What would you do in Iraq if you were President of USA?

[Bosh]

I'd arm lots of Kurds and Shiite and have them impose death-squad marshal law on central central iraq until they ask nicely to have them repalced with US soldiers, while turning over the rest of Iraq to the locals ASAP. And the civil authority the US set up is a joke, replace it with UN people or army engineers etc., not an ad hoc bunch of jokers...

[MikeH]

What so Bush gets me into this mess and now I have to solve it?

[TheStinger]

If I were Bush I'd take the advice of non military right wing consevatives who will tell me that its easy to subdue a bunch of rag heads. I'll not bother planning for what to do after any war as in the past the US has had no problems in keeping down upity locals.

[MikeH]

I'd find someone else to be a US supported figurehead dictator, like Saddam used to be. That should solve all future problems.

[Tattila the Hun]

Ummmm.... Hide? Well? Very, very well?

Visit museums?

[Thorn]

If I was Bush I'd resign from office, and go live in a Zoo with all the other Monkeys. Leave the Presidential postion to people who have actually visited other countries besides Mexico at the time of taking office.

[Ned]

I'd follow the advice of Dean, admit that Iraq was a mistake, immediately turn all responsibility for Iraq reconstruction and security over to the UN, and pull our troops out, 100%.

Oh, and btw, I would also refuse to help France, Germany and Russia pay for the troops they would now have to deploy to Iraq in large numbers.

[MikeH]

Why would they have to do that?

[Ned]

(And, oh, don't you think it is amazing that guys like Dean and Kennedy are calling for us to surrender control of Iraq to the French, Germans and Russians when all they are willing to commit is a token force at best?)

[Ned]

Originally posted by MikeH
Why would they have to do that?

Are you kidding. Iraq needs an international force of at least 200k to maintain law and order. Assuredly the UN will replace US forces with its own (French, German and Russia are only examples) when we leave. Right? The UN cannot be calling for control and still expect us to carry 99% of the burden, do they?

[Jack_www]

Originally posted by Lawrence of Arabia


Well, ****, Congress has been a REEEAAL impediment to what Bush wants. So has the Supreme Court. Bush answers to no one but himself, and his electoral minority.



As if thats happening. No one will be happy, but they wont do anything - war is too unpopular in Europe. Europe is like a small dog - all bark, all whining, no teeth, no action. Everyone can be bought, especially the Russians. We just have to throw some bones their way and voila, they are our best of friends. Besides. DF didnt say anything about nuking.



Gee why are there terrorists running around? I didnt see any when Saddam was around, and nor did you! And yes, what sort of dumbass country wants to see its soldiers bleeding and burning in the desert, 10,000 miles from home. The only dying should be done to protect the integrity of the US borders.

Now I would think Sadam could care less about the United States, really. But the you dont think those terrorist that attack US troops in Iraq would love to come to America and attack civilians?

[Jack_www]

Originally posted by Evil_Eric_4
I would try to re-institute the draft and then double troop deployment.I wouldnt go crying to the UN either.
We made this mess and it should be up to us to finish the job.If Iraq is to be the front line then we should go for the decisive victory and no more of this"we killed 5 enemy today" crap.
If I lose the election for this then so be it.I really thought GWB was tougher then this but hes turning out to be just another politian bowing to criticism for a few votes when he should be sticking to his guns.

Besides --It takes 5 years to equip and train a new division so we better get cracking cause we will be needing them.

You know- I thought one of our main military doctrines was to be ready to fight a 2 front war at any time.
right now we have about 200,000 men in Iraq and Kuwait-another 10,000 in Afg. --doesnt sound like we could fight another war right now.This disturbs me.

Interesting, but like you said the draft idea would not go over to well in US. Also you have to think that it will take time to train the troops, because you dont want troops who dont even know what they are doing going into Iraq.

Allthough what they are trying to do is get more Iraqies to help in defense of their own country and they are training them as we speak and have been seen the end of the war.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Jack_www

You have to think everything through,

Now, now -- let's not give the poor guy unreasonable expectations or demands.

[SlowwHand]

Originally posted by GePap
Several things:

1. Go on TV, state this was a war of choice, only inderectly related to terrorism, and that it will take at least 5 years for the US t finally get out.

2. A small increase in forces in Iraq: shift the type of forces: get as many MP's and other forces with better training to hande internal security in there.

3. Go to the UN: get a resolution which gives the UNSC very wide control over the political transformation of Iraq and authorizes forces under UN mandate: push India, Pak, and others to send significant forces in (which can be paid by the UN). US retains oerall command of it's own forces. This new resoltuion also ask for much greatei aid, and gives the UN control over who gets contracts to rebuild. (this is the one step that is significanty different from what the bUshies have done or are thinking of doing up to now..they don;t go this far in their resolution)

4. Use UN money to reform Iraqi army.

5. Start new constitution wiritng convention: hope that the parties don;t fal on each other....

BIG News Flash.
You sound JUST like President Bush.

[Thorn]

I wonder if this will be another Vietnam style pull-out with Bagdahd being reconquered by Saddam after the US leaves.