Top general warns against Iraq timetable

[Dreadsox]

 

[STING2]

Get your head out of your fourth point of contact.

While you are so fucking willing to keep American soldiers there in Iraq sacraficing their lives, why don't you enlist instead of being such the brave armchair quarterback.

You don't have a clue about who your talking to and I suggest you stop with the absurd name calling unless of course you have suddenly forgotten the rules of the forum.

 

[Dreadsox]

You don't have a clue about who your talking to and I suggest you stop with the absurd name calling unless of course you have suddenly forgotten the rules of the forum.

Right Chief.....

Have you taken the oath or not?

 

[Dreadsox]

Sorry about the leg son, but there will be no timetable:

 

[Dreadsox]

I wanted to go home, but there is no timetable for the Iraqi Police to take over, because we have no plan to leave

 

[STING2]

Right Chief.....

Have you taken the oath or not?

Are you going to spend the thread now talking about another forum member, or are you going to discuss the topic?

 

[Dreadsox]

Are you going to spend the thread now talking about another forum member, or are you going to discuss the topic?

Thought so....

nah....

Clearly the UN was supporting this war, hence the vast support world wide for the rebuilding of the country.

Clearly, the worldwide support is such that we should be able to withdraw some troops.

Clearly the Iraqi governement is working on a timetable to take over.

My point....We NEED to establish a timetable. They need to know what it is because I do not want my fellow soldiers sitting there nationbuilding. Sorry, It is not what I took an oath to do. If the grand coalition had been properly built and a multinational force assembled my fellow soldiers would not be bearing the brunt of this.

Instead...we have the armchair neocons sitting safe and sound at their computers...saying what a great job the soldiers are doing..blowing smoke up the asses of people putting their lives on the line...while telling them they have no timetable to bring them home...

Maybe when the armchair fucking soldiers get put in a hopeless situation....the god damn hot air blowing out of them...will make some sense.

 

[STING2]

Thought so....

nah....

Clearly the UN was supporting this war, hence the vast support world wide for the rebuilding of the country.

Clearly, the worldwide support is such that we should be able to withdraw some troops.

Clearly the Iraqi governement is working on a timetable to take over.

My point....We NEED to establish a timetable. They need to know what it is because I do not want my fellow soldiers sitting there nationbuilding. Sorry, It is not what I took an oath to do. If the grand coalition had been properly built and a multinational force assembled my fellow soldiers would not be bearing the brunt of this.

Instead...we have the armchair neocons sitting safe and sound at their computers...saying what a great job the soldiers are doing..blowing smoke up the asses of people putting their lives on the line...while telling them they have no timetable to bring them home...

Maybe when the armchair fucking soldiers get put in a hopeless situation....the god damn hot air blowing out of them...will make some sense.

You imagine a lot of things, but thats ok.

The United States forces on the ground currently make up 85% of the coalition. In the First Gulf War, the "Grand Coalition" made up 25% of the force, and most of it did very little in the way of fighting in Gulf War I. You would have to go all the way back to World War II to find a coalition in which the United States made up a significantly smaller percentage of the total force. The fact of the matter is, the United States has beared the brunt of every military intervention it has been involved in since World War II.

Establishing an arbitrary time table does nothing to accomplish any of the objectives in Iraq. That is why General John Abazid is against it. The Iraqi military is growing in size and capability, but fully developing such a large military force from scratch takes years, but it will eventually be able to take over from the US military and coalition provided those forces are not withdrawn prematurely.

What type of a time table do you envision, and how would it ensure that US national security interest are not threatened or compromised?

 

[Dreadsox]

You imagine a lot of things, but thats ok.

Clearly you took me too seriously.

 

[phanan]

This is actually the first time the democrats and cut and run have been mentioned in this thread.

No, you implied it earlier.

It is obvious that "redeployment" or "withdrawal" from Iraq as most democrats propose does nothing to accomplish these objectives.