Who are these fools that think we will buy the " Korean Solution"? Just how many of you believe this is a good way to go ? Have you really thought it ? The Military, or at least part of it, think this is the way to go.
BAGHDAD -- U.S. military officials here are increasingly envisioning a "post-occupation" troop presence in Iraq that neither maintains current levels nor leads to a complete pullout, but aims for a smaller, longer-term force that would remain in the country for years.
WaPo
Well anyone that thinks this is OK can Kiss My Ass. For years Bushco has either lied and said we weren't building permanent Bases or given us some other song and dance as to why we are spending Billions to build these bases. Now we know part of the truth, " Korean Solution" my ass.
After watching the Republican debates last week, we know that all but one of their Candidates would support a long term stay in Iraq. Remembering back to that debate, one of the things we didn't hear was the old theme of " When they standup , we will stand down ". Did it cross you mind like it did mine? Since the Iraqi Army and Police can't or won't stand up, Bush has been left holding his ermm, finger to wind. What happen to that frame is a question I've heard around here a lot in the last couple months. Here's the answer we have been waiting breathlessly for.
"The idea was, 'As they stand up, we'll stand down,' " he said. That phrase has been all but banished from the Green Zone, as has the notion of measuring U.S. progress in Iraq by the number of Iraqi troops trained or by changes in U.S. casualty counts.
"We had previously 'transitioned' ourselves into irrelevance, and the whole thing was going to hell in a handbasket," a senior official commented in an e-mail. WaPo
Was, WAS ? "Was going to hell in a handbasket"? I mean really, it's going to hell in a handbasket with rockets attached to help it along, all prolonging this ordeal does it slow down the process and add to the body count. If they think we are going to go along with this they can just Kiss my ....
What about our own Candidates and what they think? Hillary's message has been mixed at best and leaves me wondering what she would really do if elected. In March Hillary has a few things to say about what she would do. Let's take a look and see if they sound like the " Korean Solution" or not.
Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton foresees a ''remaining military as well as political mission'' in Iraq, and says that if elected president, she would keep a reduced military force there to fight Al Qaeda, deter Iranian aggression, protect the Kurds and possibly support the Iraqi military.....She said in the interview that there were ''remaining vital national security interests in Iraq'' that would require a continuing deployment of American troops.
I'll admit I've never been a fan of Hillary but to be fair she has also said she will end this war if she is elected. Having said that I wonder how one can end a War while leaving behind troops to still fight? Sen. Clinton in the same article lays out some of her ideas. Once you read the following quote ask yourself if that sounds like the " Korean Solution"? It does to me, or a version of it anyway.
While Mrs. Clinton declined to estimate the size of a residual American troop presence, she indicated that troops might be based north of Baghdad and in western Anbar Province.
''It would be far fewer troops,'' she said. ''But what we can do is to almost take a line sort of north of -- between Baghdad and Kirkuk, and basically put our troops into that region, the ones that are going to remain for our antiterrorism mission, for our northern support mission, for our ability to respond to the Iranians, and to continue to provide support, if called for, for the Iraqis.''
Mrs. Clinton described a mission with serious constraints.
''We would not be doing patrols,'' she added. ''We would not be kicking in doors. We would not be trying to insert ourselves in the middle between the various Shiite and Sunni factions. I do not think that's a smart or achievable mission for American forces.''NYTimes
So just how do we pullout or is it even practical to pullout? We have sent Billions and billions of dollars worth of equipment to Iraq. Armored vehicles, jeep, tents, computors, hell you name it, we have probably sent it to Iraq. How do we deal with all that stuff? Do we leave it behind, blow it up, or try to bring it home ? In this WaPo article comes a description of just how big a problem this will be and should be given some thought.
Even if a total pullout is the goal, it could take a year to execute a full withdrawal. One official estimated that with only one major route from the country -- through southern Iraq to Kuwait -- it would take at least 3,000 large convoys some 10 months to remove U.S. military gear and personnel alone, not including the several thousand combat vehicles that would be needed to protect such an operation.
So the big question is how much will we tolerate and for how long ? This is what your choice for Pres. should be based on, this and the Restoration of our Democracy and Rules of Law. Important responsibilities.
My own personal feelings are if anyone is going to continue to commit our Troops and funding to any kind of long term Korean Solution, or anything close to it, they can Kiss My Ass and I will fight to see them defeated, no matter who they are or from which party.
As for the Billions in equipment, we take what we can in a short period of time, give to the Iraqi Gov. what they can use, and blowup the rest. The bases themselves will probably be looted bare before the Iraqs could protect them so we either leave them to the looters and destroy them as we leave.
Crossposted at Daily Kos
__________________________
