A regional war will break out in the Mid-East and in the end we will end up back over there, in an even worse position than we are now.

In all honesty I believe we've had far more terrorist attacks inside this country by Radical Islamists in the past 15 years than will ever be admitted by our government. The risk of violence in the streets makes it just not worth it to be honest to the people about these matters.

Smitty0311 · #37 (**permalink**) 01-11-2007, 08:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by freedomlover

It has been stated that the dems don't want a plan, nor do they have a plan. Here is my plan. I am not a military strategist, so feel free to correct any wrong thinking.

One of the things I feel that this administration has failed in this war is not outlining a clear, concise objective. Since we cannot reverse history, I will start with the present situation.

Objective: To Allow the people of Iraq to rule themselves.

Goals of the Objective:

1. Quell the violence in Iraq. There are two things that need to be addressed here. Sectarian and Outside influence.

2. Train forces to be self sustaining and able to militarily take care of themselves.

3. A true democratic government that will take care of all those that reside in Iraq.

4. Restore infrastructure so that the Iraq's can return to a normal life, can be self supporting, and can defend themselves.

Ways to achieve these goals

1. Shut down all the borders
2. Let Iran and Syria and any others that think to stop the progress, know in no uncertain terms that they will be dealt with harshly. (outside influence)
3. Between the fighting factions in Iraq, first use diplomacy. Set the leaders down together of each faction and let them know that we expect them to work things out and control their sides. Also let them know that anyone caught not cooperating wil be dealt with in the same fashion as the outside influences.
4. Once the violence is quelled, I think that it will be much easier to train the police forces and a military. This should however, be closely monitered to keep corruption out.
5. Have elections again. Emphasize that we expect this government to protect all of Iraq's citizens, period.
6. Restoring their infrastructure is an absolute must. They will not be able to defend themselves and become a strong country without this.

Unless the violence is dealt with, none of these objectives can go forward. Therefore I would recommend an overwhelming troop surge. Somewhere in the number of 200,000 to 300,000 more troops. Once the borders are shut down that should help contain outside influences. When the violence is quelled, I believe we should ask the UN to send in forces, (we won't leave yet) but I believe they can help with the training and overseeing of the elections and government.

Restoring their infrastructure will be expensive. Although the Iraq people did not ask for this war, they will directly benefit from it, therefore I feel they should be at least partially responsible for the expense. Agreements between them and U.S. can worked out.

Cute plain. How to carry it out is now the question. Please give me instructions of which we are not doing now?

rob · #38 (**permalink**) 01-11-2007, 08:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Smitty0311

Cute plain. How to carry it out is now the question. Please give me instructions of which we are not doing now?

Smitty, if this was your plan how would you implement it?

freedomlover · #39 (**permalink**) 01-11-2007, 08:42 PM

The borders of Iraq have not since the onset of this war, been effectively dealt with. You yourself has stated that (you believe) it is Iran and Syria (not civil war) that is the cause of all the violence.

Secondly, we are not now dealing with the Governments of Syria or Iran. We are not putting pressure on them to stay out of Iraq. And to my knowledge, we have not made plans to deal with them.

Third, until the new congress took over, and with it the threat of withdrawal, we were not putting enough pressure on the Iraq government to stop the religious factions from fight. (And yes, they are causing violence, even the Repubs have acknowledged this). I will assume that they have knowledge that you are not privy to.

Fourth, up the point of the threat of us pulling out, the new Iraq government, had close ties to Al Sadr, which controls the Shiate militia. That means, that this government now maybe be suspect. They agreed to protect all their citizens, including Sunnis and they have not done so.

As I stated, until the violence is quelled, none of the other objectives can be accomplished, ergo, that is why things are so bad in Iraq right now. (An admission even our President has admitted to.) Therefore we have not accomplished most of what is on the list of objectives.

Also, as stated, I believe that 20,000 troops will only bring about more of the same. The 20,000 does not even come close to the amount that I have suggested.

While my plan may not be perfect, it is not the plan we have been dealing with for the last three years.

freedomlover · #40 (**permalink**) 01-11-2007, 08:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rob

Smitty, if this was your plan how would you implement it?

Rob, I'm not Smitty, but I believe that the amount of troop surge is the key to winning this war. Nobody is ready to touch this, because it will not be popular with the American public.