<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The End Game in Iraq?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.raggedclown.com/2007/04/03/the-end-game-in-iraq/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.raggedclown.com/2007/04/03/the-end-game-in-iraq/</link>
	<description>It's just a shadow you're seeing that he's chasing...</description>
	<pubDate>Sat, 10 Jan 2009 01:25:43 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Kevin</title>
		<link>http://www.raggedclown.com/2007/04/03/the-end-game-in-iraq/comment-page-1/#comment-1381</link>
		<dc:creator>Kevin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Apr 2007 15:51:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.raggedclown.com/?p=276#comment-1381</guid>
		<description>Integrity would be to say something like...

I understand that the democrats have put forward several plans for Iraq. For instance Joseph Biden has been advocating an  federal system divided along Kurd/Sunni/Shiite lines, John Murtha has been advocating withdrawing to the boundaries of Iraq, Clinton has been advocating a diplomatic offensive and that the mainstream opinion in the Democrat Party has been to champion the findings of the bipartisan Iraq Study Group commissioned by the previous (Republican) congress. But we haven't really debated those options because it's easier to just keep repeating that the 'Democrats have no strategy' in the hope that none of my supporters will take the trouble to find out what the Democrats are really saying.

Sadly, in the absence of such honesty, the natural conclusion of such partisan point-scoring is that we'll be left with two only options 'stay the course' and 'get out' and McCain's posturing will become a self-fulfilling prophesy.

Their current strategy is force the President to discuss the options rather than just to continue to hope things will get better until it's not his problem any more. This is the first time since 2002 that congress has even talked about Iraq and the reason they are doing so is because the Dems have said 'if you don't talk about it we are giving you a year to come up with an exit strategy'.

If the despots are enlightened, they will consider the alternatives that are coming from across the political spectrum (keep your eye on Chuck Hagel and John Warner). If the despots are like McCain and Bush they will try to pretend that there are only two alternatives - Victory or Defeat. If they throw in a little gay-baiting and anti-flag-burning they might get another 50.1% majority while painting the 49.9 minority as unpatriotic, treasonous baby-killers.

I'd rather the enlightened despots try to find a consensus that has a chance of working.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Integrity would be to say something like&#8230;</p>
<p>I understand that the democrats have put forward several plans for Iraq. For instance Joseph Biden has been advocating an  federal system divided along Kurd/Sunni/Shiite lines, John Murtha has been advocating withdrawing to the boundaries of Iraq, Clinton has been advocating a diplomatic offensive and that the mainstream opinion in the Democrat Party has been to champion the findings of the bipartisan Iraq Study Group commissioned by the previous (Republican) congress. But we haven&#8217;t really debated those options because it&#8217;s easier to just keep repeating that the &#8216;Democrats have no strategy&#8217; in the hope that none of my supporters will take the trouble to find out what the Democrats are really saying.</p>
<p>Sadly, in the absence of such honesty, the natural conclusion of such partisan point-scoring is that we&#8217;ll be left with two only options &#8217;stay the course&#8217; and &#8216;get out&#8217; and McCain&#8217;s posturing will become a self-fulfilling prophesy.</p>
<p>Their current strategy is force the President to discuss the options rather than just to continue to hope things will get better until it&#8217;s not his problem any more. This is the first time since 2002 that congress has even talked about Iraq and the reason they are doing so is because the Dems have said &#8216;if you don&#8217;t talk about it we are giving you a year to come up with an exit strategy&#8217;.</p>
<p>If the despots are enlightened, they will consider the alternatives that are coming from across the political spectrum (keep your eye on Chuck Hagel and John Warner). If the despots are like McCain and Bush they will try to pretend that there are only two alternatives - Victory or Defeat. If they throw in a little gay-baiting and anti-flag-burning they might get another 50.1% majority while painting the 49.9 minority as unpatriotic, treasonous baby-killers.</p>
<p>I&#8217;d rather the enlightened despots try to find a consensus that has a chance of working.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matt</title>
		<link>http://www.raggedclown.com/2007/04/03/the-end-game-in-iraq/comment-page-1/#comment-1347</link>
		<dc:creator>Matt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Apr 2007 08:18:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.raggedclown.com/?p=276#comment-1347</guid>
		<description>&#62;Also, it’s disingenuous of McCain to keep repeating that the Democrats have no strategy except defeat when he knows that there is a broad spectrum of opinion within both parties - and there have been a number of alternate strategies from including the one from the Iraq Study Group which was supported by most mainstream Democrats until it was nullified by the President’s latest surge.

If he believes the surge is our best chance,  then repeating it in the face of growing disagreement shows integrity, not disingenuousness.  

What is the current democratic strategy other than defeat?  Isn't their chosen plan to drive to a date?  Is this not defeat and failure?  Regardless of whether or not you think that's the best remaining option, it is what it is.

This current fiasco will feature prominently in future ad campaigns for enlightened despots.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&gt;Also, it’s disingenuous of McCain to keep repeating that the Democrats have no strategy except defeat when he knows that there is a broad spectrum of opinion within both parties - and there have been a number of alternate strategies from including the one from the Iraq Study Group which was supported by most mainstream Democrats until it was nullified by the President’s latest surge.</p>
<p>If he believes the surge is our best chance,  then repeating it in the face of growing disagreement shows integrity, not disingenuousness.  </p>
<p>What is the current democratic strategy other than defeat?  Isn&#8217;t their chosen plan to drive to a date?  Is this not defeat and failure?  Regardless of whether or not you think that&#8217;s the best remaining option, it is what it is.</p>
<p>This current fiasco will feature prominently in future ad campaigns for enlightened despots.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matt</title>
		<link>http://www.raggedclown.com/2007/04/03/the-end-game-in-iraq/comment-page-1/#comment-1346</link>
		<dc:creator>Matt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Apr 2007 08:00:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.raggedclown.com/?p=276#comment-1346</guid>
		<description>FWIW, I thought I heard McCain say a long time ago, that we'll be there in some form or another for 10+ years, like Japan or Germany post WWII.  The implication was a small fraction of today's forces.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>FWIW, I thought I heard McCain say a long time ago, that we&#8217;ll be there in some form or another for 10+ years, like Japan or Germany post WWII.  The implication was a small fraction of today&#8217;s forces.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic Page Served (once) in 0.367 seconds -->
