JimfromPennsylvania
05/18/07, 03:05 pm
***** See PART ONE on previous posting/thread. *****
4)The surge initiative has to be given a clear chance to work. Hundreds of American soldiers and hundreds of Iraqis have already died implementing this initiative, many Iraqis have put themselves and their families well-being at risk supporting this U.S. surge initiative. If the U.S. government abandons this initiative before its been given a fair chance it would be an egregious and an unforgivable wrong. Until the end of September 2007, three months of execution with all deployed reinforcements, is a fair chance. The surge strategy will probably show the security problem in Iraq has been improved but is not solved to an acceptable level because the death and casualty rates from terrorist like bombings will probably still be at alarming levels. Only political solutions can stop such terrorist type of violence. At the end of September 2007 if the violence in Iraq is still alarming, members of Congress can’t abandon the values they had pronounced in late 2006 calling for a new U.S. strategy because of the alarming violence and the only strategy with any real chance of succeeding would be to pull the U.S. troops out of Iraq and thus cause the Iraqi government to directly face and solve the political problems that are causing the violence. It also bears mentioning that the surge strategy’s tactics with their road blocks, home searches, etc., are extremely burdensome on the Iraqi people and there is a limit to how much they can take without an unaccepatble Iraqi public backlash; this makes an assessment that the surge is not working all the more persuasive that a new strategy in Iraq will be needed. By the end of September 2007, Congress will need to pass a new Supplemental Iraq Funding bill to fund the troops in Iraq and members of Congress, good Americans as they are, will not fail to support troops in the field; if at that time the common assessment is that the surge strategy has not worked congressional leaders should have the votes needed to pass a supplemental funding bill containing a troop withdrawal time-table and most importantly with a presidential veto-proof margin because such a bill is the only one that collectively members of Congress will be able to justify to their constituents.
5) If Congresses passes new legislation mandating a withdrawal timetable for U.S. troops from Iraq and heavy violence still reigns in Iraq, Congress has to allow twelve (12) to eighteen (18) months to complete the withdrawal, we owe it to the Iraqi people. The U.S. egregiously mismanaged the reconstruction of Iraq so therefore our nation needs to try to make-up for that fact where we can which places a moral mandate on the U.S. that when we withdrawal our troops we do so at a moderate time table so as to give the Iraq people a fair chance of making arrangements to keeping their country on the path where it doesn’t collapse. The Iraq government is going to need this amount of time to increase the size of the Iraq Security forces and have them implement a security plan to fill the vacuum left by the departing U.S. troops. The Iraq government will likely need this time to move the central government out of Baghdad because as things look now if they stay in Baghdad they will be chopped to pieces by the different militant groups that will likely operate there. An awful lot of Iraqis answered America’s call to help rebuild Iraq, many of them put themselves and their families lives and wealth on the line to do this, if we just leave Iraq at a rapid pace that will be a severe and unforgivable betrayal and will result in repercussions that Washington will maximumly regret. Moreover Congress owes it to the 3,300 Americans that loss their lives in Iraq and to the 12,000 Americans seriously wounded and their families to leave Iraq on a timetable that gives Iraq a fair chance to succeed.
**** See PART THREE on following posting/thread.****
4)The surge initiative has to be given a clear chance to work. Hundreds of American soldiers and hundreds of Iraqis have already died implementing this initiative, many Iraqis have put themselves and their families well-being at risk supporting this U.S. surge initiative. If the U.S. government abandons this initiative before its been given a fair chance it would be an egregious and an unforgivable wrong. Until the end of September 2007, three months of execution with all deployed reinforcements, is a fair chance. The surge strategy will probably show the security problem in Iraq has been improved but is not solved to an acceptable level because the death and casualty rates from terrorist like bombings will probably still be at alarming levels. Only political solutions can stop such terrorist type of violence. At the end of September 2007 if the violence in Iraq is still alarming, members of Congress can’t abandon the values they had pronounced in late 2006 calling for a new U.S. strategy because of the alarming violence and the only strategy with any real chance of succeeding would be to pull the U.S. troops out of Iraq and thus cause the Iraqi government to directly face and solve the political problems that are causing the violence. It also bears mentioning that the surge strategy’s tactics with their road blocks, home searches, etc., are extremely burdensome on the Iraqi people and there is a limit to how much they can take without an unaccepatble Iraqi public backlash; this makes an assessment that the surge is not working all the more persuasive that a new strategy in Iraq will be needed. By the end of September 2007, Congress will need to pass a new Supplemental Iraq Funding bill to fund the troops in Iraq and members of Congress, good Americans as they are, will not fail to support troops in the field; if at that time the common assessment is that the surge strategy has not worked congressional leaders should have the votes needed to pass a supplemental funding bill containing a troop withdrawal time-table and most importantly with a presidential veto-proof margin because such a bill is the only one that collectively members of Congress will be able to justify to their constituents.
5) If Congresses passes new legislation mandating a withdrawal timetable for U.S. troops from Iraq and heavy violence still reigns in Iraq, Congress has to allow twelve (12) to eighteen (18) months to complete the withdrawal, we owe it to the Iraqi people. The U.S. egregiously mismanaged the reconstruction of Iraq so therefore our nation needs to try to make-up for that fact where we can which places a moral mandate on the U.S. that when we withdrawal our troops we do so at a moderate time table so as to give the Iraq people a fair chance of making arrangements to keeping their country on the path where it doesn’t collapse. The Iraq government is going to need this amount of time to increase the size of the Iraq Security forces and have them implement a security plan to fill the vacuum left by the departing U.S. troops. The Iraq government will likely need this time to move the central government out of Baghdad because as things look now if they stay in Baghdad they will be chopped to pieces by the different militant groups that will likely operate there. An awful lot of Iraqis answered America’s call to help rebuild Iraq, many of them put themselves and their families lives and wealth on the line to do this, if we just leave Iraq at a rapid pace that will be a severe and unforgivable betrayal and will result in repercussions that Washington will maximumly regret. Moreover Congress owes it to the 3,300 Americans that loss their lives in Iraq and to the 12,000 Americans seriously wounded and their families to leave Iraq on a timetable that gives Iraq a fair chance to succeed.
**** See PART THREE on following posting/thread.****