Bush Considers Iraq Exit Strategy Options. What Will He Do?

[DistressedAmerican]

I can't make up my mind on which whether Syria or Iran is the more tasty treat for the neocons and religious right. Attacking Syria directly helps Israel which they clearly love. After all, Jesus has to have a home to come home to. On the other hand we already have Iran surrounded and we are making a lot of noise about their WMD'S!!!

Time will tell. Hey just maybe those North Koreans will need a spanking. I doubt it though, unless they get too openly in the administration's face.

What's your bet? Iran, Syria, North Korea, Other, All of the above? Or just possible none of the above. There's an argument to be made for this option. We are pretty tied down at the moment. Let's here it.

My money is on Iran. Should want to go in around March. It gets hot over there.

Distressed American
www.seedsofdoubt.com/distressedamerican/main.htm

Don't Give Them A Moment's Rest in '05!

[jody]

1. Declare the elections a success and democracy established, then leave. n/t

[DistressedAmerican]

2. Any Second Act?

Has God or Richard Pearle told him to bring democracy to any of the other "dark corners of the world"?

[jody]

11. Perhaps but Bush doesn't have the logistics and operational capacity to

transform such dreams into reality. He can try and face a more devastating defeat than he has received in Iraq. I don't believe his handlers will let that happen. They'll accept their gains for their turn in power, try to save some of the gains they've made, and wait until they return to power a few decades from now.

"When all is said and done, more is said than done!"

Evil believes it will triumph over Good. Will it? :shrug:

[DistressedAmerican]

18. That's very possible. But, I wonder if the Neocon ideologs will let it go

It is really hard to say. They may try to run the ball as far as possible before the clock runs out. Consequences be damned. The whole Neo-Con/Noereganite agenda is about spreading this type of thing around the entire region.

As I see it, their agenda basically boils down to a few basic tenets: 1) As the lone superpower, we have a unique opportunity to use America's military and economic power to spread American style democracy throughout the Middle East. 2) Our biggest and far most important ally in the region is Israel and much of our foreign policy efforts (in Iraq and elsewhere are aimed at increasing their security). 3)America must greatly increase our military superiority to maintain our unchallenged role as lone (gunman) superpower. Essentially an economic and military imperialism.

In their own words:
"Our aim is to remind Americans of these lessons and to draw their consequences for today. Here are four consequences:

• we need to increase defense spending significantly if we are to carry out our global
responsibilities today and modernize our armed forces for the future;
• we need to strengthen our ties to democratic allies and to challenge regimes hostile to our interests and values;
• we need to promote the cause of political and economic freedom abroad;
• we need to accept responsibility for America's unique role in preserving and extending an international order friendly to our security, our prosperity, and our principles.

Such a Reaganite policy of military strength and moral clarity may not be fashionable today. But it is necessary if the United States is to build on the successes of this past century and to ensure our security and our greatness in the next."

I have posted several of their most explicit documents on their philosophies at my website.

Their classic manifesto Rebuilding America's Defenses:
http://www.seedsofdoubt.com/distressedamerican/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf

Two docs on their Iraq strategy:
http://www.seedsofdoubt.com/distressedamerican/iraq-20040315.pdf
and
http://www.seedsofdoubt.com/distressedamerican/iraq-20040511.pdf


The problem is that these guys have really gotten to Dubya's head.


A great site has come into being that stands in open opposition to these policies. Please visit it: http://www.oldamericancentury.org/

[Sugarbleus]

16. And run the troops on over to IRAN......... :o( n/t

[grumpy old fart]

3. We leave anytime soon, the place devolves into civil war...

Chimp has put himself in a catch 22....he can't leave too soon, as civil war is inevitable....but his staying will just lead to more casualties (which at some point, someone, please God, will notice)....his one out, and the one I think he will use, is to have the puppet regime "tell us" to leave in the next year or so. Chimp will claim victory and move on to the next distraction, Iran, while Iraq sorts itself out under our continued covert "assistance".....

[MichiganVote]

4. I think the civil war has already begun. We're just in the way

[rumpel]

5. They are masters of fact distortion. The new Iraqi gov will rule with

fear under remote control from the WH, and if they fail * & Co will blame it on them. Maybe he is no longer worried about oil from Iraq, since all three branches of government now are free to raid all recources within the country. ANWAR, very soon probably CA coast and as far as alternative fuel goes here is an article in the LA Times today:

It's Not All Blue Skies for Drilling Project

Expansion of gas wells in Rocky Mountain states will degrade the air at several national parks.

GILLETTE, Wyo. — When he turned Mt. Rushmore into his granite canvas, sculptor Gutzon Borglum wrote that the faces of Presidents Washington, Jefferson, Roosevelt and Lincoln would remain visible, Lord willing, "until the wind and the rain alone shall wear them away."

Borglum's vision endures in the Black Hills of South Dakota about 130 miles from here, but for nearly a month every year, it may soon become harder to see the famous faces through the man-made haze generated by the addition of 50,000 gas wells in northeastern Wyoming and southeastern Montana.

snip

The federal Bureau of Land Management, under pressure from the White House to fast-track energy production, approved the drilling plan two years ago without incorporating any requirements to reduce the resulting air pollution.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-westair29jan29,0,7261023.story?coll=la-home-headlines

 
 

[DistressedAmerican]

6. They are tapping the country like a junky looking for a vein!

Certainly won't slow down in a second term.

[Just Me]

9. "Civil war" is wishful thinking. US is a common enemy.

The neoCONimperialists WANT their wishful thinking of a civil war in order to proceed with their NO EXIT PLAN. However, the US, as an occupying force, is a common enemy that actually galvanizes the Iraqi people rather than divides them.

However, the neoCONimperialists WANT to create an environment which induces a "civil war" such that PERMANENT US MILITARY PRESENCE will be justified.

In other words, the "civil war" thingy,...is a neoCONimperialist notion,...NOT REALITY.

Oh, those neoCONimperialists are tricky little demons,...aren't they?

[Just Me]

7. Actually, the neoCONimperialists are pursuing a NO EXIT PLAN.

Geez. Maybe there are fewer folks who are familiar with PNAC than I thought.

The "plan" is PERMANENT MILITARY PRESENCE.

That would be a NO EXIT PLAN.

:mad:

[DistressedAmerican]

10. I am well aquainted with PNAC and my guess is

that bases will be established but the admininistration will try to re-jigger the forces there to free some up to further expand their master plan for the region. They only have 4 more years to "leave their mark".

[Just Me]

20. True. The NO EXIT PLAN applies to strategic areas in the M.E.

Doesn't mean they have no intention of preparing for several more wars and, hence, rearrangement of forces for those purposes.

[EVDebs]

8. Funny graphics ! But any kind of 'Exit Strategy' is too late...

unless you can say "In boats" like Lt. Kerry did way back then !

I thought to begin with that we'd never enter a war of any kind without an exit strategy, as part of the so-called Powell Doctrine. And the War Powers Act of 1973...nowadays that's just a paper to pee on by PNACers and Office of Special (Stovepiped) Plans.

Truthful "circumstances" for war ? Just an opportunity to lie to Congress. Can't wait for the new 'pretexts' to turn up.

[Democrat Dragon]

12. They might attack Iran, after all * has been talking about it.

However after Iran they might want to go after....

Saudia Arabia!

I know it sounds silly, to suggest it, but I once found this article by the CATO institute stating that some of the neocons would like to attack Saudia Arabia. If you still think it's impossible remember that picture of Rumsfeld shaking Saddam's hand.

[DistressedAmerican]

13. Intersting thought.

I'd think it more likely if the Bush's hadn't been in bed with the Saudi's for over 5 decades.

Based on that history, I'm not sure I'd be against it.

[jazzjunkysue]

14. Suggestion: Drop Dubya off on a nice street in Falluja. Done.

Let the great liberator show us how it's done.

[arewenotdemo]

15. I can see it now

the Cheerleader-in-Chief personally "planting the flag of freedom firmly" in Falluljah.

if there was a god in heaven...

[John_H]

17. Once again, Rove plays the one-percenters like a fiddle.

A couple of eighth notes over here when cheney babbles something about iran. That's enough to get everybody all worked up. But in the background, the real work is being done. Plotting with the new "government" in Iraq about how they're going to demand we leave in order to get the US out of the mess chimp got us into.

And the people screaming over the iran invasion that ain't gonna happen are provideing all the cover they need.

We ought to be screaming "cut and run!" and "lost the war" over and over, as chimp tries to extricate himself from iraq with honor.

[DistressedAmerican]

19. I've been thinking and I believe the "they will just ask us to leave"

theory is mainly wishful thinking at this time. I do not think that this counsel will be the ones. They are here to write a constitution. Perhaps after such a document is ratified they'd do it. But, I do not think right now.

[leesa]

21. Every day he changes his mind!

They CAN'T leave Iraq if they intend to invade Iran and Syria. They have to use their bases. It's a completely failed strategery.

[jazzjunkysue]

22. I think it's all going the way PNAC planned.

Destabilize, occupy, rob, rape, colonize, control.