I have read most of these comments, and it sickens me that we call ourselves Americans and show no support for for our president. I didnt like Clinton, but i suported him. Why, because he was my president...We as Americans actors or singers should keep our mouths shut and do whatever it is you can to support and respect our troops, its a job and i hate it too, my wife leaves next year for her first tour...I'm not happy that its taking this long to do something that seemed at the time was so right, due to 9-11..I support my president, but when do you say enough is enough Mr. President. We were set out to stop terrorism, wheres osama..Get us out, too many have died. Let them kill themselves, we can buy the oil from whoever wins. Please bring us home. Screw all those who say to impeach you, after your dad and Regan your the best..Give me back the faith i had in you when i voted for you both terms. America Home of the Brave and the Free..Reporters report too much, be safe my prayers and thoughts are with all who are over there on that sandlot, thank you to those who have served and now serving.

Richard, Thanks for telling it like it is. It's refreshing to hear from someone who will discuss the reality of what's happened in Iraq. I appreciate your candor!!

Tell you what Walter, from WWI on, our tax dollars have never gone solely to our causes. You can't buy for a second that we're there so we need to do what we said we were going to do?

All of you sadden me. You're lack of compassion saddens me. You're lack of resolve saddens me. War happens. There is no reason we cannot win this thing. We defeated Nazi Germany on one side with Imperial Japan on the other, thousands of miles away from us, millions of combatants/logistics/vehicles involved, and you don't think that we can handle securing one country? When did Americans get such a soft and weak stomach? When did you stop caring about people in the world who are suffering? We have a volunteer army. Guess what, that means they volunteered to fight whatever war this country got into. That is their choice. Freedom, remember?

To Mr. Engel, it's not really a big deal what you label it. By some definitions, you could say America was in a civil war itself. We have clearly distinguished groups of people fighting for their beliefs. Each group has distinguished territory (red state blue state!). The only thing that is missing is bloodshed. And the way you people talk it sometimes seems like that couldn't be far off. So while we cast stones at the Iraqis, let's take a look in the mirror.

Let's say we're this divided, and then subtract our power plants, cut our police force in half, drop our military in half...where do you think we would be headed? We are not holier than thou. These people have asked for our help, and you guys don't even listen to them. You are so self centered and apathetic that you don't even listen to a recognized government that calls for our help.

I hope that my car never breaks down near your house, I'm not sure I'd even be allowed to use the phone.

http://tlocfym.blogspot.com

Why are we arguing over semantics? I am so tired of this liberal vs. conservative, Democrat vs. Republican politicization of this war. Why are our elected officials and the television pundits doing all this posturing, when every day our military men and women, as well as innocent Iraqi civilians are being murdered? Do they have any idea how ridiculous they sound? Whether or not NBC or any other news organization chooses to use the term, "civil war" vs. "sectarian violence" is not news. What is going on on the ground is news. Let's regain our perspective. And I have just about had a belly full of these posts that characterize NBC, MSNBC, and their correspondents as viewing events through a liberal lens. Is Tucker Carlson liberal? Is Joe Scarborough liberal? Is Pat Buchanan liberal? They couldn't be more conservative, yet they have each spoken out against the war in Iraq, and against this administration. If you don't like it, watch Fox News Channel for your daily steaming heap.

I want America to succeed in Iraq. The problem is nobody know how to do and what to do.
Some said stay-put, some said pull-out, some said send-more. We don't have many ways to do it and none of the proposals will solve the crisis.

We are just hopeless.

If the President continues down this "Yellow Brick Road" (his own creation by the way) and wearing blinders to block the results of the last election(Americans are against this war and want us and our troops out ASAP) and what is happening in Iraq be it called a Civil War, Anarchy or Sectarian strife than he needs to be impeached.

I did not come to this conclusion easily; I looked at what the last impeachmant did to this country and it was over an extra-marital fling. Bush if he continues in his current train of thought and brushes aside the results of the Iran Study groups' findings we as citizens are left with little else and Cheney needs to go too for his involvement. Can anyone say President Pelosi?????

Little that I know about the middle east, four years ago I kept saying "Stay in Afghanistan and finish the war there before we start another. Help the Aphgans build a nation, an economy, dig wells,rebuild villages, and give them a reason not to turn back to the taliban." Such an effort would have given the middle east a reason to trust that we finish what we began and things are better than they were before we came. Too bad we squandered the opportunity to prove ourselves worthy.

Brent, there's a problem with your logic.

Number 1) The vote didn't necessarily say "pull our troops out". It moreso said, "We are unhappy with the way things are going, and we need a new direction" It did not specify that this new direction was back home.

Number 2) Impeachment cannot be done until the President does something out of his authority. While this may be argued that he did so with the "warrantless tapping", that is under investigation and nothing else he has really done provides legal grounds for impeachment. You can't just impeach a president because you don't like what he does. The Iraq Study group is nothing but a committee, what they say has no binding implications in it. It is just an advisory panel. Just because we don't follow their advice doesn't make us or them right or wrong.

To Mr. Rainman,

We do have the means to send more troops. 150,000 is a bare fraction of our military. We can do it, by actually fighting this like a war, and not a police action. That would solve our problem, curb the violence, and restore our image. If Al-Sadr and Al-Qaeda want to call us occupiers, we should show them occupation as it truly is.

http://tlocfym.blogspot.com

So much useless, blind hatred for President Bush. A man who can't run for office in the next election anyway. How constructive these hate filled people are. Forget about having any real ideas, they live to hate Bush and it is their sport. HATE HATE HATE HATE. How do people function with so much hate? Is it fulfilling in some twisted way? You would think after winning the house and senate they would take all that hate and channel it in a more constructive way. But the hate continues...Bush won 2 elections. GET OVER IT!!! Can't change that fact by smearing him at the country's expense.

ADVICE: Stop wishing we lose and terrorists win for childish, petty reasons and take smaller doses of your own propaganda.

It is frightening to see how many Americans still have their head in the sand. Blaming the media for using the term 'civil war'. What a farce, its no wonder Bush has found such a large company of fools to follow him.

The United States can still emerge victorious as long as the liberal "cut and run" clan don't pull out before the job is finished. The news media is warping everyone's sense of what is actually going on in Iraq. Talk to the soldiers. I have two sons serving there now. It's bad, but they want to win. With enough support and ground troops, they can come out of Iraq with a victory. Of course, the liberal media will call it a defeat no matter how it ends up.

Nice story. I guess we, Americans, need to see soldiers in grey and blue to get the just of a Civil War. My fellow Americans, wakeup, there is a Civil war going on in Iraq. It is news. Our husbends, wifes, sons, and daughters are fighting for something that maybe will never materialize into, A free Iraq. Read, you'll find the out come of this mess. Don't put someone down for stating the facts, unless you have knowledge that this is not happening. All of the MIddle East knows that this is a Civil War. Every News Outlet there talks about it, they fear it. This war can cross Iraq's boarders and escalate into Syria, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Jordon. I purposly left out Turkey, because they are already felling the effects of this war. Have a nice day :(

Martin you say "our husbands, wives, sons, and daughters are fighting for something that maybe will never materialize into A free Iraq"

Question: Is anything you fight for guaranteed? Was it guaranteed that we would win the Revolution? Was it guaranteed that we would defeat Germany? The very reason you fight for something is because it's not guaranteed and you have to fight for it to work.

It doesn't matter what you call it, Civil War or not, the end goal is still attainable and still the same. It has nothing to do with having your head stuck in the sand, or being a foolish supporter of Bush. It is a simple equations. Everyone bases their assessment on the news media and Baghdad, with a side order of Al-Anbar province.

That is two out of 19 provinces (including Baghdad as it's own province). Now look at the Kurdish north, they have security and relative peace, a working regional government and assembly. Look at most other provinces with a high troop to civilian ratio. Secure, and beginning to let it take hold.

You cannot characterize an entire situation from just a few provinces. Are the Iraqis angry? Yes. I would be too. So called 'nation building' does work. Look at Japan, look at what we did for West Germany.

http://tlocfym.blogspot.com

I hate a man that lied to his people and started an un-needed war...right after he bailed on the important work in Afghanistan.

Yes, I HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE Bush for what he has done to our great nation. The USA was designed with an antagonsitic system of government that ENCOURAGES dissention and disagreement to ensure that no one group can take control.

Our weak-willed legislature (both R and D) let Bush and his crew stomp all over the people of this great nation and for that I am disgusted by them for be complicit in Bush's evilness. But Bush was the catalyst for this rediculous shift in government policy, so he gets the main brunt of my HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE.

I'm a naive 27 year old blue collar type American that wishes he could make sense of all of this.

From my point of view, the fact of the matter is that a large majority of American people fund out of their paychecks everyday the fight that continues in Iraq and across the Middle East.

My upbringing tells me that irregardless the U.S. government is investing that money in world affairs for the sake of liberty and peace for all.

I really want to feel confident that this is the case.

I agree with Noel Garcia..........There is nothing our enemies like better than to see us fighting amoung ourselves and putting our President down. This is a great country and I would not like to live anywhere else. It is good that we can disagree although I do believe at times it gives our enemies power. They watch us very closely. We need to be a country united just like we were when 9-11 occurred. We must not forget history because it is the greatest lesson we have. In the Viet Nam conflict the soldiers were the ones who suffered because many Americans did not agree on the conflict. They came home and were spit upon. I guess if you don't agree with Bush then write him a letter and quit blabbing about it to everyone else. Like it says in the Bible, if you have a problem with a brother go to hime and tell him about it)paraphrasing). If we would do that then all of the world would not know our business....just an idea. Maybe we could do the simplest most powerful thing and PRAY!!!

The USA has no business telling other nations how to act. Period. We should act WHEN something bad happens, not BEFORE. Otherwise, we are slipping into 'thoughtcrime' territory. We shouldn't jail citizens because we THINK that they MIGHT do something bad...and we shouldn't invade other nations because we THINK that they MIGHT do something bad.

Freedom isn't free. It costs you some safety and comfort. The Founding Fathers understood this very well, how have we forgotten?

Japan and Germany are very VERY different than Iraq. Japan and Germany had been cohesive nations for centuries before WW2. Iraq had been cobbled together by Britian a few decades ago.

Nationbuilding is WRONG. How would you like it if the economic trends continued and in 30 years the USA was an also-ran...and China started acting towards the USA like the USA acts towards South America?

People please wake up, stand up, unite and firmly demand that our government drastically changes what its doing in Iraq. This change has to be on a massive scale, both diplomatically and economically, commensurate to all the death and destruction we have caused to the good people of Iraq over the past quarter of a century.

After all, it was our government’s military and political support of the dictator Saddam that emboldened him and gave the “green light” to invade Kuwait. Then our government’s reaction was to starve the innocent women and children in Iraq and giving Saddam further license to murder tens of thousands of innocent Iraqi people in Najaf, Halabcha, and other Shia and Kurdish cities around Iraq during the 1990s.

Then in 2003 after our government falsely accused Iraq of having weapons of mass destruction and supporting Al-Qaida, invaded, occupied and destroyed the country.

Ladies and Gentlemen, this is old-fashioned colonialism at its utmost brutality, which is all too familiar for those of us who have experience it first hand in Iraq, and other part of the Arab world, India, and Africa. It is based on the old premise of "Divide and Conquer", where as the occupying power amplifies the differences among the indigenous population of the occupied country and watch them destroy each other rendering them too weak, while the occupier steals their recourses.

Wake up, stand up, unit and oppose this immoral brutality that is so unbecoming of this great country! Your morality, conscience, and wellbeing are at stake!

dont forget that the US supported saddam throughout the 80's when Iraq was in armed conflict with Iran. I remember the news coverage at that time when saddam gassed the Kurds in the north of the country. we knew then how he was treating his own people. I am always reminded of that old picture of rumsfeld shaking saddam's hand. we helped to support this dictator when it suited our needs. we really have no understanding of iraq or its people, nor do we really care to know. This has been evident from the beginning when we decided to take saddam out and impose western democracy to an area that have no sense of what democracy is. the country has so many different factions existing for hundreds of years that they need to be ruled with an iron fist to stop from killing eachother. when we pull out, the people will battle it out until a new dictator will emerge to rule the country once again with an iron fist. the only thing our country really understands about iraq is that they are sitting under some of the largest oil fields left in the world. if iraq's main export was broccoli instead of oil, no country would be there at all.

First, Richard thanks very much for your articles. They are extremely valuable. First, I hate it when folks "attach the Messenger rather than debate the Message". It shows a lack of intellect. Second, I could say a lot about the Iraq War but need to point out (a) In Jordan, President Bush said that Maliki was the right man in the right job at the right time and he had full faith in him. He also said that when Iraq wanted us out, we would get out. He has always maintained that when Iraq forces take over the security of Iraq, we would leave 100%. A few days later, Maliki announced that Iraq would take over security 100% by June 30, 2007. To me, this leaves us about seven (7) months to "hit the road". Since we will have a nightmare of logistics to get out, the Pentagon has already started drawing up time lines such as US Army unit to be out by a certain time and so forth. This means the dreaded words, "Time Tables". If we take Bush and Maliki at their word, is there any other interpretation possible?

All I did is support the article. Please read. You took two countries that had started a great war with the world. These were both defeated and reconstructed you are right about this. But, the infastructure was intact in these countries. That is they still had law and order! If you want to compare Iraq to a country, compare it to Iraq. The history will give all the knowledge you need.

What is the goal? - I think what we are after is the consequences and I will state my view of the goal here. I am not sure that this lines up with the President’s view.

To have Iraq be a country that is peaceful, no threat, friendly to the US, able to resist and defend itself against any efforts by nations, individuals or groups to force political change or destabilize it.

The consequences of this would be:
- a place we can have a military base to provide counter pressure to mid-east nations and groups that threaten the US, its allies or goals.
- a stable country that can produce it’s oil and contribute to the global energy supply, keeping prices down.
- a thriving, prosperous economy with a wealth distribution that would be the envy
of neighboring populations, and create desire for emulation.

Difficulties:
- the population currently has no sense of national identity or common goal – one needs to be created.
- the population groups have long seated differences traditionally solved by force or negotiation and payoff, and these need to be resolved or tamed. It will take at least a generation to calm it down – one the teaching and experience of the young can change.
- the population differences exist between small local groups and larger broader spread groups. Both have to be addressed.
- the population has to see an advantage in the national direction at some point otherwise it cannot be supported.
- there is widespread unemployment. Large public works projects that provide immediate benefit to local groups need to be started and funded. These have to be managed in a way that does not conflict with local customs or cause offence to workers, yet manage to get fair work for fair pay, and a result that the workers can point to with pride that they were part of it.
- it has been pointed out that inter-religious marriages and associations have been common, while there was no issue of pride, fear or revenge. The whole circle of pride and revenge needs to be moderated, This will be easier if the economy improves and there is less personal threat.
- there seems to be a tradition of corruption, payoff and nepotism. This surely is exacerbated by a significant economic contrast between the “haves” and “have-nots”, but trading, negotiating, barter, and scratching a living from what you can “find” has been a necessity and tradition for a very long time. Until things generally improve for all it will be tough to change much. Introducing the “fairness” and results based work ethic may help, but it has to be done emphasizing teams not only individuals.

Is there a solution?
In the past these differences have only been suppressed by a leader with use of a large thumb. I agree that it may be difficult to remove them without resorting the pressure to calm things down then releasing it in a careful manner with suitable training and guidance. One writer has suggested this. I am not confident that the US will have the will or (ability to sell in the US) such ambitious political and social engineering, but I am not sure there is another way.

The only other way I can see is if the leaders of the factions can find enough of a common goal to stop their groups warring. That is a long shot. As long as they are out for their own benefit solely, that will not happen and the stated goal above will not be achieved.

Another point is that success of Hezbollah or Al Sadr comes from their social embedding providing political support. If the USA is going to be successful, it needs to be socially embedded or have socially embedded proxies.

Definition of Civil War: Fighting between factions within the same country. I googled "'civil war' definition" and found numerous sites that state this. So....look at Iraq, or any other area of the world for that matter, and decide for yourself.

The USA does not have the moral right to preemptively strike another nation. Period.