RME Foreign Policy on Iraq---Solve International Problems....

[mbryson]

Well said.

Here is the latest e-mail I have from the bro-in-law:

Hello friends and family,

I haven't written in a while, so I thought that I would send you all a brief update on what is going on with me here in Mosul, Iraq. Things here are quiete most of the time, but make no mistake about it, we are in a war. Often I here the warning sirens go off, and I retreat to my bunker, which is right outside my door. The sirens go off and sometimes I hear and feel the impact of the mortar or artillery round, sometimes not.

My new job as a convoy commander keeps me on the roads most of the time. We escort up to 90 semi trucks to and from Habur Gate near the Turkish boarder. It is challenging, because they always break down and we are responsible for getting the trucks running. To add to the challenges, all the trucks are driven by third country nationals (usually Pakistanis, Aghgans, and Turks). Our convoys often span the distance of 10-15 miles.

I usually sleep in another camp, coming back to Mosul once every three days. The roads inside the city are littered with so much trash and rubble that it is difficult to tell where the enemy is hiding the roadside bombs. In the country outside the city, they usually bury the Improvised explosive devices (IED) so you don't see them either. Our company has had many IEDs go off on our convoys, but fortunately no serious injuries. We have great equipment that protects us from most of these blasts, so Mom don't worry.

On a positive note, on one of my last convoys, I went through the ruins of Nineva (remember Jonaha and the whale?). It was dark, but I could see the huge walls surrounding Nineva as we entered the city of Mosul. I could not help but think to myself, "This is the cradle of civilization, the holy land, and we are fighting this crazy war right in the middle of it."

I continue to get support from home. I received some care packages and mail from friends and family everywhere. Thank you. It means a lot to hear about familiar things, especially when it involves people that I love and care about. I truly feel your thoughts and prayers guide me.

I hope and pray that all is well with each of you.

God Bless,

Nate

Cool


That kind of stuff makes me wonder if we don't need MORE soldiers over there. Just go in and occupy to kabash the resistance and give security so the Iraqis can clean up all the junk.

 

[SAMI]

Here's a quick one.......if any of you could, would you rather have had Clinto still in office, or do you think that Bush is doing better?

i can only assume that you meant Clinton..

I honestly think that Bush is handling things better than Clinton could have.. didn't Clinton shy away from the attack on that US Naval ship? act of war against the US? and no response from the US?

I say Bush over Clinton... Bush has more of a backbone than Clinton IMO....

And while we're on the subject of a political head(no pun intended) and figure... and the respect they should have for their elected job... Monica Lewinski?? what was that? i'm sorry, but that should raise a red flag as far as responsibility and integrity is concerned... and definately respect for the job...

-Jason

 

[Herzog]

Because it sends a message of weakness and confusion to the rest of the world.

We ( I say we democrats, republicans, white, brown, AMERICAN. ) have a tarnished record as it is. We need to stand together, maybe going to war wasnt the best idea, maybe false information was presented but this horse **** on the tv across the world isnt going to change that. What happened happened, all we can do is move forward from this point, Rocky is moving us backwards.

Doesn't hurt to accept the possibility that our country has been doing other countries wrong. Personally, I'm officially un-opinionated on the subject and am open views about what is actually going on.

You're probably right, moving on is what we need to do... but we also need to take a look at mistakes made and learn from them.

Couldnt hurt... and if he has the right to protest why dont I? Because I dont have the same views as you? Because my rally wasnt organized?

Well, when you bring destruction / vandalism of personal property you cross that line from protestor to vandal.

 

[mbryson]

i can only assume that you meant Clinton..

I honestly think that Bush is handling things better than Clinton could have.. didn't Clinton shy away from the attack on that US Naval ship? act of war against the US? and no response from the US?

I say Bush over Clinton... Bush has more of a backbone than Clinton IMO....

And while we're on the subject of a political head(no pun intended) and figure... and the respect they should have for their elected job... Monica Lewinski?? what was that? i'm sorry, but that should raise a red flag as far as responsibility and integrity is concerned... and definately respect for the job...

-Jason

Didn't we have Bin Laden in our sights after USS Cole (or the Brits had him or somebody?)? What if Clinton would have pulled the trigger on Bin Laden then? 9/11 wouldn't have happened (not that something else wouldn't have), but it doesn't matter what 'could' have happened, we can only change things in the future.

 

[OCNORB]

i can only assume that you meant Clinton..

I honestly think that Bush is handling things better than Clinton could have.. didn't Clinton shy away from the attack on that US Naval ship? act of war against the US? and no response from the US?

I say Bush over Clinton... Bush has more of a backbone than Clinton IMO....

And while we're on the subject of a political head(no pun intended) and figure... and the respect they should have for their elected job... Monica Lewinski?? what was that? i'm sorry, but that should raise a red flag as far as responsibility and integrity is concerned... and definately respect for the job...

-Jason

You were doing great until you brouht Monica into it... let's all agree to forget about Monica and the WMD's... they accomplish nothing towards solving the current problems.:sick:

 

[SAMI]

Didn't we have Bin Laden in our sights after USS Cole (or the Brits had him or somebody?)? What if Clinton would have pulled the trigger on Bin Laden then? 9/11 wouldn't have happened (not that something else wouldn't have), but it doesn't matter what 'could' have happened, we can only change things in the future.

i can't tell if you're agreeing with me or not... it's been a hell of a day... i think that you're agreeing with me.. so i'll go with that...

that's what i'm saying... is that Clinton just avoided issues, sweeping them under the carpet until the next guy came in and stumbled across them... and it's that new guy's fault...

like on tommy boy, when the door falls off richard's GTX.. "what'd you do?"

should've taken care of the "issue" when we had the chance...

-Jason

 

[TigerStripe40]

And while we're on the subject of a political head(no pun intended) and figure... and the respect they should have for their elected job... Monica Lewinski?? what was that? i'm sorry, but that should raise a red flag as far as responsibility and integrity is concerned... and definately respect for the job...

-Jason

OK,

so, where are the new-coolar (Nuclear) weapons that were supposedly in Iraq?

I am not buying the whole 'bad intelligence' BS story that was given. That's WAY too convienent.

How about 'we have intelligence that Saddam was working with the Chinese to supply oil'. I'd at least respect that, and find it half believable.

But he keeps changing the reasons.
First it was New-coolar weapons.
when we didn't find any, it was to liberate the iraqi people from Saddam.
Well, now that Saddam isn't in power, it's to battle the insurgants.

Iraq IS going to have a civil war, and there is nothing we are going to be able to do about it.
It's Vietnam all over again.

Not that I liked Clinton any better, but I'd rather have my president lie about a blow job than about Nuclear Weapons

 

[mbryson]

i can't tell if you're agreeing with me or not... it's been a hell of a day... i think that you're agreeing with me.. so i'll go with that...

that's what i'm saying... is that Clinton just avoided issues, sweeping them under the carpet until the next guy came in and stumbled across them... and it's that new guy's fault...

like on tommy boy, when the door falls off richard's GTX.. "what'd you do?"

should've taken care of the "issue" when we had the chance...

-Jason

Exactly. They screwed with our warship. They should pay the price (delivery has TONS of variables, though--there's no right answer because we aren't in the Oval Office with the information an informed person that we've elected is)

 

[SAMI]

You were doing great until you brouht Monica into it... let's all agree to forget about Monica and the WMD's... they accomplish nothing towards solving the current problems.:sick:

I was bring that up in answer to who i would rather have in office and why. that's all.... that's one massive black eye for the entire country...

-Jason

 

[mbryson]

OK,

so, where are the new-coolar (Nuclear) weapons that were supposedly in Iraq?

I am not buying the whole 'bad intelligence' BS story that was given. That's WAY too convienent.

How about 'we have intelligence that Saddam was working with the Chinese to supply oil'. I'd at least respect that, and find it half believable.

But he keeps changing the reasons.
First it was New-coolar weapons.
when we didn't find any, it was to liberate the iraqi people from Saddam.
Well, now that Saddam isn't in power, it's to battle the insurgants.

Iraq IS going to have a civil war, and there is nothing we are going to be able to do about it.
It's Vietnam all over again.

Not that I liked Clinton any better, but I'd rather have my president lie about a blow job than about Nuclear Weapons

The WMD was INTERNATIONAL intelligence (at least that's what our "press" and their agenda told us). Confirmed by multiple sources (Germany, Britian and ????)........ GW comes in with his Texas swagger and says, "We'll kick their asses, we just took out the Taliban in Afganistan in three weeks".......

..... I don't disagree with you about this ending poorly. I have no idea how (if?) it will end, but I don't think it'll be good for a LOT of innocent people (basic citizens of countries and our armed forces) and a bunch of cowardly terrorist types.

 

[Hickey]

It's Vietnam all over again.

Come on...

 

[OCNORB]

OK,

so, where are the new-coolar (Nuclear) weapons that were supposedly in Iraq?


But he keeps changing the reasons.
First it was New-coolar weapons.
when we didn't find any, it was to liberate the iraqi people from Saddam.
Well, now that Saddam isn't in power, it's to battle the insurgants.

It's Vietnam all over again.

Not that I liked Clinton any better, but I'd rather have my president lie about a blow job than about Nuclear Weapons

This is where I can't stand it anymore--The reasons haven't changed; they are layered one upon the other!! I never heard nuclear anyway- just biological and owned by a man willing to use them! Saddam was the WMD as far as I am concerned, guess what ? we got him.

It's only Vietnam all over again if the Rocky Anderson Iwannabitchnwhinewithoutofferingabettersolution types continue to empower the enemy and undermine our guys. Why can't some people understand that the past is the past and its time to find a solution.

I really could care less about Dems or Republicans -- it's a two headed snake with the same body.

Fact is we really have no choice in the matter anyway. But there are places in Iraq that have power and water for the first time in years, kids that are now able to go to school, women can vote and work, and Saddam's sons aren't out raping and pillaging... Our soldiers can be proud of that.

 

[JoeT]

Not a Rocky fan, but I do think it's time to bring the troops home. I would love to see the US pull/stop all foreign aid for 2-5 years. Take care of our own first, homeless,borders, poor.etc. Focus on cures and better enviro issues. Let the world see what it's like to be on it's own without the USA. In some ways this would be good and bad. Too many countries out there that milk U.S.A. and too many that lack a spine (FRANCE). Bush had to make a tough call on Iraq, either way he's going to get crap.

 

[Brett]

I don't know jack about Rumsfeld. I don't trust him or any other politician.


{I'd LOVE to have someone to vote for that I thought would do the job. Unfortunately, we've had to choose the best of the worst in the past 40--50? years worth of presidential elections. The only people that I've seen show leadership in the last few years are Guiliani, Norm Schwartzkoff and Condi Rice(to a certain degree). None of the want the President job (unless Guiliani has changed his mind)}

Here's a quick rundown on what he said on Tuesday......

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14570794/

 

[mbryson]

Here's a quick rundown on what he said on Tuesday......

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14570794/

He's right. Still doesn't give me a better/worse opinion of him and I don't know if he knows what he's doing.

 

[Brett]

Didn't we have Bin Laden in our sights after USS Cole (or the Brits had him or somebody?)? What if Clinton would have pulled the trigger on Bin Laden then? 9/11 wouldn't have happened (not that something else wouldn't have), but it doesn't matter what 'could' have happened, we can only change things in the future.

Well, the thing is though.....all 13 people that were involved in that attack were caught, tried and some executed. Yes, they did have ties to other terrorist groups, but even then it was harder to just go after a specific group.


Honestly, I think that if 9/11 had not happened, the US never would have gone into Afganistan or Iraq. We used it as an excuse. Be that a good or a bad one, who knows.

 

[Brett]

He's right. Still doesn't give me a better/worse opinion of him and I don't know if he knows what he's doing.

"In unusually explicit terms, Rumsfeld portrayed the administration’s critics as suffering from “moral or intellectual confusion” about what threatens the nation’s security and accused them of lacking the courage to fight back."


I don't see myself as suffering from "moral of intellectual confusion" but apparently according to ol' Rumsfield, there's something wrong with me.

It seems that our administration is just set on promoting anything to with Iraq as something our country needs. Other than what we started there, what is that the United States needs from Iraq? I understand that we need to finish what we started and not abandon the country. As people have said, it would become a breeding ground for terrorist groups.

I guess what I am asking is, when this is over, what is it that we built there?

 

[Brett]

Not a Rocky fan, but I do think it's time to bring the troops home. I would love to see the US pull/stop all foreign aid for 2-5 years. Take care of our own first, homeless,borders, poor.etc. Focus on cures and better enviro issues. Let the world see what it's like to be on it's own without the USA. In some ways this would be good and bad. Too many countries out there that milk U.S.A. and too many that lack a spine (FRANCE). Bush had to make a tough call on Iraq, either way he's going to get crap.

I somewhat agree with you on that, to a point. I don't think that we should ever go back to the era of isolationizim like we had before WW2. That just left us open for anyone to say we were weak, as Japan did. I do think that we should try to force the international community to play more of a roll in the worlds affairs that what they have. However, as was pointed out above, the UN unfortunately doesn't always respond as it should.

We have a lot of problems here at home that I think we should deal with. Homelessness, low income, health care, even immigration. I think that a lot more money should be spent in the US than what currently is going on.

 

[mbryson]

"In unusually explicit terms, Rumsfeld portrayed the administration’s critics as suffering from “moral or intellectual confusion” about what threatens the nation’s security and accused them of lacking the courage to fight back."


I don't see myself as suffering from "moral of intellectual confusion" but apparently according to ol' Rumsfield, there's something wrong with me.

It seems that our administration is just set on promoting anything to with Iraq as something our country needs. Other than what we started there, what is that the United States needs from Iraq? I understand that we need to finish what we started and not abandon the country. As people have said, it would become a breeding ground for terrorist groups.

I guess what I am asking is, when this is over, what is it that we built there?

Isn't he right though? We all want out, it's just how we should get out. I don't know if anybody knows how it will end. I think the only ally we have in the area is Kuwait. Why wouldn't they like us? I'm not sure they really do. They should, but who knows. If the 'huddled masses' of Iraqis commoners support what we've done for them, I think we will have done something cool. Those people have been under SH for 25 years(?) or longer. I don't know that they know what power a large population can have. I believe THEY could solve the problems that exist in Iraq today if either they knew that the could or knew how. I'm not sure they know that..... It's been gansta rule over there for over a generation, maybe two. You have an opinion, you die. Now they can have an opinion and I think it'll be an expensive (people cost, $$$$, US-world relations, etc.), interesting experiment to see what happens.

 

[Brett]

This is where I can't stand it anymore--The reasons haven't changed; they are layered one upon the other!! I never heard nuclear anyway- just biological and owned by a man willing to use them! Saddam was the WMD as far as I am concerned, guess what ? we got him.

Here's is President Bush saying that Saddam had them.......

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/10/20021007-8.html

And here is the CIA reporting that they found nothing, not even the ability to produce them

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/10/06/iraq.wmd.report/