Soldiers in Iraq Say Pullout Devastating

[satellite66]

Here is an article from the Washington Post expressing what the soldiers say. The WaPo is a very liberal paper so this is surprising.

Soldiers in Iraq Say Pullout Would Have Devastating Results

By Josh White
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, November 6, 2006; A13

FORWARD OPERATING BASE SYKES, Iraq, Nov. 5 -- For the U.S. troops fighting in Iraq, the war is alternately violent and hopeful, sometimes very hot and sometimes very cold. It is dusty and muddy, calm and chaotic, deafeningly loud and eerily quiet.

The one thing the war is not, however, is finished, dozens of soldiers across the country said in interviews. And leaving Iraq now would have devastating consequences, they said.

With a potentially historic U.S. midterm election on Tuesday and the war in Iraq a major issue at the polls, many soldiers said the United States should not abandon its effort here. Such a move, enlisted soldiers and officers said, would set Iraq on a path to civil war, give new life to the insurgency and create the possibility of a failed state after nearly four years of fighting to implant democracy.

"Take us out of that vacuum -- and it's on the edge now -- and boom, it would become a free-for-all," said Lt. Col. Mark Suich, who commands the 1st Squadron, 89th Cavalry Regiment just south of Baghdad. "It would be a raw contention for power. That would be the bloodiest piece of this war."

The soldiers declined to discuss the political jousting back home, but they expressed support for the Bush administration's approach to the war, which they described as sticking with a tumultuous situation to give Iraq a chance to stand on its own.

Leading Democrats have argued for a timeline to bring U.S. troops home, because obvious progress has been elusive, especially in Baghdad, and even some Republican lawmakers have recently called for a change in strategy. But soldiers criticized the idea of a precipitate withdrawal, largely because they believe their hard work would go for naught.

Capt. Jim Modlin, 26, of Oceanport, N.J., said he thought the situation in Iraq had improved between his deployment in 2003 and his return this year as a liaison officer to Iraqi security forces with the 3rd Squadron, 4th Cavalry Regiment, based here on FOB Sykes outside Tall Afar. Modlin described himself as more liberal than conservative and said he had already cast his absentee ballot in Texas. He said he believed that U.S. elected officials would lead the military in the right direction, regardless of what happens Tuesday.

"Pulling out now would be as bad or worse than going forward with no changes," Modlin said. "Sectarian violence would be rampant, democracy would cease to exist, and the rule of law would be decimated. It's not 'stay the course,' and it's not 'cut and run' or other political catchphrases. There are people's lives here. There are so many different dynamics that go on here that a simple solution just isn't possible."

Soldiers and officers had difficulty conveying what victory in Iraq would look like or exactly how to achieve it. In some ways, victory is a moving target, they said, one that relies heavily on the Iraqi people gaining trust in the Iraqi security forces and the ability of the Iraqi government to support essential services. In northern Iraq, officials said they expect to hand over major parts of the country to Iraqi forces within the next five months, but most agree that Baghdad will be far behind.

Even if top commanders meet their goal of transferring authority to the Iraqi army within the next 18 months, a U.S. presence long after that is likely, several officers said.

"This is a worthwhile endeavor," said Maj. Gen. Benjamin Mixon, commander of Multinational Division North and the 25th Infantry Division. "Nothing that is worthwhile is usually easy, and we need to give this more time for it to all come together. We all want to come home, but we have a significant investment here, and we need to give the Iraqi army and the Iraqi people a chance to succeed."

Numerous soldiers expressed frustra

[strangelove]

Yep total withdrawl from Iraq today would be bad. So what do we do? Maybe if Donald Rumsfeld got it right in the first place and sent in 400,000 troops into Iraq which many Military advisers advised and trained for, and even gave it a name, "Desert Crossing," which predicted sectarian violence, and would have helped secure the boarders from insurgents sneaking in weapons, and militia.

So what do we do? Can you honestly say that what's been going on in Iraq has been all good. Maybe the troops there now need more help, maybe they need a new strategy. Maybe we should all stop whining and suit up and take up arms in Iraq. How bout it, lets all go and secure the borders of a foreign desert nation. Then what?

more on desert crossing:
http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/...rss_topstories

[satellite66]

No its not been all good but can you name any war that has? War is not predictable nor is it something that can have a planned end date. The problem which you seem to ignore is that the obstruction by both the left and the media have not contributed to anything positive. It has been bad news central from the left and media for years. Surely you can see how that constant drone of negativity gives comfort to those who oppose us?
Would more troops help I don't know. I don't possess the info or knowledge to make that call. No one outside those in the military and our leaders have that info. The problem is that the media for the most part only parades the antiwar stance every chance they get. That is why this article is a surprise from the WaPo.

[strangelove]

If there wasn't criticism from anyone then most likely we'd be living in a communist or fascist Country. Lucily we live in America and we have people of all sorts with opinions of all types, that are free to speek about whatever they choose. And I for one am glad that we have a media that can bring us news and can inform us of what is going on in the world. And believe it or not the "Media" is not the left arm of the Liberals body. And this agenda you keep talking about, exactly what is the agenda?

[satellite66]

Listen there is no doubt that the media for the most part is liberal. It is not a myth. It is not a conspiracy but because the type of person who goes into that field is usually liberal their veiw tracks left. There is an agenda. The media wanted Kerry to win and has been antiwar from the start. Look at how they bury certain things a harp on others. We have record employment and revenues are up but you don't hear the media pushing that story.
If you are really interested in seeing the bias of the MSM main stream media check out this site. If your mind is made up that the media is neutral then don't bother.
www.newsbusters.org

[strangelove]

That's funny they report on the news, it's like a reporter reporting on a reporter. I'm pretty open minded, but i've never seen such biased bullsht in my life. Newsbusters, are they affiliated with Mythbusters and Ghostbusters... Drainbusters even.

[satellite66]

Okay I can see where you come from now.

[quicksilverdon]

Read the Charter of the UN - which we signed - we engaged in aggressive (as opposed to defensive) war in Iraq. It is the charge leveled against Germany and Japan after WWII. Iraq was a war of choice. Notice the difference in support between Afghanistan and Iraq? How many 9/11 terrorists came from Iraq? War should be a last resort - it wasn't in the case of Iraq. Colin Powell, hardly a liberal lefty, and many others, tried to slow down the rush to war, but the chicken hawks had their way. Somebody should buy Bush & Cheney a set of soldiers so they can act out their macho fantasy without killing Americans...Maybe buy them a game of Stratego.
Can it with the Liberal media whine... The media was all over the capture of Bagdad and Saddam's statue being pulled down.
You wanna hear bias??? Kerry got bashed and taken out of context by botching a joke about Bush - "If you don't do your homework, you get stuck in Iraq" - They twisted that to imply he was talking about the troops - Bull, and we all know it. What about the Fundraiser where Bush joked about looking for WMDs, looking in the podium "no, no WMDs there" - THAT's REALLY FUNNY - making a joke out of what cost American lives. That should be played over and over - the media gives Bush a pass. I heard Bush campainging yesterday - he finally said some truth about Iraq - he said something like we can't let terrorists control the supply of oil. Finally a bit of truth comes out. IRAQ IS ABOUT OIL.
What good news should they report about Iraq? The facts are it's going into the crapper. The only ones who say Iraq is getting better is Bush & Cheney. Your article doesn't mean squat - there was the same crap during Vietnam - Nixon would get some guys to write about how we were winning, and should stay, etc.
Economy? Real wages have gone down, the number of people living in poverty has gone up, fewer people have health care, good jobs are flying overseas - sure, business is doing well, but only the upper % are reaping the benefits. AND the prosperity is funded by the deficit.

All this talk is over - watch DICK Santorum fall in today's election - unless the fix is in on the voting machines...

By the way, I listen a lot to Pat Buchanan - a lot of what he says I agree with - he's disgusted with Bush claiming to be conservative.
HYPOCRITES.
Bush claims to be Christian, but apparently it's a different Christianity that what I know - He took an oath to defend the constitution, yet he's been dismantling the balance of power, the bill of rights, and it's clear he will do anything, say anything to stay in power. "A vote for the Democrats is a vote for the terrorists" - give me a break.
The sad part is, these clowns have made us more vulnerable - NOTHING has been done with our Mexican border, we've generated who knows how many terrorists in Iraq, we've driven good generals out of our military, disgusted with Rumsfeld, we've stretched our troops so thin so that we have to extend their tours....

Maybe if Cheney had actually served his country in uniform instead of getting FIVE draft deferments he wouldn't be excited about war. Maybe if Congressmen had their kids in Iraq they'd think twice about rubber stamping. Maybe if there were a Geography/History test that Presidents, VPs, and Defense Secretarys had to pass....I'd settle for a lie detector test.

Just curious, wonder who be the next anti-same-sex marriage closet queen to be exposed? Sure seems to be plenty of them. No wonder so many look like they have a pole up their butt - they do!

Abramoff, DeLay, Foley, Katrina, Rumsfeld, Iraq, the Deficit, Our borders, Failing to get Bin Laden, Torture, ....
And you pick on Clinton? Clinton had Whitewater and Lewinsky. At least Clinton wasn't incompetent. At least Clinton's lies didn't cost American lives.

[satellite66]

Whats the matter don't like what the troops are saying? Rant on about whatever but the troops should be the ones who matter.
Deny as much as you want and spin till your dizzy but the terrorists are salivating at the thought that liberals may take over.

[strangelove]

Satalite. you've got nothing really interesting to say, all you do is post lame spam on this forum, why don't you go out and vote and do something for the good of this Country instead of sitting on your butt all day replying to anti political views.