Spectacular attack on Bush

democrates

Has to be seen.
http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Olbermann_slams_Bush_after_Hillary_blamed_0719.html
Are we approaching a tipping point of support for impeachment?

is_that_so

Extremely well-argued and very powerful piece even if people don't completely agree with Olbermann. As for impeachment ,he would need to do something quite drastic domestically that he can be directly linked to, to be impeached. Americans seem to relate better to crimes against themselves than any foreign problems. Considering the rate of hara-kiri amongst his minions to date I would say that impeachment is fairly unlikely.

Sand

"Premature and public discussion of the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq reinforces enemy propaganda that the United States will abandon its allies in Iraq," wrote Edelman, "much as we are perceived to have done in Vietnam, Lebanon and Somalia."

Eh - doesnt pressuring and demanding effectively immediate withdrawal actually reinforce the view amongst US allies in Iraq - and enemies - that they will be abandoned shortly and thus encourage them to seek other allies and reduce co-operation with the US?

Logically if youre in Iraq and are allied to the US in some form, if you reckon theyre going to be gone shortly - and all the shouting from the homefront says they will be very shortly - then you reposition yourself to account for the fact theyll be gone? The Iraqis arent morons - if every Democratic [i.e. only ones with a chance of winning] presidential candidate is calling for withdrawal, then theyll reckon a withdrawal is on the cards. And if the US is gone, then they vanish from the calculations of those Iraqi groups.

I know if I was an interpreter for US forces or worked in any capacity with them Id be getting the bags packed and checking out options. Id also be looking for friends amongst the likely winners of the Iraqi civil war.

jonny72

Sand wrote:

Eh - doesnt pressuring and demanding effectively immediate withdrawal actually reinforce the view amongst US allies in Iraq - and enemies - that they will be abandoned shortly and thus encourage them to seek other allies and reduce co-operation with the US?

Logically if youre in Iraq and are allied to the US in some form, if you reckon theyre going to be gone shortly - and all the shouting from the homefront says they will be very shortly - then you reposition yourself to account for the fact theyll be gone? The Iraqis arent morons - if every Democratic [i.e. only ones with a chance of winning] presidential candidate is calling for withdrawal, then theyll reckon a withdrawal is on the cards. And if the US is gone, then they vanish from the calculations of those Iraqi groups.

I know if I was an interpreter for US forces or worked in any capacity with them Id be getting the bags packed and checking out options. Id also be looking for friends amongst the likely winners of the Iraqi civil war.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6908792.stm

The Danes are bringing Iraqi's back to Denmark with them..



If there is a withdrawal, it won't happen overnight..

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1644877,00.html

Thats a decent article by the way, seems fairly down the middle.

Zombrex

No great surprise, Olbermann is kinda a less funny version of Jon Steward, anchoring a left leaning (for the US at least) show on NBC.

If Bill O'Reily was saying this that would be news ... Fair and Balanced news (TM)

Mick86

democrates wrote:

Has to be seen.
http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Olbermann_slams_Bush_after_Hillary_blamed_0719.html
Are we approaching a tipping point of support for impeachment?

Unlikely. What would be the point, since his term has only 18 months to run anyway. On top of that it's quite likely that any impeachment attempt would swing a certain level of sympathy vote to the Republicans and the Democrats know that. They'll be quite happy to leave Bush blundering about in the Iraqi swamp in election year while they preach withdrawal.

The next president has a problem though. Presuming it is one favouring withdrawal, he or she will have to deal with the fact that disengagement could take many years. It won't solve Iraq's problems and will exacerbate the US's problems next time they want to form a coalition to wage a war.

On the subject of casualties, while any death is a tragedy, the fatalities in Iraq should be viewed in perspective. At the moment the US has suffered 3,631 dead since March 2003. That's about double the US dead of D-Day
(1,465) and far below the average 5,000 a year in Vietnam.

The Democrats and their supporters are just playing politics with Iraq and their own casualties. I doubt that a change of administration will change anything in Iraq.

jonny72

Mick86 wrote:

On the subject of casualties, while any death is a tragedy, the fatalities in Iraq should be viewed in perspective. At the moment the US has suffered 3,631 dead since March 2003. That's about double the US dead of D-Day
(1,465) and far below the average 5,000 a year in Vietnam.

The Democrats and their supporters are just playing politics with Iraq and their own casualties. I doubt that a change of administration will change anything in Iraq.

Perspective does change. What was acceptable in 1918 or 1945 or 1973 is not always acceptable now. Look at US intervention in Somalia or Lebanon, all it took was brutal reality, in the case of Somalia, in which the US military could not contain the media, and then in Lebanon it was one giant truck bomb.

I don't think too highly of the Democrats but I definitely think Republicans are far worse..

We all know the world would be utopian if it ENTIRELY was run by women and pinko lefties, but because rightwing dicks exist we need rightwing dicks to take care of them, to an extent..

However many Republicans use this same mindset when it comes to all problems..

Crime - Lock them up and throw away the keys
Immigration - Close the borders, kick them out
Drugs - Declare war on it
Iran - Nuke it
UN - F**k it
The environment - Who cares
World opinion - Screw it
Protesters - Anti-American
Failing war - Support the troops (I'm sure Goebbels said that too)
Terrorism - Kill/arrest/torture as many brown people as it takes
The constitution? The Geneva convention? Human Rights? Free speech? Censorship?

Iraq needs an American government who can actually communicate with the rest of the world as opposed to the current government who arrogantly shuns the rest of the world.

Mick86

jonny72 wrote:

Perspective does change. What was acceptable in 1918 or 1945 or 1973 is not always acceptable now. Look at US intervention in Somalia or Lebanon, all it took was brutal reality, in the case of Somalia, in which the US military could not contain the media, and then in Lebanon it was one giant truck bomb.

The lack of willingness to accept casualties is part of the problem. The world would be in great shape if the US had decided in 1943 that they just couldn't afford the casualties. Likewise the US started this great crusade on terrorism and now they want to jack in when the going gets tough.

jonny72 wrote:

We all know the world would be utopian if it ENTIRELY was run by women and pinko lefties,

Do we?