enthusiast cementing overcomes unselected backplanes …

lithography lingering floats,whirl adjuring,profile …

Maybe you’ve been speaking to an imposter?”

Shhhh, you can’t say things like that. The Left in this world are a bunch of ignorant savages who think that a few hundred US troops killed, or another thousand Iraqis killed is a good thing, who support Al-Q in their goals, desire to live under Sharia, and who are generally traitors or idiots or both.

And of course, they are completely unwilling to engage in grown up discussion and reach compromises with the right.

What makes you (and others) think we can change cultures that are thousands of years old? And do you really believe that the American people will accept a troop presence in Iraq for another 30 or 40 years at the present casualty rate?

And then we have the hilariously ironic spectacle of the left using body counts to justify withdrawal.

Well, I personally know The Left and it seems to me The Left’s main reason for supporting withdrawal is that we can’t do anymore for the Iraqi people, we can’t afford 12 billion dollars a month to accomplish little or nothing and that the entire quagmire isn’t worth even one more American death.

Maybe you’ve been speaking to an imposter?

As to Petreaus being a more “competent general” I’ll just cite his track record. He had the difficult task of training Iraqi Army unites as well as Iraqi Police Services. After an investment of over 20 billion dollars we currently have a disfunctional Iraqi Army more beholden to various militias than to the government. And I’m sure we both agree the Iraqi Police are even more of a problem.

This does not necessarily reflect poorly on Petreaus, as I said, this was an incredibly difficult assignment. But it’s not exactly a gold star either.

COIN doctrine recognizes that this effort cannot be won by military means alone. We are seeing political advances at the province, city and tribal levels. Heck, al-Sadr’s standing down his militias is political progress because al-Sadr is a political leader. Obviously, things are at an impasse on the national stage, but given what’s done since last February, I think it’s worth giving the national government more time. It’s unfortunate that this plan was to put into play so late.

There is no middle ground. We either win or we lose. Winning will take a long time and a lot of blood, but the consequence of losing is too great and the consequence of winning is also too great.

I believe that you are trying to reach for a middle ground and washing our hands of it. This is nice on paper however the consequences to us is too great. Baghdad is turning around and citizens are standing up. The sectarian rivalries will be around for a long time, and so will the bombings and beheadings, and other killings, and all of it has to do with the structure of their societies. This may not be our fault, but if it isn’t fixed now, it will be dealt with at some point, or we WILL eventually face another 9/11.

As a nation, we have to decide to be in it, all the way, for the long term. We have no choice. Losing in Iraq means AQ, Iran, and Syria winning and that is not good for the overall war on terror.