but where is the netroots outrage and pushback to Clinton? the demand that the other candidates do better? The insistence that the candidates disclose the real numbers behind their residual troops plans?

sigh …

perhaps it is foreshadowing of the netroots performance when/if she is the nominee. Hard questions will not be encouraged, there will be calls to mute criticism as she is ‘only tacking to the center to appeal to swing voters’ or some such shiite.

Oklahoma kiddo @ 18

Economic calamity here, and chaos in the sands covering the world’s most valuable pools of oil. Now I ask you… what’s that recipe for?

The U.S., as the Founders designed it, is dead.

There is now the task of re-building.

Unfortunatley, the tearing down of the evil we’ve wrought is not even begun, and the world is gonna level a SEVERE wercking ball upon us for our behavior.

Only after that, will any rebuilding remotely begin. And THAT healing, will hurt worse than the old methiolate on an open cut.

Thanks everyone.

Twain – Richardson estimates that we could get out in 3 months or so, leaving equipment behind. Mil folks I know give estimates more like 6-10 months and point out that getting out is going to be a nasty business with one route available and that route heads south through Basra where British troops are being “picked off” acc to UK reports.

What we ignore is that the Iraqis are quite skilled fighters (making the train the Iraqi forces more bs than I can cope with) and we have been a brutal occupation force. I expect them to exact a price for what we have done … as we head out.

Much of the timeline for a departure depends upon what the underlying policy will be. That said, a reasonable timeframe would be about 9 months. The key is that we don’t have to withdraw everyone and everything to bases in the US and Europe all at once. The principal objective would be to remove troops and equipment to staging areas in Kuwait where they can be processed for a more permanent withdrawal in a more secure environment.

argosfalcon @ 150

for all of them out two years, current planning.

Why 2 years?

The two years 6 months for politicization of the move 6 mos for the paper work, and a year for the cycle out, the merc.s well thats why the get the pay, damn most are just paying the bills the pol.s don’t want to submit.

Y’know, Petraeus isn’t all that, really. I mean he’s a tactician and a teacher. He wrote a book about counter-insurgency. Then he wrote an WaPo op-ed just before the 2004 election, saying how well we were progressing in Irak. Then he got a big promotion, another star, and an assignment to train Irakis and give them 190,000 weapons. Which he lost track of.

So why anyone expects anything other than a glowing report in September is beyond me. What’s the anti-war, anti-surge position going to be then? Because we don’t really need to wait for September. We know what he’s gonna say.

Teddy I don’t know if you are really in San Francisco but every Thursday at noon for one hour a group of committed folks stand in front of the Federal Building on the corner of Larkin. They have been there from the day Bush rattled rockets at Afghanistan. Their perseverance changed many hearts and minds on invading a country. If you are in the area, drop by. These people never give up.

And Petraeus was one of the two commanders Col Westhusing called out in his “suicide note.“

Siun @ 111

Eureka – good point… but where is the netroots outrage and pushback to Clinton? the demand that the other candidates do better? The insistence that the candidates disclose the real numbers behind their residual troops plans?

sigh …

They all look at the floor when Bill Richardson sez he’d get the troops out by 12/07, essentially right away. Unless Joementum Biden is there; he sez “You can’t get 160,000 troops out in six months!” Then the others all nod.

Watch next debate. It’s what happens. Then there’s no more discussion.

MSM either marginalizes, trivializes or ignores the Dems who have called for immediate withdrawal. (Edwards, Kucinich, Richardson) There have been a number of calls for withdrawal, and after the large applause from the audiences, the issue is dropped. Is that to protect Hillary? why is that? what has MSM invested in Hillary that they are protecting her? Why is there such coverage of Obama implying an action in Pakistan? Is it that war sells news?
I’m tired of all the yippee crap already.

I posted this late in the previous thread…I just came home from seeing “No End In Sight” and am ready to fight these warmongers by myself. It was absolutely infuriating.