Ron Paul vs Mike Huckabee on the Surge in Iraq

What is more honorable then... compounding a mistake or conceding that you made one?
deedub81says...

Huckabee has some great points. Ron Paul talks about losing elections. Huckabee stresses the importance of sticking around and finishing the job. We didn't attack the Iraqi people. We attacked Saddam and successfully executed him for his crimes against humanity. While we were there, we began to be attacked. Terrorists have moved in attempting to kill our soldiers and take over in Iraq.

So you agree with Ron Paul? We should just leave and let them have Iraq?

rougysays...

Iraq belongs to the Iraqi's.

You're an idiot if you think Americans didn't kill a lot of innocent Iraqi's.

We've displaced 2,000,000 people and counting, people who have chosen to live as refugees rather than risk their lives in their own country. You call that success?

We cannot "win" Iraq with the military and puppet-master political theatrics we now refer to as strategy.

You've been wrong about Iraq for six years, and in all likelihood, you'll be wrong for as long as we stay there imposing our will on a defeated nation.

Farhad2000says...

It's become part of Bush's surge propaganda to equate sectarian insurgent groups in Iraq with Al-Qaeda, especially given OBL's comments in his new video.

"A numerically small but politically significant component of the insurgency is non-Iraqi, mostly in a faction called Al Qaeda-Iraq (AQ-I). Increasingly in 2007, U.S. commanders have seemed to equate AQ-I with the insurgency, even though most of the daily attacks are carried out by Iraqi Sunni insurgents. AQ-I was founded by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, who was killed in a June 7, 2006, U.S. airstrike.

AQ-I has been a U.S. focus from very early on in the war because, according to U.S. commanders in April 2007, it is responsible for about 90% of the suicide bombings against both combatant and civilian targets. AQ-I is discussed in detail in CRS Report RL32217, Iraq and Al Qaeda, by Kenneth Katzman.

In large parts of Anbar Province and now increasingly in parts of other Sunni
provinces, Sunni tribes are trying to limit Al Qaeda’s influence, which they believe is detrimental to their own interests, by cooperating with U.S. counter-insurgency efforts. In other cases, there have been clashes between AQ-I and Iraqi insurgent groups, such as in June 2007 in the Amiriyah neighborhood of Baghdad, apparently representing differences over targets and AQ-I’s reported abuses of Iraqis who do not fully cooperate with AQ-I.

U.S. commanders say they are trying to enlarge this wedge between Sunni insurgents and AQ-I by selectively cooperating with Sunni insurgents - a strategy that is controversial because of the potential of the Sunni Iraqis to later resume fighting U.S. forces and Iraqi Shiites. The strategy is reported to have led to increased tensions between Maliki and the lead U.S. commander in Iraq, Gen. David Petraeus."


- CRS Report for Congress : Iraq Post-Saddam Security and Governance.

This of course is perfect for both Bush and OBL.

After years of talking about sectarian violence, Bush can now fear monger that leaving Iraq would create a terrorist state formed of the AlQ's Caliphate, giving him more blank checks to continue the surge and the war. Think January 2009.

While OBL can garner more support from radicals since America's president is giving him such constant praises about military operations in Iraq. Sending political bombshells via videotape in safety somewhere in the area between Pakistan and Afghanistan slowly rebuilding his organization, preparing for more attacks avoiding the attention of the US military and special forces because they are all in Iraq. He even had time to color his beard.

So both are playing into each others objectives at the expense of American and Iraqi lives.

Robert Parry covers this eloquently in Bush-Bin Laden Symbiosis Reborn.

Grimmsays...

Why do people buy into the lie that if we bring the troops home now that it means to "dishonor" them? It's not their fault that we have an administration that put them in an almost impossible situation promising that taking out Saddam and bringing democracy to Ira q was going to be a cake walk. The people responsible for those decisions are the one to be disgraced and dishonored....it has nothing to do with the military. They are doing what they are asked and when they are asked to come home their honor will not be determined by if some pie in the sky objective was met or not.

siftbotsays...

Tags for this video have been changed from 'honor, iraq, war, strategy, gop, debates, saving, face, neo cons' to 'ron paul, honor, iraq, war, strategy, gop, debates, saving, face, neo cons' - edited by Grimm

Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists




notify when someone comments
X

This website uses cookies.

This website uses cookies to improve user experience. By using this website you consent to all cookies in accordance with our Privacy Policy.

I agree
  
Learn More