My argument is not wishful thinking. The British were glad to get out of Iraq it was a mess then and it’s going to be one for years to come. They also had no control of the country side. They also ruled with brute force.

Robbins you use personal attacks on my statements because your arguments like that of the right is wrong. History has proven this time and time again. What do call what has happened in the last 8 years? How do you explain this mess?

The Taliban and Al-Qaeda are stronger than ever, Pakistan is falling apart. Iran is now an emerging super power in the Middle East.

Afghanistan is falling apart and we don’t stand a chance there, it’s a quagmire. Do you know anyone there?
Well I do, and they had been working with trying to rebuild the country. They failed, they left the country because nothing can be done.

The rights days are now numbered, you people screwed up, your ideology is faulty and nasty and hateful, in short dare I say un-American.

Tiresome old argument and wrong.

Everyone and his mother conquered Afghanistan.

The Arabs did it easily. How do you think the Afghans became Muslims?

Before them the Indians conquered it.

Conquering and keeping it are two different things. There is nothing there worth keeping.

The British were there for many decades.

“The same is true for Iraq. Historically it has a nightmare for any country who tried. The Turks occupied the territory (Iraq became a country after WWI) but they were brutal. jeff

More nonsense. The Persians conquered it, then the Arabs, the Turks, and the list goes on.

Your argument is wishful thinking, Jeff.

Here’a a hint: When Robert Kagan opens his mouth, he is getting ready to either lie or say something terminally clueless. When he talks, it is always a lie or a clueless statement of incompetence.

Why, why, why does this guy continue to get these national podia? What is the magic dust that allows him, year after year, access to national news programs to make his inane bleatings? Does no one remember anything this bozo says?

Why do you continue to invite him? Why not invite someone who is occasionally right?

On the positive side of the invasion of Iraq, I did have a co-worker (in-fact two) from a Kurdish background (he is now back in Iraq) who was delighted to have freedom at last because the US took action to remove Saddam Hussein. It was exciting to hear how Tom Ashbrook himself reported on the invasion interviewing a Pash-Murga and how exhilirating it was to hear all those stories of freedom from oppression and ethnic cleansing.

I wish US would stand for truth and righteousness and never turn back from stopping genocide and depose dictatorial tyrants.

I know that the US is not God’s kingdom, and neither the President of the United States the Messiah King who is to come for those who are waiting for him. The US Government is also not the “Police of the World”, but it still exerts an unmatched influence in the world politics, and my prayer is may it be used wisely and justly.

“Righteousness exalts a Nation, but sin is a reproach to any people” says the Proverbs of the wisest man that ever lived. I pray that Americans would not think that they have gone beyond righteousness and exalt sin and self indulgence in the guise of freedom.

May the knowledge of God cover the world as the waters cover the sea. May truth and righteousness shine in every home of this wonderful country.

Maaza

You talk about wars and operations and tactics but you never question the assumptions that underlie our actions in the world. Why don’t you get an arms dealer on your show who could talk about America,s vested interest in conflict?(We are the world’s largest arms dealer.), Why don’t you get some people on who can help Americans understand what the Pentagon and CIA do with all the money they get? (Our military/intel budget is bigger than the rest of the world’s combined.)

And how about something on Oil and empire? And ,oh yea, what have we done lately to help resolve the Palestine question? Before we go around “righting” the world by our lights don’t you think it’s important that the voting public understand more fully
the “unexamined” assumptions that power those lights.

Finally, I suggest that when you do get around to looking at us more objectively that you get on more foreign guests, especially English and French ones. Having done the empire thing, they are in a much better position to see us as we are in contrast to us taking a wishful look at ourselves.

The same is true for Iraq. Historically it has a nightmare for any country who tried. The Turks occupied the territory (Iraq became a country after WWI) but they were brutal.

MOHAMMED N. RAZAVI, DALEVILLE, AL 36322

At best, we’ll probably see an extension of the UN mandate until the next administration takes up the issue, and I don’t see the Iraqis budging much on the terms of withdrawal or jurisdiction.

Someone needs to articulate, exactly, how our extended presence there benefits the United States. Considering the circumstances that got us there, it has never been in our interest.

The Iraqis don’t seem to want us there anymore. And when one considers the SOFA, McCain’s idea of “victory” is totally out of touch when one takes into account the terms of the SOFA. Additionally, he sounds like someone who is stuck at the tactical level in his thinking. I have never heard him speak coherently from a strategic angle. I think he’d run our military into the ground just to get a win.

Try mixing in someone from antiwar.com, or the Future of Freedom Foundation.

America could use the voices of people who don’t just cheerlead for the Surge, or lament the resurgant Taliban, but indeed can argue cogently that the USA shouldn’t have military intervention into every freaking corner of the world as its sole foreign/energy policy.

THAT would stimulate a true debate.

Thanks!