Redstate

Instead of just uttering "centrist" platitudes.

Seems to me that you are making the "so what" argument yourself if a little more artful that the congressman.

I hear the far right remark about how the only option is to stay and finish what
we started" it makes me think these words are coming fro some militia group
from a 5000 acre militia compound in Arkansas.

Because here you are clearly saying "so what" to a US defeat in Iraq, the only difference I really see between your position and his is that he's simply articulating it more clearly.

"A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition." -- Rudyard Kipling

I am merely expressing my feelings ...

Your thinking is what interests us.

Your feelings do not.

See the Academy

First I didn't cut and paste another's quote.

In a nutshell my point is simple, although the solution may not be. I do not rip apart or denounce posts and comments because they are not from my "party". Instead of being berated I would prefer and embrace information that I wasn't aware of and would take a serious look at it. Even as a mainstream liberal, you would (probably) be surprised at my thoughts on immigration, gun control and the ACLU. If asked to expound on my thought's, feelings or opinions, I would gladly present them and in a truthful way.

I do not want to "lose" this war, I do believe war is necessary at times, and I do NOT stick up for every democrat. Perhaps what I write gets taken out of context because I'm not the best writer and I do not know what ever politician said when and where and why. I do rely on google and links that take me to sites where I can get a better understanding of things, and I agree with issues from both sides.

I am not a troll and have never been accused of one.

Bidens plan has some realistic propositions with in it, as does the Iraqi Study Group.

So tell us what they are. Again, all you have is platitudes and vagueries. It's not a "dig," it's a critique - you've commented here twice without actually saying anything. What are these good ideas? What are these smart options?

Furthermore, who are these "highly intelligent people in our government"?

And please use the "reply to" link when responding to a comment, so that everybody knows to whom you are speaking.

Given the circumstances in that part of the world, it looks like a pretty
good start to me.

Bidens .A Five Point Plan for Iraq

1. Establish One Iraq, with Three Regions

• Establish three largely autonomous regions with a strong but limited
  central government in Baghdad
• Put the central government in charge of border defense, foreign policy,
  oil production and revenues
• Form regional governments -- Kurd, Sunni and Shiite -- responsible for
  administering their own regions

2. Share Oil Revenues

• Gain agreement for the federal solution from the Sunni Arabs by giving
  them 20 percent of all present and future oil revenues - an amount roughly
  proportional to their size - to make their region economically viable
• Empower the central government to set national oil policy and distribute
  the revenues, which would attract needed foreign investment and reinforce
  each community's interest in keeping Iraq intact

3. Increase Reconstruction Assistance and Create a Jobs Program

• Provide more reconstruction assistance, but clearly condition it on the
  protection of minority and women's rights and the establishment of a jobs
  program to give Iraqi youth an alternative to the militia and criminal gangs

• Insist that other countries make good on old commitments and provide new
  ones - especially the oil-rich Arab Gulf countries

4. Engage the Neighbors, Maintain Iraq's Territorial Integrity

• With the U.N., convene a regional security conference where Iraq's
  neighbors, including Iran, pledge to respect Iraq's borders and work
  cooperatively to implement this plan
• Engage Iraq's neighbors directly to overcome their suspicions and focus
  their efforts on stabilizing Iraq, not undermining it
• Create a standing Contact Group, to include the major powers, that would
  engage Iraq's neighbors and enforce their commitments

5. Drawdown US Troops

• Direct U.S. military commanders to develop a plan to withdraw and
  re-deploy almost all U.S. forces from Iraq by 2008
• Maintain in or near Iraq a small residual force - perhaps 20,000 troops -
  to strike any concentration of terrorists, help keep Iraq's neighbors honest
  and train its security forces

If you have read the ISG's plan, I am sure you see at least some it's that
make sense. If not I won't attempt to convince you. My main point is something
is broken that needs to be fixed, and neither side has the complete solution.

Number one is a non-starter. Absolutely terrible idea - please learn something about the region if you don't understand why. 2,3, and 4 have all been done do a large degree by the President - except the abysmally foolish part of number 4 which demands that we ask those who are already working to destabilize Iraq to please, please tell us how to make it better. 5 cannot happen until the situation is correct for it, and Gen. Petraeus knows a heckuvalot more about when that is than Joe Biden or the other 534 legislators inside the beltway.

It appears that what you do it simply listen to people and regurgitate, when actual thought and analysis is required. Until you begin to do the latter, you won't know realistic and workable ideas from foolish ones, and will go on parroting the latter without ever even knowing it.

...of a good idea, my response was not "please copy and paste his plan, because I've never heard of it." I asked you to explain why you think that it is a good, workable idea.

Again: ANALYSIS > regurgitation of what you hear

and just for the record, the large percentage of what gets posted on blogs are regurgitation of what people here. I am not here trying argue that I am right, I am in search of what can be done to make things right. Open discussion is enlightening, closed mined sarcasm is useless.

...and what we ask from the great members of our community is insight and analysis - not regurgitation.

Open discussion is enlightening, closed mined sarcasm is useless.

Absolutely - so discuss. Don't just drop a pasted paragraph, or simply mention that you might have heard that any number of things were perhaps possible decently good ideas -- discuss. Analyze. Expand. Learn more, and weight pros and cons.

We don't ask all that much here, but an engaging of the brain is a recipe for success -- and a refusal to do so is a recipe for the opposite. If you engage your brain and do a little thinking, I'll bet that you'll surprise even yourself with what you can know, and what stimulating conversation and discussion you can maintain.

Oh, and another suggestion? Spell check is your friend.

For the record I didn't disrespect this blog, nor do I disrespect any blog I partake in. And the "dig" about the spell check?...that's a little on the weak side a

"Oh, and another suggestion? Spell check is your friend" a typo slipped by me (maybe you can point it out for me), but your remark just doesn't seem to be proper grammar. I could be wrong.

"Pherhpa snot," "what people here," "closed mined," "my thought's," "ever politician," and "with in it," for starters. Please don't ask me to critique your grammar.

A suggestion to give your comments the once-over for spelling and grammar is not "a little on the weak side" - it's a helpful tip, because the coherence and perceived intelligence of what you have to say are greatly diminished by poor spelling and poor grammar.

And yes, mine is correct. Thanks for the check, though.

That is the end of this threadjack. Back to issues.

See the Academy