I like that the Iraq Study Group told Congress that they needed to fund the military properly for the next five years.

There are very few things that really are the federal governments job, but National Defense has always been one. If Congress will only listen.

The Iraq Surrender Group has completed its work. Leave it to James Baker, the architect of encouraging the Kurds and Shiites to rebel against Saddam in 91 and then abandoning them to poison gas and murder to say we need to do this and that. The Europeans love him, he is more closely related to their ideas than to ours.

The arab press is already crowing that we are defeated, that we will leave and that we are once again paper tigers. We have willed ourselves into defeat, this time of a much more serious scale than Vietnam or Somalia.

Iraqis better pack a suitcase and leave it by the front door. You never know when that last helicopter out of Baghdad will be leaving. Its a sure bet it wont be long.

The next attack in this country will be directly related to this surrender and the lack of will to complete the job at hand.

And what do we tell people like my new Intern, Richard Ingram, who lost his lower left arm in Iraq? What did he give it up for? Surrender? How about the 26 dead members of the 48th Brigade? How do we face their mothers and tell them, "well, we are tired of the fight and will now give it up."

This whole business makes me sick at my stomach. The Surrender Monkeys and Defeatists will rue the day we didnt destroy Muslim Fascism in the middle east while we had the chance.

I don't think we should leave right now, but the longer we stay, the more "Muslim Fascists" we help breed.

The welfare-warfare state is healthy! That is what the Iraq Study Group report means. Keep on funding the military and the troops......which will continue the same old quagmire. No wonder Colin Powell left the administration. He preached for 25 years that whenever the US intervened militarily, it needed clearly defined objectives, political support, and an exit strategy. The neocons thought this was foolish. They wanted to remake the world for democracy. Let's make a democratic Iraq.... Ya, that has turned out well. (I do not understand the logic of Senator Douglas -- all respect sir, but just because servicemen have been killed and wounded in Iraq does not mean we should stay there indefinitely. I admire the bravery of our troops, but they are cannon fodder for the intellectually bankrupt policies of the neocons)

Libertarians, in my fallible opinion, should push for the US to get out of this war and return to the foreign policy of the early 19th century -- mind your own business and strike only in self defense. It seems to me that that is the proper foreign policy for a republic.

Increased funding & troop strength are the good points.

The Iraq Surrender Committee setting a time to leave is wrong. Failing to define 'the mission" was also wrong.

I am little surprised that the non-partisan, non-elected bunch of business interest lawyers (**) and advocates came up with political cover for everyone - and plenty of "The US screwed up" to go around. But they provide us with nothing but recommendations to begin talks with the very countries that supply troops and armaments used against us.

** Baker & his firm (including his son James IV) represent Saudi Arabia. O'Conner supported Dubai in running our ports. Like the 9/11 Commission, this hot-shot committee was created to pull W's fat our of the political wringer, but not to further US interests.

Joshua: Do police cause crime? Do speed limits cause speeders? What were we doing Sept 10, 2001 to cause Sept 11, 2001? Why do you fall into the same trap as so many who would blame America for every ill in the world?

Rick: "He preached for 25 years that whenever the US intervened militarily, it needed clearly defined objectives, political support, and an exit strategy." Absolutely! (Although the best Exit strategy is Victory).

"The neocons thought this was foolish. They wanted to remake the world for democracy. Let's make a democratic Iraq." Yeah, foolish us for working to spread freedom and democracy. How could we be so stupid???? Tyranny is the only thing those dimwits understand so lets leave them to it. Right? They dont care about their families living in terror and slavery. Maybe Hitler was onto something in Europe? Pol Pot in Cambodia and Stlain in the USSR?

What were we doing Sept 10, 2001 to cause Sept 11, 2001?
The one myth of the war on terrorism is that "they hate our freedom." While that may be true to some extent, I think they hate the fact that we've constantly involved ourselves in their business.

Yeah, foolish us for working to spread freedom and democracy. How could we be so stupid????
That sounds so altruistic. That we must sacrifice our country to secure "democracy" to a foreign people.

I'm not in the anti-war crowd, mainly because I don't want to associate myself with pacifists and leftists. But, I think the reasoning here is flawed. Our Constitution does not give the United States government the power to "spread freedom and democracy" (democracy is something our Founders loathed) to other countries.

And morally...I don't think we have a right to say anything about freedom because we have stood by and watch China kill millions of it's own people. I'm not saying we should, but aren't they the most frequent offender?

Senator Douglas-

Police do not cause crime, but a foreign military presence does tend to cause resentment and sometimes hatred. If military vehicles from a foreign power were patrolling the streets of Conyers every day for three years, how would that make you feel?

While they do hate our freedom, its our religons they really hate. While the President stands by political correctness and spouts off about Islam being a relig'on of peace, the facts prove otherwise.

I didnt expect to find the "Blame America First" crowd here. Somthing of a surprise.

What were we doing on Sept 10th to cause Sept 11th?
It wasn't what we were doing on the 10th, it is what we have been doing since WW2. Interventionist policy breeds resentment and hatred.

Senator,

I am not "blaming America first." I have no affection for Islam or the Middle East. My point is that foreign policy for a republic (which we used to be) must be humble. Extending the size of the military and scope of military obligations places harsh tax burdens on the population and subjects our armed forces --- which are supposed to protect the republic -- to possible death in foreign lands. Powell argued that we should not go into a campaign without a clear exit strategy. That was clearly not followed in Iraq. It is not the job of the US government to spread democracy around the globe. That idea has its genesis in the American left of the early 20th century -- Woodrow Wilson, in particular. That Republicans have now endorsed it shows how far the GOP has drifted from conservatism.

I didnt expect to find the "Blame America First" crowd here. Somthing of a surprise.

Go ahead...you should go ahead and go on with the next part and say we are unpatriotic and appeasers.

The only thing I'm saying, and it's not that America is to blame, is that it's not our job to spread "democracy" to any country. That's hardly a "blame America first" stance. It's putting our government back into it's Constitutional role.

I have the utmost respect for our troops and I support them, but I question our President's policy because it's clear that it's not working.

Josha, whether you agree or not, the world is a very dangerous place and without a country willing to stand up and try to control some of the evil, we would be in a new dark ages and chaos would prevail over the globe. I for one am glad we are willing to pay the price to try and provide freedom for ourselves by providing it for others.

Call me selfish, but I value the lives of American Soldiers more than I value the voting rights of someone under the jurisdiction of another government.

...the world is a very dangerous place and without a country willing to stand up and try to control some of the evil, we would be in a new dark ages and chaos would prevail over the globe. I for one am glad we are willing to pay the price to try and provide freedom for ourselves by providing it for others.
This is altruism at it's worst. The idea that we must sacrifice ourselves for another country. That's dangerous.

Freedom is only paid lip service in this country. Our rights are constantly being sacrificed. How can we truly be free when our freedoms are being taken away everyday?

Senator,

If you feel the need to stand up to Islamic Fascism, why is it not possible for you and those who agree with you to privately give to those who support your cause? Why do you have to confiscate MY MONEY through taxes to fund foreign policy escapades that result in taking away my freedom (and property) and produce negligible results. Look how much the US flushed down the drain in Vietnam. Do we want that again?

I didnt expect to find the "Blame America First" crowd here. Somthing of a surprise.

Senator,

I have a lot of respect for you, but quite frankly, this was an unfounded statement. It's just further proof that the GOP didn't learn a damn thing from this last election. That type of stale, empty, pointless, divisive rhetoric is exactly why the GOP lost.

And, just so you'll know where I stand on this, I support the war, I support the mission. But, Bush's "stay the course" plan is hollow. Using a good guy like Richard Ingram to further an emotion based crusade is also pretty low.

Like I said, I have a lot of respect for you. But, we just disagree on the strategy of the war.

I think we were right to go in and destroy the Iraqi military and to dismantle it's oppressive and dangerous government. I think it was overly optimistic to believe we could ever spread freedom to a people when their religion prohibits it. Sending thousands of 'infidels' into the Muslim world and expecting them to be welcomed with open arms was foolishness.

Sending thousands of 'infidels' into the Muslim world and expecting them to be welcomed with open arms was foolishness.

Note: I chose this quotation but many statements at this post caught my ire.

I am in agreement with Sen. Douglas, but Jason's statements are also true. The concept of nation building should not have been our stated objective - not in the sequence of events that played out. However, the interventionist role the US has played is terribly misunderstood by some of the young bucks posting here.

The primary objectives should have followed Bush's "With me or against me" mandate. He wimped out and chose a PC course, aligned with folks more loyal to the dollar and economic markets than to establishing a strong (and dominant) US position. Nobody can deny the roles of Iran and Syria. Nobody can deny the upheaval in England, Spain, Southeast Asia, Africa... there is an enemy; this is a world-wide war.

We are not facing a simple disagreement or variance of cultures. There is a force in this dangerous world that would dominate or destroy (they care not which) Jews and Christians simply because they are all infidels. This psychotic foe cannot be "talked to" or "reasoned with." Failure to grasp that simple set of facts will force the US into the same position as France in WWII: talk, balk and surrender.

This greatest of nations on God's green earth has the economic, military and intellectual strength to stand tall. As a nation with paper tiger leadership and intellectual debates about PC applications of strength, we simply lack the will to survive.

Stop thinking about Iraq and 3 or 4 years of struggle. Think about 5, 10 or 15 years from now. Apply all you know about history of Muslims and warfare. Apply realities in today's news you may not want to accept: Indonesia, France, England, Lebanon. We cannot continue to placate the schoolyard bullies - they have Will & Weapons and no hesitance to apply both.

"Surrender Monkeys","Iraq Surrender Group"

I think Senator should stop copying the NY Post's most ridiculous quotes of the day. Originality counts for something.
Iraq did not attack on 9-11 nor did any of the terrorist come from there nor trained there nor was Iraq a fundamentalist state....yeah yeah we all know the history.
So why would anyone at this day and time cling to the idea of this huge mistake of a war.
Maybe guilt for sending these poor guys to the meat-grinder?
It's human nature to cling to a belief that gives reason or a purpose.Even when it results in the deaths of god knows how many.
It is difficult to say that a loved one died for nothing, but ingnoring reality is not the answer.

If dehumanizing the enemy works for you so be it. That is an age old reaction of making the enemy somehow less human than you. They do it. We do it. Eternal cycle of hate.