RUMSFELD admitting DEFEAT in IRAQ?

“One of his options was to "cut and run", LOL.

Damn defeatists....Stay the course!”

“Don't have to register for this course, you will learn when the pay off money ends.”

“Following is the text of a classified Nov. 6 memorandum that Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld sent to the White House suggesting new options in Iraq. The memorandum was sent one day before the midterm Congressional elections and two days before Mr. Rumsfeld resigned.


Nov. 6, 2006

SUBJECT: Iraq — Illustrative New Courses of Action

The situation in Iraq has been evolving, and U.S. forces have adjusted, over time, from major combat operations to counterterrorism, to counterinsurgency, to dealing with death squads and sectarian violence. In my view it is time for a major adjustment. Clearly, what U.S. forces are currently doing in Iraq is not working well enough or fast enough. Following is a range of options:


ILLUSTRATIVE OPTIONS

Above the Line: (Many of these options could and, in a number of cases, should be done in combination with others)

¶Publicly announce a set of benchmarks agreed to by the Iraqi Government and the U.S. — political, economic and security goals — to chart a path ahead for the Iraqi government and Iraqi people (to get them moving) and for the U.S. public (to reassure them that progress can and is being made).

¶Significantly increase U.S. trainers and embeds, and transfer more U.S. equipment to Iraqi Security forces (ISF), to further accelerate their capabilities by refocusing the assignment of some significant portion of the U.S. troops currently in Iraq.

¶Initiate a reverse embeds program, like the Korean Katusas, by putting one or more Iraqi soldiers with every U.S. and possibly Coalition squad, to improve our units’ language capabilities and cultural awareness and to give the Iraqis experience and training with professional U.S. troops.

¶Aggressively beef up the Iraqi MOD and MOI, and other Iraqi ministries critical to the success of the ISF — the Iraqi Ministries of Finance, Planning, Health, Criminal Justice, Prisons, etc. — by reaching out to U.S. military retirees and Reserve/National Guard volunteers (i.e., give up on trying to get other USG Departments to do it.)

¶Conduct an accelerated draw-down of U.S. bases. We have already reduced from 110 to 55 bases. Plan to get down to 10 to 15 bases by April 2007, and to 5 bases by July 2007.

¶Retain high-end SOF capability and necessary support structure to target Al Qaeda, death squads, and Iranians in Iraq, while drawing down all other Coalition forces, except those necessary to provide certain key enablers for the ISF.

¶Initiate an approach where U.S. forces provide security only for those provinces or cities that openly request U.S. help and that actively cooperate, with the stipulation being that unless they cooperate fully, U.S. forces would leave their province.

¶Stop rewarding bad behavior, as was done in Fallujah when they pushed in reconstruction funds, and start rewarding good behavior. Put our reconstruction efforts in those parts of Iraq that are behaving, and invest and create havens of opportunity to reward them for their good behavior. As the old saying goes, “If you want more of something, reward it; if you want less of something, penalize it.” No more reconstruction assistance in areas where there is violence.

¶Position substantial U.S. forces near the Iranian and Syrian borders to reduce infiltration and, importantly, reduce Iranian influence on the Iraqi Government.

¶Withdraw U.S. forces from vulnerable positions — cities, patrolling, etc. — and move U.S. forces to a Quick Reaction Force (QRF) status, operating from within Iraq and Kuwait, to be available when Iraqi security forces need assistance.

¶Begin modest withdrawals of U.S. and Coalition forces (start “taking our hand off the bicycle seat”), so Iraqis know they have to pull up their socks, step up and take responsibility for their country.

¶Provide money to key political and religious leaders (as Saddam Hussein did), to get them to help us get through this difficult period.

¶Initiate a massive program for unemployed youth. It would have to be run by U.S. forces, since no other organization could do it.

¶Announce that whatever new approach the U.S. decides on, the U.S. is doing so on a trial basis. This will give us the ability to readjust and move to another course, if necessary, and therefore not “lose.”

¶Recast the U.S. military mission and the U.S. goals (how we talk about them) — go minimalist.

Below the Line (less attractive options):

¶Continue on the current path.

¶Move a large fraction of all U.S. Forces into Baghdad to attempt to control it.

¶Increase Brigade Combat Teams and U.S. forces in Iraq substantially.

¶Set a firm withdrawal date to leave. Declare that with Saddam gone and Iraq a sovereign nation, the Iraqi people can govern themselves. Tell Iran and Syria to stay out.

¶Assist in accelerating an aggressive federalism plan, moving towards three separate states — Sunni, Shia, and Kurd.

¶Try a Dayton-like process.”

“Loose a Nuke on Teheran....mention we found evidence the Iranians were supplying the insurgents. Pull our troops out of Iraq. Base in Isreal place three Boomers in Missile range or Saudi/Iran/Syria....”

“¶Publicly announce a set of benchmarks agreed to by the Iraqi Government and the U.S. — political, economic and security goals — to chart a path ahead for the Iraqi government and Iraqi people (to get them moving) and for the U.S. public (to reassure them that progress can and is being made).

¶Significantly increase U.S. trainers and embeds, and transfer more U.S. equipment to Iraqi Security forces (ISF), to further accelerate their capabilities by refocusing the assignment of some significant portion of the U.S. troops currently in Iraq.

¶Initiate a reverse embeds program, like the Korean Katusas, by putting one or more Iraqi soldiers with every U.S. and possibly Coalition squad, to improve our units’ language capabilities and cultural awareness and to give the Iraqis experience and training with professional U.S. troops.


Why weren't these things being done in the first place?

Who's running this show?”

“The one on the left:

”

“XL, while you're in a nukin' mood, nuke Los Angeles. Oil would drop to $5 a barrel and the Saudi family would be in the soup lines.”

“That was good Sale...now lets think without FEELING for the other guy (LOL).

Okay here are the facts the libbies don't want to admit. The Islamo Fascists are going to do anything they can to obtain their two basic missions.
1. Destruction of Isreal - now the supporters of this belief are pretty much like the nice German Citizens in the 1930's who thought ('Ah well so they are taking Hymie, whats the big deal, he always made a lot of money, now I can get some of it.")
Granted in 1945 about half of them, who were not incenerated, learned that there are worse things in life.

2. The goal of the Islamo Fascists has been pretty much what the Nazi's and Soviets et al had on the books. It is the spread of a global power they alone control. The sad thing will be that there will come a day when you can either be Islamo wackjob...or a headless corpse in a soccerfield. And if the former happens then there will be a point where you cannot be Islamic Enough for them. (it is historical gang)

So now we have a choice...do we decide to take this Cancer out in the small stages with the loss of only a few thousand lives(like the Cowardly Euroweenies of the League of Nations should have done in 1936) or do we wait until we have to expend MILLIONS of lives and TRILLIONS of dollars to regain or freedom.

You know I still have the estimates of loss of life that the Feelgood LIBBIES made for Gulf War I, and Afghanistan and Iraq...each one was 25,000 and up (in the intial stages)....wow...so 2500 is not really that bad considering that we have been doing this since 2001....”

“Send your kids, XL.
Then tell us how you FEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEL!!!”

“XL already told how sidesplitting funny he would find it if LA and a few NE cities were nuked. It would serve them right for voting Dem.

Red-blooded Americans would consider an attack anywhere on our soil to be an attack on all of us, but not our XL.

Sociopaths just think differently, that’s all.”

“take this Cancer out in the small stages

Now this, I think, is the primary problem with the right's mentality on Iraq and why we are where we are. It shows the complete and utter lack of understanding/respect for a religion that has a billion followers, has been around for hundreds of years longer than Christianity and what many moderate Muslims see as an attack on their religion. The U.S. should have spent some time crafting their messaging before our president and entourage decided to piss off the entire Muslim population. The reality is, this is a world-wide religion that you can't possibly just "stamp out" as XL would like to believe.
last edited: 12/04/06 10:21:08 AM”

““For the first time that I can think of WE are the agressor. The US has always defended itself, or come to the aid of allies, but we have never STARTED a war. That's where Dubya is heading.

I have yet to see any concrete evidence linking Iraq with Sept 11. Dubya is picking a fight. I don't like what that little idiot is doing to my country.”
Big Wave Dave
10:30:41 AM
12/11/02”