It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Foundations set for US withdrawl

page: 1

log in


posted on Oct, 18 2006 @ 07:30 PM
US might have to reconsider its options if the Iraqi government fails to bring order to the country within 60-90 days - Donald Rummsfield

U.S. may have weeks, not months, to avert civil war, adviser warns - Republican, Virginia Sen. John Warner, the influential chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee.

James Baker, has already made headlines by saying that "stay the course" is no longer a viable strategy.

"The Bush administration needs to initiate a "crash program" to avoid a catastrophe,"

The US Admininstration is starting to lay the foundations on how to ext Iraq, under the guise that we did all we could, its Iran, Syria and the failing IRAQI governmnets fault that have caused the failure. They failed to create a working government is the tone being set here.

A Crash programme? is that the same as saying
" we failed, we need to find any way possible to get out, and make it appear as if 'we succeeded'

more lies, and stinking putrid coming from the US Administrations mouth.
Why isnt GWBush standing in front of the camera's saying this?

"This is the fourth quarter, there's two minutes left in the game, and we're down two touchdowns," said Diamond. "There may not be enough time left."

And your presidents already decided he's going to run the ball, through the entire defence line... regardless of what anyone says.

posted on Oct, 18 2006 @ 07:35 PM
The sad part about this is if the US does cut and run, every political and religious movement in the world will know that all it takes to win is use terror and more terror until you wear your opponent out.

Then the darkness will really begin....

posted on Oct, 18 2006 @ 07:44 PM
you wear your opponent out when they dont have the will to fight.
you dont have the will to fight, when you dont believe in what your fighting.

They may be dedicated to there country, and there military.
But ultimately if you dont believe in the mission, you can only hold on so long

posted on Oct, 18 2006 @ 07:46 PM
Well this is a rather large mess. I wonder if the oil is secured or not? Even if the US left?

I wonder why they don't just instate another dictator like Saddam. Like 2 dictators, one Sunni and one Shiite and they can take the country under control again.

In the US they are reporting these things like crazy, and Democrats are taking major advantage of it.

posted on Oct, 18 2006 @ 08:00 PM

Originally posted by RetinoidReceptor

I wonder why they don't just instate another dictator like Saddam. Like 2 dictators, one Sunni and one Shiite and they can take the country under control again.

Thats probably what they will do is partiotion the country into 3 seperate states. This is going to bring lots of problems.


posted on Oct, 18 2006 @ 08:10 PM
I can already hear it now.

'' Its not the presidents choice to go to war, I didnt make the decision. Its a large assembly of people utilising the best information at hand providing the best course of action. We took on this task, succeeding in our goal. The unity government we setup failed to achieve there set objectives, and now my assembly are providing me with the best information at hand, and that is to remove our forces from harms way, and allow the Iraqi police force to flourish in there own surroundings, learning from there experiences "

Pieman, dividing this country into seperate states, I agree I just cant see how peace will be achieved.
It will be much like gaza in my mind,

endless volleys of rockets going from one side to the other. I already know the answer to that problem too, lets create a 10ft concerete wall and partition them off from each other.

saddening to say, there is just nothing... i mean nothing we can do any more to even attempt to make this situation improve.

there's just to many outside influence here hindering the movement forward.

logically, the only course of action is to take on the entire region...a steady flow of fighters and equipment will just continue to flow into baghdad... its not like a tap where u can turn it off, you need to remove the entire water source.

thats is why its all the presidents men voicing the need for dramatic change...
because its his advisors that will come to the conclusion of withdrawl, this way blame will never be placed on the president.

[edit on 18-10-2006 by Agit8dChop]

posted on Oct, 19 2006 @ 04:36 PM
Its well under way and gaining steam, keep and ear out for the building up of statements in regards to ' cutting and running '

just heard ont he news,

'' The USA only need to create a 'RELATIVLEY' secure situation in iraq, before troops can leave. "

- Relatively (Rel"a*tive*ly) adv.

In a relative manner; in relation or respect to something else; not absolutely

So, we've craeted the forces, it doesnt matter they are uttlery useless..
because we created a relativley secure situation.. forces on the ground, they have guns... thats pretty relative...
We set you guys up, its up to you guys to sustain the situation

oh how the focus has changed, with such subtle decleration.


[edit on 19-10-2006 by Agit8dChop]

posted on Oct, 19 2006 @ 04:54 PM
I honestly don't care what they say, as long as we exit Iraq,
I'm glad.

As for other countries, well, we need to be less compassionate
and liberal, and be willing to use nuclear weapons as a threat
towards such countries/groups.

new topics


log in