WASHINGTON (AP) — Emboldened by election gains and the resignation of Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, Democrats want to press a top Army general and other advisers to President Bush on beginning to pull troops out of Iraq.

Gen. John Abizaid, the top U.S. commander in the Middle East, and David Satterfield, the State Department’s senior adviser on Iraq, were scheduled to testify before the House and Senate Armed Services committees on Wednesday, followed by CIA Director Gen. Michael Hayden and Defense Intelligence Agency Director Lt. Gen. Michael Maples.

“I would hope and expect that we’re going to be given some indication at that hearing that they see the need to change direction,” said Sen. Carl Levin, who will take control of the Senate Armed Services Committee next year.

So what would happen if we did abandon Iraq to terrorists and jihadists as Sen Levin and many other top Democrats want?  

  • Many more casualties.
    • Does anyone expect the Terrorists and Jihadists to simply put down their AK’s, their bombs and other instruments of death and become peaceful contributers in a representative government? Much more likely is that the sectarian violence would increase dramaticly as each group tries to gain the upper hand in the aftermath and exact a measure of revenge on the other factions.
    • The Lancet Survey estimated total Iraqi deaths at 650,000, Iraq Body Count puts the number at between 48,000 and 52,000, The Iraqi minister of health put the number between 100,00 – 150,000.  Regardless what the Numbers are now, without US and coalition forces there the numbers will be far far higher. 
  • Even greater Terror Threat world wide.
    • Terrorists and Jihadists would be emboldened and more willing to undertake greater risks to inflict even higher numbers of casualties.  
  • Our allies in the War on Terror will question our resolve.  Many of those facing insurgencies of their own may see appeasement as a means to their own survival.

Sure some will say that by Cutting and Running from Iraq will allow us to focus more clearly and dedicate more forces to get Bin Laden. This approach assumes that by killing or capturing a six and a half foot tall terrorist hiding in a hole in Afghanistan or Pakistan we will somehow bring the Global War on Terror to a successful conclusion… Then we can all go back to watching reruns of our favorite sitcoms and reality shows.

Many point to the war in Iraq as a recruiting tool for Al Qaeda, Hizbollah and other terror groups. To some extent it is. Imagine though, the recruitment levels that Al-Qaeda and Hizbollah will experience when they can proudly claim to the muslim world that they have stood toe to toe with the most powerful military in the world, and won!

Jihadists world wide will dance in the streets, and then launch new and more devastating attacks on US and western interests. Our Allies in the Global War on Terror will question our resolve in defending freedom and democracy. Many will conclude that appeasing the terrorists is their only hope of survival.  

Jihadists in the Phillippines, Thailand, Indonesia, The Sudan, Nigeria, India, and in many other countries throughout the world will step up and intensify their attacks. If terrorists in Pakistan are successful in removing President Mushariff they will also gain control of nuclear weapons.

This is the reality of the Cut-N-Run policy that many leading Democrats want to pursue. It certainly is not in the best interest of the United States nor of any other society based on freedom and places a value on human life to allow this to happen.  Our goal in Iraq has always been to establish a secure government that protects the rights of its citizens, and one that is capable of defending itself from the terrorists.

Everyone is appalled at the horrendous loss of life in Iraq. We all recognize that progress in Iraq has been slow, and we must adjust our tactics and our strategy to meet the situation on the ground. Democrats have a choice here, they can either work with Republicans to refine those strategies and tactics and help in the building of a stable, secure government in Iraq, or they can continue to pursue a policy of massive increases in body counts.



  1. I think you’re missing the point completely here. The Democrats are not suggesting (well, some are, but I digress) that we immediately remove all troops and leave Iraq to stew in its own feces of a country.

    They want to make the government there hold itself accountable for protecting itself. They want to soon – but not immediately – start thinning our force over there.

    On the point of Bin Laden, you couldn’t be further off base. No one in their right mind believes that killing/capturing him is going to stop terrorism and make everything all sunshine and lollipops. The point of it is to bring the man who killed 3,000 Americans (who certainly wasn’t in Iraq) to justice.

  2. Ryan;

    The Dems seem more concerned with getting our troops home than finishing the job they are there to accomplish. Our focus needs to be on getting Iraq standing on its own two feet not just on redeploying our troops to Okinawa. Everyone wants to get Bin Laden and we have forces deployed to do just that. But it is the Dems who insinuate that our effort in Afghanistan is somehow diminished because of Iraq. When in fact the number of US forces in Afghanistan increased when we went into Iraq.

    Thanks for your comment.


  3. “redeploying our troops to Okinawa”

    LOL – Darrell – now I have to go clean my screen.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: