Sitting on the benchmarks

I was against U.S. military intervention in Iraq since Pres. Bush called the situation an imminent threat (lies). Now most Americans are feeling bamboozled. I see it as a money making venture for private industry trying to open up new markets. I see no problem with U.S. servicemen leaving Iraq. If the private sector wants to continue their operations in Iraq they have every right to do so but it was wrong to use our military to invade
Iraq and it is wrong for our military to
occupy Iraq.

I think Obama was clear. The better option would be to focus our military and intelligence efforts on Central Asia, the real al Qaeda. Obama calls Iraq the distraction from the war we need to fight. Given what we've heard about how al Qaeda has regained strength comparable to before 9-11, after hearing for six years how they've been hit hard and degraded, Obama may have a point.

I don't get it. The best way to support our troops is to prevent them from getting killed. All you people who say "We have a job do that needs to be done" or "We have a moral obligation to help the Iraqis," if it is that important, why don't you volunteer to go to Iraq yourself? If any of our soldiers there want to come home, we should let them. Let those who say they believe in the "mission" do the fighting, instead of just whining on message boards?

Good question. Good job. You need to ask those senators and representatives to set up some benchmark for them also. Those senators sent soldiers to battlefield, but does not want to support them now. How can they ask Iraq government to meet all benchmarks. We need to set a benchmark of approval rating of 50% for the current senators and representatives. Can you believe these people only get around 20% approval rating? What laws have these people passed or accomplished during the past six months other than getting some post office renamed? Wake up Americans.

I am very happy that you pressed Mr. Reid on this subject today.

It is indeed our moral obligation to help the Iraqis. The Iraqi citizens, the children... they are our brothers and sisters.

We mustn't fail them.

Mr. Obama may be unwilling to clarify, so I will. The bad option is what happens when we withdraw---there will be continuing chaos until some political stability of the Iraqis choice emerges. It is their country, and they will have to figure out what to do with their future. The worse option is that we stay and create even more terrorists, encourage even more insurgents to come to Iraq to remove "the occupiers", and there will be even more innocent bloodshed.

tony - good point, we should be in to win period.

DKNY - umm what muzzling is being done?
I think your talking about Hilary' Presidency when she was president in the 90's when she sicked the IRS after anybody who questioned her. I guess Vitter was right the moral fabric of this country is under attack by the libs and fake Conservatives.

Chuck - During any war strategies change you evolve against the enemy. When People say stay the course they are not talking about strategy but the original goal. In a Post 9-11 world, could we take a chance? See Hussein had vision of conquering old Persia which included Saudi Arabia, Iran, Kuwait and so forth. He would of just built up again.

This front of the War could of been prevented if France and People like Marc Rich, George Soros did not illegal do the oil for Food scandal, If Clinton sent in the air support for the Kurds for them to take out Saddam, Clinton called it off right before the Kurds moved, thus allowing Saddam to use chemical weapons against them.

9/11 would of been saved if Clinton took out Bin Laden the at least 9 times we know of that he was in site of the CIA.

There is NO civil war going on in Iraq, Look at Kosovo for civil war better yet look at our own country for a true civil war, where did it not take over 100 years to fully win ? Figuring it took the Republicans to pass the civil rights bills in the 60's against the Dems. Bring Democracy takes time.

Under the libs billions have died, look at Rwanda when Clinton again pulled out support from there and over 800000 people were killed.

So come on, the Libs are wrong period, they can never give a straight answer.

Way to go barack, that is righ he said the right answer that we (americans) all know that there are no good option but only bad and worth options in Iraq. so if any one was saying something good about this hypocrisy war or gaining oil that will be only bush, so america lets exercise our right to make dems impeach him !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! bush ofcourse

DKNY LOL what they lack in integrity, they make up for in predictability

Barack Obama is right. It may be nonspecific but it's the right answer. We shouldn't be there in the first place, and now we need to get out. Civil war may erupt. But maybe it has to. I mean, the Shiites divvied up the oil fields, and the Sunnies didn't sign off on the accord. Nothing is valid as long as we are propping up the government. Maybe the country needs to go into chaos before order - true, valid order - can be restored. All we are doing right now is postponing the inevitable. The administration and those that believe in the administration cling to the belief that we can secure the country with military might. It's time to concede that there is no merit to that belief.

Come on, Jake, you're a journalist, do some research before asking question that can easily be answered...You can look on any Dem candidates website and find what their plan is for Iraq, or should I say the war on terror, after we leave. Here, Jake, I'll help you; this is a direct quote from Obama's campaign site: "At the Chicago Council on Foreign Relations in November 2005, Senator Obama called for: (1) a reduction in the number of U.S. troops; (2) a time frame for a phased withdrawal; (3) the Iraqi government to make progress on forming a political solution; (4) improved reconstruction efforts to restore basic services in Iraq; and (5) engaging the international community, particularly key neighboring states and Arab nations, to become more involved in Iraq." And, Jake, this is only a tiny piece of what Obama wants to do with strengthening our country's moral standing around the world.

Why is "Staying the course" or "Pull out of Iraq now" the only two options? What ever happened to "Fighting a war to win"?

Thank you for asking the question that I have in mind every time I hear talk of withdrawal from Iraq: what happens next? I deplore the Repubs' position of "staying the course" and an attitude of "wait and see" until September when a miracle is obviously expected. Nor can I fall into lockstep with the Dems and their continued cries of troop withdrawal from Iraq (which would surely be vetoed by the President anyway) without considering what should be done after that. Neither party has made any convincing argument as to what should happen next in Iraq.

Although I found former Sec. Colin Powell to be an ineffective foreign policy leader, I completely agreed with him about one important principle concerning Iraq. He called it the "Pottery Barn" rule, or "If you break it, you bought it."

The US declared war on Iraq under the most flimsy of pretenses; disrupted its government, its economy, and its way of life; created a state of chaos with a squabbling government of petty tyrants who are more interested in consolidating their own sectarian power than in solving the country's problems; fostered an atmosphere which serves as a proving ground for terrorists; and directly or indirectly caused countless deaths of Iraqis. For us to withdraw troops from Iraq without any plans in place to help the country we destroyed is morally unconscionable. This is George W. Bush's historical legacy and this is what he will be remembered for, no matter what his interpretations may be about benchmarks or the price of tea in China.

And there it is, on cue! I could have written that White House report. That was as predictible as Senator Vitters' invoking God when he spoke of his paying for sex with hookers at the same time he was married with children and decrying the fraying moral fabric of our country.

In light of the history this White House has muzzling opinions different from its own and squelching disagreement and debate, it is not clear why anyone should put any stock at all in the White House's Iraq self-evaluation. Let me guess: the report will say that there are some problems, but there are these really good things that are largely underreported.