Iraq NIE 2007 Part I
I want to do a slightly longer post about the new NIE of Iraq. However, I wanted to pull out this graph:
Let me see if I get this right... In his 2003 State of The Union Speech, Bush spent 1,200 words discussing the dire need to disarm Saddam Hussein of his WMD and nuclear weapons programs. (Heck, he was researching five separate methods of enriching uranium according to this speech.) This is the speech that sent us to war, and it said nothing about establishing democracy or resolving old sectarian differences.
Four years later we now have this NIE. There is no mention of WMD or nuclear programs. However, it does state that we must stay there. We have to stay and fight a different war than the one Bush discussed. And we can't leave.
Question: If Bush had asked the American people if we would support a 5+ year war to bring democracy and order to a fractured, sectarian society; would we support this war? No. No. No. If Bill Clinton had proposed a similar war, he would not have received the support of the American people. If Hillary Clinton had proposed a similar war, Conservatives would have assassinated her.
Why are we staying? Why the hell are we staying? Explain this to me. It's time for us to realize that we will not see the United States of Iraq in our life. It's surely not going to happen in the next year or two. And what of the people of Iraq? They are going to splinter into sectarian provinces sooner or later. And at some point in 5, 50, or 500 years they will learn to get along (like the majority of Muslims in the Middle East) or they will kill each other. Either way, it's their decision to make and they aren't going to be taking advice from Bush, Cheney, or any other Conservative blowhards.
Get US out.
Coalition capabilities, including force levels, resources, and operations, remain an essential stabilizing element in Iraq. If Coalition forces were withdrawn rapidly during the term of this Estimate, we judge that this almost certainly would lead to a significant increase in the scale and scope of sectarian conflict in Iraq, intensify Sunni resistance to the Iraqi Government, and have adverse consequences for national reconciliation.
Let me see if I get this right... In his 2003 State of The Union Speech, Bush spent 1,200 words discussing the dire need to disarm Saddam Hussein of his WMD and nuclear weapons programs. (Heck, he was researching five separate methods of enriching uranium according to this speech.) This is the speech that sent us to war, and it said nothing about establishing democracy or resolving old sectarian differences.
Four years later we now have this NIE. There is no mention of WMD or nuclear programs. However, it does state that we must stay there. We have to stay and fight a different war than the one Bush discussed. And we can't leave.
Question: If Bush had asked the American people if we would support a 5+ year war to bring democracy and order to a fractured, sectarian society; would we support this war? No. No. No. If Bill Clinton had proposed a similar war, he would not have received the support of the American people. If Hillary Clinton had proposed a similar war, Conservatives would have assassinated her.
Why are we staying? Why the hell are we staying? Explain this to me. It's time for us to realize that we will not see the United States of Iraq in our life. It's surely not going to happen in the next year or two. And what of the people of Iraq? They are going to splinter into sectarian provinces sooner or later. And at some point in 5, 50, or 500 years they will learn to get along (like the majority of Muslims in the Middle East) or they will kill each other. Either way, it's their decision to make and they aren't going to be taking advice from Bush, Cheney, or any other Conservative blowhards.
Get US out.
posted by Hot_Tuna at 5:54:00 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home