Absolutely not! We should have a plan to be there indefinitely.

You really have no idea why we were and continue to be in Iraq, do you?

__________________
"Don't confuse effort with results."
Marine Corps saying.

I see. So we need to keep American troops (the guys you claim to care about) in harm's way in order to help protect Iraq and Iraqis (the guys you supposedly don't give a shit about)?Why don't you tell us?

I know. You don't. May I suggest you read some history?

__________________
"Don't confuse effort with results."
Marine Corps saying.

Keeping troops in harms way just to justify Bush's arrogant error is not victory. Our troops did their job, that is victory, and now they need to get out of that ungovernable hellhole.

__________________

I disagree. If we should get out of any place it is Afghanistan. Now there is an ungovernable hell hole that is or ought to be of no concern of the United States. Get out now.


Bobo's not smart enough to get us out of there.

__________________
"Don't confuse effort with results."
Marine Corps saying.

Honestly I don't know and I have read Rob Fisks book on the Middle East, Fiasco and Assigns Gate. And I don't know.

Here is the range of reasons:
1. Bush screwed up
2. WMDs
3. Saddam screwed up
4. Oil
5. Regional Control
6. Industrial Military Complex
7. Petro Dollar
8. Israel
9. Revenge ("He tried to kill poppy..")
10. Misunderstanding
11. Iran.
.....

Tell me which or add one and explain

What are: 4, 7, 5, 8, 6, & 11, but not necessarily in that order, Alex.

Debatable.

In any event, it's unlikely Iraqs borders will be intact in the long term. But until the Iran situation is settled, allowing them to change would be a disaster.

__________________
January 21, 2013: The End of an ERROR.

"Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become more corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters."
"When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic."
"The Constitution only gives people the right to pursue happiness. You have to catch it yourself."
---Benjamin Franklin

Considering you're always the first to point out Bush is no longer the president, and throw up your hands in frustration whenever comparisons are made, I find it odd you need to make the comparison yourself ad nausium.

We have a mission in Afghanistan, the same mission Bush walked away from when he invaded Iraq.

__________________

"But until the Iran situation is settled, allowing them to change would be a disaster."

Agree. Iran is the key to the entire area. There is our reason. The only reason to be there. Until and unless they, the mullahs, are brought down, that area will never be safe.

__________________
"Don't confuse effort with results."
Marine Corps saying.

That mission was ended when one of the two reasons we went in there was accomplished and the other given up on.

We destroyed the Taliban government....good.
We gave up on finding and killing OBL....bad, but irrelevant now.

The key to Afghanistan and the Taliban is and always was Pakistan. That is where our troops ought to be. Not in the hell hole of Afghanistan.

__________________
"Don't confuse effort with results."
Marine Corps saying.

Can we just pause a moment on that "given up on" part? Why the hell would we give up on finding and killing the people who planned the 9/11 attack, also the Cole, the embassy bombings, and God knows what else. I know Bush gave up, but did you also?

__________________

Do you advocate for the invasion of Pakistan?

If so, explain your aproach to doing so, as in the military and more importantly the occupation strategy.

You do realize we, the US are the cause that the mullah's being in power. Personally I'm not going to buy the notion we can set things right be invading it. And this is the second backhanded insuation you've made to invade another country. Again, you have a strategy for an occupation of Iran? Have you considered the international fallout and reprocusions of such an action (ie do you understand Russia and China would be obligated to intervene directly or by proxy if we simultaniously invaded Pakistan and Iran?)? Do you believe an all out or proxy war with Russia is winnable?

If Iran gets farther along with their nuclear projects, we need to bomb their enrichment sites no doubt, but you seem to be a bullheaded warmonger from your posts. And that position is dangerous, and flawed.