We support the troops..."Yea right" - Dallas-Mavs.com Forums

dude1394 · 07-27-2007, 11:23 AM

Here is one of the reasons that all of the "we support the troops" junk by the defeatist party is just that, junk.

http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/...ves/010649.php

Quote:

Note: Despite Robert Gates' fence-mending with Hillary Clinton over the withdrawal rhetoric coming from Congress, Col. Twitty confirms that the highly-publicized demands to retreat from Iraq has damaged his command's ability to get good intel from the local populace. It has left them distrustful of the Americans, and fearful of a takeover by the terrorists in the wake of our departure. See the Colonel's answer to my question at the bottom.

In his last comment at the end, Col. Twitty noted how difficult it is to get the media to come to Ninewah and his command to get a better sense of the progress we have made there. The blogger conference calls are all we have, apparently.

Quote:

* [My question] Withdrawal debate - has it made the Iraqis fearful and damaged HUMINT capabilities? -- "Absolutely". It comes up daily. They accuse us of betraying them, and have stopped giving good intel as a result. It's significant.

Flacolaco · 07-27-2007, 11:44 AM

Ah man that really sucks. I didn't think about that.

Wouldn't it behoove the local populace to give good info so more progress could be made, leading to us staying and really finishing the job as much as possible?

Usually Lurkin · 07-27-2007, 12:01 PM

making progress won't convince the democrats to say the war is going well. Gaining power in the US will convince the democrats to say the war is going well (well, most of them, anyway). Perceptions of the war are here only to serve their quest for power.

As for the Iraqis - if they believe we will abandon them, even when things are going well, then they might be better off keeping their mouth shut so that they are not punished afterward, when we leave the country in the hands of the genocidal maniacs. Didn't Obama recently say that he'd prefer that to actually helping these people? Why the hell would they want to help when that guy might be president?

dude1394 · 07-27-2007, 02:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flacolaco

Ah man that really sucks. I didn't think about that.

Wouldn't it behoove the local populace to give good info so more progress could be made, leading to us staying and really finishing the job as much as possible?

So do this thought experiment. You give up good intel on the hopes that the US stays. If they don't you and your whole family will be tortured to death.

I would find it hard to put my faith in the US in that case with the current congress for sure. Dubya, yes, others...nope.

Mavdog · 07-27-2007, 02:35 PM

really, the question of if there is a plan for the removal of US troops from iraq doesn't "aid" the insurgents. don't we all- including the iraqis- see (and hope) that there will eventually be a removal of all our forces from iraq?

the question by clinton is valid, especially as 1) there was a clear failure of planning for our occupation post invasion, which is why there's been such a problem 2) there has been subsequent acknowledgement that yes there is a plan.

Usually Lurkin · 07-27-2007, 04:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mavdog

the question by clinton is valid, especially as 1) there was a clear failure of planning for our occupation post invasion, which is why there's been such a problem 2) there has been subsequent acknowledgement that yes there is a plan.

the question is valid, but they've let the debate play out irresponsibly. They pander to and encourage the "leave now, damn the consequences" crowd. That is what hurts the mission.