John Murtha on Iraq
Brad Blog has the Video here. Congressman John Murtha - Pennsylvania's 12th Congressional District - Press Releases: "I said over a year ago, and now the military and the Administration agrees, Iraq can not be won ‘militarily.’ I said two years ago, the key to progress in Iraq is to Iraqitize, Internationalize and Energize. I believe the same today. But I have concluded that the presence of U.S. troops in Iraq is impeding this progress.
Our troops have become the primary target of the insurgency. They are united against U.S. forces and we have become a catalyst for violence. U.S. troops are the common enemy of the Sunnis, Saddamists and foreign jihadists. I believe with a U.S. troop redeployment, the Iraqi security forces will be incentivized to take control. A poll recently conducted shows that over 80% of Iraqis are strongly opposed to the presence of coalition troops, and about 45% of the Iraqi population believe attacks against American troops are justified. I believe we need to turn Iraq over to the Iraqis.
I believe before the Iraqi elections, scheduled for mid December, the Iraqi people and the emerging government must be put on notice that the United States will immediately redeploy. All of Iraq must know that Iraq is free. Free from United States occupation. I believe this will send a signal to the Sunnis to join the political process for the good of a ‘free’ Iraq.
Tweet




Comments
Now we're talking! This can't be going over well at the White House. Cheney must be sneering even more than usual if he isn't already apoplectic about this. Did they really think their critics would just run away with their tails between their legs? Sorry but the campaign is over. Now it's time to see if they can actually govern (NOT).
I'm calling his office and saying, THANK YOU! A real American hero - he knew he would get an attack from Bushco and he charged. What a guy! Everyone please call and let him know, we are backing him.
I don't understand how anyone can say that we need to withdraw troops now. I'm about as "liberal" as you can get, especially in that I don't believe that Bush has done anything right since he stole the White House in 2000 and 2004. But he is right (although he's doing it for the wrong reasons) in that we can't just pick up and leave. As horrible as things are going in Iraq, our leaving would be catastrophic for that country. I don't understand how any "liberal" can say that we need to leave if he or she truly believes in the value of the Iraqi life. If we leave, the civil war that is so close to bursting through right now will become reality. Militants will take control of the country and slaughter millions of citizens. This is not speculative - it's unavoidable if we leave.
Now, I'm ABSOLUTELY not saying that we should just continue what we're doing. It's a crime what we have done and what we continue to do in Iraq. But the military presence is necessary in order for us to even have the option of establishing peace talks between the various religious sects. Of course, it's not so simple to just sit everyone down and negotiate, but it is possible to at least get them to listen to each other for a start. The reality is that the country probably needs to be split into three regions (also an impossibly difficult task). But again, no one will agree to such talks without the American military breathing down their necks.
My interests lie in the well-being of Iraq, the Middle East, and America. If you're worried that Bush will pull out the troops before the Democrats can take credit for it (making it a "victory" for the Republicans), don't be. The Democrats are finally starting to realize that they CAN attack the validity of the war, and we're starting to see now that they will take this route. Bush can do whatever the hell he wants with the troops; the fact still remains that it was a waste of at least 2100 American and tens of thousands of Iraqi lives. In the eyes of History, that's indefensible.
I don't understand how anyone can say that we need to withdraw troops now. I'm about as "liberal" as you can get, especially in that I don't believe that Bush has done anything right since he stole the White House in 2000 and 2004. But he is right (although he's doing it for the wrong reasons: control of oil so that his crony friends at ExxonMobile can turn another $100 billion profit next quarter) in that we can't just pick up and leave. As horrible as things are going in Iraq, our leaving would be catastrophic for that country. I don't understand how any "liberal" can say that we need to leave if he or she truly believes in the value of the Iraqi life. If we leave, the civil war that is so close to bursting through right now will become reality. Militants will take control of the country and slaughter millions of citizens. This is not speculative - it's unavoidable if we leave.
Now, I'm ABSOLUTELY not saying that we should just continue what we're doing. It's a crime what we have done and what we continue to do in Iraq. But the military presence is necessary in order for us to even have the option of establishing peace talks between the various religious sects. Of course, it's not so simple to just sit everyone down and negotiate, but it is possible to at least get them to listen to each other for a start. The reality is that the country probably needs to be split into three regions (also an impossibly difficult task). But again, no one will agree to such talks without the American military breathing down their necks.
My interests lie in the well-being of Iraq, the Middle East, and America. If you're worried that Bush will pull out the troops before the Democrats can take credit for it (making it a "victory" for the Republicans), don't be. The Democrats are finally starting to realize that they CAN attack the validity of the war, and we're starting to see now that they will take this route. Bush can do whatever the hell he wants with the troops; the fact still remains that it was a waste of at least 2100 American and tens of thousands of Iraqi lives. In the eyes of History, that's indefensible.
The simple fact of the matter is that WE, can not establish peace talks with the various factions in Iraq. WE are the common enemy of all those factions. Think about that.
The only effect, of maintaining occupation forces, is to unify those warring factions in their opposition to that occupation.
The foreign Jihadists that we worry so much about, are estimated to be less than ten percent of the forces against us. They are not loved by the Iraqi people and will find them selves in a very difficult position, the day the American forces leave.
There will be warfare between those factions. But, there is warfare between those factions right now. Our only purpose there, now, is to be a common target to all of those factions.
Try as we may, in the end, we will not control and remake the destiny of Iraq and it's people, except in the most negative ways. There is no possibility of peace in that country, as long as US troops are there.
The deficit created by this war and the corruption of this president and his administration, is breaking this country and it's military. We will be paying for this administration, it's mistakes and it's corruption, for decades. It will effect every aspect of life for those not too rich to have to pay their share of this colossal waste.
I do find it interesting how many conservative Republicans are now referring to themselves as independents and even claim to be "liberal as anybody", while promoting the same old BS.
I doubt that anyone is seriously worried that Bush will take the troops out, on his own and somehow deprive the Dems of a victory.
The troops must come home, who ever makes that final decision.
More Iraqis will die when we pull out, but, in case you haven't noticed, they are dieing in large numbers, right now, because American troops are there.
We will not be able to control the process of Iraq becoming its own country again but we can stall that process, for as long as we remain there.
There is much more at stake than point winning, between the Repugs and the Dems.
". . . I like guys who got five deferments and never been there . . . then send people to war and don't like to hear suggestions about what needs to be done."
"I don't understand how anyone can say that we need to withdraw troops now."
I'm surprised you didn't get more bitter/angry responses to this statement. But the fact is that people who call for 'withdraw now!' aren't thinking long-term. They're thinking short-term. They have a short-term 'victory' in their eyes ... and can't be bothered to think of the long-term loss of life, both foreign and domestic, if we remove all support from the region and terror-based regimes seize control of such a resource-rich part of the world.
All you need to do is look back at when OPEC first flexed its muscles in the 70's to see a weak shadow of what would happen: the world economy would suffer to such extent that many countries would be immobilized. The UN would be powerless to stop the flood of terror-based control in the region; those blowing up innocent civilians in the name of Allah would be emboldened by what they would see as a 'victory' over the US.
The real victory is, as is generally the case, somewhere between the two extremes. We do need to get out of there. But we also need to be sure that the situation we leave behind is one that can be adequately handled by Iraqi security forces. The problem is that one side wants immediate withdrawal, and the other keeps saying they want to stay to make the place secure but doesn't seem to be really setting a path/plan for ever getting out. Both sides are flawed.
"WE are the common enemy of all those factions. Think about that."
That's simply not the case. We are not the enemy of the government currently trying to establish control in Iraq. We are their ally. They, however, quite sensibly want us out of the country because they understand that our presence is polarizing. Behind any grief that exists between the Sunni/Shia/remainder there is the obvious distrust that many of the factions have regarding our presence.
An actual plan to get out of the country and leave a manageable state behind would probably go a long way towards fixing this problem. But contrary to what a lot of people believe, just leaving won't make us anybody's best friend.
So I say: get out, but get out with a plan. Stop saying you have some secret plan, Bush, and lay it out. As my teachers used to say: show your work.
"More Iraqis will die when we pull out, but, in case you haven't noticed, they are dieing in large numbers, right now, because American troops are there"
This is also an oversimplification. The bombings will not stop once we are gone. There is a lot of bad blood between the many factions in the area, and to think that Iraq once we leave will be some Michael-Moore-lie vision of kids flying kites and peace rainbows is just naive.
"I do find it interesting how many conservative Republicans are now referring to themselves as independents and even claim to be 'liberal as anybody', while promoting the same old BS."
Many of us independents, whom you childishly insist upon calling 'repugs', find it interesting that you so closely toe your bleeding-heart party line that you can't even examine a position beyond its headline impact.
A lot of people do want a solution to this problem, regardless of whatever bumper stickers you have on your car, and a lot of people don't fall into the easy classification of "Republican or Democrat". There is something to be said for the prominence of the lackwit mentality that wishes to pigeonhole complex situations into black and white cave wall etchings.
You need to open your mind.
Thank you Rep. Murtha for giving the truth to the people. You are right in all you say and keep fighting for us. My husband fought in Korea and has since passed away. He told me how terrible it was to see his friends die. He had nightmares and screamed in his sleep 4 years after he returned. You are so right about the need to deploy our troops as soon as it can be done safely. Keep fighting for us