Obama, McCain square off on war

I wish NeoCon John McCain would just go away.

Three reasons why John McCain won't win the 08 Prez job.

1)His involvment in the Keating scandel will be reopened to the public.

2)He's been sucking up to the same Religious Right NeoCons who gave us George W. Bush, i e (his speech at Bob Jones University).

3)His continued call for more troops in Iraq which was a good idea in 2003,but will be like pouring gasoline on a Shite/Sunni firestorm now days.
People don't like W.'s so called "Surge" idea,but McCain does.

The Straight Talk Express has blown another tire.

Obama is just like the rest of those left wingers, he talks in buzz words all of which translate into "Tax and Spend" then "Cut and Run" they do not know anything about running a country except "Give me the power" so they can buy more votes.

WE need a leader who has exective experence. Not a Obama come lately who has passed what one bill?

Now the real truth is that if we pull out Iraq goes. Jimmy Carter another lefty started this mess in Iran in the 70S now we get to pay.

Left is just left, if you ask them for a plan they just left.

Unfortunately, Senator Mc Cain doesn't seem to remember that he was kicked to the curb by Bush. Now he wraps his arms around Bush in order to put himself in the news cycle for his presidential bid. A word to McCain...we Americans have seen enough, you ARE the ultimate flip-flopper!

John McCain has my respect for his service to the country in Vietnam but that's it... as a politician he is scary. One of these days all that anger I sense in him will bust out and make George W. look like a pussy cat.

The withdrawal of troops will be a catastrophe that is unimaginable - this is the rhetoric of fear, more fear and greater fear that is being sold to the public by supporters of this administration. It is obvious there are dangers to a sudden withdrawal but the surge and/or escalation of this war is not the solution. Most agree that a military strategy will not cure the political sectarian problem.

It still amazes me that even after hearing a concrete alternative plan fleshed out in full, both McCain and W continue to claim the opposition has no plan. They are simply being "emotional" and not offering alternative strategies, yadda yadda.

W's only objective in this is "victory", because in the simplistic black-and-white bubble he lives in, the only other alternative is being a "loser". National interests be damned, this is zero-sum game for W, and his only interest is proving to history he isn't an incompetent nitwit. Unfortunately, he's destined to fail.

We owe nothing more to the Iraqi people. CLEAR, HOLD, and BUILD. Why not redirect that effort toward New Orleans. I think it makes more sense to help our own at this point, than helping a people who clearly either don't care or are conflicted. We as Americans have no genuine understanding of the middle eastern mind set. Some might think that this is a more or less an isolationist view. Perhaps it is, however being the worlds keeper doesn't seem to be working.

I believe there is much to lose by turning over the middleast to folks who desire the destruction of this country and it's principles. Principles, by the way, we need to return to in this country. If we fail to stand up to them there,we will eventually have them here! With all the chatter about the "religious right." I would rather be "religious right" than "religous wrong!"

Barack Obama is a true democrat. I am not really sure why there is such a surge of indecision by the democrats. They call for withdrawal, yet will not make any effort at cutting spending.

While McCain's previous involvements with the Keating scandel may be opened up to the public, I still believe a person who can stand by a decision that they make knowing, very well the long term effects may not have a fairy tale ending. You have to respect someone that is decisive and stands the course.

Once again, democrats lack the initiative to get anything done without blaming all that is wrong on Republicans.

If you must eat parsnips, there is no sense nibbling at it. It's the same way with war. You either fully commit to it or you don't do it.

Sending 100,000 or 120,000 troops to Iraq makes little or no sense given the objectives that now exist (since no weapons of mass-destruction were found). You should either bring them home or insert 4 or 500,000 and get it finish it. If Alexander the Great were watching this he'd be laughing his butt off over the way we "fight war."

If the real objective is selling democracy, then bring the troops home. Why? Because democracy is established where there the strong upper class wants it, where the middle class needs it and where the lower class are wealthy enough to afford pursuing ideals. Those conditions did not exist in Vietnam and they don’t exist in Iraq.

It’s pretty stupid to try to sell something to a market full of people that don't want it and don't even know that they need it.

CONCLUSION:
Bring them home.

i don't see any reason why we shold send more troops in Iraq if we 've been there three years of fighting .all i see is the iraqi troops joining the insurgents and fighting against the U.S.,even the the police forces had quit because the safety of their family's lives and their heads,so Mr. McCain ,just drop out and shut the hell up !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It's not a question of Congress running the war, as Cheney stated; it's a question of Congress ending the war, which they have a responsibility and authority to do.

It's not a question of pulling out being a disaster, as McCain stated; it's a question of increasing the disaster by continuing the war. Nothing has moved forward in a constructive way in the past; so there is no reason to assume that more war is going to be an improvement.

There has never been a significant military activity which has done anything other than destroy the country it invades. It has never won an insurgency or created democracy. If the military could not stop looters because it was not trained in police work, it isn't going to create democracy, as if it were trained in politics.

I have to agree with John. I have been disappointed by McCain. I think he is only supporting this surge to get Bush's financial connections for the election. I wonder what his feelings will be if he loses his son in Iraq. But maybe he wouldn't mind sacrificing his son to be president....

Obama sounds like a fairly reasonable person but I think he has too much going against him to be president. Even though it doesn't make any logical sense, I don't think people in this country will vote for a man with his name. Sad but true....

I don't think McCain is too concerned about winning the the 2008 Presidential Election. He'd rather win this war instead.

He told CNN's Larry King: "I would much rather lose an election than lose a war."

We won't know whether this surge will work, but if it is successful, he'll be our next President.

Barack Obama is the right man for the job.
OBAMA IN 2k8!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Cheney has all sorts of rhetoric about wars - which he has no experience with; and, John McCain - I hate to bring it up but, a prisoner of war is more out of the loop than a gun boat captain on the Mekong River.

One thing that is missing from this debate is what happens after the 21,500 troop surge. If the surge reduces violence and instability, I expect the Administration to be back asking for another 20,000 or even 50,000 in a few months. I haven't heard anyone suggest that 21,500 more troops will secure the entire country of Iraq. It seems inevitable that the next logical step is to say, "it worked in Baghdad, we can secure more keys areas of Iraq with another surge." Also, while "clear and hold" sounds good militarily, it will expose troops to sniping and bombing and IEDs while they are "holding" neighborhoods that they have cleared. For these reasons and others, the surge strategy is another bad idea.

Cheney has all sorts of rhetoric about wars - which he has no experience with; and, John McCain - I hate to bring it up but, a prisoner of war is more out of the loop than a gun boat captain on the Mekong River.

John will be relegated to running as VP. The Rove controlled RNC will put a a Bush clone... or brother on the podium. Six weeks before the election during a back stage "heated policy debate" John will deck Carl.

Obama has now starting to talk like a politician, which is in my mind a losing proposition. If he is truely running for president, then he must think, speak, and act with truth and unfailing example to the American people. We have seen him speak truth to power, and seen some chance for change.

As far as I am concerned, any debate with McCain is no contest. McCain forgot about truth, justice, and the American way a long time ago, and plays the game with a set of rules that can only advance the cause of the existing corporate government.

If Obama is trying to play politics with this evil regime he has lost allready. One thing that God himself can't do is play another man's game. He can't beat an ace with a duece, and playing games is not the way to meaningful change.

We The People hace spoken, and are now being ignored by the present administration, that has decided their course many years ago. Meaningful change is necessary for any chance for peace in the Middle East.

Good thoughts...good words...good deeds G:

This may seem small in the larger context, but your decription of what Sen. Boxer said to Sec. Rice is a total mischaracterization. What she said was that neither of them were paying the price of the war, since neither of them had family there. Sec. Rice's status as a single woman was never mentioned. Read the transcript, not some second hand account of it.

this is just another example of how John McCain has lost touch with the American people and is refusing to hold bush accountable for his ambitions to save face instead of lives

I saw Obama the show and I was struck by the poor lighting which was evident every time Obama moved his hands - as he does quite often.

For those who think I'm being frivolous, I would just note that many believe the lighting hurt Nixon during his debate with JFK.

John McCain is now a tired old man, desperate to become president. He'll say and do whatever it takes to get access to the Big Money out there. I don't trust him at all and "straight talk"? Not any more.

I truly believe Barack Obama will be our president, if not in 2008 then certainly in 2012. It's going to take 25-30 years to undo all the damage this incompetent president has done to our country and to our basic rights as Americans. His adventuring in the Middle East as our "war president" just boggles my mind. How could we have consented to such a thing? He used our fear to gain unprecedented and undeserved power.

The problem is by cooked up intelligence and continuous lies, we have been led into this mess. As one of the European news report said "Now the Presidents wants to clear the mess with American blood."

Americans are very patient and accommodating and forgiving people. How long can we put up with disinformation and lies, and what upsets me, is we waste our resources by sending our officials abroad to trumpet about our misguided policy.

If we express our disagreement with the President's policies we are labelled unpatriotic and not dedicated to the principles of democracy. As someone said 'the President is a public servant. The public is his employer.' And everyone who has worked knows that employer can also fire an employee.

As Sen. Biden forewarned, we hope that the President won't extend the conflict in Middle East. I am not so sure, Senator. Two months ago his top generals in Iraq spoke against the surge. And what did he answer reporters' questions with? "I have to listen to the generals out in the field." And did what he was advised by Cheney, Rumsfeld et al. And will do the same.

So there Senator.

Pl. send a copy to Sen. Biden

The middle East controls 70% of the world's oil reserves. To allow it to be controlled by forces hostile to the free world would place the world in economic and political unrest.

Obama simply mouthed current Democratic talking points, i.e. we are already in a catastrophe, nobody wants to pull troops out immediately but to withdraw gradually, and then he simply criticizes Bush. The Democratics have no plan except to "talk with" those commited to our destruction. At least Obama, unlike most of his Democratic brethren, is consistent since he voted against the war initially.

McCain's principle is an old fashioned belief, that after voting to commit troops in Iraq, we should continue to support them until we succeed. McCain questioned how others in Congress could vote to send troops to Iraq, and now say they were duped by Bush. Additionally, these same politicians that voted to go into Iraq, would now announce our intentions to withdraw and betray from our allies, the Iraqi people who have elected a democratic government, leaving them alone to handle those who want to overthrow their democracy. What a great message this sends to those who love freedom in the world about the United States.

Generations of brave Americans who have fought and defended freedome must be "turning over in their graves".

Fred makes a good point, but it is headed in the wrong direction. We need to take a stand against moralists here in our own country before we can take a stand against moralists in the Middle East.

And maybe we SHOULD wait until they come to our country. Then at least we'll make a united stand, we'll all have to sacrifice, and we won't stop fighting until all of the Middle East stops fighting.

Now that's a war worth fighting.

Onward Christian son ... and daughter ....

And death to the Disco King.

... Uh... Sorry. I got carried away.

Perhaps I am cynical, but with sectarian violence tearing apart the country, why is the focus on Bahgdad? Perhaps because the current adminstration well knows that, just like Saigon, that is where the end game will play out, and they don't want those last helicopters leaving the roof of the embacy during thier reign.

An additional 21,500 troops is not enough to win, even the pentagon's intial estimatles called for 350,000 personel, and the Rand Insituties estimate is closer to half a million men.

If as the President and his supporters suggest, that if we pull out the rsult is an unimaginable catastrophe, then why isnl tthe proposal to put 350,000 or ever 500,000 men on the ground? Yes that latter number would require every deployable soldier and marine we have, but, if the consequence of not winning is an unimaginable catastrophe, then why aren't we pulling out all the stops?

The real asnwer is simple, it is because the result will not be an unimaginable catastrophe. There will jsut be a new dictator in a region used to them since we overthrew the first democracy there in the 50's. For all the rhetoric about democracy, we as a country like dealing with dictators, they are predictable, corruptable and controllable.

beyond a shadow of a doubt Iran and other oil producing countries are joining together to cause a horrific problem for the few democratic no Islamic countries in the world. They have announced it yet we still keep our heads stuck in the ground being non re-active instead of being proactive. Iraq is also in this same mix....
How will we stop them from nationalizing the oil once we "pull out" or even when they become more powerful..

Keeping troops in the area is not just important but essential to our remaining a viable power in the world.
How long are we going to kid ourselves that we can maintain our presence just on our word...
We are toothless.... and we are doing nothing to build up our forces... all the weapons in the world do not make up for lack of bodies on the ground....

Americans dont want to fight a battle that they have no chance of winning because of " rules of engagement."
We have won nothing but more grave sites since world war 2...

Now if we wanted to do what was right.. we would even now go in.. .bring all to capitulation then build from there... being goody goody has only cost us body bags...

No one wants war.. but is part of the what the world requires..
When we come to the understanding that this is NOT a political war but truly a religious war ..
then we have a chance of winning.. but when they can shoot from a building and we cant fight back because its a Holy Place is a bunch of garbage...
If it was your son being shot at......

Its nice to sit in Washington and call the shots even tho it does hurt when our side has casualties but
Let the Generals and commanders get into the front lines and fight and you would see the strategy change might quickly...

Its either all out or get out...

I have a son and a nephew in Baghdad and a son in Afghanistan. These brave volunteers need our financial and emotional support. They are doing a hard job; we were warned from the onset that this was going to be a long and brutal war, but if we don't fight it there, we will fight it here. The terrorists have vowed to eradicate our culture and we need to fight it unequivocally. We need to stop whining and start being as brave as our sons and daughters are.

The middle East controls 70% of the world's oil reserves. To allow it to be controlled by forces hostile to the free world would place the world in economic and political unrest.

Obama simply mouthed current Democratic talking points, i.e. we are already in a catastrophe, nobody wants to pull troops out immediately but to withdraw gradually, and then he simply criticizes Bush. The Democratics have no plan except to "talk with" those commited to our destruction. At least Obama, unlike most of his Democratic brethren, is consistent since he voted against the war initially.

McCain's principle is an old fashioned belief, that after voting to commit troops in Iraq, we should continue to support them until we succeed. McCain questioned how others in Congress could vote to send troops to Iraq, and now say they were duped by Bush. Additionally, these same politicians that voted to go into Iraq, would now announce our intentions to withdraw and betray from our allies, the Iraqi people who have elected a democratic government, leaving them alone to handle those who want to overthrow their democracy. What a great message this sends to those who love freedom in the world about the United States.

Generations of brave Americans who have fought and defended freedome must be "turning over in their graves".

I have a son and a nephew in Baghdad and a son in Afghanistan. These brave volunteers need our financial and emotional support. They are doing a hard job; we were warned from the onset that this was going to be a long and brutal war, but if we don't fight it there, we will fight it here. The terrorists have vowed to eradicate our culture and we need to fight them unequivocally. We need to stop whining and start being as brave as our sons and daughters are.

Give the prez one last chance to show significant progress in the next 12 months. Most of the generals for a long time have been crying out for more troops. Let's see if that works. If not, then out.
I would hope that EVERYONE wants to see significant progress. So far we haven't seen it. More troops might do it. I don't see how a pull-out would. Whether America likes it or not, they owe Iraq that after the crazy invasion. Of course, if the Iraqis don't step up, then it's hopeless. And they will need to sort it out themselves.

The ignorance of Obama and his lack of understanding about Iran's ambitions in the middle east as well as Saudi Arabia's stake in keeping Iraq Sunni "dominated" is astonishing. Junior, sit down please.

I am glad we have so many educated people leaving their comments here. I for one know little and what I know from the one sided press, I don't like. Yes Bush is not too great a president, but he was better than the other choices these past two election. Please find some one better in 2008. Why do we have so many people that think they know what to do; yet so many others say they are wrong? No matter who's calling the shots, that will be.

The question is no longer should we be there. The question is how can we finish what we started. If we pull out too soon, without finishing what we started, we have paid a high price for nothing. That price was paid by over three thousand of our troops and their families. I support finishing it. I don't like it, but Bush's plan is still the best I see. I don't think 21,500 are enough to finish this soon. But I understand sending too many also has its price. More troops should have been sent sooner. God bless our troops and God bless our people.

Why is no one commenting on the *hydrocarbon law* and the protection it offers big oil under the guise of W's latest surge strategy? See Bob Cesca's 1/9/07 article on the hydrocarbon law, reported in the Independent 1/7/07:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bob-cesca/kennedy-offers-a-slam-dun_b_38223.html
"Right around the time when new brigades will be hitting the ground (should the president get his way) this March, the new and underreported Iraqi 'hydrocarbon law' will likely be passed. According to The Independent, the law, written in conjunction with the Bush administration and brokered by a firm in McLean, Virginia, allows Western oil companies specifically including Shell, Exxon-Mobile and BP to hork Iraqi oil and pocket 75-percent of the profits. That's 75-percent of the profits from the source of 95-percent of the Iraqi economy. The Independent:

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/article2132569.ece
'[The law] would give big oil companies such as BP, Shell and Exxon 30-year contracts to extract Iraqi crude and allow the first large-scale operation of foreign oil interests in the country since the industry was nationalised in 1972.'

"You remember Shell, Exxon-Mobile and BP: three of the principles in Vice President Cheney's energy task force. And now, with security a major issue, they could be granted by the president an American military 'surge' to protect their trafficking lanes and dampen any resistance from the Iraqi people who surely won't dig the idea of their only commodity ripped out from under their feet."

John McCain wrote:
Glory is not a conceit.It is not a decoration of valor.Glory belongs to the act of being constant to something greater than yourself,to a cause,to your principles,to the people on whom you rely and who rely on you in return.
Barack "H" Obama wrote:
Junkie,Pothead...I "got high" to push a question of who I was out of my mind.
I think I'll go with McCain on this one!
Paulo

If we left Viet Nam we were told the Communist dominoes would fall and it would be a catastrophe. While it may have been to a few people, it wasn't to the vast majority and in the long run, Viet Nam is a reasonably functional country, one that Pres. Bush recently visited. What leads us to believe that leaving Iraq would be more of a catastrophe than it currently is? We lost in Viet Nam. we are losing the war in Iraq. Admit we lost and leave in an orderly fashion.

When the escalation in Vietnam was being rejected by the American people, the Industrial Military Complex ie our government, said the same thing as they are saying now. 'To pull out would be a catastrophy'. Guess what. Didn't happen.
George W. has been wrong about just about everything since day 1. Brownie was not doing 'a heck of a job'. Rumsfeld was not 'the right man for the job'. There were no 'weapons of mass destruction' and Steely Dan is not one person. Stop the madness!!!!!!!!!

Our nation illegally invaded Iraq.

Our nation continues to occupy a defeated Irag.

Our nation contributes to the perpetuation of insurgent violence at the expense of the civilians of both.

Our nation seeks control of the resources of Iraq and create an additional proxy state by which to further control the region.

What else is new? This is American History 101 people!

When the dust finally settles we will have truly impacted the Middle East. Will it be positive? It will depend on who is asked.

Peace is better.

There comes a time when one must look beyond the veil and ask why Bush really went to war. It was not becasue of 911. If there was truth to anything Bush does it would be to see that he and Cheney are in the oil business. That said, where does the oil come from? Saudi Arabia. Where were the so-called terrorists from? Where was Bin Laden born? Who were the only people allowed to fly after all others were not on the day 911 took place? Lets look at another possibility. Could Bush have made a deal with the Saudi's? During his Presidency could Bush not assure the Saudi's continued support and financial gain by giving them unlimited continued oil consumption? And isn't it interesting how the price at the pumps reflect certain political actions during elections? Think about it. The Saudi's agree to contain the terrorists in their region as long as we fabricate a reason to send troops there. Bush then can claim his so called success by pointing out there have been no attacks on our soil becasue of his efforts. And Bush implants so much fear in the minds of Americans, he even gets away with violating our privacy. Lets think for a moment about 911. How could two towers crash down when jet fuel does not burn hot enough to create that type of reaction? Why did the Securities and Exchange Building collapse when it wasn't even hit? Perhaps there was information there that would nail Bush? You bet. Its time to wake up Americans. Its time to let go of the false fear that Governments use to control the masses and see that Bush is the terrorist. Bush is the murderer. Bush is the liar and manipulator. Wake Up and stop this mad Bush man NOW!

"Lefty" Carter didn't start that mess in Iran, that was done years earlier by the CIA eliminating the elected govt. of Iran and installing the "Shah", after which he was removed in turn by the revolution of the Ayatollah...backlash of which is today they still don't trust us, big suprise.

Obama is inexperienced with international diplomatic issues (from a presidential stand-point), however he represents a fresh perspective that I look foward to seeing in action after his election in '08.

I used to like McCain awhile back, now days tho' his sucking up to and changing positions on issues to pander to the far right has soured me to the possibilty of voting for him.

Right is just wrong, if ya ask them they think they're right, no matter how wrong.

by invading Iraq, we opened a can of worms that can never be sealed again. It was the biggest blunder of our time, bombing and invading a country that was no threat to our country. W must live with that, innocent Iraquis, died and thousands of our troops died and are wounded in a fight that should have never been started.We need to take our guys home and take care of American interests. McCain is rubber stamping GW and that is a huge mistake. GO Democrats!!! we need your leadership!!!

If this country is going to support another presidential candidate who serves the religious right and continues to abandon the idea of religious pluralism (a big part of being an American in my view) then I might have to stop being an American and find myself another country. I guess all great democracies have fallen, so will be the fate America sooner or later...sooner if the religious right that Frank choose to be a part of continues to assert itself.

There are only two solutions to the fanatics & this war. Are grandfathers applied it to the enemy in WWII: Beat them until they know they are defeated (Germany) or put them to the point of annihilation (Japan).

Both camps are wrong. Either we go in with everything we go, take the fight to AlQueda, Ex-Baathists, Sunnis, & Sadir's Shiite Army and win. Or we should send all our troops to Iran, Syria, & Saudi Arabia borders. Tell those 3 countries to stay out of Iraq. Cut off all supplies & people coming across borders. Then let the Iraqises kill themselves if thats what they want to do. Just keep the oil out of terrorists hands so we don't let AlQueda get it.
Eventually they will get tired of the slauder or there will be one left to live in Iraq. Either way we solve this problem & keep the region from becoming WW4.

The real question is never asked? Why didn't we leave Iraq immediately? The truth is - the administration saw an opportunity to rob Iraq and the American taxpayer blind.
Now the game is to keep the money flowing to right wing - hawk cronies for the 2008 election.
The reporters should as they say "follow the money"! They would be surprised to learn how many "republican centric" companies are sub-contracting to China while selling parts for the toops in Iraq. Air hoses, water hoses, hydraulic hoses and machined parts- all from China. Boxed in the USA. (especially Humvee parts)
Makes China happy. Republicans are happy and prosperous. Damn Democrats and the minimum wage - raising the cost of boxing for our troops.

As a military war veteran, I support President Bush's new decision. This is not your typical war with rules. We need to weed out the enemy who hides within the population. We need to have a show of force. Let the Iraqi population know that we're here to support them. Let's not have another 80's Afghanistan or Somalia where we supported, then leave, just to have criminal's run the countries. And then, have to go back to try and finish the job after they've built a foundation. Let's finish what we started. The men and women who have joined our armed forces know the consequences and are there to finish their job. No matter what. Who is Obama? What experience does Obama have? Maybe Obama should get a little more experience before trying play full court ball. The old men who start wars, and who have the young men to fight them. Should have experince in that field. As well as experience in governing a successfull city, county, and or state.

As a troops point of view, Mr. President," Give us liberty or give us death."

The republicans promised "everything good" and to "re-institute republican fundamentals" when they had both houses and the presidency. Voters gave them that. They delivered nothing of the sort. From local politicians to the White House, they betrayed their promises and the US voters. Based on the last 6 years of performance, the GOP doesn't deserve to be a recognized political party. As a former GOP executive, it will be cold day in h--- before I cast a vote for another republican. I'm not the only voter who feels this way . . . As for Mc Cain, there will not be another republican president during the balance of his career.

In all the furor over the 'surge' in troops the crucial change, focus on job building, not just infrastructure, is overlooked. We need a "Marshall Plan" for Iraq and should take a page out of that play book for a "Plan" for Iraq.

One of the most successful political tactics of the Bush administration has been keeping the American people fearful of the consequences of not going along with the current administration. This tactic got Bush into office and kept him there. The tactic is in play again. This time it is the dire consequences of a withdrawal (of any sort). I smell a certain master republican strategist's involvement here!

This administration has gotten it wrong so often why does anybody believe it would get it right now? Why believe their crystal ball about these "dire" consequences? The administration can't even see that the current Iraqi government is playing America like a sucker - keep us there until they get control over the Sunnis.

The cold war bankrupted the Soviets and their system fell apart. Could the grand scheme of our enemies be to bankrupt us and thus our system will fall apart? If so, they are doing a pretty good job of it. If not, they are still doing a pretty good job of it!

My small town community has contributed over 26 million to this war. If the money spent on this war had been spent at home improving education, medical care, infrastructure, etc. we would have a country that the rest of the world would be looking up to instead of down upon. Radicals would then have a pretty tough time selling others on the faults of our democratic system.

Here is a web site that will tell you how much your community has spent thus far: http://nationalpriorities.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=61

Lets face it America. We blew it. Bush's messianic stubbornness got us into this mess and it is going to keep us in it until we demand that he stop. We rallied and got our government out of Viet Nam and we can rally and do it again!

I am saddened by the infighting while we have our sons and daughters are in harms way.

Perhaps the US is not morally strong enough to withstand a long war and most likely that is what our enemies count on. War is ugly and given a free country gets to see both sides and our enemies often see only a state controlled information system, perhaps our will is less cut and dry, then those that fight us.

I understand the US/Allies in WWII killed 100,000s of non combat citizens in Germany/Japan from fire bombing and we consider that a noble war. I also recall that oil was also a major factor in how WWII started and which countries were attacked.

I would like to see the full open debate on the pros and cons or staying to win or leaving to reduce losses. Include long term region alignment and world oil supply issues. It would be interesting to see what impact the loss of oil would do to the US job level.

Perhaps the UN with Europe should be part of the discussion as some of them would be big winners or losers depending on what we do.

Mr. Baxter and Mr. Kelly:
You both have bought the neo-con/bush line, with hook and sinker. It seems no amount of fact will change the way you view the situation. It is because of people like you, who ignore or are unable to understand the facts, that we have the government we do. We have a president who will, by his own admission, follow his delusions, even if his dog and wife are his only supporters! The scariest thought is that "people like you," through fear and religious zealotry somehow control the direction of our country.

Dems are putting forward a phased surreder policy that would leave the Iraqis who love freedom and liberty to fight our enemies alone. Hacks like Obama show their true colors when asked whether or not Americans should stand with freedom loving people from all around the world including Africa; which by the way is having major crises with Islamo-Facsists themselves. Peace through surrender will work only if the US people are willing to grow beards and wear burkas. The enemy will follow us home as they did on 9/11 and we will run out of places to retreat to. Iraq happens to be the most perfect place to have a battle field in a war against Islamo-Facsism and we owe it to them to follow through w/ our values.

I believe that if W and W'annabe McCain both think that we need to send more troops to Iraq, then we know of at least 2 people that should both be removed from of their jobs.

"Securing Baghdad" will do NOTHING to secure the REST of Iraq! This whole thing was one big blunder after another, perpetrated by dimwits and power/war mongers.

It is time for both of them to go, and for our brave sons and daughters to come home.

When a country invades another country, abolishes all standards and government, and expects to be greeted as liberators, there is a major problem. The Iraqis have always been divided, but the bloodshed since the invasion has drastically increased. This proves that America isn't making anything better. They have turned war into a game of politics, riddled with rhetoric and fear-mongering while the real issues remain ignored.

Hmmm, the only answer for this Republican created mess is more troops? Add more fuel to the fire? Why should US troops play referee between three sides of Iraqi's? Does not make sense. When we leave, they will fight on and on, as they have for decades. If we stay they are going to fight on and on for decades.
Has US involvement solved the Israel vs. Arab conflict? Nope.
Those who cling to the notion that Bush and Co. are somehow religious or right are simply blind.
This man is easily the worst President since Nixon. Those who accuse the Democrats of "Tax and Spend" fail to see that Bush & Co have outspent any previous Democratic President to date (without rasing taxes...they just add it onto our nationa debt at full interest).
Now that the moderate Republicans have woken up, the Neo-con's that are left are reduced to parrotting whatever Bush & Cheney have said for years: The Democrats have not plan.
Hmmm, turns out the Republicans had no plan other than invade a country and de-stabalize it.
No plan for a new goverment, no exit stratagy.
But it's the Democrats who lack a plan.
Right. Wake up Neo-Con's! Demand Accountability from YOUR GUY! To not demand it means you have essentially elected a King that can do no wrong.
Maybe that's what you folks really want?
Maybe debate and the democratic process frightens you? Since we're stuck with YOUR GUY, who invaded a country on trumped up charges and is directly responsible for thousands of deaths, maybe we should demand a better plan then simply "More, more, more".
The only indication of future behavior is the past. God help us all.

I think it's time for people to stop the hateful discourse and start sending some light to washington. I know this may sound kooky, but I think that we can all agree that the "situation" in the middle east is beyond any leftrightneoconrepublicrat strategy for peace. I suggest that we as The Human Race(all inclusive) try like hell to generate some love in our hearts and minds, and send it to the people who actually make these decisions every day.

This present administration has zero credibility. It was wrong about WMD's. It was wrong that we would be welcomed as liberators. It was wrong when the vice-president stated that the insurgency was in its "last throws". It was wrong when it declared "mission accomplished". Now it want us to believe that they have critically analyzed the situation and that increase of troops is the solution. How can they honestly believe it has any credibility left?

However, that said, I hope this works, for the longer we stay, the longer this nightmare of a mistake continues.

In my opinion the real question is:

If we increase troops and succeed in winning territories in Iraq, then how long can we keep the massive amounts of U.S. troops in Iraq necessary to hold down the insurgents?

Vietnam is only one of many military examples that fighting a war on foreign soil is impossible to win unless you have A) a clear objective which defines victory, B) a plausible victory that will not wash away after our troops leave and the "enemies" are still there; because afterall it is their home, and finally C) an exit strategy - because our troops need to come home, otherwise how have we "won"? and of course we do not want to occupy the Middle East forever. DO WE???

It is strange that neither side wants to talk about the obvious outcome if America simply picks up and goes home. There are in fact three obvious results that would follow: First the Iraqis would sort things out themselves without a puppet government backed by US firepower that commands no popular support and hides in the green zone. Second, populist and democratic movements in Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait,Jordan, Lebanon and Turkey would be encouraged to do something about installing governments of their own choosing rather than the paternalistic dictorships backed by western firepower they now enjoy. Third, the massive investment in dollars and blood the US has made for the development and exploitation of the Iraq oil fields would have to be written off. Oh, the horror to think of it!

There are two ways out of Iraq: by boat and by airplane. At some point in time it will occur to folks that the U.S. is not...say again, NOT...in control of Iraq or, for that matter, much of the rest of the world (New Orleans, fr'instance). It is safe to say that one may measure the generalized level of national self-delusion by observing the antics of those fools who still think that the U.S. has the capacity to direct events; among the great losses that this self-created madness has brought us is the awareness among our enemies that we are not invincible, that the U.S. military is in fact rather easily out-thought and, as a result, out-fought. There is a great difference between the ability to kill a lot of people and the ability to win a war...something the U.S. Air Force has yet to figure out, by the way...and the longer the Bush administration takes to realize this, the greater will be the price. The word for pursuit of a policy contrary to self-interest is "folly", and this is one of those interestingly rare cases where to go ahead is folly...and to go backwards is folly. The McCain - Obama differences are about a future that may or may not come to pass; that is, they are speculation; and in truth, there is little that we can other than to sit back and as much as possible enjoy watching the American Century come to an end. It is a great sadness, a terrible sadness, but that's what you get when you vote for an ex-drunk lunatic.

Hillary is the one. Forget the fulminating parrots who call her a raging liberal. Whether one LIKES her or not, she's the one for '08. She's one tough, smart bitch; She's the warrior Queen, and she'll do what's necessary. Those who hate her hate her not least because they fear her and they sense what a tough-as-nails survivor she is. The U.S. is in one awful mess in Iraq, with awful messes threatening in Iran, North Korea, Somalia, and God knows where else in the future. If the U.S. wants to be a tough-as-nails survivor as well they better choose the tough bitch, whether they like her or not.

I understand now, after reading the comments here. That "FREE SPEACH IS FOR DEMOCRATS/COMMUNIST ONLY, these days, IN THE GOOD OLD USA!"

Anyone else, should close their pie hole. Be seen and not heard.

Considering the fact, that most Americans have never travel or move further that 50 miles from where they are born. How is it that they are now experts on foreign policy? Have they ever travelled or lived in Central America, South America, Europe or Asia. Probably not!

As a citizen, I know first hand, from travelling, reading the religious texts and deep conversation, the Arab intentions concerning we americans. And, it is not good for us.

Inconclusion, if you think, that pulling out of Irag, is going to end terorism. And end the spread of Islamic Fascism. And make the Arab world like us. Just think about the, Islamic invasion of Spain in the 700 AD's. And the fact that America would not have been discovered if Spain had not driven them back across the Straits of Gibraltar prior to 1492 AD. (700 years)

And when they do finally take over. And you spineless Americans are on your way to the chopping block, for missing your daily prayers, listening to your "hip hop", "rock and roll", "rap", or maybe not being in control of your women. Remember, back when you saw the writing on the wall.

First of all, who is Barack Obama? What has he done and where does he stand on national security? because our national security is the most important issue right now. if you donot believe this, your liberal head must be stuck in the sands of the hollywood beaches. To withdraw troops from Iraq would weaken an infant democracy. Civil war is part of the growing process. It will not be a self sustaining democracy in only a few years of existence. This great nation was fighting a civil war 97 years after the signing. So lets be realistic. Many more troops made the ultimate sacrifice in the civil, world wars 1 & 2, & vietnam. I believe Senator McCains knowledge on war is probably more accurate than a rookie senator from Illinois. Sitting down in conference with warring radical muslims is not going to solve this,and only because this is not how they do "business". I hope no true American has forgotten 9-11. I haven`t. As a nyc ironworker, i helped in the rescue effort. we will never forget. When the dust settles and history looks back at the Iraq war and a free and prosperous Iraq,the vision and courage of George H.W.Bush will be viewed alongside the great wartime presidents.

If they cut funding the people will turn on the party for decades just like they did in the 70s. They cut funding because people wanted vietnam to end now and for a thanks the people turned their backs on the party and we got stuck with 30 years of damn republican rule.
They are going to proceed warily when it comes to cutting funding. They don't need to be stabbed in the back again and called names for doing what everyone wants now but, regrets later.
As for redeployment, it will take months to begin pulling them out if they started now. They ain't coming home overnight.
I think the dems have a good plan and should stick with it. They are working on ways to leash Bush.
Nothing is done overnight and nothing good comes from making stupid, rash things.
Obama is not going to be stupid and take wild stands to satisfy those who don't understand how politics work. It's a chess game. he is standing in solidarity with his party for a strong front. there is going to be a huge storm with Bush and the dems must be united to fight the brat.

Don't get mad at the democrats or Obama for indecision. This stance was brought on by the American public, for belieiving Bush in the first place about the danger Iraq possessed. He played off Americans fears of 911 and continues to do so because he knows deep inside you scared.

This war will not end future terrorist attacks here or abroad. PERIOD! Hasn't anyone heard them speaking out of both sides of their mouth yet?

They say it will be catastrophic if we pull out.
Yet it will be catastrophic if we stay in and continue to fight a war we cannot win without continuing to degrade our countries integrity.

Democrats have to worry about those same Americans who will turn against THEM instead of BUSH should they freeze spending and Bush decide to keep those troops there despite it all.

It tickles me how this guy is allowed to get away with sacrificing these military families like he is. He is using PRIDE to win them and the soldiers over. This of course is what they are taught.

This is why he kept using the "Cut and Run" slogan because that hits right into their training. If you don't believe me listen the next time you hear a militay campaign/advertisement/recruitment on TV.

He did the same with support your troops!!!
America bought it and look at where we are today.
Here is a nice campaign message for him.

JUST SAY NO!

The Iraq war is already lost. We don't have enough troops to send over there to finish the job, and even if we did, our secular version of Government would never last long in their culture.

Bush is throwing a small surge of troops at this war to try to save face and to buy TIME. More ominous is his recently revealed underlying agenda to engage Iran. He needs time and the justification of securing Iraq, to give him an excuse to strike Iran.

Iraq was pointless. Iran is a more serious danger, but starting a war with Iran right now is pure insanity.

Bush needs to be stopped now!

The idea that bumping troop levels by 20% is going to make a significant difference seems silly to me. Without the support of the Iraqis, even doubling the troops wont secure the place.
Insurgents might melt away for a time, but will certainly still be in the wings waiting for our inevitable departure. On a purely value based analysis, we have received worse than nothing for our investment, not to mention the lasting effect this will have on the military. Had Bush followed the Powell doctrine of overwhelming force and clear goals including an exit policy we would not be where we are today. Bush (who scoffed at the idea of nation building when first elected) had a perfect opportunity to learn how to do it right in Afghanistan but foolishly jumped to Iraq. In the Balkans during the Clinton years we had a vastly higher ratio of troops to population and this resulted in success.
Now we are screwed in Iraq and are having regression to Taliban control in Afghanistan. Lets move towards redeployment to the friendly north of Iraq, finishing our business successfully in Afghanistan and reestablishing a diplomatic front in the mid-east.
A minor point but Boxer did not say Rice didnt understand because she is single, but merely that Rice has no family in the war.
Obama is correct, McCain is wrong, simple as that.

The article spends a lot of words trying to bolster Mr. McCain's positions and fails to even mention that Mr. Obama opposed the war from the beginnig. What a relief to find out that despite government and media distortions there are clear minded people like Mr. Harry C above who can see through it all, and reach a logical, impassionate, irrefutable conclusion.

We the people of the US ought to tell George Bush the alternative plan we have for him is:

"As Commander-in-Chief he should be leading the next 21,500 he wants to send to Iraq and into battle since he is so confident of his plan for victory, and he should take Dick Cheney with him to carry his gun."

Let us see if his "bring them on" speech will sound as strong then!

JMB

Please, let us not think that John McCain knows much about war. He knows much about flying Navy aircraft. He knows much about being a prisoner. When it comes to the reality of war, McCain knows as much...and as little...as do Obama, Hillary, Bush (the younger), Cheney, Clinton, Reagan...add you own favorite politician's name in here anywhere. Wouldn't it make more sense to find some other way to solve America's problems than by brute force and bloodshed? What is there about America that makes it believe that terror is the answer? We've had a century of bullying little countries: when is enough? Let's be blunt: the policies of this government have created the finest instruments ever created for the killing of civilians...and of young American soldiers. Thank you, Republicans, thank you, right-wingers, thank you, Christians and Muslims and Jews, but ENOUGH. It isn't working. Why don't we do the same damn things, follow the same damn policy, tomorrow...maybe it'll work better then. We must be nuts, all of us.

IMPEACHMENT & REMOVAL OF GWB IS THE SOLUTION TO THE PROBLEM. THEN IMPEACHMENT & REMOVAL OF OIL SLICK DICK NEXT. THAT SIMPLE.

If the escalation of this war is as necessary as the president contends, then the fats cats who support it should have to help pay for it by giving up their tax breaks.

Any who objected to this measure should be branded as anti-american (and still forced to pay).

Without addressing the real reasons behind why this administration rushed us into an illegal war? we cannot work together successfully in bringing peace, let alone, democracy to Iraq.

As a former Republican I would like to believe that this Republican administrations motives were genuinely noble and without reproach. Alas, the amount of published evidence proving the culpability of these war profiteering scoundrels is damning! No Bid Contracts to Cheney's Freinds and peers is immoral.

To blame the press as irresponsible in reporting the misuse of, as well as abuse of, the trust which we the people entrusted them with. Is a stain upon the many noble citizens who have fought, suffered, and died in preservation of the ideas embodied within the Constitution. As a veteran, I swore an oath to uphold the Constitution! irrespective of party affiliation. No one is above the law.

As a former supporter of Sen. McCain I admirered his courage and nobility which he exhibited in full measure as a prisoner of war in his youth. I wish that same noble self sacrifice and civic virtue that sustained him in his youth was not now clouded by his pursuit of unrivalled power. I fear for the republic Senator when I no longer can find trust in the heros of my youth.

Although I was too young to personally serve in Vietnam. My older brother and cousins did. My brother was shot down seven times as a door gunner. He lives to this day. Two of my cousins were killed within two weeks of each other. One of whom I was named after. One of my earliest memories is being presented his coffin flag-which I have to this day. I grew up with a map of Vietnam on my wall, a coffin flag and an unabashed desire to serve my country. We couldn't leave that war either. You know the "Domino Effect" that would leave all of Southeast Asia and eventually the whole world open to communist aggression.

Now, former government officials tell us they knew all along that Vietnam was unwinnable long before my cousins died. I have nephews serving our country presently. If they die? will it be for a noble cause?

As a born again Christian I fear we the citizens of the United States have misplaced our trust in those who would sell our Christian principles and the Constitution's rule of law for Satan's false idol's and unabashed greed. Impeachment of this administration with a thorough examination of the Byzantine wheeling and dealing that have brought us to this untenable position is the only true question for we the citizens of the United States irrespective of party need to address.

I'm impressed by the level and tenor of dialog on this web site. Whatever the Chicago Trib is doing - I hope it catches on as we move toward the most divisive presidential cycle in my political memory (starting around Reagan's era). Thanks to all who have contributed opinions, I now have a much better sense of the issues and might even change my mind. (I just notice the disclaimer: "Comments are not posted immediately. We review them first in an effort to remove foul language, commercial messages, irrelevancies and unfair attacks. Thank you for your patience." - I suppose that expains the high floor of quality).

Its an outrage that W has no concept of the system of checks and balances that our founding fathers thought were so important. Apparently, he still believes that he has a blank check and is not responsible to anyone else. Perhaps if his family was in Iraq dodging IED's he'd reconsider listening to someone besides the voices in his head.

There is always Weapons Of Mass Destruction in Iraq. This is Oil. So send in the American troops and kill all Iraqis and take the oil and protect Israel and encourage it to take Arab lands. God bless America and the Israel "government". Untill the next 9/11.

We still ask the wrong questions of McCain and Barak. The question is...how did our country allow by election an entire crew of incompetent,axis of evil, right wing zealots steal our cuntry, fail to protect us before 9/11, trick us into war.

Barak is right about Iraq. Nothing Cheney/Bush etal has decided has been right in the last 6 years. Watch what people do, not what they say. A "Bush Plan" is an oxymoron.

The best solution would be getting rid of Bush/Cheney...turn the executive brand over to Nancy Pelosi (or almost anyone else), and hopefully there will be some thinking.

McCain is the lap dog, crooked deal depress (not express) of Bush/Cheney. He may think the Republicans will ask him to be its Candidate in desparation. He will get no credit for supporting more disaster.

Was McCain really in Vietnam. He sounds like someone leading the troops into the big muddy.

I watched the whole thing on CSPAN.
Boxer never said Rice didnt understand because she is single.
Bush type of lie.

Rather than firing off critiques of the individuals involved in this discourse on Face the Nation, I think we should attept to understand what these gentlemen are trying to accoplish. Unity and common ground. An exchange of ideas that will move the country in a direction away from biparisianship. Mcain and Obama are on the same team, look closley and you will see taht truth.

Anyone who thinks we can simply withdraw and fight the Islamic Fundamentalist movement on our own soil has his head in the sand. We made the same mistake thinking Hitler and Hirohito would leave us alone if we ignored their "expansion". Anyone remember Pearl?

With the Middle East oil controlled by fanatics bent on k