7 Apr 2005
Skip S
Set a date & get out. Our continued presence is not going to create anything lasting or positive, just more loss of life. It's a ridiculous thought of "Democracy" in a muslim country. If you got half a brain you know the clerics are gonna end up running the show & their ideas approach nothing close to ""Democracy"

6 Apr 2005
Tony Campillo
FALUJAH Falujah: Destroyed; Faith, lost; Freedom on the march, a lie; Fascism, the marriage of corporations and government for greed, sound familiar? Fear and fury at, guess who? Future; bleak, see above. Atrocities; Committed in our name, 10 killed to 1 left alive the one we went to liberate; Americans; Dying and getting maimed, for what? A lie and greed? Abomination; American invasion of Iraq. Lies; From front to back and from side to side. Lost; Humanity, compassion, any right we may have had to the moral high ground. Left; Falujah destroyed and souls with it. Lesson; Shock and awe but Iraqi’s didn’t buy it. Leave; We should, only way to really support troops. Used; Iraqi’s and Americans, just like toilet paper. U.N, to what purpose? Upheaval; natural consequence of our actions. Uprising; Ditto, Is anyone surprised by this? That is what we would do! Usurp; The word to fit the deed. Jesus; How could we sign on to this? Justice; Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo, troops going to jail for following orders. Jihad; The word and deeds that WE put at the top of things to do for Iraqi’s. Ask; Any American what to do about Falujah, Iraq and all they know is support the troops, wish someone would tell me what that means. You troops stay over there and maybe die or be maimed in body or mind or both and we stay back here and celebrate the holidays? Ask any Iraqi and they will say get out Americans. What part of this don’t we understand? Humanity; We had been going down a slippery slope before but in Falujah we hit the fast track. Harvest; We reap what we sow. How can it be plainer than that? This is the overseas version of what may come to pass here for there is no honesty, humanity or humility in this administration. Tony 12/22/04 Ly’n, Dy’n, Cry’n and Sigh’n Ly’n Went to a memorial for the our military who all get a chance to see and feel what it is like to be under the gun. One of the speakers said that truth is the first casualty of war but what if we are lied to before the war? That makes democracy and freedom the first casualties of anything that follows. Does it make any difference? Only if people care. To use God or Jesus as mentor and co-conspirator is presumptuous at best and obscene at worst. Think of the amount of tyrants used in the Bible to keep his people straight and what happened to them after. Not three hundred years old and we head towards history’s dust heap and all for ly’n. Dy’n Think of all the different ways that a person can die and you can be sure that war will visit them all and some that we have not even thought of yet although that would be a tough chore. To die saving another soul is heroic, to die in battle is war but to die in the many ways of the spirit is a crime. Extreme death, suicide. The ultimate statement against any war. What of killing another human? The warrior will say that is war but what of the citizen soldier? What are the chances he or she will come home changed forever? Killing is not easy for the soul. When the most come home then will be seen the cost in spirits Dy’n Cry’n The powers that be say that bodies that are dead and mangled and spirits in the same shape deserve privacy. What an abomination that is! Did they not go over there to fight for the whole country and should we not all HAVE to grieve? War should be seen by all so that it is known what some are paying for us all. Some may differ and that is still American. For me, I cannot hide the cry’n Sigh’n It is sometimes so easy to sit here and worry about nothing but what is going on in my life like nothing is happening outside of my circle of friends and family and how many of us are right there. Not that Country wide or world wide things don’t intrude but they are relegated to what I call the sigh factor. Some are doing for war and some not but most are into this sigh factor and if they go against the evidence we will all pay a price in a freedom we take for granted. The Ly’n caused the Dy’n, the Dy’n caused the Cry’n and the sigh’n was caused by neglect. Iraq is death in the sand instead of the jungle for us and for them and God will judge all the same. Tony It has to be the UN and I can't think of a more obscene statement than "We don't do body counts". Out this year. Tony

5 Apr 2005
Ed Tubbs
Lord knows there are solid reasons to work to replace the present power structure in Washington, as well as around the country. We’ve seen four-plus years of top-light taxing, bankruptcy and tort schemes that overwhelmingly burden most those who are least able to fend off the job reductions, Reserve and Guard call-ups and overseas deployments, and an employer downward rush to eliminate medical insurance benefits. Orwellian-titled tax rescheduling has resulted in revenue-shy record budget deficits that, according to the GAO, set a trajectory of red ink that will impale all of America’s progeny on a post of foreign-owned debtors’ notes they will never be able to lift themselves from. For the first time in our nation’s history, in the names of Religion and National Security, the expansion of civil rights, social tolerance and acceptance of diverse perspectives and life-styles have been turned hard to an extreme, intolerant, rearward path. Our government strives diligently and ever more secretly to maintain everything as secret; not just those on behalf of national security, but also to shield an administration from all congressional and public inquiry. As if we hadn’t enough, the weeks of Terri Shiavo showed clearly how extraordinarily obscene is the push to invade even the most sacred and private of family intimacies. Nothing is any more out-of-bounds. Winning at any cost, by any means, for utter domination is the objective. The list of current grievances against the Bush Administration and the GOP-dominated houses and courts exceeds what was levied in the Declaration of Independence as against a ruthless British monarch and justification for our very independence from those intolerable conditions. Absolutely, there are solid reasons to seek to replace the present power structure. I intentionally did not include in the above any reference to Iraq. On lies and what objective consideration of the evidence must reveal as intentional deceit, we are ensconced in a tragedy that unfolds larger every day. The difficulty with too-heavy concentration on Iraq is that such concentration begs for an effective rejoinder. And in truth there may not be one. Recall how Richard Nixon defeated the Democratic candidate Hubert Humphrey, primarily on the issue of Vietnam. And how he fared no better than Lyndon Johnson, and how it all ended. There are solid reasons to want to replace the present power structure. Currently, we lead the Top-20 Industrialized Nations only on imprisonment of our own citizens, our national debt, and on defense spending (where we exceed the combined total of all other nations on the face of the earth!). Communal venting of our spleens may feel good. For a while. Perhaps. But the future of our children, the economic and moral future of our country, and the very physical future of our planet are at stake, and are much more important than any transitory feelings of satisfaction. Rather, we as a party and as a nation need to begin thinking long and broad and fearlessly honestly as to what it is we realy, truly do want. Then we need to assemble that inventory so that it can be sold plainly to every citizen. Except for the wealthiest, exceedingly, we’re in a collective pile of doo-doo, headed down a most malodorous drain. Getting out will be neither quick nor easy nor pain-free. We need to admit that, first to ourselves, perhaps most of all to ourselves. As much, however neither should we give a damn from whom we gather proposed ideas for specific solutions. If my kids or I need a surgical remedy, I don’t care a whit about the philosophical notions of the doctor. If Rick Santorum or Tom Delay or ex-Attorney General Ashcroft was the best neurosurgeon on the planet, and it was neurosurgery that was needed, one of the three would be who I’d want doing the job. Similarly, I’ve heard ex-Speaker Gingrich on education and on medical delivery and on social issues. His social issues agenda stinks. But he seems to make some sense on education and medical delivery. We doom not only ourselves, but our future and the future of our children and our country when we go ad hominem, follow the route of the GOP and the Bush Administration. It’s much of how we got in the mess we’re in. Following that, we’ve got to bring the suggestions to the table, even at the risk of alienating some. I feel there exists no genuine alternative to scaling back or eliminating many or all of the Bush/GOP tax cuts. Similarly, we may have to scale back some of the Social Security benefits. In concert with increasing the auto fuel efficiency standards, we may have to tap ANWR. We may have to do a great many things we’d rather not even contemplate. The operative words are ‘may have to.’ It doesn’t mean we will have to . . . unless, of course, we in fact do ‘have to.’ Regardless, we must have the courage to confront the American public honestly. Winning is good, only if you accomplish good by it. It’s called common sense. It’s called pragmatism. And it’s also love of country. I’d like it to become thought of as being a Democrat. Ed Tubbs

4 Apr 2005
Chana Maree
You say leaving Iraq will leave the majority of Iraquis at the mercy of the violent insurgents. My question is, what exactly is an insurgent. Would people in this country, especially the avid supporters of the 2nd amendment be called "insurgents" if they used their arms to fight were we to become an occupied territory? Iraquis, too, had the right to possess guns--are they the "insurgents"? If so, what need would there be for insurgency if there were no occupation? Would not the highly intelligent Iraqi people be able to then handle their own policies in their own country?

3 Apr 2005
Dennis Ledden
Originally I took the current VCS position. However this has changed as the situation administered by the Keystone Generals for the invasion and occupation of Iraq has grown progressively worse. Neither the military leadership or intelligence organizations have any idea of the size or makeup of the insurgent groups some of which are Iraqis fighting to restore their country to the Iraqi people. The election held 1/30/05 was a farce as the final numbers reflect not the vote, but what the US politicos want to show. This was to reduce the power of the Shia majority and increase US influence in the setup of the government so the governing body will not say “US go home and take your permanent bases with you”. I subscribe to a plan that will: Remove all but 5-10,000 troops (trainers for the Iraqi military and police) within 6 months Close down the “permanent military bases” Provide funds for: 1. Reparations to the Iraqi families with civilian casualties 2. Funds to rebuild Iraq by and for the Iraqi people Turn over administration of monetary distribution, contract awarding and management, peacekeeping, policing, and Iraqi government building to the UN and NATO Some will ask if this plan will work? My response is “can it be any worse”. Some will say, but we have not won. My response is winning is an ego thing, saving lives is a value thing. Some will say we have not established a democracy. My response is you don’t institute a democratic form of government, you allow the people to form their own kind of government that fits their culture, history, and experience. If it is democracy wonderful, but if not, it is not time for democracy. Some my say if “we cut and run” it will mean the US leadership made a mistake. My response is YES and… The final argument for “getting out of Iraq now” is The DRAFT.

3 Apr 2005
Eddie robinette
1. Millions of Americans supported Bush for re-election, but did not support the war. 2. They will not join an effort that smacks of Bush bashing. 3. The troops are not getting out now. Anyone who thinks in today's political climate in Washington that we can force the administration to pull out has his head in the sand. 4. What we might affect is the kind, and timing, of leaving. 5. A rant may make us feel better, but it has no chance of affecting U.S. policy.

2 Apr 2005
Eddie Robinettte
Charles, I am in the same situation with some fellow vets in our Florida Chapter of VCS. While I applaud their passion and agree with them on what a botched mess this is, I disagree with them on looking back. As hard as I worked for the Kerry-Edwards campaign, I recognize this as a non-partisan issue. And, I also want to have some impact this time around which means, I believe, that it is time to stop yelling and start quietly building a position that appeals to a broad segment of our vet population and the population at large. Timing has to be part of this. The Iraqis have to ratify a constitution this fall and hold elections in December. That completes the political part of this process. So, our thrust, I believe, is that the government owes the country clarity. Not a date certain when the last troops will be out, but a plan to pull out when it is their country. I hear more and more vets who approve of the war now agreeing with me that we have no reason to stay beyond next year, that an 18-month pullout timetable would be reasonable. Perhaps we should look forward to that kind of approach. Don't talk about why we got in and all the mistakes, but aim at the future and making this work. It becomes more legitimate to say that our presence is counter productive after they have a government. Eighteen months for a gradual drawdown beginning in spring of next near and completing sometime in 2007 shoud be something everyone can buy into. eddie

1 Apr 2005
Rich Egenriether
We should get out of Iraq asap. From the looks of it, the new government will die stillborn and civil war will ensue. "Coaliton" forces will be caught in the middle like Brits caught in sectarian violence in Belfast during the eighties.

1 Apr 2005
Sue Geiger
so you're drawing criticism from both the Left and the Right? a wise old lady once told me that, if both sides are upset with you, you're probably getting as close to "fair" as you can.

1 Apr 2005
John Sessoms
As much as I oppose the current war in Iraq, and the incompetents who have brought us to where we are now, an immediate unilateral withdrawal will create in Iraq exactly the rogue state the administration accused Iraq of being. Short and sweet ... You broke it, you bought it, and you have to pay for it. A viable exit strategy must leave behind a functioning non-sectarian government. Where we should concentrate is bringing to justice the criminals who foisted this war upon us and replacing them with someone competent. But if there's a way to accomplish either task by mid-2006, I'm not aware of it.

1 Apr 2005
Sue Noel
A staged withdrawal is better than no withdrawal. But what makes any of you think that the war criminals and theives who got us into this mess will be the ones to get us out of it honorably? Land the helicopters on the buildings. Get the Iraqui collaborators out. Leave the 14 US military bases for the Iraquis to turn into hospitals, schools, teen centers, whatever. I said it before, I'll say it again--only greed and arrogance keep us in Iraq.

1 Apr 2005
John Stevens
Please read the comments by ·Norma· for she explains better than anyone why a prompt withdrawal of American military forces must be swiftly coordinated with other steps that would fill the acclaimed Vaccuum that our military withdrawal would cause. We are not the only people in the world worried about the Iraqui future. The present course is a disaster and must be rapidly altered. American troops must come home now!

1 Apr 2005
Charlie Hinton
Two aspects of the war on Iraq that are rarely commented on but must be resolved are: 1. the privatization of the Iraqi economy and 2. the military bases that seem to be being built to be permanent. An "exit strategy" is not just about getting rid of troops, but also the institutions the U.S. is setting up for permanent control of Iraq, regardless of who is the government.

31 Mar 2005
Bruce Genereux
I'd like to know how the Iraqi PEOPLE feel about having us there. We have referendums here all the time. Since we're ostensibly trying to foster democracy in that country, why not let the people vote? If the majority want us out of there, at least it's a face-saving way to leave. If they want us to stay, it looks like that's what we're goint go do anyway. At least more Sunnis would vote!

31 Mar 2005
Paul Nichols
Dear VCS Brothers and Sisters, I am acutely aware of the serious, nearly impossible dilemma that plagues our country and your fine organization regarding what to do in the Iraq mess. As a member of Veterans for Peace and Vietnam Veterans Against the War, I personally feel that VCS is too right-centered, though I have tremendous respect for your organization and its aspirations.

31 Mar 2005
Vince T
Exiting Iraq: It is unrealistic to anticipate a "quick and easy" withdrawal from Iraq. The Untied States has invested so much in lives and money that we can ill afford to exit Iraq without a clearly thought-out timetable for realistic withdrawal. I urge people to read Dr. George Friedman's "America's secret War", which gives exceptional detail on why the US "had" to go to war in Iraq. I changed my perspective on this entire engagement with Iraq after reading Friedman's book. I am no fan of the GW Bush administration, but I am convinced this Bush White House did what it absolutely had to do. Before you shout back in disagreement, get this book and read it from start to finish. I believe your point of view may change, if you were not in support of the Iraq war from the get-go. (I was not in support of this war in the beginning, but now understand its necessity.)

31 Mar 2005
Gary Van Ess
Get out now. No further comment, except that I remember Viet Nam, and 55,000 needless deaths.

31 Mar 2005
Barbara
In a recent article in Truthout I just read that the amount of Iraqui children who "are chronically undernourished" has doubled since the coalition troops are there. http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/033105Z.shtml When we "liberated" the Iraqis we told them we would improve their lives. I was against the invasion and now I believe the only option for the US is to gradually remove ourselves and give the country back to the Iraquis. Attacks on American soldiers have decreased for the time being and so this is the time to put more into rebuilding the country. I wholeheartedly support the vcs idea. We did it in Vietnam and that country was able to survive. We need to get the troops out before we become too entrenched. Let's start as soon as possible.

31 Mar 2005
Frank Elkins
We should never have been in this war, but now we are in it we should get as many Spec-ops troops as necessary to train the Iraqis to fight against a guerilla war. Use the Army & Marines to shelter them until they are able to carry the war to the guerillas.Withdraw the protecion as units become proficient and keep Spec-ops as advisors until the troops & police can carry the load

31 Mar 2005
John Brennan
The Iraq invasion was a very bad mistake. We caused the Iraquis more harm than good. If we left precipitously, which I would really like to do, we would harm them further. I cannot accept this further harm to Iraquis, nor the further ridicule of this great nation. Our ill advised leaders placed us in this untenable position in the first place. They need to own up to that and set a timetable for total withdrawal. .

31 Mar 2005
Kim
I just want to commend VCS for their position on a gradual, responsible withdrawal from Iraq. I was against the war when it began and still am. However, we created this mess and the only responsible thing to do is help to stabilize the country before we leave. Anything less I find morally wrong. Thank you VCS for pointing out that choices are not always black or white, but that there is indeed a middle ground. Keep up the great work!

31 Mar 2005
gordon haire
I believe that we should get out as quickly as possible, and do so by turning the occupation and transition over to the United Nations, at our expense because we screwed it up. then we need to impeach bush and cheney and turn them over to the International War Crimes Tribunal.

31 Mar 2005
Rick Venturi
I believe that the War was a mistake and that to just abandon the country and leave willy-nilly would also be a mistake. But with my whole heart I believe the greatest moral travesty not would be to eventually leave Iraq for their citizens to work out the differences, (which we will do sooner or later), but to force young men in this country to go kill and/or be killed against their will through a military draft. Therefore I believe that the timetable for withdraw of American troops, whatever it will be, should be at a rate that does not require a draft. If you think we need to be committed to keeping troops there longer than that, then you should volunteer to go. Don't tell my three sons who are of draft age that they have to go because "we" owe it to the Iraq people. They did not choose to go into this illegal, ill-advised conflict so they should not be forced to go die for it. No Draft, No Way, No matter what! If a war is not worth volunteering for, it's not worth fighting!

31 Mar 2005
Alan Gregory
Big mistake this war was. And the king and his knights still have not fessed up to their lies and distortions and falsehoods. Having said that, the VCS position seems imminently right and fair.

31 Mar 2005
susie kinzie
i support the position of vcs, and the strategy suggested by the article. as much as i would love to have all of our troops home immediately, it would be irresponsible to mhave brought Iraq to such a state of destruction, and then walk away. the problem seems to me to get this administration to finally make some sensible decisions, rather than just acting in the interests of the oil companies, and those with the reconstruction contracts. we can only hope that continued public pressure might finally break thru the wall that they have built around themselves so effectively, and that a little reality might leak in.

31 Mar 2005
Norma
Yes, there must be a staged withdrawal of foreign military and technical support in Iraq to prevent chaos and civil war, and NO, THAT SUPPORT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE PROVIDED BY THE U.S. MILITARY. Why do you keep implying that as our only choice? In your email message today you stated... "An immediate withdrawal places the Iraqi majority at the hands of violent, radical insurgents."... What a misleading statement! -- implying that a rapid U.S. withdrawal would necessarily mean leaving a security vacuum in our place (and since that would be irresponsible, therefore we must of course stay on, trying and trying to maintain the peace as the insurgency continues to grow). I'm sure that you are aware of Rep. Lynn Woolsey's bill (H.Con.Res.35) introduced into congress calling on the U.S. to begin immediate withdrawal of troops, while at the same time convening an emergency meeting with the U.N., the Arab League and other groups to create and international peacekeeping force to replace the departing U.S. troops. Why are you so silent about this bill? Why are you not enthusiastically publicizing it and promoting it as the best solution on this dilemma of withdrawal? Why are you so committed to a continuation of U.S. leadership and direct presence in the campaign for stabilization and reconstruction of Iraq? Many conservative military experts have said that no matter what changes we make in our military policy in Iraq, the resistance and insurgency will continue to grow as long as we are there, because the very fact of our massive direct presence in the country has become a lightning rod for violent and growing resistance, undermining any willingness among the insurgents to cooperate with the struggling new Iraqi government. I urge everyone in this group to go to http://thomas.loc.gov and take a serious look at Representative Woolsey's House Resolution (H.Con.Res.35). If you wish to see the passage of this congressional resolution for Iraq withdrawal, I urge you to go to www.house.gov , look up you representative, and send them an email or phone call asking them to co-sponsor this bill (H.Con.Res.35). It is currently languishing in the House Committee on Int’l Relations (you can also contact the committee members) where it will probably expire, never coming up for a vote, unless it gets very broad based co-sponsorship from many representative across the U.S. (not just from the current 28 co-sponsors who are mostly from “blue” states). Furthermore please consider forwarding this information about H.Con.Res.35 to all of your friends who wish for Iraq withdrawal (especially those in “red states”), and ask them to send it to all of their friends, and on to more friends, etc. Let the ripples expand exponentially into a massive groundswell until our congresspeople finally have no choice but to cosponsor this bill so that our troops can come home and the healing of Iraq can begin!

31 Mar 2005
Frank Swift
I agree with VCS that removal of our military presence as soon as possible is very important. We shpuld demand that a very specific plan and timetable be made known and enforced by law, including the closing of all military bases in Iraq and assurances that Iraq will own and control its own resources.

31 Mar 2005
roger
I must repectfully disagree. The longer we stay the more damage we do to the fabric of our society. As much as I despise John Kerry I must quote his famous remark from the days when he had balls, " . . . how can you ask somebody to be the last to die for his country?" The premise of this adventure is/was so flawed, so duplicitus and so dishonest that nothing short of just pulling out will do. It seems to me if we stay, we will be there for years and years. I don't want my tax money and the children of the working/mddle classes squandered or used up supporting this folly. The billions wasted thus far have weakened us domestically and provided cover for the mad dog quislings running the government and the congress. Very few of this crowd, as we all know, ever served or never served in a meaningful way. Roger

31 Mar 2005
frank belcastro
The fact is that the target of the insurgents is the US armed forces and if they leave, the insurgents will disappear and will have no targets. We are the problem and to stabilize the country we have to get out. We could withdraw to to several centers and leave the country to the religious leaders who are really running it now. After all, who is directing traffic and carrying out out civil duties? If the country falls into the hands of the religious, that is its problem. We could then supply the money for the Iraqis to rebuild their country with relliable electricity, sewage disposal, and water filtration instead of giving these tasks to US corporations for their profit.

31 Mar 2005
Bill Warrick
Staged withdrawl isn't the point, obviously its staged, but when does it start and how is it staged is what we're talking about. Two weeks? two months? two years? ASAP? take your time? Spell it out, when and how fast? Bill Warrick VFP Gainesville N. Fla GI Rights