This is an interesting article. (http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_kyle_pom_070314_after_the_surge_inev.htm) What is the plan for after the surge? How much time do they think they can milk out of this surge?

What is the plan for after the surge? How much time do they think they can milk out of this surge?

For Bush and his band of **Project for a New American Century** warmongers, this ongoing "surge" -- like everything else having to do with the Iraq war-- is far more related to how many additional hundreds of billions of taxdollars they can bleed out of the ignorant American public than it is about *time*.

For Bush and his band of **Project for a New American Century** warmongers, this ongoing "surge" -- like everything else having to do with the Iraq war-- is far more related to how many additional hundreds of billions of taxdollars they can bleed out of the ignorant American public than it is about *time*.

Gee, when you say it like that it just doesn't seem so bad. :)

If the necessary political measures are taken in conjunction with the surge, then it's not inevitable that it will fail. However, there is no telling if that will happen.

If the necessary political measures are taken in conjunction with the surge, then it's not inevitable that it will fail. However, there is no telling if that will happen.

So far they have not even talked about them, let alone implimented them.

The necessary political measures will never be taken by the Republicans because that would disprove their fantasy about the utopia of privitization.

Calling it a failure already huh. I agree with Jester though, there will have to be some political changes made in conjunction for it to work.

so much for "more boots on the ground" I guess.

Calling it a failure already huh.

No, actually it is talking about planning ahead.

No, actually it is talking about planning ahead.

The title of the thread doesnt give that impression.

he didnt mean fail, he meant it as planning ahead, what are you some right wing dummy? does she have to spell it out for you!

Calling it a failure already huh.

A bit premature, isn't it. I'm no big fan of the Iraq War, but it irks me when people assume our country will fail at what it sets out to do.

The title of the thread doesnt give that impression.

"How to Succeed in Iraq After the Surge Fails "

It doesn't give the impression that it has already failed either.

It gives the impression that the author expects it will fail in the future.

A bit premature, isn't it. I'm no big fan of the Iraq War, but it irks me when people assume our country will fail at what it sets out to do.

I agree with you.

Tell me, do you think the Surge is going to work?

Do you think we should not be planning for contingencies?
Personally, I am a big fan of having a plan B.

Isnt it possible that the Bush Administration dont have any long term plans for Iraq, as they wont be around to implement them, and if the Democrats were to come to power, Iraq could bring them down also, if the situation were to deteriorate in the coming years.

Isnt it possible that the Bush Administration dont have any long term plans for Iraq, as they wont be around to implement them, and if the Democrats were to come to power, Iraq could bring them down also, if the situation were to deteriorate in the coming years.

Well said. I agree. I think Iraq is going to turn into an anchor hanging around the neck of America and it will thus effect Republican and Democratic administrations alike. The only hope is that someone will rise to the challenge of uniting the majority of America and leading us out of there.

The biggest challenge to the next Administraton is 'how to get the fck out of there' and keep face.

The biggest challenge to the next Administraton is 'how to get the fck out of there' and keep face.
Clinton & Obama are already admitting our troops aren't coming home anytime soon even if one of them wins.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,258897,00.html

Were going to end up being in Iraq as long as we have been in Korea. We're at 50+ now here. And to be honest with you, I dont particularly think that we need to still be here. I dont think Kim Jong Il is even stupid enough to attack the south, whether were here or not. Little off topic, but yeah.

Clinton & Obama are already admitting our troops aren't coming home anytime soon even if one of them wins.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,258897,00.html

That is unfortunate, but at least they have both talked about reducing the number of troops there. We can't stay there forever and the Iraqis especially need to know that. If they think we will stay indefinately then they will never step up.

If this does deteriorate into a regional war dispite our presense there, then I think we should pull out because at that point we are no longer preventing anything, we are just caught in the middle.

Were going to end up being in Iraq as long as we have been in Korea. We're at 50+ now here. And to be honest with you, I dont particularly think that we need to still be here. I dont think Kim Jong Il is even stupid enough to attack the south, whether were here or not. Little off topic, but yeah.
you're completely on topic.

Were going to end up being in Iraq as long as we have been in Korea. We're at 50+ now here. And to be honest with you, I dont particularly think that we need to still be here. I dont think Kim Jong Il is even stupid enough to attack the south, whether were here or not. Little off topic, but yeah.

During that time S. Korea has moved from being an impoverished, corrupt dictatorship to an advanced, rich deomocracy. Hmmmmm.

Americanised