A sensible plan
The New York Observer's Joe Conason writes today about a sensible plan of action aimed at ending the debacle in Iraq. Drawing on last weekend's demand by the Arab League for "the withdrawal of foreign forces in accordance with a timetable," and echoing the desire of over 75% of the Iraqi people themselves for a swift, scheduled reduction of American troop presence in their nation, Mr. Conason proposes the logical alternative of a "negotiated ceasefire." He notes:
Working through the Iraqi government, U.S. officials should set forth a clear timetable for the departure of our troops -- in exchange for an end to armed attacks by Sunni guerrillas. Spokesmen for the rebels, including leaders of the Association of Muslim Scholars, have often hinted at the possibilities for such a settlement.The issue of a viable exit strategy can no longer be ignored and misrepresented by our stubbornly inept Obfuscator in Chief, nor can we allow him to press on with the same tired, empty talking points and disingenuous attacks on his critics. We need a plan now to bring an end to Mr. Bush's shameful little war - and a negotiated ceasefire sounds like a smart and workable place to start.
posted by Bob P @ 6:50 PM
2 Comments:
Everybody seems to forget the innocent Iraqis, whose lives hang in the balance and deserve self rule, not another madman like Saddam, not the oil rich politicy of Saudi Arabia or the Rockefellers, they deserve to benefit from their own natural resources, self rule and participate in the global economy.
We have an obligation to help countries like Iraq and Afghanistan whose rights are trampled by Russia, Standard Oil and Dictators like Saddam or the Taliban.
All opposing opinions are simply defining the problem: you're viewpoint is way too narrow.
Read this article on http://www.acsa.net -
"Anatomy of a Covert pro-Terrorism Agenda" and you'll figure out how your opinion and that of others is being used.
No one really LIKES war, except for pathological types like Saddam Hussein, Hirohito or Hitler, and the oil industry who profits from it. So they created a problem by appearing to covertly support Saddam getting him commitment of nuclear weapons and SAM missiles and German, French, Belgian and Russian support in building their military up using the Food for Oil program as cover.
Furthermore, their owners did a deal to convince Pakistan to sell Saddam some nukes. We had to intervene or at least three cities in America would now be glowing cinders.
Wake up to reality here, the President can't out and out accuse Sharon Percy, David or Jay Rockefeller of insurection, can they? But they can prevent them from getting Saddam nukes and conspiring at the UN to lift sanction in exchange for 1/2 of Iraq's oil.
So, which Rockefeller do you think Saddam would have nuked first?
Just because they're the wealthiest people on the Planet does not mean the Rockefellers are the smartest, you know?
Don't fall for their BS anymore.
Be truly self-ruling. Exercise freedom of choice. If you dare.
???
What kind of ranting drivel is that?
What you, "anonymous", seem to forget are the innocent Iraqi's whose lives have been taken during the last two years, and an Iraqi people who desire self rule WITHOUT US occupation.
Our presence is making it worse, not better.
Wake up and smell the napalm.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home