91Èȱ¬

The fact that 70% of Iraqis want the US to leave makes Bush's "stay the course" slogan absolutely unnacceptable and indefensible. He needs to stop pretending invading and occupying Iraq, unleashing death and misery that even Saddam couldn't manage and decreasing the quality of life for the Iraqis is some giant favor. You're welcome, guys! Please. That Bush has failed miserably is his shame. I see no reason for more US troops, a war-weary US public and the long suffering Iraqi people to be affected any more for HIS failed policies. Admitting defeat and owning up to his failures is the only way to salvage any honor. I see no shame in leaving a country in which we are not wanted.

Now that the mission of destableising iraq is complete,it is time to go.The free world has done there job setting them back a hundred years.And Israel has set back Lebanon a hundred years.I guess Iran is next.

It is time that some creative people comes up with a better solution to statibilize Iraq. In order to achieve this the USA leadership must forget 2 basic goals of their occupation:
a)getting their hands on Iraqi oil and installing military basis in the midddle east to secure more oil. America can convert to ethanol with no major damage to their economy.
b) installing USA brand of democracy in the iddle east. What the middle eats need now is peace. Democracy will come later (say 50 years down the road). However it will be Islamic type of democracy (whatever that is), which still has to create by them.After all US democratic model is just an election scheme to elect an emperor every 4 years. Is much less democratic than the USA propaganda machine is selling

Bush has failed miserabley and this is to show him and his cronies the taste of defeat.

These Republicans only cause Problems for the world remember Vietnam etc.?

So its time America changed its policies and should not lisen to those zionist amongst them.

They should now you can never force things the way you want them to be.

So its time Bush and his cronies own up.

And God is waiting for him on the great day.

As an American society, we are so conditioned to calling our President the "leader", that it is somewhat awkward to change these terms/habits, but Bush is NOT leading this country. He is the puppet...It's his creepy old man, wife Barb along with the dozens of cronies whose relationships were cemented-in, during G.H.W.Bush's reign as director of CIA and as former President--for decades now....These people, namely Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Baker, et al. These black-hearted old toads actually call the shots when a real decision is required...Don't forget, George Bush doesn't even read a daily newspaper or other source of info, by his own admission and prior to his Presidency, never visited another nation other than Mexico. Pitifully, the citizenry of the United States is asleep at the wheel, and has now allowed voting machines to solidly corrupt the democratic process and oftentimes seems to only care about how shiny their imported cars are. Being one of them, I can only say how ashamed many of us feel regarding this void, as well as many in the world today. Those poor humans, living in all the nations who've suffered the treachery of this current U.S. Administration and Israel, since 2000, can only rest-assured, knowing that these torturing, sadistic monsters will have no place to rest in the universe after all the smoke clears. I don't believe I can remember a leader of any nation calling the President of the United States by the name of Satan, but it's not an incorrect assessment in Bush's case. Welcome to the twenty-first century! May God bless us after all....

Iraqi Partition is inevitable, but not in the best interest of Iraq or the region but that of US and UK only. Baker's syndicate along with that of Cheney, Rumsfeld, Kissenger, Wolfowitz, the industrial-military-political-security-banking, petrochemical-organized religion- pharmaceutical-not for profit do gooders complex, the Heritage Foundation, the Carlyle Group and Conservative republican think tanks are the real winners.

Southern Iraq will with Shia majority will eventually join Iran and centeral Iraq, with Sunis join Syria. But does Syria the Bush axis of evil want the Saddam insurgency and al Qeada problems ? One would think not.

No dobut Condi Rice is in the Middle East to appease the Israelis, while Tony Blair wait out, what is in the best interest of UK.

Oil after all as Baker recently said" it has always has been our policy to go to war inorder to protect our (oil) interests in the Persian Gulf" is the real issue and not the Iraqi Freedom and Democracy, that Bush and Company have been exploting and as usual misleding the American people and the world.

What is perhaps the worst part is that Bush has acted unilaterally and has not consulted the international community on how to perhaps NOT ruin Iraq. But Bush is backfiring on the Republicans (thank goodness) and hopefully, we'll see some change for the better once the Democrats take back the House.

commenting on george bush's exploits
only reminds me of the fiddler marching all those who would follow, to the sea--so i'll let nature take it's course.

Baker is jiving Bush cover on Iraq. This is a distraction to mislead that their will be a change of cource after the election. Iran is next and the bases in Iraq will be used to launch the attacks.

Not to interrupt the chorus of Bush-bashing here but, it's a bit unrealistic and dishonest for Mr. Beale to claim the Baker workgroup is causing pre-election headaches for Bush. In truth, the report is not much of an issue at all yet in the US. Maybe it will be when the full report is released but as for now even the 24/7 pundit-news networks are not discussing it.

Nobody ever mentions TERRORISTS. Remember those poeple that KILL innocent public. Everone makes it sound like Bush and the US are the bad guys here. IT's better to fight them on their turf, than on your own. Deny that. If there's fighting going on, we're killing terrorists. Don't kid yourself. Bringing in Baker will imrove the strategy from a new point of view, and that's a smart move for Bush.

For the loss of 3000 lives in the Twin Tower tragedy Bush and Blair extracted a heavy price from the Iraqis. 600,000 deaths, a country bombed to Stone Age. And the Iraqis were NOT EVEN RESPONSUBLE for New York!!! The real winner is Israel. They don't have to worry about Iraq anymore and soon they will ask the U.S.to drop their bombs on Iran. Who is to blame ultimately? The American voters, for being so blinkered and jingoistic and for being led by the nose by such fanatics as Cheney and Rumsfeld and the Christian Right.

This latest suggestion questions the wisdom of invading Iraq in the first place. The Bush administration has finally- though balatedly- come to grips with the harsh reality that the brazen show of force in today's globalized world would rather isolate the United States. American power would be more effective if it used to win hearts and minds. History is indeed a great teacher.

"5. At 09:52 PM on 17 Oct 2006, Husein wrote:

These Republicans only cause Problems for the world remember Vietnam etc.?"

No I don't, but I do know the escalation and eventual war encompassed 6 US Presidents between 1945 and 1975. They were Truman (D), Eisenhower (R), Kennedy (D), Johnson, (D), Nixon,(R) and Ford (R). I make that a 3-3 draw between Dems and Reps.

Fact may not always win, but it's always right.

"Nobody ever mentions TERRORISTS. Remember those poeple that KILL innocent public. Everone makes it sound like Bush and the US are the bad guys here. IT's better to fight them on their turf, than on your own. Deny that. If there's fighting going on, we're killing terrorists. Don't kid yourself. Bringing in Baker will imrove the strategy from a new point of view, and that's a smart move for Bush."

Er, as has been repeatedly proven - and, indeed, stated by President Bush - there's no link between the Al-Qaeda terrorists of 9/11 infamy and Iraq.

Furthermore, the hundreds of thousands of people estimated to have been killed in Iraq were manifestly not all terrorists - unless there's been a spate of pre-kindergarten suicide bombers of which we are unaware.

If your definition of 'terrorists' is 'poeple (sic) that KILL innocent public', then I'm sorry to say that definition includes the United States Army and Air Force.

Finally, capitalising your points doesn't increase their validity.

Michael, It has been proved beyond any doubt that the 'terrorists' were not opperating in Iraq. The attacks today are as a result of the invasion.

It has also been shown that the US has been responsible for more civilian deaths than Saddam could/would have caused. The US continues to go out of it's way to stop any numbers of civilian deaths to be released. A few years ago, they put a stop to the data being released by hospitals.

The US invaded a country based on lies and have killed at least 50 times more civilians than the terrorists did on 9/11. Their actions has fueled the number of people wanted to fight the US.

"Nobody ever mentions TERRORISTS. Remember those poeple that KILL innocent public. Everone makes it sound like Bush and the US are the bad guys here. IT's better to fight them on their turf, than on your own. Deny that." - Michael B.

You got it. I absolutely deny that half a million dead Iraqis - killed by terrorists and coalition forces -is progress in the "war on terror." Why do their lives mean less, and do you know that Iraq wasn't "their turf" until Bush made it so? I thought the idea of the "war on terror" was to decrease terrorism, not increase it and allow it to flourish where it never had before...hmmm.

President Bush will "stay the course" until the next presidential election, then "cut and run" leaving someone else to clean up his mess. All the rest of it is just rhetoric.

The same for PM Blair.

Still, it will be nice to see the back of the Bush/Pearl/Wolfowitz Axis of Evil.

Another report? No.
Americans must demand Transparency and Accountability from Bush and from Congress, beginning with the lies that started the war in Iraq. And vote to end it.

America! America!
God shed his grace on thee
Till selfish gain no longer stain
The banner of the free!

The abscence of coalition forces would not remove the desire for power from those who are willing to slaughter tens of thousands of Iraqis to achieve their ends. The end would be much worse and the means would be much worse with westerners out of the picture.

The United States needs to secure a democracy in the Middle East and Iraq made the most since. How can a comparison even be made to Vietnam? This war has gone on for just over 3 years, yet just under 3,000 American soldiers have lost their lives, and just over 3,000 counting the entire coalition By no means does this statement undermine the ultimate sacrifice these brave young men and women have made, because I am forever indebted to them for the freedom we are blessed with. However, after 3 years in Vietnam 30,000 American Troops had lost their lives and in 1968 1,000/month were killed, you don't have to be a math major to realize the comparison here. Going back to my original point, when the U.S., and other coalition countries, finally do pull the majority of their forces out of Iraq and Afghanistan the sacrifice those soldiers have made will have given the U.S., and coalition forces, two solid bases to operate out of in an unstable region, especially with an emerging nuclear, fanatical regime in nearby Iran and fanatical extremist Islamic jihadists in Lebanon, Syria, Georgia, Palestine, and Chechnya. Additionally, although they have the kinks they do the democracies in Afghanistan and Iraq will have at least had their foundation laid down. You must remember that during the American Revolutionary War against Imperialist Great Britain, 1/3 of the colonists wanted to stay under the king's rule, 1/3 were apathetic, and 1/3 fought against the king. Then after victory against the British, a war which lasted for 8 years, with the Treaty of Paris the United States was very unstable under the Articles of Confederation until 1788 when the oldest democratic constitution in the world was drafted and adopted. Hmmm, sounds a lot like what's going on in Iraq in Afghanistan, fractionized populations striving towards democracy while building a modest army. In 1945 after World War II there were 20 democracies in the world, today there are roughly 120. Democracy will prevail over the perverted form of radical Islam that Bin Laden, Mahmud Ahmadinejad, KSM, and others are pushing, and Democracy will also prevail over the fascism of Communists like Hugo Chavez, Kim Jong Il, and Fidel and Raul Castro. In no way is Iraq like Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan are works in progress and although they are not perfect, one only needs to look at history to realize that the world's greatest experiment in democracy grew out of a factionalized, and by no means solid, beginning.