Will the Iraqis be Safer if We Leave?

Discussion in 'Middle East - General' started by red states rule, Jul 14, 2007.

  1. red states rule
    Offline

    red states rule Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Messages:
    16,011
    Thanks Received:
    571
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +572
    Maybe you will answer the question Harry Reid refused to


    Political Punch
    Power, pop, and probings from ABC News Senior National Correspondent Jake Tapper


    What about the Iraqis?
    July 12, 2007 1:50 PM

    From today's press conference with the Senate Democratic leaders.

    I tried to get an answer to what I blogged earlier today.

    I did not succeed.

    TAPPER: Senator Reid, what do you say to critics who say, "Look, the Senate voted, including two of you up on the stage, to authorize the president to use force in Iraq. Is there not a moral obligation of the United States to make sure that the Iraqi people are safe before the U.S. withdraws"? It's very clear that withdrawing U.S. troops might make U.S. troops safer, but it won't necessarily make the Iraqi people safer.

    SENATE MAJORITY LEADER HARRY REID, D-NEV: As reported in the news this morning, 69 percent of Iraqis feel they are less safe because of the presence of Americans; 21 percent of the Iraqi people feel they're safer. That's pretty clear that American troops who are over there protecting the Shias, the Sunnis and the Kurds -- they're not welcome. That's the reason that they're doing a good job of protecting the Shias, Kurds and Sunnis, but they are all trying to kill our soldiers. That is a recipe to bring our troops home. And that's why the Levin-Reed amendment is so critically important. …It transitions the mission within 120 days, and by the first day of May of next year, our troops will be out of there, our combat troops will be out of there. They will be left to do counterterrorism, training the Iraqis -- continuing to train the Iraqis and protecting our resources. That's what the Iraqi people want and that's what American people want.

    TAPPER: I'm sorry, if I could just follow up very quickly...Do you think the Iraqi people will be safer with U.S. troops out?

    REID: It is clear that the Iraqi people don't want us there. It is clear that there is now a state of chaos in Iraq. And it is up to the Iraqi people to make themselves safe….We can't do it. It's time the training wheels come off and they take care of their own country. We have spent billions dollars. We're now spending $12 billion a month on Iraq. That's enough. In the last six months of the surge, six months, 600 more dead Americans, $60 billion more of American taxpayers' money. We, Democrats, unitedly believe that's enough.

    TAPPER: With all due respect, Senator, you didn't answer my question.

    REID: OK. This is not a debate.

    TAPPER: Will the Iraqis be safer?

    REID: We're answering questions. (calling on someone else) Yes, young man? Anyone else have a question?

    http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2007/07/what-about-th-1.html
     
  2. DeadCanDance
    Offline

    DeadCanDance Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Messages:
    1,414
    Thanks Received:
    127
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +127
    "Will the Iraqis be Safer if We Leave?"

     
  3. red states rule
    Offline

    red states rule Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Messages:
    16,011
    Thanks Received:
    571
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +572
    Instead of posting a four month old poll - could you answer the question?

    Or are you ducking it like Reid did?
     
  4. Gunny
    Offline

    Gunny Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2004
    Messages:
    44,689
    Thanks Received:
    6,753
    Trophy Points:
    198
    Location:
    The Republic of Texas
    Ratings:
    +6,770
    I'd say it depends on what faction they fall in with, and which faction is winning/doing the most damage.

    The Arab-backed Sunni's and Persian-backed Shia are going to continue their little civil war. When and if it's decided, they'll start looking at the kurds. All the quitters have no qualms whatsoever with leaving the latter to the wolves.
     
  5. DeadCanDance
    Offline

    DeadCanDance Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Messages:
    1,414
    Thanks Received:
    127
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +127
    At this point, I'm not interested in spending billions of dollars and thousands of dead american soliders, on people who overwhelmingly have a negative view of us, and half of whom want us to be killed and attacked in Iraq.

    You wanna fight for these people? Go over there and fight for them yourself.
     
  6. red states rule
    Offline

    red states rule Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Messages:
    16,011
    Thanks Received:
    571
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +572
    The Defeatocrats are right in one area. Iraq will be like Viet Nam if they get their surrender wish

    The bodies wil be stacked much higher in Iraq then they were in Viet Nam after Amercia left - and Pol Pot started his slaughter
     
  7. Gunny
    Offline

    Gunny Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2004
    Messages:
    44,689
    Thanks Received:
    6,753
    Trophy Points:
    198
    Location:
    The Republic of Texas
    Ratings:
    +6,770
    Been there, done that ... got the t-shirt, medals and sleepless nights.

    How is it you liberals can be so damned "compassionate" and concerned over the plight of criminals who enter this country illegally; yet, you'll hang just as many innocents out to dry in Iraq?
     
  8. red states rule
    Offline

    red states rule Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Messages:
    16,011
    Thanks Received:
    571
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +572
    The people of Iraq can't donate money to them or vote for them in elections
     
  9. DeadCanDance
    Offline

    DeadCanDance Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Messages:
    1,414
    Thanks Received:
    127
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +127
    I find the "compassion" argument to be wholly unconvincing, and in fact a desperate way to grasp for "justification" for this war.

    If it was compassion that was driving us, we'd be babysitting civil wars and genocides in Sudan, The Congo, Sri Lanka, etc.

    I see no reason to baby sit a civil war in iraq, spend tens of billions more $$$, and kill more american soliders, in a country where half the people approve of attacks on us, and the overwhelming majority view us negatively.

    The Iraqi Prime Minister - their top leader - said yesterday that Coalition forces can "leave anytime", and the Iraqi Army and Police will be able to keep the peace - with logistical support and weapons from us.
     
  10. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    OK, skip compassion. Let's look at vital Western interests in the ME. Where better as a base than Iraq? It doesn't matter regarding al Qaeda, they proclaim that anywhere we are on 'Muslim lands' is cause for them. (They also say, which is ignored, that all lands should be Muslim).

    So where better? In our interests?
     

Share This Page