Tuesday, July 10, 2007

Don't point that finger at me unless you intend to use it.

Harry Reid's comments yesterday that there would remain thousands of troops in Iraq even after a withdrawal should not lead to all the gnashing of the teeth among progressives that it has.

The important thing is we begin pulling out troops as soon as possible. We can begin to cut deployments and rebuild our weakened military after that gets underway.

More importantly I have no doubt that there will come a point after we've withdrawn a majority of our troops when it will become politically impossible for us to keep any force in Iraq for long after. Events on the ground will accelerate and even under the best case scenario for resolution - a stable coalition government in Iraq - we will be asked to leave.

I want our troops out. The sooner the better. Nothing Reid said plays against that desire.


Swinebread said...

Iraq is a total disaster, so at this point let just bring home anyway we can.

Don Snabulus said...

I don't foresee us letting go of control of Iraq's oil. With that said, a few thousand troops would be easy targets. On the other hand, 20,000 or 30,000 could protect themselves and guard our, I mean Iraq's, oil.

Dean Wormer said...


What I'm saying is it doesn't matter. Once we start pulling out en masse events will mean we will have to pull out of the country entirely anyway.

I just hope they let the actual military coordinate the withdrawal.

Don Snabulus said...

Gotcha. Indeed.

t.a. said...

remember the "orderly withdrawal" from Vietnam? the Dean's right: once we start rolling out, it'll be an avalanche. everyone knows, sadly, that our leaving will unleash chaos for a while. probably like the Iranian comes across to "help" their brethren.

Dean Wormer said...

Not just Iran but Turkey will want their piece of the pie.

It's gonna be a mess.