IRAQ "Leave" or "Stay" ???
Should this nation seek to leave Iraq as Sen. Obama has proposed during his campaign? or Should we stay until Iraq is secure enough to maintina its own security as Sen McCain has proposed during his campaig?
I will not answer that for you for it is up to you to decide which you feel is the best. I will however give you a look, my opinion, at both sides of the question.
To leave in a time frame proposed by Sen. Obama, which is what most Americans seem to prefer at this time, would probably save lives of American service men and women in the short term but what is the potential for future need for conflict? Consider that Sen. Obama in his debates has suggested that it would take 10 years through his energy plan, which is not fully disclosed, to achieve energy independence. Please bear in mind that a portion of the parliment of Iraq is controled by factions that actually reside or are loyal to Iran, though at this time this portion is not in the majority. Imagine what would happen if after we leave in the month time frame suggested by Sen. Obama, the government of Iraq suffers a change in this position, where the influences of Iran come into a majority interest in the Iraq's parliment. Unless the United States had significantly improved relations with Iran, which I do not believe that Sen. Obama would be able to achieve as President, Iraq would become a client state of a state that is diametrically opposed to the United States and Isreal, shifting the balance that has been achieved during the war we approved the commencement of and have been engaged in for the last 5+ years.
True many Americans are not supporting the war now, however how many of you have considered what the consequences would be if we departed Iraq with out insuring the new government of Iraq was a completely secure and independent state. Would Iraq becomming a client state of Iran have a negative influence upon the area, Irseal's security and this nation's security? I believe it would, and it is for this reason and this reason alone that I find it difficult to support Sen. Obama, though I could find other things that I could support. My opinion is that this nation's security is paramount to any other issue that lays in the hands of our government. As such, it should be the most important issue to we the people that elect our government in making our decession of whom we should elect.
Sen. McCain on the other hand, has siad we should stay as long as we need to to ensure victory, this means achieving a stable government in Iraq before we completely leave the country that we deposed the government of by act of war. Though, i am not sure of how he plans to address improving relations with Iran, because with out that the difficulty of attaining a secure and independent government in Iraq remains complicated or until the government of Iraq no longer has influences with in it that stem from Iran.
Then there is the issue of Afganistan and Pakistan in regards to Al Quida and the Talaban influences that are linked to global terrorism activities. Not to mention that there is evidence that one of the most supportive nations to the disruptions in stability that occur in Iraq appear to originate from Iran and I would say, in my opinion that Iran supports global terrorism groups with atleast financial support if not offering safe haven as well.
Thus this nation needs to consider, if it is going to take at least 10 years to develop energy independence and we are dependent up the middle east for oil, how can we as a nation of electors elect anyone that is willing to remove the security blank for the new govenment of Iraq by the presence of our troops until such time as we have acheived independence from imported oil?
It does not make good sense to say you would take troops out of Iraq regardless of the conditions of long term stability of that nation in such a short period of time when it is projected that it would take longer to achieve energy independence which this nation is dependent upon the region for our energy needs. For if Iraq were to become a client state of Iran and become a rouge nations such as Iran, the region would be again destabilized and the risk to our national security would be extreme.
This is evident in the fact that this nation is currently facing economic difficulties due to rapidly escalating oil prices that raised to a level of $147.27 per barrel before falling again due to decreasing demand in this nation as our economy slowed from the effect of extreme rises in energy costs versus increses in earnings of the average consumer.
The potential continued harm to this nation of economic difficulty due to unstable oil prices caused by a destabilized middle east far outweights the costs of keeping our troops in iraq to provide stability. Until such time as this nation can achieve and sustain energy independence, we have no other option but to ensure the stability of the region that we disrupted by act of war that we as a nation supported the commencement of.
Please consider wisely America! I find faults in each of the candidates for President, but what faults are the? I wish we had a better choice to make, but we do not. Obama, only follows what the nation wants as a whole, which I feel is not considering the total implications of removing our troops on a specific time frame and no based upon conditions that the government of Iraq can sustain it security and independence to provide stability in the region.
Then there is the issue that we must act during the next 4 years to immediately begin an aggressive development of the infrastructure that this nations needs to support the development of our energy independence. If we can achieve this prior to the time that Iraq is able to secure its own self then we can then leave them to their own devices. Until then it would be a very bad national security move to remove them with out regard to the ability of the govern of Iraq to sustain its own security and independence.
I wish Sen. Obama would change his position publically on this issue. If he is unwilling to do this, I would not be able to consider him as the best candidate for the office he is running for. I personally think he would be a better choice than McCain should he do this, but with out doing this I would have to say Sen. McCain would be the better choice.
The choice is yours, but consider what is at stake, and consider how far from energy independence we are in this nation and consider what it would mean to our economy to suffer continued instability in the middle east and continually high oil prices as a result as we already feel the effect of $147.27 a barrel of oil with a $700 Billion dollar bail out of our financial system. How much more are you willing to bail out our financial system before we develop energy independence, I hope a lot more if you want to leave Iraq on a time table that does not ensure the government of iraq is completely secure and independent prior to removing our troops.
This would be a defeat we could not endure financially as a nation with out having developed energy independence to hedge against the continual financial drain of imported oil from the middle east region.
I will not answer that for you for it is up to you to decide which you feel is the best. I will however give you a look, my opinion, at both sides of the question.
To leave in a time frame proposed by Sen. Obama, which is what most Americans seem to prefer at this time, would probably save lives of American service men and women in the short term but what is the potential for future need for conflict? Consider that Sen. Obama in his debates has suggested that it would take 10 years through his energy plan, which is not fully disclosed, to achieve energy independence. Please bear in mind that a portion of the parliment of Iraq is controled by factions that actually reside or are loyal to Iran, though at this time this portion is not in the majority. Imagine what would happen if after we leave in the month time frame suggested by Sen. Obama, the government of Iraq suffers a change in this position, where the influences of Iran come into a majority interest in the Iraq's parliment. Unless the United States had significantly improved relations with Iran, which I do not believe that Sen. Obama would be able to achieve as President, Iraq would become a client state of a state that is diametrically opposed to the United States and Isreal, shifting the balance that has been achieved during the war we approved the commencement of and have been engaged in for the last 5+ years.
True many Americans are not supporting the war now, however how many of you have considered what the consequences would be if we departed Iraq with out insuring the new government of Iraq was a completely secure and independent state. Would Iraq becomming a client state of Iran have a negative influence upon the area, Irseal's security and this nation's security? I believe it would, and it is for this reason and this reason alone that I find it difficult to support Sen. Obama, though I could find other things that I could support. My opinion is that this nation's security is paramount to any other issue that lays in the hands of our government. As such, it should be the most important issue to we the people that elect our government in making our decession of whom we should elect.
Sen. McCain on the other hand, has siad we should stay as long as we need to to ensure victory, this means achieving a stable government in Iraq before we completely leave the country that we deposed the government of by act of war. Though, i am not sure of how he plans to address improving relations with Iran, because with out that the difficulty of attaining a secure and independent government in Iraq remains complicated or until the government of Iraq no longer has influences with in it that stem from Iran.
Then there is the issue of Afganistan and Pakistan in regards to Al Quida and the Talaban influences that are linked to global terrorism activities. Not to mention that there is evidence that one of the most supportive nations to the disruptions in stability that occur in Iraq appear to originate from Iran and I would say, in my opinion that Iran supports global terrorism groups with atleast financial support if not offering safe haven as well.
Thus this nation needs to consider, if it is going to take at least 10 years to develop energy independence and we are dependent up the middle east for oil, how can we as a nation of electors elect anyone that is willing to remove the security blank for the new govenment of Iraq by the presence of our troops until such time as we have acheived independence from imported oil?
It does not make good sense to say you would take troops out of Iraq regardless of the conditions of long term stability of that nation in such a short period of time when it is projected that it would take longer to achieve energy independence which this nation is dependent upon the region for our energy needs. For if Iraq were to become a client state of Iran and become a rouge nations such as Iran, the region would be again destabilized and the risk to our national security would be extreme.
This is evident in the fact that this nation is currently facing economic difficulties due to rapidly escalating oil prices that raised to a level of $147.27 per barrel before falling again due to decreasing demand in this nation as our economy slowed from the effect of extreme rises in energy costs versus increses in earnings of the average consumer.
The potential continued harm to this nation of economic difficulty due to unstable oil prices caused by a destabilized middle east far outweights the costs of keeping our troops in iraq to provide stability. Until such time as this nation can achieve and sustain energy independence, we have no other option but to ensure the stability of the region that we disrupted by act of war that we as a nation supported the commencement of.
Please consider wisely America! I find faults in each of the candidates for President, but what faults are the? I wish we had a better choice to make, but we do not. Obama, only follows what the nation wants as a whole, which I feel is not considering the total implications of removing our troops on a specific time frame and no based upon conditions that the government of Iraq can sustain it security and independence to provide stability in the region.
Then there is the issue that we must act during the next 4 years to immediately begin an aggressive development of the infrastructure that this nations needs to support the development of our energy independence. If we can achieve this prior to the time that Iraq is able to secure its own self then we can then leave them to their own devices. Until then it would be a very bad national security move to remove them with out regard to the ability of the govern of Iraq to sustain its own security and independence.
I wish Sen. Obama would change his position publically on this issue. If he is unwilling to do this, I would not be able to consider him as the best candidate for the office he is running for. I personally think he would be a better choice than McCain should he do this, but with out doing this I would have to say Sen. McCain would be the better choice.
The choice is yours, but consider what is at stake, and consider how far from energy independence we are in this nation and consider what it would mean to our economy to suffer continued instability in the middle east and continually high oil prices as a result as we already feel the effect of $147.27 a barrel of oil with a $700 Billion dollar bail out of our financial system. How much more are you willing to bail out our financial system before we develop energy independence, I hope a lot more if you want to leave Iraq on a time table that does not ensure the government of iraq is completely secure and independent prior to removing our troops.
This would be a defeat we could not endure financially as a nation with out having developed energy independence to hedge against the continual financial drain of imported oil from the middle east region.
Views: 1
Comment
-
Comment by Roy & Rae Ann Krohn on January 21, 2009 at 3:44am -
Thanks for the info on the pilots of 911 I saw that and have a copy it is VERY Convincing indeed. Especially if one is familiar with fireworks or explosives. Engineers have tried unsuccessfully to recreate the same effects of a building collapsing under the "expressed" way it was presented to the public on the twin towers. It is very convincing. Rae Ann
-
Comment by Roy & Rae Ann Krohn on December 18, 2008 at 2:38pm
-
I say leave. Why aren't we just minding our own backyards, taking that money and developing our own sources of energy, taping into our own natural resources both oil and others that we know will become extinct in use with the development of better sources of fuel, such as solar, wind, kinetic, hydro. I know it's to fill those family coffers while in office because they know thier time is limited on the "oil" run. Just like other families of means of the past, Instead of spending it on bush family gains for oil, let us take the money that we spend on war, maming our youth and thier youth, start getting one community at a time off the "grid" with that same amount of money that we would be spending on barbaric stupidity. We would not have mamed veterans of war they would be working in factories, whether it be engineering, shipping, purchasing etc. to make U.S. less dependent of foreign oil, preserve our natural resources and make us the leader in enviro energy resources. I have a daughter, and two son in laws enlisted right now and I would hate to see any of these bright kids suffer from this unecessary plight for power and money over oil. Oil is probably the main reason for the high rate of cancer too! Well enough venting as I have never understood any type of war, peace man peace. I have a cd that shows how the twin towers were imploded and that one of the bush brothers is a specialist in that field. Its pretty convincing whoever put this together and that there is nowhere on the books that we as individuals need to file income tax returns, only corporations for profit do! Weve been douped by the federal government for years! Several people have fought and won the right not to file! Anyone interested in copies of these informative and eyeopening cds let me know. Rae Ann
-
Comment by Mark Feagins on November 5, 2008 at 10:28am -
Iraq....Stay or Leave?
It seems that decision has already been made by Iraq.
I get the feeling we are going to get the "Thanks......but no Thanks".
Iraq finally seems on the threshold of being able to secure their own streets and protect themselves without our hand holding.
The Iraq government has already indicated they want us out. That pretty much sums it up. If we overestimated our continued presence to protect whatever interest we have in their oil, this may have turned out to be a bad "bet". We were never guaranteed anything regarding their resources. And given the collateral damange of war, it will take everything they can produce to build their infrastructure for us to expect a pay-back.
Going into Afghanistan with the same objective that we are successfully achieving in Iraq really needs to be reconsidered. The problem with Afghanistan is.... the tribal region just inside the border of Pakistan is not exactly controlled by the Pakistan government. Tribal doesn't mean 500 people living in tents. There are a few million of people. Everybody knows everybody and outsiders are easily identified and are not welcome. If provoked, the tribal warlords have the capacity to launch guerilla and terrorist attacks on the Pakistani government and retreat back into the hills; or live amongst other Pakistanis in total anonymity.
Pakistan has already indicated; they will not accept us coming across their borders.
Without Pakistan's total commitment and assistance to totally destroy the tribal region......Afghanistan will be a lost cause......just ask the Russians. The best we can do is to train the Afghans to protect their border and leave it to them. Afghanistan is not worth 1 more American life.
Besides, what have we achieved if we win in Afghanistan? They don't offer us oil, products or commerce. And, pleae don't give me the human rights crap. If we waged war everywhere somebody is oppressed, abused or underfed, we would be engaged in 50 other wars.
The only reason we will stay in Iraq is to solidify the stability of the country and possible the region.
This too is a lost cause and we need to get the hell out of the Middle East.
$100 Billion = 10 months of money spent in Iraq
This will convert 50 million cars @ $2,000 per car to CNG
This will convert 50,000,000 cars = 20% of registered passenger vehicles.
Average Daily gasoline usage is 3 gallons = 150 million gallons per day.
This will reduce daily crude oil consumption by 7 million barrels based on 21 gallons of gas per barrel of oil.
This is significant, because....... 7 million barrels will eliminate our daily imports from Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, Iraq, Nigeria and Angola. .
Good riddence.
-
Comment by EARNHARDT on October 26, 2008 at 7:15pm -
I've seen a few enough comments left by this john lasseter to now that hes just one of those far left nut jobs that like one way conversation. if he had a two way conversation he would lose.
-
Comment by LeeF on October 26, 2008 at 1:11am -
John Lasseter,
Carter was one of the worst Presidents of this era.
Enough said about that issue...
And, I know your response, Bush is responsible for
your plantar warts, HIV-AIDS, malaria, the French
revolution, the inquisition and etc.
But understand, the current problems were spawned
prior to 2000 and the evil Bush empire!
Get real!
-
Comment by Kenneth Guntkowski on October 25, 2008 at 5:16pm -
This week, the 12th of 16 provinces was handed over to the Iraqi government. A few years after the war began, these were some of the most dangerous places in the world. Life is getting back to normal for the vast majority of Iraq. There are still many problems there but if my math is correct 2/3 of these issues are no longer our problems. With the wonderful hard work and sacrifice of our soldiers, the next president may very well land on ship with a "mission accomplished" banner. Perhaps this time, it will be true.
-
Comment by EARNHARDT on October 22, 2008 at 10:06pm
-
kenneth was you talking about obama i dont no if where alloud to talk about him we could be called raciest no matter what you say he cant do no wrong he is the one they say.
-
Comment by EARNHARDT on October 22, 2008 at 9:29pm
-
i agree if all you watch is cnn or msnbc you would think where loseing over there.thats becouse the hippies from the 60,s and 70,s has maid there way to a newsdesk and give one sided story,s.it,s sad when you got proud parents that have lost a child and have to listen to what some of these news ancor,s say about our troop,s and there mission no matter what put us there if we leave lran wins it sad that some poeple just dont get it.
-
Comment by Kenneth Guntkowski on October 22, 2008 at 6:26pm
-
Seems like a group of ex-hippies longing for the days of old--you know, "anti-establishment, peace, love and dope" types. They espouse useless political rant and offer no solutions. Their minds were closed at the Coolaid fountain. LOL
On a more serious note, I do urge all to read the TroopScoop on a daily basis. Our successes in Iraq are very encouraging. I had lost all hope of success until I did a little digging. The other day, I spoke with some soldiers at the airport and they were energized and excited about the gains we have made. They were disappointed at the lack of support and media coverage.
Because I now believe we are much closer to a successful outcome, it would be foolish to leave. We do need to pressure Iraq to pay more of the costs.
Finally, we have a stubborn, egotistical president now that ignored his military advisers. We don't need another. Obama's mistakes seem to become his doctrine. I've had enough of that.
-
Comment by Robert Ware on October 22, 2008 at 5:23pm -
IThe term Neocon sems to come from that particular political group. I am not one of them nor am I a Republican. I am proud to be independent so I can be objective and not pressured to hold a party line when I see it is not a good line to hold, just for political gain. People should be judged by what they stand for and what they say and what they do. Funny though most people that that to be literially applying to what you do for them not for all people in the interest of a common good, which is the mark of a great person.
© 2013 Created by PickensPlan.
Powered by
Badges | Community Guidelines | Report an Issue | Terms of Service
You need to be a member of PickensPlan to add comments!
Join PickensPlan