It’s no secret I tend to take Israel’s side more often than my liberal friends, and I make no apologies for it. I think we’re probably on the same page with this one, Yeah Boy.

That said, I’d like to see a new “beacon” up there in Turkey. Turkey will be a crucial part of any long term solution in the middle east. While the government may still be drowning in Islamic influence, one can’t deny the inevitable push for secularity that’s afoot more so now than ever. It may be small by way of comparison, but it’s still there nonetheless. Look at the current Gul situation. Such secular tendencies need to be encouraged, and I think Turkey represents a golden opportunity for progress in the decades to come. They have some major human rights issues to work out, but they’re desperate for EU inclusion, and we all know money talks. If a muslim country in the heart of the region willingly and officially aligns itself with the west, we might just see the walls start crumbling down. Not to mention, Turkey’s geographical location could eliminate the necessity of any “staging ground” characteristics that Iraq may hold, no? Of course, it’d most likely be the EU’s up and coming military institutions - not ours - that would lead the way should any future action be required. The question is whether or not the US could accept such a major power shift in the balance of international geopolitical influence. The empire is rising, folks…

Just my opinion, of course.

That’s exactly what they would have done, which would not have been good. That’s probably another discussion which does not have the space here. Let’s just agree to disagree that splitting the country in three would have been a good thing.

That may or may not have been bad,

A country who’s leader wants to blow another country (who is the only beacon of light in the Middle East) off the map should not have influence ANYWHERE, much less a bordering country.

I see your correlation with nuclear weapons and our involvement in Iraq - thanks for explaining that.

Yeah, I’m sure the Sunni’s, Shiites and Kurds would have hugged it out.

And Iran might not have found it as necessary to work on developing nuclear weapons.

Iran would have meddled to a greater extent in Iraq. Without us there, they certainly would have far more influence in Iraq. What does Iraq have to do with Iran developing nuclear weapons?

Damn the consequences like another 1000 U.S. soldiers and thousands of Iraqi civilians, right? The fact is the Iraqi government, it’s military, and most importantly it’s civilians aren’t “standing up”.

Check the recent posting from a few weeks ago on how we’re not counting on the Iraqi military to “stand up” all the sudden anymore, and ask yourself why you’re still continuing to supporting this war so much so that you’re recycling talking points about spinach farmers.

That’s one of the best statements I’ve read lately. Pork spending and Iraq ought to be kept separate issues. Pork is one of the worst problems with our government as a whole, but especially the Congress. The president hasn’t done a thing to discourage it, and his governments have spent much more on wasteful projects than Clinton’s.

Second, as to the Army Chief of Staff being put out to pasture, the execution of war ought to be left to the generals, and presidents should be active in the strategic planning to the extent that they have military experience. Being governor of Arkansas or owner of the Texas Rangers shouldn’t count when it comes to planning war.

As for the “pork,” as you describe it: Of what are you speaking? The provisions for spinach growers? A quick perusal of last year’s, emergency supplemental yields more interesting resuts. Like $15 Million for cottonseed, $100 Million for tree assistance, $17 Million for dairy assistance, $40 Million for sugar. That list is only a small amount of the absurdities in every emergency supplemental. Where was the President threatening to veto that spending? How about the year before last, or the year before that? For the President to use the fiscal conservative argument is laughable when he hasn’t vetoed a single spending bill to date.

“Let’s put some pressure on the military ”
I think I can say with relative certainty, that the military (US, that is) has more than enough pressure on it. To suggest that any of this is somehow the military’s fault (although I could point some fingers at some of the generals) is just wrong. The strategy was set by the President and the Secretary of Defense. The military just carried it out. And I distinctly recall the last time the Army Chief of Staff disagreed with the strategy. His replacement was announced 18 months early and he was set out to pasture.

Here’s my suggestion to the idiots in D.C.:
1. This thing is lost. If you can’t define success or what it will take to achieve it (not to mention, how long), then you cannot “win.”
2. Eventually, we have to leave. Leaving now would put us in a better position to control the borders of the country, as well as maintain some allies in the state. It will be a horrific bloodbath for the Iraqi people, but there isn’t any way to prevent that now.
3. Stop using soldiers as props! If you’re going to do that, make sure you at least request enough money for them in your budget. By the way, we’re still at peacetime levels of production for almost all military equipment.

The difference between the two parties on this one is that the Republicans want an end to the war when the Iraqis are ready. The Democrats want to get out whenever is convenient and damn the consequences. I suppose you could argue a deadline would “encourage” the Iraqis to “stand up” sooner, but I think they are trying to stand up as quickly as possible right now.

When the bill to fund and withdraw troops …

I like how you spun this line. Care to comment on the pork spending in the bill? Or how about the nice political stunt of throwing the minimum wage hike in this bill so during election year the Dems can say, “Look, he vetoed the minimum wage increase”. $25 million to spinach growers. lol Gotta like political parties.

Here is what I suggest to the idiots in Washington:

1) A bill to fund the troops with nothing else being proposed.
2) A separate minimum wage hike bill. Our president supports the hike, so go ahead and put it on his desk to sign.
3) No deadline for pulling the troops out of Iraq from Congress. Let’s put some pressure on the military and set some deadlines they can come up with. And hey, let’s not tell everybody about it! We have generals that can conduct this war without Congress telling them how to do their jobs.