Are Americans Safer?
By anniepa
@anniepa (27955)
United States
September 12, 2007 12:56pm CST
An interesting exchange occurred during the Senate hearings with General Petraus yesterday; Senator Warner, Republican, asked the general if these policies were making America safer and the general didn't answer the question at all, rather made some remarks that seemed to me to be double talk...not a criticism of the general, just an observation. Te Senator repeated the question, "Are these policies making America safer?" The general's answer was "I don't know"!
So what are our troops risking and losing their lives for, day after day? If they're not doing so for the safety of their country, then why? It was said more than once on TV last night that the troops would be quite devestated when they heard this later on the radio. Any comments here? Apparently the pullout they're talking about coincides with exactly what already was going to happen with some units being sent home.
Annie
3 responses
@xfahctor (14113)
• Lancaster, New Hampshire
12 Sep 07
Yes. Whay you ask? It is simply this. In the 8 years under Clinton, we and our interests were attacked numerous times, the first world trade center, the cole, hobar towers, our embasies in africa, the infamouse attack that led to us bombing lybia and many more. NOw since 9/11 how many times have we been attacked other than in the theaters of war? ZERO, in 6 years ZERO.
1 person likes this
@anniepa (27955)
• United States
12 Sep 07
We've been having this debate for years about what happened under Clinton, etc., etc. and I guess we're going to have to agree to disagree on some of your points there...however, you didn't comment on what I started this discussion about which is have our policies in Iraq made America safer? Are our troops risking and losing their lives to make us safer, or are their sacrifices for nothing? General Petraus hasn't "sorted it out in his mind" so have you?
Annie
@xfahctor (14113)
• Lancaster, New Hampshire
12 Sep 07
Ah, lol, sorry, I digress. In all honesty, iraq in itself has not made us any more safe, NOR has it made us any less safe. LEAVING iraq would make us and the world less safe. I laid out a scenario in another thread, here, I'll re post it here, it is a very real and likely scenario, its a long read to,lol, pack a lunch, anyway:
***********************************************8
Here is what happens when we suddenly up and leave: Iran moves in and influences heaviily in the eastern part. Kurds in the north, who are already miles ahead in progress ahead of the rest of the country, align with the Kurds in turkey, who themselves attempt to seperate their part of turkey and join with the kurdish area of iraq to form their own nation of "kurdistan". The Sunni who were starting to work against al quieda in iraq and WITH us, take advantage of the scenario to turn against the shia and re align with al quieda, al sadr turns his militia machine back on to do so and doubles the streagth of AQI (al quieda in iraq). Iran, in support of the shia groups, moves troups in to iraq. Turkey sends troups down from the north to quell the seperatists groups in both iraq and turkey. Syria, in support o the shia, takes advantage and moves in from the north west to assist iran, its sworn brother. Iran, wishing to secure it's operations, will form a naval blockade of the gulf. Isreal, fearing now that Iran has been emblodened and agressively active in the region, send air strikes in to iran to knock out it'snuclear facilities. Wether or not the facilities are peacefull nuke ops or not is irrelvent, isreal sees tham as a threat and acts in it's defense against them, Syria, in support of iran, sends troups in through lebenon, securing that for it's defense then on in to isreal...... DO I need to keep going with this? As bad a mess as there is right now, the results of a pull out are far more of a nightmare scenario than anything we have had so far over there.
***************************************
The bottom line is we're stuck with it now and there doesn't seem to be anyone else stepping up to go in and take over for us in any real usefull capacity.
The sacrifices? I'll garanty if you ask the MAJORITY not the handpicked dissenters, THE MAJORITY, they believe they are doing the right thing and feel an obligation to the people of iraq to leave them with a peacefull country and are proud of their acomplishements over there and resent being told, "you guys have lost, just give up and come home".
1 person likes this
@anniepa (27955)
• United States
13 Sep 07
The things you map out could very well happen (or similar situations) whether we stay for ten more years or ten more days! I don't think our troops should feel an obligation to the Iraqi people to leave then with a peaceful country, and I don't think it's possible for them to do that! When you have the various factions hating each other and fighting each other, what can we do to stop them? I'm in agreement with those who have said a military solution isn't possible we need a political solution, as the one suggested by Senator Biden among others. Our troops are supposed to keep US, us as in U.S. safe and I don't think they should have to die for any other reason. The idea we could be over there for ten more years or even longer is more than I can even bear to think about, and all this so one man could "prove himself" to his daddy. Unbelieveable!
Annie
@RosieS57 (889)
• United States
13 Sep 07
Wow, what a tightrope Petraeus had to walk, eh? Get Bush mad and get fired, but don't answer fully and truthfully and get a comtempt of Congress citation? Can you say 'rock and a hard place'? LOL
John Warner is a Republican but is retiring and so felt he could go after the truth, and did. The truth being that no one can really make a connection between the war in Iraq and the war on terror. There were no al Qaeda terrorists in Iraq until we occupied the nation. We are only doing the bidding of the Saudi sheiks and it's working out poorly -- their Sunni sect bretheren are being driven out of Baghdad as we speak. For the Iranians and Syrians that's 'progress' -- does it make US citizens safer? Not at all.
Halliburton and Cheney are making moola hand over fist, however. Cheney could say there's progress in Iraq -- in filling Cheney's pockets!
"I don't know" is a good and correct answer. It's the best one he could have given.
How can you lose a war of occupation and attrition? There's no such thing as a loss -- you can't lose territory that wasn't ever supposed to be yours in the first place. How can you lose an illegitimate occupation of a foreign nation? Don't believe the pretzel logic of the war apologists, ok?
We are no safer than we were 6 years ago. We should have put all our forces into Afghanistan where the real enemies came from. We ARE losing there and that's the one we can't afford to lose. That's the war that will hurt us most if Afghanistan and Pakistan aren't cleaned up of Taliban and other incipient terrorists.
1 person likes this
@anniepa (27955)
• United States
13 Sep 07
I totally agree! I'm pretty much a peace lover but I was in total support of going into Afghanistan but all of a sudden most of our concentration was transferred to Iraq and look where we are now! You're right about Cheney making money hand over fist and what else does he have to care about, he has no kids that will be sent over there. Hearing Joe Biden speak of his plane trip home from Iraq with six "fallen angels" brought tears to my eyes, and like he said "It has to stop!"
Annie
@anniepa (27955)
• United States
13 Sep 07
"No terrorist attacks lately"...is that because of our Iraq policy? Are you of the belief that if we "fight them over there we won't have to fight them here"? Only problem Iraq didn't have terrorists before we invaded. Saddam Hussein was a horrid man but I'm talking about the car bombing and terror attacks that are killing our troops and innocent civilians over there on a daily basis now.
Annie
