Nation Building

Very few Americans would agree that the US should engage in overseas nation building. Most Americans would agree that we have our work cut out for us right here at home.

Iraq lost almost 90% of its industrial and manufacturing bases when the U.S. invaded the country and systematically shut down most of the state run businesses. Those businesses have not reopened and probably will not without some kind of government support -- something that does not exist at the moment.

Farming is in a severe state of distress due to outdated practices, lack of planning, technology, and again, non-existent government support.

Small businesses are slowly appearing to fill the needs of Iraqi's, with the advent of shaky security in the urban areas, but these businesses provide few if any jobs, and corruption is still widespread.

About all Iraq has going for it at the moment is the ability to produce and sell oil, but again, there are few jobs associated with oil production. Iraq's were poor in 2003 and they are now poorer in 2010.

The United States has pumped more than $800 billion dollars into Iraq, as the representative costs for liberating a nation from a tyrant, for fighting insurgents that invaded the nation when Saddam Hussein was hung, and for costs related to rebuilding it basically from the ground up.

How desperate are the Iraqi's and how has the war affected them? They are rather desperate and quite affected.

2.25 million Iraqi's have been displaced from their homes.

2.1 million to 2.25 million Iraqi's fled to Syria and Jordan.

The current unemployment rate? 27% to 60%, varying from region to region.

Consumer Price Inflation? Well above 50%

Percent of professionals who have left Iraq since 2003? - 40%

The number of Iraqi Physicians Before 2003 Invasion? - Approximately 34,000. The number of Iraqi Physicians Who Have Left Iraq Since 2003 Invasion? - more than 12,000

The number of Iraqi Physicians Murdered Since 2003 Invasion? - 2,000

Electricity is still woefully lacking in most homes.

To date, the percentage of water treatment plants that have been rehabilitated, stands at less than 40%.

Iraq’s Presidency Council announced that the national parliamentary election will take place on March 7, 2010. In this election, voters will elect 325 members of Iraq’s Council of Representatives. The acceptance or the rejection of this upcoming election by the people of Iraq is going to largely determine the future of Iraq.

If the country does remain stable following the election, then the United States can then claim some amount of success for all that has been done to infuse democracy into a nation where it did not exist. If the country erupts into civil war, as some are predicting, then the only words that will describe seven long and costly years of incursion, will be..."a complete and utter failure."

Although I personally disagree with our having invaded the country, I do pray that it remains stable.

The people of Iraq have been through enough.

Wow. Great figures. Where did you get information to compound all these figures? Have you been to Iraq?

Iraq has been part of about fourteen empires and nations since it's early history, with Babylonia being a prominent Biblical area. My guess is that Syria, Iran and maybe Turkey will probably absorb that region through force or peaceful means. For those following Biblical prophecy, the Euphrates River is key in the end times. What about our trillion dollars spent there? Bye-bye.

Nunchuck and alpo, what is the alternative. Do you think we should pack up our military and leave tomorrow? Saying we shouldn't have invaded Iraq to begin with doesn't answer my question. Do you think Iran or Syria could do better a job of getting Iraq on its feet again? I'm always amazed at the liberal loones rationale. "Leave Iraq now" Do you realize the ramifications. You think things are bad now, if we were to leave in 6 months their would be a massacre of biblical proportions.

Larry, what I would like to say to you, I can't. My mother would come back and show me the errors of my ways.

The fact that you either don't spell check, or merely don't care says enough. However, you could show a bit of civility, if you have any to show.

Leaving Iraq was an option as soon as Hussein was discovered and pulled from his hiding place. It will continue to be an option until it finally occurs. And yet, spending more money on a country that would rather we had never come at all is an option I hope our leaders will not consider.

But spend or not, nothing will ever change in that entire region until the people themselves decide they have had enough. It's happened elsewhere and it can happen there as well.

The key is they have to want it badly enough to fight and die for it themselves. Then and only then should anyone else step up and offer assistance to help finish the job.

And by the way, that is not the rationale of a "Liberal Looney", it is, however, the belief of one who benefits from ancestors who did exactly as I have outlined above.

Let it snow, let it snow, let it snow, Woody

Alprova, sources please? Saddam murdered foreigners; therefore foreigners could and did justly set him on a road to trial and execution. What is Iraq's problem? What is the problem with nation-building there and in Afghanistan? Why is the cartoon true for a change? Hint: Mohammed started wars (and is dead), but Jesus taught and healed (and is alive).
Hint: Iraq was thrown together after World War I as a mix of Sunnis, Shiites, and Kurds, having less in common than the 13 colonies of A.D. 1776 had. Hint: Saddam and Bush and the new Iraq, and Obama, agree on big government instead of on "...TO SECURE THESE RIGHTS, governments are instituted..." Instead of nation-building, we should've set up a limited government securing rights. Would results have been any worse? No voting or holding office, Iraqis, unless you sign off on the US Bill of Rights, or maybe the UN Declaration of Human Rights. Is there hope? Yeah. Jesus said, teach all ethnic groups to obey all My orders (Mt 28); then He pushed off to Heaven and left us to get it done. Which means we'll do it. (www.garynorth.com/freebooks; Kenneth Gentry's book HE SHALL HAVE DOMINION.)

Woody, this morning as I was leaving your moms house she told me she wouldn't get mad at what you had to say so bring it. Concerning my spelling, your correct, it sucks. My delivery may be lacking but the substance is great.

larry,

If you were truly a Libertarian you would know that we should pack up and leave Iraq. You would also know that we shouldn't have gone there in the first place. The Libertarian perspective on America's military is the most senseable of all the political parties. Are you a Libertarian or a neo-conservative?

Mohammed started wars (and is dead), but Jesus taught and healed (and is alive).

Andrew - Sources please...

Larrythelibertation wrote: "Nunchuck and alpo, what is the alternative."

Are you asking a question or was that a statement? I see you have trouble spelling too.

"Do you think we should pack up our military and leave tomorrow? Saying we shouldn't have invaded Iraq to begin with doesn't answer my question. Do you think Iran or Syria could do better a job of getting Iraq on its feet again?"

What gives the United States the right to invade another country, to upend all semblance of civilization, to inadvertently cause the deaths of what has been estimated to be 600,000 civilians, to sacrifice of 4,693 American troops, all in a quest..."[to] do a better job of getting Iraq on it's feet again?"

Our military is to be used in the defense of the people of the United States. There is no justification that permits our Government to use our men and women in uniform as tools to effect regime changes in other nations.

"I'm always amazed at the liberal loones rationale."

I'm further amazed at the rationale offered by those who sit in their armchairs, from a position of complete disassociation, who think that their pro-war stances are rational to begin with.

It's not your fault. You haven't had to bury a loved one as a result of our Government's outrageous policy of forcing our men and women to be used as sacrificial lambs to clean up messes that were created by our Government to begin with.

" "Leave Iraq now" Do you realize the ramifications. You think things are bad now, if we were to leave in 6 months their would be a massacre of biblical proportions."

As I stated in my earlier post, if the people of Iraq reject the outcome of the Parliamentary elections, that country will explode into civil war.

AndrewLohr requested: "Alprova, sources please?"

Too numerous to list. Google "Iraq" and specific variations related to the above statistics and start reading. Much has been written about the progression of events in that country since 2003.

I didn't say I was pro war and I never said we should have invaded to begin with but what's done is done and now we have to do the right thing from this point forward. The right thing to do at this point is to leave Iraq better than when we found it. Leaving Iraq unstable would likely lead to a take over by Iran thus creating a superpower that would control a huge amount of the worlds oil. You think Iran is a threat now, leave a power vacuum in their backyard and see how threatening they become Furthermore I'm not an armchair quarterback. To say that I have a little experience with the arab and persian community would be an understatement.
Lastly Alpo, I have burried loved ones, I've presented the U.S. Flag to the widow with three fatherless young boys standing by her side at the grave side service, I've wept during taps so don't assume I don't understand the price that is paid. I've also carried limbless afghan children who were victims of suicide bombers. Suicide bombers that were trying to kill afghan officials who were glad we were there,and were trying to improve their enviornment with our help. The suicide bomber didn't kill or even wound his target but did kill or wound several police and about 14 children. Ah what the hell do I know? Let's just quit, go home and let them go back to denying women their rights.

Larry, you're a stand-up American alright. Do you hear the sound of silence?

There's nothing like one with frontline, real life experience to silence the Left who talked about "armchair critics", "pro-war", misquoted you AND corrected your spelling. Sound familiar? Not one seems to know what the word 'enemy' means, never mind confront one and deal with the reality. What our soldiers do and have been doing in Iraq, Afghanistan and around the world cannot be calculated by sheer data and stats. No decent person wants war. But no decent person should go to the aid of others and then leave them helpless before the job is finished. Unless you're the enemy.

Ah, silence is golden.

Don't quit now, larry. That is exactly what the quislings here want you to do. Hang in there. Your posts are spot-on...that's why they detest seeing them. The truth not only hurts them, it destroys their arguments.

yes, it is tough to keep from being discouraged by the deliberately thick headed folks here and those who live outside our country pretending to represent Americans and know their thoughts.

You are right, you know; we cannot bring down a country's government and then turn and walk away. Upon that removal we have a moral obligation -- a self-imposed American one -- to see that country through, and help in, its first stumbling steps toward freedom for its peoples.

Nothing these naysayers chitter-chatter about can change that obligation by one word.

Another good cartoon, Clay. Lotta truth in it.

larry,

Leaving Iraq better than we found it is a noble,but arguably impossible objective. At this point polling data shows that a large majority of Iraqis want us out now/soon. We should respect the will of the Iraqi people.

When the US toppled Saddam and disbanded the (mostly Sunni) army,the Shia became the dominant political force in Iraq. Because of that,Iraq will be a natural ally of Iran going forward. The US basically placed Iraq in the Iranian sphere of influence by not understanding Iraq's internal politics before invading. Iran was delighted with the US invasion of Iraq.

As to women's rights and human rights,shouldn't we be tireless advocates,but not to point of invading other countries? No one has suggested invading Saudi Arabia because of women's lack of rights. More mutual respect among cultures would serve as a good foreign policy goal.

Earlier this morning I wrote the following, "...Larry, what I would like to say to you, I can't. My mother would come back and show me the errors of my ways."

A while later larrythelibertarian countered with, "...Woody, this morning as I was leaving your moms house she told me she wouldn't get mad at what you had to say so bring it."

Well, Larry either you are the most dense individual on this site or you are even less civil or more crass than even I gave you credit for. Most here would understand my saying, "...my mom would come back..." as alluding to the fact my mother has passed away.

Do yourself a favor and check your shoe size before attempting to stick your foot in your mouth.

I feel better now, Woody

After August 31, 2010 our combat mission in Iraq will end. After that date our mission will have three tasks: train, equip, and advise the Iraqi Security Forces; conduct targeted counterterrorism operations; and provide force protection for military and civilian personnel. All combat troops to leave by end of 2011.

Eventually we will extricate ourselves from this mess along with the financial mess that was left by the previous administration.

The past administrations policies have crippled this country. Are these the same type of people we want to be handed the reins again? How many times must we be flogged by this conservative neo-con philosophy?

After Larrythelibertarian quotes, he finishes with: "Let's just quit, go home and let them go back to denying women their rights."

Oh...pardon me. I wasn't aware that we were in Iraq and Afghanistan fighting the fight for women's rights. I must have missed the vote in Congress that authorized that particular tenet as a reason to plant boots on the ground of the Middle East.

canaryinthecoalmine panted like a puppy at the feet of Larrythelibertarian with: "There's nothing like one with frontline, real life experience to silence the Left who talked about "armchair critics", "pro-war", misquoted you AND corrected your spelling."

I have doubts the man served. If he did serve, it was not as he claimed. His declaration came as an afterthought, rather than to offer it at a more appropriate time, when he first posted on the subject.

"Not one seems to know what the word 'enemy' means, never mind confront one and deal with the reality."

I dare offer that not one person that our military has encountered in battle in both Iraq and Afghanistan has attempted to harm one person within the borders of this country. Our military went over there to wage a war and they found it.

"What our soldiers do and have been doing in Iraq, Afghanistan and around the world cannot be calculated by sheer data and stats. No decent person wants war. But no decent person should go to the aid of others and then leave them helpless before the job is finished. Unless you're the enemy."

The job will never be "finished." People of that region have been fighting amongst themselves for centuries. They will still be fighting after all of us discussing this issue are dead and buried.

Alpo, let me be claer. I have made 3 combat tours since 911. I do know what its like to loose loved ones. I have presented more than my share of U.S. Flags to widows at grave side services. I have cried many tears over taps. I have carried Afghan childrens lifeless bodies to triage after a suicide bomber killed 14 children, countless adults and wounded many more. I don't advertise my service inorder to prove a point. My argument has substance. I could tell you stories that would break your liberal, ungreatful hearts others that would make you retch (check my spelling A-hole) but this isn't the forum and you aren't worth the time. Rolando, canary thanks for the backup. Woody if you hadn't brought your dead mother into the forum I wouldn't have used her in my response.

Larrythelibertarian stated : "Alpo, let me be claer. I have made 3 combat tours since 911. I do know what its like to loose loved ones. I have presented more than my share of U.S. Flags to widows at grave side services. I have cried many tears over taps. I have carried Afghan childrens lifeless bodies to triage after a suicide bomber killed 14 children, countless adults and wounded many more."

That's your story and don't mind me one bit. Stick to it as long as you wish. I find a near word-for-word reposting of it to be even less convincing.

"I don't advertise my service inorder to prove a point. My argument has substance."

Do you really think so? It's very much along the lines of the same crap that was shoveled by GWB and the Republicans in 2003 and beyond, in order to keep Americans convinced that what we were doing over there was in the name of national defense, and pardon me, but those silly arguments have lost all of their luster and substance.

Now in case you truly are someone who served in either country, I want it made clear that I absolutely have all the respect in the world for those who served in the trenches. They were ordered to go over there and do our Government's bidding. But we (as in the military) went there under false pretenses and it opened up a very big can of worms.

"I could tell you stories that would break your liberal, ungreatful hearts others that would make you retch (check my spelling A-hole) but this isn't the forum and you aren't worth the time."

I am quite shockproof. I, like most Americans, am not interested in any more stories. We've heard enough of them. The facts are more telling to the reality of the situation and my opinion(s) on the matter are unshakable, as are your own.

Regarding your remark to Woody, "...if you hadn't brought your dead mother into the forum I wouldn't have used her in my response."

The fact that you did "use her" in your response, only shows how little class are able to muster when debating an issue.

All Americans of all political persuasions honour your service and the horrors of war that you have endured. For better or for worse,those experiences will be with you for life.

That not withstanding,a soldiers strategic overview may be more clouded than clarified by the horrors of combat. The geopolitical and international economic issues are rarely revealed or well understood by any but a few insiders. To think that boots on the ground adds strategic insight would be naive.

You have brought thoughtful opinions to this comment board and I hope you will continue to do so...even when,or if,I disagree.

nucanuck wrote,

"To think that boots on the ground adds strategic insight would be naive."

I'd agree with this thought if the person you are referring to is a low rank grunt. In actuality Larry attained a pretty impressive rank and was positioned in such a way as to have a great deal of insight on our military actions in the Middle East. I'd wager that Larry has a much better grasp upon the situation in Iraq (and Afghanistan) than our current POTUS.

As for my opinion on the subject of Iraq.

You break it, you buy it. I feel we owe it to the Iraqi people to help them achieve a stable state. I have no illusions about the difficulty of the task.

A few posters above seem to think our military personnel are forced to go off to foreign lands and fight wars against their will. Please remember that our military is a 100% volunteer force. These young men and women CHOOSE to join. They are doing exactly what they signed up for. They signed a check, payable to the U.S.A., for an amount up to and including their very lives.

To all of them, including you Larry, thank you very much.

Woody, you did bring in your mother into this, but Larry, there are some softballs which should only swatted at by friends.

As for Nation Building, I was very against invasion, in part because of the aftermath.

Sadly, we may have triggered genocide with our intitial decision. To prevent it will take an effort we Americans don't have the funds or the will to pursue. I could be wrong. Afterall, things are better in Iraq than I expected. I said we'd be there 15 years.

But back to nation building. It's not our job, but we took it on. We are reaping what we sowed. Let's do our best to do it right.

SCOTTYM, While it is true that we have a volunteer military it is not one in which a soldier or sailor has an option of choosing which countries he will agree to invade once he has enlisted.

Nunchuck, where do you gather your gather your insight? Allow me to educate you further. Their are three different levels when it comes to the military. Tactical, operational and strategic. Tactical being "boots on the ground" and strategic being the generals plans. Being that I was a commander in one tour and a generals aide in another I probably have a good idea of what's going on.

Max, are you so naive as to think military recruits are not aware of what they are signing, where they can be sent, and what they will do there?

What they don't know [then] is how they will be changed in the years to come...how they will grow, mature...and age. And how their left-behind High School friends one day appear as children with childish thoughts. And within a short decade or two, they become politically conservative. Exposure to Reality has that effect...

Although they picture themselves as "bulletproof", if they think about it they know full well they may return home not carrying their shield but carried upon it. They form very close-knit groups and relationships that last a lifetime and beyond. Go the The Wall and watch a few old codgers [like me] and you might get an inkling of what it means.

Direct exposure to combat is not necessary; witnessing the aftermath is sufficient -- although I am told it is a weaker experience. Go to Haiti [or any VA clinic]; look around; talk a bit; help; volunteer. Embedded War Correspondent Michael Yon has taken some amazing photos in Iraq [http://www.michaelyon-online.com/little-girl.htm is but one of his best. You should read the accompanying text.]

I do not believe today's recruits have changed in the ten years I have been away from them. I shake my head in awe of these young people and I sure don't know where we find them, but I thank God for them every day.

This has gotten much too long.

Larry, you needn't justify yourself to alpo and his ilk. They jabber amongst themselves like monkeys -- and without much more insight and even less result. The best they can do is blame Bush...

larry,

I would argue that Generals and their aides have a military strategic perspective that would be below the geopolitical level of decision making. Generals did not decide to go into Iraq,they took orders and planned accordingly.

You may have had a good overview of what was going on from the military perspective,but that is a long,long way from making you expert in foreign policy and geopolitical decision making.

You may be that expert,but nothing you have revealed so far would indicate expertise beyond your rank and position.

If you are going to "educate me further",your previous post didn't deliver.

Clay...you sure know how to open up the worms don't ya lol. jk. nice comic!

Yeah, larry, take that!

it takes a community organizer with ZERO executive or command experience to "have a military strategic perspective" or to be an "expert in foreign policy and geopolitical decision making" of sufficient "geopolitical level of decision making" level.

The one we have IS expert in kowtow, ring-kissing, forehead-floor bumping, and general grovelling, I must give him that. He is also expert in teleprompter-reading and money-wasting on personal flings -- important international relationship-wise. Chicago evidently prepared him well...

Larry, you made the following two statements:

"Woody, this morning as I was leaving your moms house she told me she wouldn't get mad at what you had to say so bring it. Concerning my spelling, your correct, it sucks. My delivery may be lacking but the substance is great."

"Being that I was a commander in one tour and a generals aide in another I probably have a good idea of what's going on."

I'll tell you up front that I served six years in the USAF and separated as an E-5. I was stationed at a base with roughly 20 Generals and too many O-6's to count. I served in the Honor Guard and attended many high level functions. I also spent time in Bosnia and Mosul, Iraq. Never once did I meet an officer that I could ever imagine saying the things you said in your first post I quoted above, let alone on a public forum. Sorry but I just can't imagine a U.S. military officer making a "your mom" joke and trying to gain credibility at the same time.

Personally, I think you're lying about your rank. Maybe not your service in the Middle East but I definitely think you're stretching the truth with your rank.

On a side note, most officers, especially O-4 and above tend to have impeccable grammar or at least know how to use spell check.

For what it's worth, I believe Iraq is a lost cause and the billions could be better spent elsewhere.

Didja see that Larry?

Apparently you don't write like a USAF officer.

I'll bet you don't even whine when you have to sleep on a cot in a heated tent.

HiDef,

I think you may not be considering the differences between those who command computer operators, wrench spinners, and flyboys, with those who command and live among the bloody hands types.

The former are usually pretty well polished individuals. The latter tends to be a bit rough around the edges, and the humor can get downright crude.

When that ramp goes down at the back of the plane and the operators go running into the the night sky, the commander goes too. It takes a different type. Not better, not worse, just different.

Personally, I think accusing a military officer of lying is unbecoming for an TSgt.

Scott wrote: "A few posters above seem to think our military personnel are forced to go off to foreign lands and fight wars against their will. Please remember that our military is a 100% volunteer force. These young men and women CHOOSE to join. They are doing exactly what they signed up for. They signed a check, payable to the U.S.A., for an amount up to and including their very lives."

Well...that's one way to put it.

I might be inclined to agree with you if it were not for the fact that military recruiters visit our public high schools on missions to fill our young people's heads with illusions of grandeur. They dangle promises of further education to those of lesser means, paid for by the Government, in exchange for a commitment of three years of service.

Is it always a choice? To a young person who has no hope of finding a decent job, or the means to do little else but live on the streets, it's not always a choice, but rather an option open to them in order to avoid starving to death. And we all know that military recruiting centers are routinely located in the more desperate of neighborhoods for that very reason.

Another reality to the situation is that you first, have to live long enough to qualify for and to receive the education benefits, and your hiney belongs to the military for many years after that minimum three year commitment period. An unprecedented number of those serving have been sent into war zones for several tours of duty or have been made to stay there long past the time they were supposed to return to the states.

Without question, there are those who are fine with all of that, but I'll bet there are far more who feel that they have been exploited and used. And of course, there are those who are no longer alive to feel one way or another about it.

While all the "T's" may be crossed and the "I's" may be dotted on the contract that is signed by those who sign up for service, I severely doubt that the military is under any obligation to spell out all that a recruit may be subjected to, or that they may be required to do as a result of their decision to join.

I truly wonder at times, how successful the military would be in recruiting young people, if our economy were humming at it's fullest potential.

Is it an accident that right now, recruiters are having no trouble at all meeting quotas?

Scott wrote: "Personally, I think accusing a military officer of lying is unbecoming for an TSgt."

Personally, I think that impersonating a military officer is rather unbecoming of a human being.

If you have in some way confirmed this man to be what he says he is, then fine. On your word to that effect, I'll be happy to retract and apologize.

If you are taking his word based on postings that he offers, the same as the rest of us, then I call BS. HiDef seems to be seeing the same thing I did.

I have a highly tuned BS detector, from years of interaction in forums, and Larry is setting it off every time he posts.

Alpo, get your BS detector recalibrated. Scottm has known me for over 25 yrs. Woody I retract the mom comment that was unbecoming, unfair and unprofessional. HiDef, I'm rough around the edges, 5 year in the infantry and 3 in SF will tend to do that. I've walked so far w/out sleep it felt like the bags under my eyes were heavier than the pack on my back. Those who have done it will agree. And their are many who haven't served that really appretiate those who have. As far as my grammar, I struggled so much with writing in high school that I minored in English (writing) in college. Spelling and grammar have always plagued me. At 29 I discovered I had a bit of a learning disability. I think the two may be related. I'm still working and learning everyday. For example last week I finally figured out the proper use for "their" and "there". How's that for candor?

SCOTTYM-- A very small nitpick or two, certainly not critical of your post in reply to HiDef.

An Air Force E-5 is a Staff Sergeant; A Tech is an E-6. Let's not promote the dude. Strange HiDef only made Staff in six years...hm-m-m. Must have been a goodly number of years ago.

It is also well known that the Air Force is not exactly a high risk combat service...certainly not your standard front-line work. I know because I was active duty AF for 24 years. My AF brother was a computer tech in Da Nang for almost a year.

Al,

Larry is in no way misrepresenting himself. Your B.S. detector may need to be re-calibrated.

rolando-

Since you are making assumptions, I feel the need to clear things up about my service. First, I tried very hard and successfully was awarded "BTZ" (below the zone). If this program post-dates your service, it is for exceptional Airman First Class (E3) and they are awarded SrA (E4) six months early. This meant I tested early for the SSgt cycle as well. I made SSgt the first time around and had sewn it on with about 3.5 years of service. My AFSC was 1C1X1. I was a Watch Supervisor in an air traffic control tower overseeing daily operations with under four years of experience. I'm sure if they felt that my intelligence was questionable my superiors certainly would not have had me in the position they did.

As for not making TSgt, I only tested once because I only had the opportunity once. I knew I wasn't going to stay in and make a career of it because I had to get out and get hired by the FAA before I turned 31. Even if I would have tried on the test and passed it my sewn on date would have been after I separated. It would not have benefited me one bit.

As I said earlier, I also served in the Honor Guard for almost 2 years. I have carried my fair share of caskets and presented close to 100 flags to family members (mostly WWII veterans). I have also been in multiple pro-sports arenas, on the field, court etc...

Overall the AF is very low risk (although I still think the Navy is the least dangerous). However, when I was in Mosul (and this is the way it is at most other bases with airfields in Iraq) when the base comes under a mortar or rocket attack, they aim for the tallest building first and then fire subsequent rounds based on what they want to try and hit next. I have a video I recorded one night where a mortar hits so close to us, my camera shakes. I have many more stories and pictures that I could share however I think you get my point. For our service, the ARMY awarded all of us Air Force pukes in the tower the Army Commendation Medal. Having said all that, there are many more service men doing much more dangerous work than what I did. A good friend from high school was there at the same time as me as an O-3 in the Army. Compared to HIM, I had it easy. But then again I'm just a dirt bag airman that only made staff in six years...

By the way SCOTTYM, both deployments I went on, I stayed in the exact same quarters as the U.S. Army, Germans, Russians, etc...

Not to disrespect anyone's military service here, but it's obvious that Rolando, Scotty and Larry's points are well-proven. Hi-Def confirmed their truths. As in civilian life, there are many perspectives on war and the necessity of it-or not. What is glaringly obvious though is that those who jump to conclusions, use deceptive, slick language couched in 'niceness' are often proven wrong. And their twisted 'progressive' mindset is on full display for the rest of us to ponder.

Back to the cartoon. At what point can the US say it's time to leave Iraq completely?

There is still some sectarian violence,but there always has been. The government is functioning,the Iraqi military has been reconstituted,life on the street is better. Contracts have been let to develope Iraqi oil fields. Iraq will have plenty of money.

Nearly 25% of the US budget is spent on military and defense related items. Leaving 50,000 "non-combat" troops based in Iraq is an expense that has to be compared with our other needs as we talk about less government spending.

Our wordwide military presence,unlike any other country,may be beyond our security needs AND our ability to afford. We are moving into a new economic era that will call for adjustments to "business as usual". A redefined military posture is sure to be on any list of budgetary items that need review.

canaryinthecoalmine, I want you to pay close attention to this post. I'm going to demonstrate to you how easy it is to retract and apologize when you are proven to be incorrect.

Larry, I humbly apologize for making the accusation that you were misrepresenting your military service. I should not have offered my doubts openly. I hope you will accept my apology, but I would understand completely if you do not.

See how easy that was Canary? It doesn't hurt a bit.

Larry,

Don't let them goad you on spelling! I have a terrible time with putting in the right vowels in the right place.

My bubaboo is nuescence? nuscance? etc. I have to keep going back to spell check that word. It's nuiscance. Who'da thunk it.

I also include a Wikipedia page on Libertarianism, HAH!

Wade through that and decide if you are even a benign Anarchist.

Alprova,

You are right about recruiting practices of the armed services.

Canary,

you should read your submissions carefully, and then do a little insightful judgement on yourself.

Larry, Rolando, and HiDef,

Thank you for your service to OUR country. Both conservatives and liberals have benefited from your sacrifices.

I was brought up to believe that if you broke something then you make it right to the first party's satisfaction. I believe we should be helping to rebuild Iraq.

Larry and HiDef, correct me if I am wrong, but didn't you see that the Iraqi people were very grateful for you to be there as a whole? I have family and friends that were there and come back saying that they were lauded as heroes there.

My military service is very much like HiDefs. I was in USAF for 8 yrs and got out as an E-5 (staff sergeant). Similarly, I sewed on Senior Airman BTZ and made SSGT on my second try. I tested for TSGT only once before getting out and missed it by 3 points. I was a Jet Engine Mechanic. I was awarded inspection orders as the youngest and lowest ranking person ever at the time. (Inspection orders gives one the responsibility to sign off on major repairs to planes that would ground them.)

Alprova, I went in the military primarily to have a career and learn a trade. However, I and everyone else that I ever came in contact with in the AF would have gladly gone to war to protect this great country of ours. Your argument that the kids don't know what they are getting in to is null and void. If you had ever served you would know that you spend the first several weeks training for scenarios of war and capture. As well as just plain maturing the recruits as much as possible. Once again you should live by the quote “it is better to be thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.”

Now were all holding hands and singing kumbaya. A good, healthy debate is great for the soul. To the people that helped defend my arguments, I thank you. For those of you that disagree thanks for excersicing your right to free speech. I will help you remove your blinders.

So it's not larrythelibertarian,it's larrytheomnicient.

Modesty might become you,but your blinders comment is pure arrogance.

Nunchuck, are you female?

nurse,

I would agree the the US should be involved in reparations for Iraq. I would suggest that the reparations should be channeled through the Departments of State and Commerce with funds allocated by Congress.

The military phase in Iraq should end as we move into reparations.

And yes,some Iraqis want the US military to stay,but according to polling data,they are in the minority,a small minority.

I wasn't asking for polling data. That can be manipulated anyway you want. I was interested in their personal experience, and still am.

At this point I agree with your assessment of the military phase but at the same time I understand that it is not as easy as one may think. I do not envy the President as to making that timeline stick. It is such a difficult situation.

HiDef - Let's clear this a bit further...I predate you a number of years. In my day it was AB, A2C, A1C, SSgt, TSgt, MSgt. Period. Making Staff in 4 was next to impossible without a commitment, so your six wasn't unusual during those days. Later on, it was.

I know well what BTZ means and what it signifies. I finally made Staff in six then they came every two years like clockwork with high numbers each time. Yeah, big deal. All it took was a little clandestine, disavowed-by-the-secretary type work with O-6s writing the APRs. The last one I won was E-8; after I told the AF to shove their stupid academy and I went no further.

Escorting caskets, etc is not a particularly dangerous job although a depressing one. As I started to say earlier, my brother also knew incoming well at Da Nang. Including "friendly fire" intended for his hooch mate [a REAL A-Hole.] That hardly compared to what the guys in the jungle put up with.

Ask a Marine what they think of the AF as a fighting group...my son-in-law and I have friendly disagreements over it. He was among the first-in in Iraq...then they turned it over to the Army [FRIENDLY jab :0]

None of that means a whole lot, of course. We had our Pathfinders, after all...and they were pretty badass.

HA! Great question, larry! Do you expect an answer? It would explain a lot.

So rolando,you think my views display a gender bias? I assume you mean my views reflect the thought and sensitivity that you ascribe to women. If not,you may have just dug yourself a hole with the female readership.

In your attempt to demean me,you demean all women. We now have rowlandothebrilliant and larrytheomnicient,what a pair!

The struggle/war/fighting Etc. with the radical Muslims in the Middle East will end when they love their children more that they hate us and the Jews. So we are in it for the long haul.

larrythelibertarian said, "Nunchuck, are you female?"

rolando responded, "HA! Great question, larry! Do you expect an answer? It would explain a lot."

Actually, I could use a little help on this one. How is nucanuck's gender relevant and what exactly does it explain?

Everyone's on the same page now re: larry's service, but I don't see why it mattered whether he was telling the truth in the first place. If you're basing your argument on personal experience or anecdotal evidence you're dealing with the microcosm. No one's personal experience encompasses the macrocosm (unless you're all-knowing, and that's Yahweh's territory).

Why wouldn't you take the man at his word? It doesn't change the strength of his argument one way or the other.

Nunchuck, I wanted to see if you were female because I find myself strangely attracted to you. I had a fling with an NGO in 2001 that was equally as liberal and as opinionated as you. We disagreed on a lot of issues but man did we agree on some others. Ahhhh, memories.

Oh my!!

roland, HiDef,

Sorry about the confusion over rank, I saw E-5 and read it as E-6. I'm just a civy after all.

Nurse,

I wish I could say that I felt welcomed by the locals I dealt with in Iraq but I just didn't. The people I met just didn't seem interested in becoming like America. Comparing my two deployments though, the people in Bosnia were much more appreciative of our presence, however in Bosnia I was allowed to leave the gates and visit local refugee homes, enabling me to interact much more with the locals. In Iraq I was limited to the people I met on base. Again, that's just my personal experience.

I voted for GWB the first time around and would have voted for him in 2004 but I was deployed and lazy. Before and after the invasion I fully supported what the US was doing. I was offended when I saw folks, including my own brother, questioning our intentions. Since I've been out my mind has changed quite a bit. I feel that we never should have gone into Iraq in the first place and that high level officials had another agenda. Whats done is done though. I know it's impossible to just up and pull out. As ScottyM said, you break it, you buy it. Well, we broke it now so we ought to do the decent thing and TRY to fix it. Whats the answer to fixing Iraq? I don't know. I don't know how to stage troop reductions, exit strategies etc...and until somebody pays me to start thinking about these solutions, I probably won't give them much thought.

/chuckle. I don't see you answering larry's question either, nucanuck. Nor, I suspect, do either of us expect you to. It was, in effect, a rhetorical question not needing an answer.

But yes, it does.

Which is not demeaning to women at all, although you try your best to make it that way.

ALERT! Men and women [and boys and girls] are different in just about every way from the way they look and think right down to the DNA. Women certainly know that -- although some try to ignore it; some men are slower than others and need guidance...usually from a woman.

These are self-evident truths, aka axioms, and have no basis for denial; might as well hate yourself for being you.

sd -- If you don't already know you probably won't understand it anyway.

And Microcosm and Macrocosm are relative terms.

Oh my, indeed, scottyM. I like larry's answer ever so much better than my own. Oh! I have GOT to stop laughing...

I DO love this forum...

Nuseforjustice wrote: "Your argument that the kids don't know what they are getting in to is null and void."

On the contrary. You are quite educated. You can read a contract and discern the contents therein. That is not the case for those who are lacking at least a high school education.

And unless someone can point me to a source that proves otherwise, there is absolutely no requirement that a recruiter go through the finer points of that contract to explain it to a recruit. You have far more rights when you buy a car, than you do to exchange your life for military service.

"I and everyone else that I ever came in contact with in the AF would have gladly gone to war to protect this great country of ours."

Ah...but that's not what we are doing in the Middle East. No one over there presents or has ever presented a direct threat to this nation.

"Once again you should live by the quote “it is better to be thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.” "

While you are certainly entitled to your opinion, at least I retain the full use of my God given brain, which has not been washed of its ability to perform rational thinking.

Nunchuck, your not the first person to call me arrogant. Please allow my arrogant self to educate the readers a little more.I will also prove that I'm not a neo conservative that tows the republican party line. Get ready, I'm about to write something profound. Inorder for the U.S. to be sucessful in Iraq and/or Afghanistan we must solve the Iraqi problems with Iraqi solutions. American solutions to Iraqi or Afghani problems aren't well received. Oh dear lord I've waisted to many brain cells in this forum. I need a scotch.

Condescension is always fun.

Obviously everyone here appreciates comics: http://beatonna.livejournal.com/128302.html

Has Rolando stopped laughing yet? Actually, Larry be careful what you wish for with nucanuck. I've debated with him for quite awhile now and he himself can be pretty superior and smug-sounding. He plays like he's so above the fray. I've seen flashes of anger though (not such a bad thing after all). I see him more as a micro-managing, statistics-loving Metrosexual-of the first order. If I'm wrong, Larry, proceed with caution anyway. If I'm right, you military guys, much as we love ya'll, gotta do some inner work here, this isn't the first time I've seen these 'wrong'-headed attractions go bad. ps: Larry, you are a valuable, welcome addition here, we love people of character and funny to boot.

Thanks Clara for your advice on "judgement". Now maybe you could correct some of the others who do worse-on the other side of the aisle. That would be nice for a change. I looked and looked at my posts and failed to see where "twisted" progressive mind does NOT apply to some on the Left who post arrogantly and wrongly just about all of the time. They were proven wrong here, so if the shoe fits...

I apologize for what is proven wrong to me, not for someone else's imagined nonsense that I should maybe apologize for.

Listen up America!

larrythelibertarian deserves our full attention for nailing a major issue.

"...WE MUST SOLVE IRAQI PROBLEMS WITH IRAQI SOLUTIONS. AMERICAN SOLUTIONS TO IRAQI OR AFGANI PROBLEMS AREN'T WELL RECEIVED."

That simple thought could and should be at the core of US foreign policy in the Middle East.

The CTFP comment board has a new rising star. Go larry.

NN,

He does that sometimes.

Larry,

If everything went well today(Congratulations), we need to get together and celebrate our new business arrangements. If I ever get to take a day off, LOL.

sd:

Enjoyed your cite although I suspect it is drawn by an irate ball-buster of the first water. She has her own problems -- but then "comics" deal in extremes, don't they?

Reminded me of the great difference my teenage daughters noted -- and mentioned -- shortly after we moved from Calif Eastbay/Silicon Valley area to Dayton, Ohio. Other than noting the Neanderthal-ish, exclusively sports-oriented, monster pick-up driving attitudes of their male peers, they were seen as "a lower order of organism", to use their exact words. My wife, a computer geek and techie [her words] with a 3.94, could not find a suitable job -- too many years at Intel Corporate on her resume, I guess.

Alprova, are you seriously trying to insinuate that people who sign up for the military do not realize that by doing so, they may be called to action should a war situation arise?

I don't care what level education you have, or how illiterate you are, even some of the simplest of minds know that being in the military may mean going to war.

Larry, your comment.." In order for the U.S. to be sucessful in Iraq and/or Afghanistan we must solve the Iraqi problems with Iraqi solutions. American solutions to Iraqi or Afghani problems aren't well received" is spot on.

In the past any country who engages in nation building invariably make the same mistakes. They attempt to change or influence tradition, beliefs, politics, etc without any consideration to the populace. This is what invariably leads to resistance or resentment of the populace even if they have been relieved of oppression or are defeated in battle.

The classic example of how to subdue an enemy and still retain the support of the defeated was illustrated by General Douglas McArthur after defeating Japan. He allowed the emperor to retain his god status by the Japanese, allowed companies to rebuild, allowed unions, respected traditions, supported elections, etc. It was an unqualified success as the Japanese respected us, because we showed respect to them.

Interestingly, even the Romans, while conquering numerous tribes/ nations, were smart enough after defeating people to allow their religions, traditions, and local government to basically continue but required taxes or tribute. Otherwise, unless they revolted, they were pretty much left alone.

Whoknows wrote: "Alprova, are you seriously trying to insinuate that people who sign up for the military do not realize that by doing so, they may be called to action should a war situation arise? I don't care what level education you have, or how illiterate you are, even some of the simplest of minds know that being in the military may mean going to war."

Signing up to defend this nation against enemies, foreign and domestic, is far different than being sent halfway around the world and made to wage a war against religious zealots.

I don't care what level education YOU have, or how illiterate YOU are, even some with the simplest of minds know that the United States has a nose problem. It has stuck it's nose into the affairs of too many nations, rather than to take a wiser approach to back off and mind it's own business.

This is a core reason WHY people would have a desire to attack us on any level.

You're not one of those people who thinks that we were targeted for attack because people are jealous of our capitalistic empires, are you?

Look around you. Unless people get a grip, we're going to become a third world country. Do you REALLY think that spending a million dollars a day in the Middle East is going to give the people of the United States any return on their investment?

Is it going to ever give those people who lost loved ones in the 9/11 attacks, any sense of satisfaction or any feeling that justice has been served?

And most of all, even if the threads of blame for 9/11 were hog-tied at all to those whom we are engaging in the Middle East, is it going to have been worth the probable loss of 10,000 lives of our military personnel, not to mention a million or more civilians who may well die as a result of these wars?

The way I see it, there are very few people who will reap any reward from what will come to be at least a decade of war.

Corporate military suppliers, always eager to deliver the goods, quick to contribute to the war chests of those politicians, who in their own right are just as quick to send our military around the world to be that gigantic nose stuck where it does not belong, will have banked billions of dollars in profits.

Wake up and smell the coffee before you drown in your bowl of Cheerios.

Al, I never offered up any comment on the politics or my beliefs of the war we are fighting. I'm defending the insinuation that you made about people who are illiterate are too stupid to realize that when they go into the military, they may have to go to war. Whether you agree with the war or not makes no difference. My post was in comment to your post on February 1, 2010 at 3:38 a.m. as well as to your response to Nurse on February 1, 2010 at 7:12 p.m. So, again, as you so often do, don't read something that isn't there. I'll repeat my comment earlier... as Scotty said, these people CHOOSE to join the military. Their choice is made knowing full well that if a war situation arises, they may have to fight. It makes no difference of their level of education. Some of them may do it as an only option to get out of the despair of poverty or any other multitude of reasons, but you insinuated that those who do that are too stupid to realize they may have to go to war. That's just plain insulting to our military as a whole. And foolish to boot.

Alprova, somebody needs to slap some sense in to you. But I am afraid they would have to be slapping all day and wear themselves out to no avail. Whoknows is spot on and probably more educated and with more common sense than you will ever have or have had.

Every minute and every dollar of these wars are worth it to keep us from being attacked again. The war is not just being fought on foriegn soil. Homeland security is just as much a part of this war as the military. We as civilians are even a part of it in the long run. We need to keep our eyes and ears open as much as anyone.

Alprova foolishly states: "Ah...but that's not what we are doing in the Middle East. No one over there presents or has ever presented a direct threat to this nation."

ALL of the maggots that bombed the USS Cole, the Trade Center and practically every other terrorist attack was either from that region or had ties there. If Clinton would have had the webles to do something about the attack on the Cole, then the Trade Center may still be there and none of those lives would have been lost.

You and NN need to go to your Al qaeda buddies and have a big cumbaya session. I am sure that would make you feel better.

Hotdiggity, I was thinking of the same thing regarding the Roman era. You are exactly correct. Thanks for your post.

The Progressive mind on full display again. I rest my case.

Just a wee interjection here guys, the Roman thing Hotdig brought up got my attention: "Interestingly, even the Romans, while conquering numerous tribes/ nations, were smart enough after defeating people to allow their religions, traditions, and local government to basically continue but required taxes or tribute. Otherwise, unless they revolted, they were pretty much left alone."

Gotta fill in history a bit more there old chap. The Romans interfered in and with many civilizations, including their own, to their own downfall. There's a little detail of kidnapping, raping, torturing and killing many tribal peoples in their aboriginal lands and in the Roman arenas of sport, including innocent Jewish and Gentile Believers.

When the Romans ruled Palestine and the Jewish tribes, they lorded over, killed and intimidated many Jews, including Yeshua di Nazaret. Caesar had the last say over every man, woman and child in the Holy Land. I believe it was no accident or coincidence Roman civilization was decimated and imploded from within. The same today with America. Is that too our destiny?

Canary, the point hotdiggity was making is valid to a point. It would be impossible to overtake a country or region without imposing your own values/ideals. However, as demonstrated in the crucifixion of Jesus, Pilot reverted back to the Jewish tradition of letting one prisoner go free. The reason it came out the way it did was because the crowd was made up of religous leaders that wanted Him dead. And I know that it was God's ultimate plan for Him to die this way but that is the way it played out. The Romans did allow them to practice their own religions, dress the way they wanted as long as the payed homage to the Empire appropriately.

Agreed Nurse, as far as that goes. Though the Roman Prefector always had to defer to Caesar's edict and it was Romans who effected and carried out the Crucifixion. This, I believe is in line with the Biblical plan of salvation and the necessity of it for humans because all humans, Jew and Gentile are represented by the journey (the accusations, the 'trial') to the Cross (or Stake in Hebrew) and again are represented at the Cross. All are guilty of sin. And my points of Roman brutality and Roman internal disintegration still stand. <@

And I agree with your analysis of the reason for their failure. Which could very well be our undoing as well.