Does Bush Plan to Withdraw from Iraq Before the Election ??

[welshTerrier2]

my latest thinking, and it's probably no more than just wild speculation, is that bush wants out of Iraq once his buddies "inherit" their $87 billion ... i came to the conclusion that we'll see some kind of withdrawel plan from him around next march or april because:

1. the long-term hopes of skimming off Iraqi oil revenues for certain oil industry corporations no longer seem viable or at least seems many years away
2. a failed policy with no exit "strategery" has become a major political liability
3. bush can declare victory, claim that rapid progress has been made and turn things over to an Iraqi governing council with a big "i told you so" to his democratic critics
4. if he doesn't leave voluntary, the Congress, nervous about re-election, may eventually force him out of there

it seems to me that bush's risks on staying in Iraq have started to outweigh his potential benefits ... or is it possible that he really believes progress is being made and he'll be rewarded for his efforts?

comments?

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Booberdawg]

2. Don't forget - He needs the troops elsewhere

Iran? Syria? Korea?

[trotsky]

3. Neocons won't let him.

Without American military presence in Iraq, their ability to grow the New American Empire is destroyed. Iraq is the prize jewel - they cannot leave, and never will. We will have enormous military bases all around that country.

[welshTerrier2]

6. they may not have a choice

there is no question that your point about PNAC's empire building apirations is valid ...

however, it is less clear what will happen if bush appears to be in trouble after a democratic nominee emerges from the pack ... if the Iraq mess remains a significant political liability, the neo-cons may have to accept the loss of a battle to keep their team on the field ...

their agenda is not likely to find much support with a democrat in the white house ...

[Occulus]

7. heh

I'mgonna borrow a term from the John Titor fiction. Let's start calling it....

instead of the "New American Empire"....

the "American Federal Empire".

I'd say the label hits the nail right on the head...

[readmylips]

4. Bigtime Yes...

Don't want the media reporting about dead soldiers during his campaign. That's why he went to the UN. What the UN voted has no teeth unless little man bush gets his 87B's. How else is he going to pay for other (less human) young people of color from other countries to die so that he can get elected in the USA.

[dbt]

5. bu$h was intended to be no more than a one-termer

There has been absolutely no thought beyond 2004 in any of the Regime's planning. The reign of Dim Son is simply Poppy's Second Term--the one in which profits were to be extracted.

If bu$h wins a second term, that's just gravy for the vultures.

:scared:
dbt

[Jackpine Radical]

10. You mean Poppy's fourth term.

Poppy was in charge Jan 1981-Jan 93.

[dbt]

15. D'OH!

Sorry. Too much TV! My bad.

:evilgrin:
dbt

[mmonk]

8. He might withdraw through Syria

[Cocoa]

9. no, but he's going to rush the elections there

and rush the passage of the constitution.

Both extremely complex processes, especially with the war not really being over, but Bush will make every effort to get them done in time for him to use them in his own election, despite the long-range problems caused by doing them prematurely.

[Zero Gravitas]

11. He can't

There's no way we will be able to get of Iraq within the next year. No doubt Rove will try and manipulate the willing coprporate media whores as much as possible, but we're stuck in Iraq for several years if not much longer.

[beyurslf]

12. I have been thinking

they have an October surprise planned. Say, if we catch Saddam or Osama in the next few months, and maybe hold him. Then in OCt 2004, oh look who we caught. Brings the focus right back to 9/11 and the hero for catching him.

[Donna Zen]

13. Exactly

and there are many other correct answers here.

1) No war on tv no matter how many Americans are being killed
everyday.

2) Many, many happy homecomings with an occassional tv
movie of the week.

3) Large corporations will stock pile to bring up job growth

4) Expect to see more "balanced" forums of Reps trashing
Dems, with the exception of a sporadic appearance of the
Joes (Biden and Lieberman.)

This is a forever war; they don't need to end it, they just need to wash it down the memory hole. Since the GOP=PNAC controls all corporate and most non-corporate media, one could preempt next year's campaign coverage with the phrase "mission accomplished."

The next question is: how hard can we fight? Shoulder to shoulder is the answer.

[twilight]

14. Impeach Bush now!!! Why wait for more hell?

Viable reasons to impeach Bush:


The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and
Misdemeanors. - - ARTICLE II, SECTION 4 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

President George W. Bush, Vice President Richard B. Cheney, Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld, and Attorney General John David Ashcroft have committed violations and subversions of the Constitution of the United States of America in an attempt to carry out with impunity crimes against peace and humanity and war crimes and deprivations of the civil rights of the people of the United States and other nations, by assuming powers of an imperial
executive unaccountable to law and usurping powers of the Congress, the Judiciary and those reserved to the people of the United States, by the following acts:

1) Seizing power to wage wars of aggression in defiance of the U.S. Constitution, the U.N. Charter and the rule of law; carrying out a massive assault on and occupation of Iraq, a country that was not threatening the United States, resulting in the death and maiming of tens of thousands of Iraqis, and hundreds of U.S. G.I.s.

2) Lying to the people of the U.S., to Congress, and to the U.N., providing false and deceptive rationales for war.

3) Authorizing, ordering and condoning direct attacks on civilians, civilian facilities and locations where civilian casualties were unavoidable.

4) Threatening the independence and sovereignty of Iraq by belligerently changing its government by force and assaulting Iraq in a war of aggression.

DENNIS J. KUCININCH FOR PRESIDENT IN 2004!!!

:dem: :kick: