Why are the white-flag wavers so ignorant of how that will impact our long-term security?

You see...it's easy for them to 'give up' and run home because it's taking too long to settle everything down.

Just the fact that it has been stated, by al-Qaeda, that they want to continue to kill our troops in Iraq....should be the logic that we should not leave yet.

I guess that because it has been taking as long to settle the government of Iraq....that must be out fault...I don't know about you...but a fledgling government that they are...I wouldn't just walk away...and never mind the admission of al-Qaeda being in Iraq.

If people would actually research what is going on in Iraq...and not listen to the non-stop dribbling of crap coming from US media...they would finally understand the the people of Iraq, as well as the government of Iraq, do not want us to leave yet.

I guess you could look at it this way.....a woman has a child...at 6 weeks sends said child to daycare because she doesn't want to leave her career! I left my career to raise my child...and I had one hell of a career! There needs to be a sacrifice...if you want the child....RAISE THE CHILD....don't drop it into someone else's hand to do for you! But there's that RESPONSIBILITY again.

WE, the US, removed the Iraqi government and we CANNOT leave that country until the new government in place now is MORE THAN capable of controlling the government. I would hate to think what would happen to Iraq should we leave too early!!!

Because flag-wavers have set a lower standard for the US. Flag wavers think the US is great the way it is. Liberals have higher standards, and know that the US can improve. It's like the parents who cheer when their kids bring home a report card with Ds and Cs. The "flag-waving" parents will cheer, while the realistic parents will try to find ways of helping their kids.

You must have missed the part where Zawahairy said that the bill would deprive Al-Qaeda of the opportunity to "destroy the American forces we have caught in a historic trap".

They knew Bush would go into Iraq if they attacked the WTC. They knew that we would send our forces as invaders to a place that hadn't attacked us, and recruit tens of thousand of mujahedeen for them, AND provide them with the best postgraduate urban warfare and terror school in the entire world, with American faculty and staff to fight.

Have you not noticed that Al-Qaeda is not scared of us, but actually WANTS to fight us? The way to win is to wisely choose the time and place we fight them, not go invading entire nations and handing them a casus belli on a silver plattter.

Nothing but nothing could have made Osama happier than he was the day we invaded Iraq. Bush stepped naively into a trap that was FAR more cunning than the 9/11 attacks were, and there is no honor in remaining in a trap just because you stepped into one.

I have to disagree with you on one particular point.

Fact

Al Qaeda deputy stated in his video if the US leaves, we would deprive them of killing more US soldiers.

"This bill will deprive us of the opportunity to destroy the American forces which we have caught in a historic trap," Zawahiri says in answer to a question posed to him by an interviewer."

Phased redeployment is NOT surrender. A contingent of troops will still remain " in theater" and will be able to go back into Iraq if the need arises. There would also still be troops in Iraq to do the following:-

(1) To conduct targeted operations, limited in duration and scope, against members of al Qaeda and other international terrorist organizations.

(2) To provide security for United States infrastructure and personnel.

(3) To train and equip Iraqi security services.

2%-10% of the violence is from Al Qaeda, this is from our own governments' estimates, therefore the remaining 90-98% is sectarian, i.e. the so called " complicated to explain and label 'civil' war".

Long term impacts were not thought of when they planned this little invasion with reasons shifting like the sands in the Sahara.

In any event, our staying there is PLAYING INTO ALQAEDA'S HANDS. Bin Laden's goals remain the same, as does his basic strategy. He seeks to, as he puts it, "provoke and bait" the United States into "bleeding wars" throughout the Islamic world; he wants to bankrupt the country much as he helped bankrupt, he claims, the Soviet Union in Afghanistan in the 1980s

If they had bothered to find out about the culture they would have realized that democracy, or rather our version of it cannot work all over the world. You cannot invade a sovereign nation that did not have anything to do with an attack on us, occupy it ( which is what we have done) and expect that there will not be building resentment.

The Iraq Accountability bill, provided $4 billion more for our troops than the President requested and provided $1.8 billion more for veterans' neglected health needs.

The bill sets a NONBINDING GOAL of completing the troop pull out by April 1, 2008, allowing for forces conducting certain noncombat missions, such as attacking terrorist networks or training Iraqi forces, to remain.

It was not set in stone, despite the Presidents' rhetoric, he just does not want to be held to the same standards he harped about for his predecessor in the war in Bosnia. Then -Texas Governor George W. Bush told the Seattle Post-Intelligencer on June 5, 1999: "I think it's also important for the president to lay out a timetable as to how long (U.S. troops) will be involved and when they will be withdrawn."

Bring on the selective amnesia

Because the defeatists are extremely short-sighted and exceedingly simple-minded.

They know very little about human nature and they believe that by leaving Iraq, we leave the problem of Islamic Extremism behind. Are they really that mindless and naive?

Rudy Guliani was right on about the Dems. The Islamic Extremists love these guys and know that they are weak and can be manipulated. How sad is that?

We won, then we lost by overstepping our duty and invading Iraq. By doing this we have fortified Al Queda and sparked the sectarianism to the nth degree.

They do not appreciate our being there and more & more youths are joining Al Queda. Keeping our troops there to get blown up is not the way-DIPLOMACY and the desire to end the war is. But then there's the industrial military with nothing to manufacture and keep them booming.

i couldn't agree with you more. unfortunately, al-qaeda's assessment of the western libs is right on. the dems might as well put a target on the whitehouse.

fortunately, they're going to have to wait until they take the oval office - a long, long time.

Al-Qaeda's #2 stated that our leaving would deprive Al-Qeda of having a reason to keep killing US troops in Iraq.

Get your ideologies straight. It has nothing to do with Democrats wanting to "surrender".

It may be the same reason that Bush and his cult of neo-cons were ignorant of how invading Iraq would impact the worlds long term security.

so basically we should just do the opposite of what our enemies want. Al Qadia said "Send your whole army" should we do the opposite based on your logic?