bascule Posted February 26, 2008 Author Share Posted February 26, 2008 That's too bad. So it's more of a 60/40 split then an 85/15 split? So is it 24% of the total who want to pull out immediately, or 24% of that 61%? Wow, so much confusion caused by my poorly stated topic. My apologies. To quote the breakdown on the page's sidebar: As of February 13th... "When it comes to the War in Iraq, the U.S. should..." 24% - withdraw now 37% - bring the troops home in a year 34% - stay 5% - undecided? Which they're apparently boiling down into: 61% - bring the troops home in a year or less 34% - stay 5% - undecided? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParanoiA Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 That's generally how a small "defenseless" country can win a defensive war against a far more powerful enemy. It would have been far worse if Saddam had gotten away. No kidding, it worked for us against the British. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ecoli Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 No kidding, it worked for us against the British. Thanks France! (ugg, france) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lance Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 Does anybody actually believe the US is going to risk pulling out ALL troops anytime in the near future? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iNow Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 Because you capitalized the word "ALL," I'll say no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pangloss Posted February 29, 2008 Share Posted February 29, 2008 Does anybody actually believe the US is going to risk pulling out ALL troops anytime in the near future? I think that's what many folks here would like to see, and some are willing to state such outright. They have some valid points regarding futility and security impact, which I feel are countered by legitimate disagreement over those two issues, plus the responsibility I feel we've incurred to help Iraqis get back on their feet. But I think it's fair to say that both sides have legitimate concerns. But realistically, I don't think anyone here actually believes that all troops are coming home immediately (i.e. early 2009) under most election scenarios. My personal opinion is that the level of and timeline of withdrawl will be largely the same regardless of whom we elect this fall, because both sides have put so much emphasis on paying attention to boots-on-the-ground analysis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ecoli Posted February 29, 2008 Share Posted February 29, 2008 I think that's what many folks here would like to see, and some are willing to state such outright. They have some valid points regarding futility and security impact, which I feel are countered by legitimate disagreement over those two issues, plus the responsibility I feel we've incurred to help Iraqis get back on their feet. But I think it's fair to say that both sides have legitimate concerns. But realistically, I don't think anyone here actually believes that all troops are coming home immediately (i.e. early 2009) under most election scenarios. My personal opinion is that the level of and timeline of withdrawl will be largely the same regardless of whom we elect this fall, because both sides have put so much emphasis on paying attention to boots-on-the-ground analysis. I feel that there are differences btw the democrats and McCain. McCain has pretty much said that he will treat Iraq like we treat S. Korea... keep troops there and treat it as an overseas base for an indefinite period of time. I reject this proposal, and will possibly vote for a Democrat in 2008 for this reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pangloss Posted February 29, 2008 Share Posted February 29, 2008 You're welcome to think that, of course. My personal opinion is that Clinton and Obama will also keep troops there indefinitely. They're just not going to say so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ecoli Posted February 29, 2008 Share Posted February 29, 2008 You're welcome to think that, of course. My personal opinion is that Clinton and Obama will also keep troops there indefinitely. They're just not going to say so. I agree with that too. I guess I'll just have to take that risk if a decent third party candidate doesn't make an apperance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pangloss Posted February 29, 2008 Share Posted February 29, 2008 I agree with that too. I guess I'll just have to take that risk if a decent third party candidate doesn't make an apperance. A fact which will make McCain applaud, I'm sure. This is why Obama's treading such a narrow path, here. I wonder if MoveOn.org has ever withdrawn an endorsement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now