WTH? "Democrats' plan would still leave many (half) troops in Iraq" (for decades)

[elehhhhna]

Nov. 22, 2007, 2:14PM
By ANNE FLAHERTY Associated Press

WASHINGTON — The Democrats' flagship proposal on Iraq is aimed at bringing most troops home. Yet if enacted, the law would still allow for tens of thousands of U.S. troops to stay deployed for years to come.

This reality — readily acknowledged by Democrats who say it's still their best shot at curbing the nearly five-year war — has drawn the ire of anti-war groups and bolstered President Bush's prediction that the United States will most likely wind up maintaining a hefty long-term presence in Iraq, much like in South Korea.

For those who want troops out, "you've got more holes in here than Swiss cheese," said Tom Andrews, national director of the war protest group Win Without War and a former congressman from Maine.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/5322543.html

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

1. Smoke and mirrors designed for the election in '08.

The Democrats are trying to have it both ways. "Supporting the Troops", while, being "anti-war" (sort of).

Both sides (if they could be described as such) are playing politics with lives and trying to avoid being seen as having lost and obviously lost war.

[papau]

2. About min of 30,000 to max of 50,000 for training/terrorist combat - currently 160,000+ are there

Obama and Clinton support this, Edwards wants less - just enough for Embassy protection, with the rest in some other near by location.

I know of no one that is further into "out of Iraq" than the Edwards position.

[elehhhhna]

3. DK, maybe?

[papau]

10. DK is possible as I have not heard details - but I thought they all allowed for Embassy forces and

nearby combat/training troops - the difference being in country (Iraq) or out of country reaction combat and training forces - and short term leased bases versus long term leased bases - but I easily could have missed something.

[jody]

4. The U.S. must leave troops for air cover, logistical support, and training for perhaps a decade.

I see no other moral way to withdraw from combat operations given the disastrous failure of the Commander in Chief.

But we must return full sovereignty to the Iraqi government.

[Disturbed]

5. The Dem Leaders want to maintain the US Occupation.

They want to keep the Fiasco going for their benefit of the '08 Elections & also want that Oil Deal to be finalized. The MIC & the Multi-Corps control them all. The majority of Dems don't give a rat's ass what the citizens want. They are also banking on Dems to vote for them no matter how betrayed they feel.

[jody]

6. Agree, corporatists finance both Dem & Repug candidates so they can move us inexorably closer to a

corporate state with bipartisan support.

[rjones2818]

7. And this is surprising? Why?

The corporate Neo-liberal core of the Democratic Leadership should be expected to toe the line. Sure, they're lying to us, but what's new about that?

:nuke:

Go Dennis! Bring the troops home. All of them! :woohoo:
http://dennis4president.com
Choose Peace!

[Disturbed]

8. Jody, that flag & the pledge says it all.

Nothin' needs to be added.

[The2ndWheel]

9. That's what the US Government does

It was bombing Iraq and helping enforce sanctions(which never hurt Saddam) for the entire decade of the 90's. Everyone knows what it did during the 80's in Iraq. This is what it does.

[TreasonousBastard]

11. Aside from the kneejerk "corporatist" rants, this is...

what we've been doing for almost 50 years-- planting bases around the world.

We've been in Europe, Japan, the Philippines, and Korea for more than 50 years now, with over 130 bases and installations worldwide. Anybody heard of Diego Garcia? Hint: it's not in the Carribbean or Latin America.

TPTB have decided that Iraq is the perfect place to stick a bigass base to control our "interests" in the Middle East. We're spending billions on NATO bases in Europe to guard against the Russian "threat" that they figure now should be spent to guard against the latest international threat, whatever that is.

Try to cut ANYTHING out of the Pentagon budget and see how far you get. Every penny they spend, lose, or steal has its defenders who will go to the wall crying that to cut it out would mean the immediate fall of the Republic.

Which brings us back to kneejerk corporatist rants-- yes there is a point there. We've managed to get to a point where every Congressional district in the country gets a large piece of Pentagon pie, and that means jobs that each congresscritter will defend to the end. Even things the miiltary is chary of and will happily do without are kept alive by our own sterling Reps who are even more chary of a plant or base closing. Party affilliation makes no difference-- they want those jobs kept.

And, it seems, so do we. Most of those jobs are pretty good ones.