I think now we should stop thinking about loss of war and surrender. The lives of people are at stake.
Lets hope the best happens for the people of Iraq.
Let us forget the power struggle and think about the people for once.

And I hope you have a Happy Holiday season and Christmas.

Thanks, Muslim Unity.

I know Ramadan just ended a bit ago. Are you celebrating anything else this season?

I feel to leave before we have accomplished our goals of setting up a Democratic From of govnment and insureing it is able to defend it's self would make the deaths of all those who have died over there in vane. Do not listen to the american News Meadia as they are all against our country (USA) of winning as they want us to loss and will and have lied to the Amercan public again and again, that includes the finding of weapons of mass distruction they refuse to admit have been found.
Rodney A.Wenger
USAF retired.

As long as military generals give him advice that the war is still winnable, I'm betting Bush will probably double down (even though a substantial number of voters disagree). Remember Bush's comment on the perils of 'Vietnamization' "We will win unless we quit." The problem or spanner in the works, may be Gates, a former member of the Iraq Study Group.

Oooooh! Nancy is not going to be happy about this.

This is the best news I've heard since that lame ISG report came out.

I got in and I'm ready to go!

The whole world knows W won't "be rushed". The 2 mile ride to the airport hasn't been secure for 3 years, what's another 3 weeks. Hell, the English held Calais for a hundred years when a hundred yards was as safe as you could expect to be, yet there's not enough sense now to employ a single infantry company to cover 2 miles??? A thousand yards per machine gun times 12, and if more are needed, make riflemen gunners,too. How many yards in 2 miles? I haven't even mentioned the 40s and the big boys of the weapons companies with dragons and tows, let alone a tank or two (though they wouldn't be needed). No, the brain who can't figure this out (hell, use a whole battalion- it IS THE AIRPORT! d'uh!) is NOT now fashioning anything other than his pecs in the White House Gym where he likes to hide from the likes of Mama Sheehan, Hugo Chavez, Almedinijad, and now...REALITY, to wit: alliance with "nazi" shiites or insurgent, head-hunting sunnis? IN CONCLUSION: O, Lord deliver us from rich kids with the power of life and death over us! Amen.

"IN CONCLUSION: O, Lord deliver us from rich kids with the power of life and death over us! Amen."

Yeah, Kerry would have sucked indeed...

Somewhere in Texas...A village is missing it's idiot. They are still looking, better look in WDC. Get out now before the death toll hits 5,000.

Let us forget the power struggle and think about the people for once.

Here, here. Indeed let's consider what would happen to the people should the US withdraw, immediate or otherwise.

Unstoppable Sunni on S'hia violence. Unstoppable death squads in the al Anbar providence and inside Baghdad. Unstoppable S'hia on S'hia militia violence. Mass roundups of innocent civilians who are summarily dragged from their jobs or buses, tortured and then executed by Sunni thugs for....being S'hia, Sunni or who the hell cares as long as they kill somebody who doesn't believe exactly what they believe.

In short, two words: sectarian-driven genocide.

And that is considering the people? I think not...

Peter F. Aren't you describing the current state of Iraq ? Tuesday: December 12, 2006

I just knew some wisenheimer would attempt that tact, Steve.

So answer these:

According to NBC News, shortly after the checkpoints were removed to and from Sadr City by Maliki, violence increased dramatically.

When curfews are enacted and enforced, violence decreases.

Prior to US/Iraqi forces re-taking Tal Afar, that city may as well have been the OK Corral for terrorists. After we took the city back? Some semblannce of peace-more than the city had known previously.Now that Iraqi forces are trying to run the city? Hmmm, not as good as before.

So, with just 3 quick examples off the top of my head, if we leave an unstable government that is incapable of enforcing order, then that fails and does not consider the people of Iraq.

In short, two words: sectarian-driven genocide.

aka: Civil War.

So, with just 3 quick examples off the top of my head, if we leave an unstable government that is incapable of enforcing order, then that fails and does not consider the people of Iraq.

You're exactly right, Peter. If we leave Iraq without some kinda of stable government, there's going to be a real shit-storm over there, and it won't be pretty.

Too bad Bush wasnt giving more thought to the effects upon the people of Iraq from the beginning. Not sure what else was to be expected...I mean hell we took out Saddam, which was good, but we also basically took out the rest of the government as well (including most of the military).

No wonder the place became a chaotic nightmare: war-torn infastructure (Iran/Iraq and 2 with the US), no government, and a bunch of pissed off disbanded soldiers with guns in their garages. Then on top of all that there's the sectarian hate fest.

Quick question Kim:

Did you read the ISG report?

Wow, this is both sad and amusing to read the comments here from the true believers who still think we can somehow 'win' in Iraq. I'm not entirely surprised, seeing how this behaviour is natural for those on the right; they believe what the dear leader says unquestioningly and anyone who speaketh ill of the dear leader or his words are traitors and enemies of the state.

Sure we can win in Iraq, and I'm an NFL star running back.

"If we leave Iraq without some kinda of stable government, there's going to be a real shit-storm over there"

But it will be Nancy Pelosi's shit storm. Perhaps a new generation will need to learn that it's Democrats that lose wars.

Dear John,

But it will be Nancy Pelosi's shit storm. Perhaps a new generation will need to learn that it's Democrats that lose wars.

No John, it will be America's shit-storm. Don't go trying to pretend that everything was rosy before the Democrats made some ground in the last election. There have been PLENTY of screwups by this administration. Add to that the fact that Democrats AND Republicans have been a part of this war effort from the get go. Reducing this massive problem down to "it's all the fault of the opposing political party" is weak.

Maybe we can figure out a way to realize that we're all Americans, and that we might actually have to stop all the bickering in order to get ourselves out of this situation. Maybe.

Note: Don't try pidgeon-holing me into some half-baked ideological category, just because I disagree with you.

" Add to that the fact that Democrats AND Republicans have been a part of this war effort from the get go."

True. Most Repubs have been supportive of this war effort and most Dems have been unsupportive of this war effort; so both have been 'a part' of it. Imagine how much further ahead we could be if both sides actually worked together in supporting the U.S. war effort?

Brother Kim- Yes we have several festivals, I like to celebrate all festivals, as it brings people of all religions together.
I think festivals bring out a universal urge to bond together and spread happiness.

About Iraq, it is sad that their is a fight between people who claim to be Shia or Sunni. Why don't we just try to get over all the talk of being Shia or Sunni or Democrat or Republican, and just think we are humans?

Nobody wins in a war according to me. Everybody is at loss. America, Iraq, me, you , all of us lose.
It proves we as humans are still very barbaric. All of us.It is sad.

Les Nessman,

That's not "how much further ahead", it's "how much less behind".

Advice: If you don't want to be on the losing side in the war, join the winning side.
Apply for an executive position at Bechtel, Carlyle Group, KBR, etc.

Hey Less,

Imagine how much further ahead we could be if both sides actually worked together in supporting the U.S. war effort?

I think that it would have been a wonderful, and productive, thing if Repubs and Dems were actually working together from the start. That doesnt mean that I think one side needed to do everything the other said...I'm talking about a respectful cooperation, even amidst disgreements.

Imagine that.

I'm not sure if you're implying that Democrats should have just "supported the war effort" by going along with everything that Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld came up with. Blindly supporting the war effort--regardless of what is being done--is not what I'm talking about.

I'm talking about politicians ACTUALLY working together in some kind of constructive and critical manner. Good luck with that one though, huh?