Iraq is nearly over. BTW we won.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Oh horseshit, there was no plan. This exit strategy is a new development after Petraeus pulled their fat out of the fire. Up until he took over they were just going in circles, not knowing what to do next.

[DanaC]

No, no, you're wrong Bruce! The whole thing was carefully planned and executed exactly according to that plan. That whole 'going round in circles' bit was just a double-bluff to fool the insurgents!

[xoxoxoBruce]

Oh dear, silly me.

[Undertoad]

Combat deaths in Iraq so far this month: 7

Combat deaths in Afghanistan so far this month: 10

Deja vue Nam!

We need a timetable for withdrawal from Afghanistan. No more war for rubble!

[Urbane Guerrilla]

Just think of it as strangling fascism and you'll be fine with it -- like I am. It is, after all, hardly unlibertarian to remove libertarianism's most determined foes, or democratic republicanism's as an intermediate step in the development of a more libertarian society in a country that not only could use it, but is probably incapable of being run any other way, between geography and psychology.

A libertarian democracy's foes ought to get removed and stay removed -- consider forever as only barely long enough. Take the world away from tyrants and let that liberty that is humanity's birthright be the only thing that reigns.

[And UT, don't imitate tw's needlessly eccentric spelling of dejà vu -- he can plead all the ignorance and incapacity he needs to, but the rest of us don't have those excuses.]

[Undertoad]

That, UG, depends on whether what ends up there is a Democratic Republic. Most pundits say it won't. Does that change your usual?

[DanaC]

Why would it? That would presuppose that his usual is in some way affected by facts :p

[Clodfobble]

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

[And UT, don't imitate tw's needlessly eccentric spelling of dejà vu -- he can plead all the ignorance and incapacity he needs to, but the rest of us don't have those excuses.]

Well technically, it's déjà vu. Y'know, if we're being picky. Did you get a handle on Philippines yet?

[tw]

Originally Posted by Clodfobble

Well technically, it's déjà vu. Y'know, if we're being picky.

Technically we also won in Nam because body counts also proved we were winning. No poltiical settlement in Nam or Iraq? Deja Vue. We just ignore basic military poltical principles to declare victory. Clearly a light at the end of the tunnel. UT tells us it is so.

[Radar]

Originally Posted by tw

Technically we also won in Nam because body counts also proved we were winning. No poltiical settlement in Nam or Iraq? Deja Vue. We just ignore basic military poltical principles to declare victory. Clearly a light at the end of the tunnel. UT tells us it is so.

Actually, it's the end of the Bush nightmare, so suddenly without any change in circumstances, they magically want to declare victory...and what an empty victory it is.

UG is always the apologist for tyrrany .... as long as it's America who is the tyrant.

[tw]

Originally Posted by Radar

Actually, it's the end of the Bush nightmare, so suddenly without any change in circumstances, they magically want to declare victory...and what an empty victory it is.

Nixon also knew Nam was unwinnable when he entered office. His only objective - not lose that war under his watch. Spin included "peace with honor". So Nixon sacrificed precious treasures for his greater glory. Like Iraq, Nam was a civil war made more complex by American presence. As in "Mission Accomplished"", the president said anything to avoid that reality. Where have the reasons for civil war been eliminated in "Mission Accomplished"?

George Jr got exactly what he wanted - a war that would not end on his watch. We are now committed to "Mission Accomplished" until 2011 when Iraqis kick us out. We learn after that whether a strategic objective was achieved - and whose strategic objective gets achieved.

As in Nam, body counts don’t measure results or define a strategic objective. Known to those who learned the lessons of Nam.

[Urbane Guerrilla]

Originally Posted by Radar

UG is always the apologist for tyrrany [sic].... as long as it's America who is the tyrant.

This kind of thinking keeps you in a condition of complete noncomprehension of American history, radar, particularly the history of the last hundred years. Everyone but you knows better, and a good many of the ones who do are now glaring at you. Your desire that we be the tyrant -- howsomever -- makes you one very stupid leftist, committed forever to the wrong. Geez, are you ever easy to sucker. You cannot be right and be the way you are, radar. Wise up -- what America does is shoot at tyrants, which you will never acknowledge, from remarkably silly motivations. You are a slave to many stupid emotional desires, and you really need a liberation which you aren't able to comprehend, owing to your resolute purblindness -- you'd rather be the schmuck you're used to being than a rational thinker about policy. Ranting emotionalism and telling me how awful I am for pointing out where your ideas aren't cutting it do not amount to reinforcing your argument. Instead, you lose it utterly.

[Urbane Guerrilla]

Originally Posted by Clodfobble

Well technically, it's déjà vu. Y'know, if we're being picky. Did you get a handle on Philippines yet?

Why, déjà. Gee, it would have been meilleur vu in a font color other than white. :p

[Undertoad]

Welcome my friend! We've been waiting patiently for your first post in the thread. I must say this one disappoints, however. It's far too short to be a rant, only contains one baiting, does not mention mental midgets, big dic, etc.

There weren't US casualty counts this low in Nam until we left. But please, continue to predict the worst possible outcome! There'll always be *something* negative to crow about, so keep on jerking that knee. I'm depending on it!

[tw]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

Welcome my friend! We've been waiting patiently for your first post in the thread. I must say this one disappoints, however.

Nothing has changed strategically. Many parties are stocking more weapons for what nobody wants but may be necessary. Shiites are removing Sunnis from positions of power. Once the Americans are gone, Sunnis will be completely disenfranchised and unrepresented in government. Only thing keeping that from happening is American troops. Also unknown is what the Shiites will do with the Kurds who have all but separated from Iraq. Will the Shiites attack the Kurds to take back the oil fields?

What we do know. Shiites what the Americans out. Shiites such as Sahdr are stocking weapons, training soldiers, and preparing for what may be necessary - open civil war. UT just ignores that. UT confuses tactical victories with a strategic objective - deja vue Nam. UT confuses body counts with victory - deja vue Nam.

Why no political settlement? Because an American created civil war will not end when Americans leave if no political solution exists. A lesson well proven in history. UT ignores what also happened even in Nam. He does this by mocking posts that only define those well proven principles from history.

Petraeus even said so. He cannot create a political solution - the strategic objective. He can only make it possible a tactical solution to permit a political solution to happen. Nothing new and still ignored by UT. There is no political solution ongoing. Just a demand by Shiites that Americans leave and have no remaining bases. Then a political solution may begin.