It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Libertarian Plan for exiting Iraq

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 16 2005 @ 07:28 PM
link   
Here is the Libertarian Exit plan for Iraq.

I have read most and will read the rest later but wished to give the Board a chance to read it.

www.lp.org...

I am not 100% behind it myself and have doubts about parts of it but would like to hear others opinion on it.

Most of my doubts lay in giving an exact timetable for leaving but I agree with several points mainly that we MUST leave at some point its just when that is the question.

Here is the web page for other info about the Libertarians

www.lp.org...

You can also sign the petition to send the plan to congress

[edit on 16-7-2005 by Amuk]




posted on Jul, 16 2005 @ 08:48 PM
link   
Sounds good to me

I have always been one of those people who believed that we should stay the course in Iraq until Iraq becomes its own nation (own government, police force, Army, etc.). Well its happened they have a government its time we got out so what are we still doing there?



posted on Jul, 16 2005 @ 09:03 PM
link   
Maybe someone can explain to me, but I'm a little unsure how this plan differs from the one the current administration has in place... ie, cut down on troop numbers and support a friendly government in Iraq with aid. As for what I think of it, it would be nice if it works, but isn't this exactly what we tried in Vietnam?

-koji K.

[edit on 16-7-2005 by koji_K]



posted on Jul, 16 2005 @ 10:02 PM
link   


Most of my doubts lay in giving an exact timetable for leaving but I agree with several points mainly that we MUST leave at some point its just when that is the question.


Ummm... I dare you to find someone that DOESN'T agree with that! lol

It's like saying "I agree the sky is blue its just how blue that is the question."



posted on Jul, 16 2005 @ 10:08 PM
link   
I agree with the plan and said so earlier this month but I seemed to be alone in my support.

Libertarian exit strategy for Iraq




Iraq Exit Strategy: America's Path Forward (pdf)

Iraq Exit Strategy: Troop Withdrawal

The first step is immediately to begin the withdrawal of all American troops from Iraq. Currently American troop levels are at about 140,000. Troops would leave gradually, in increments of approximately 11,600 per month, resulting in a complete withdrawal in one year’s time. This will bring the troops out of harm’s way quickly, preventing more unnecessary loss of life. Allowing a year for the withdrawal will give the Iraqi government time to train and deploy a sufficient security force in trouble areas.

As the United States removes troops from Iraq, 30,000 will be relocated to other Middle Eastern countries. Ten thousand troops will be placed in Afghanistan for peacekeeping purposes. Decisions regarding troop reallocation will be based on the locations of existing U.S. military bases in the Middle East. The most likely candidates would be Turkey, Bahrain, Egypt and Oman. These countries were chosen based on current foreign military base information in the Department of Defense Base Structure Report. All of the previously mentioned countries have U.S. military bases that possess additional acres to house more troops. The remaining troops, numbering approximately 100,000 would return home rather being relocated to other Middle Eastern countries. This would help reduce the strain on military reserves and free up military resources for the War on Terror.



posted on Jul, 16 2005 @ 10:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by koji_K
As for what I think of it, it would be nice if it works, but isn't this exactly what we tried in Vietnam?

-koji K.


Would Vietnam have turned out differently if the Vietnamization plan hadn't been implemented? US troops were already there for a number of years with many deaths, if they had stayed the only result may have been more deaths for more years with the same eventual end result. We don't really know for sure.

[edit on 16-7-2005 by AceOfBase]



posted on Jul, 17 2005 @ 01:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by AceOfBase
I agree with the plan and said so earlier this month but I seemed to be alone in my support.


Sorry Ace, I have been gone for a month or so and didnt know you had posted over this already.

As for koji_K question as to how this differs from the Bush Admin plan, this lays down a exit plan with a stated date, not a vague promise to leave at some later date when some unstated conditions are met.

I think something in-between the two would work better myself. I dont like laying out an exact timetable of when we will exit but it seems that this Admin changes the Goals every time we meet them now.

Its late here and I am tired but will post more tommorrow.



posted on Jul, 17 2005 @ 05:54 AM
link   
Sounds Like a Good Plan to me.

But do you all Seriously think that US Forces can just "Exit Iraq" like that?

After all, Iraq is on the Brink of Civil War and plans are for US Troops to stay until 2012 (!).

Too bad your Goverment does not Agree with these plans at all...



posted on Jul, 17 2005 @ 12:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Souljah
But do you all Seriously think that US Forces can just "Exit Iraq" like that?


Isnt that what everyone wants? Us to just pack our bags and leave?

That is the problem I have with the plan.

Like it or not, no matter the reason, noble or greed, we are there. Most stores have a policy "you break it you buy it" and we have "broke it". You will not find a person that was more against going into Iraq then me, not only did I think it was a waste of time but that it also distracted from what REALLY needed to be done, taking out OBL, etc.

But a question here.

If you agree that without the Americans there there would be an even WORSE bloodbath going on, why do you encourage the attacks against the Americans and the Iraqi government and even try to justify attacks on innocents? Doesnt this just needlessly prolong the bloodshed?

Shouldnt you encourge ALL the sides (there are WAY more than two) to try to come to a PEACEFUL agreement?



posted on Jul, 17 2005 @ 01:05 PM
link   
Well, I agree with Amuk... I was against the war from the beginning, for similar reasons. I also think the war itself was not conducted with much tactical wisdom (ie, disbanding the former Iraqi army, in its entirety rather than just removing key officers, was a huge error which we are paying for now). The US military conducted itself with great skill in the areas it was allowed to, but just about anything dictated at a policy (ie, political) level seems to have made the war a disaster.

The problem with any plan that uses set dates and troop amounts is that it really can't predict whether or not these dates or amounts could be adhered to, in practice, without leaving Iraq worse off than when we found it. I couldn't for the life of me provide an alternative "solution" though. We're really caught between a rock and a hard place in Iraq, in terms of end-game.

As I said before, I'm reminded of Vietnam. LBJ's solution, to escalate and use massive force, just didn't work in a guerilla conflict, with support for the guerillas coming from "off limits" areas, such as China and Russia. On the other hand, Nixon's "Vietnamization" solution didn't work in the end either, because the South Vietnamese were corrupt and, with some exceptions, of very little military value, despite the huge amounts of weapons, supplies, and training they recieved.

I hate to sound defeatist, and I support our troops 100% and think they are doing good work in Iraq, but I think that America is about to re-learn the lessons we forgot as a nation from our experience in Vietnam. I would love to be proven wrong, however, and see Iraq prosper. Negotiations are better than fighting, at any rate.

-koji K.

[edit on 17-7-2005 by koji_K]



posted on Jul, 17 2005 @ 02:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amuk
If you agree that without the Americans there there would be an even WORSE bloodbath going on, why do you encourage the attacks against the Americans and the Iraqi government and even try to justify attacks on innocents? Doesnt this just needlessly prolong the bloodshed?

Shouldnt you encourge ALL the sides (there are WAY more than two) to try to come to a PEACEFUL agreement?

I think its a bit too late for Peaceful Agreements.

Hatred and Revenge is now in Control in Iraq. The Country is Falling apart, and all 3 sides have their own Goals and Ambitions. Civil War is kind of Unavoidable. I really Hope for a Peaceful Solution, but it does not look to me that way, considering the latest news that come from Iraq - the Second Most Bloodiest attacks occured on Saturday, which only means that the Resistance and the Insurgency is getting Stronger.

I think that the only Peaceful Agreement that ALL Sides can agree with is, that they all get Seperate Independant States - the Fragmentization of Iraq. That is what always happenes. I have seen that Happening here in Former Yugoslavia, where everybody was pulling to his own Side and sooner or later they got what they wanted - usually with ALOT of Blood Spilled.

And then there is also the "Vietnamization" if Iraqi Conflict, as mister Koji has mentioned before me.

And you always have to bear in Mind the Corporations that WANT this Conflict to Last as Long as Possible in order for them to make even More Money out of it.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join