Yes, this was planned as a viceroyal palace, where the Americans who ran Iraq would live and work. Remember back in 2002 when we were going to kick ass, take charge, and install Chalabi as our tame strongman? This would have been the place Chalabi took orders from.
Now, of course, that “plan” is in tatters, to the extent it existed at all. But to cancel construction of the viceroyal palace would be to admit that we’re bugging out. Since according to Bush we’re staying until Iraq is a liberal democracy, we keep building the palace.
The palace’s construction will be cancelled when we get a president who plans on abandoning Iraq. Sure, it’s expensive to build an gigantic embassy complex only to abandon it to the Shiite militias or whoever, but what’s more important, a few billion dollars, or preventing Bush from losing face?
Boy, talk about your quotes that could turn around to bite you in the ass.
Yes, the U.S. IS going to be chased out, though admittedly not in quite as dramatic a way as 1975.
And I wouldn’t bet the house on what sort of government will be left behind. There’s a ferocious civil war yet to be fought and who the hell knows what will come out of that?
But we weren’t “chased out” of Vietnam either, in the sense that our military units were being defeated in battle and retreating and we had to withdraw them or they’d be killed or captured. We could have stayed in Vietnam indefinately as long as were were willing to accept the steady casualties and monetary costs that come even if you win every battle.
The trouble was, it wasn’t worth it to stay even though we “won” just about every military engagement. The North never really invaded the South until after American troops were withdrawn.
So our withdrawl from Iraq will be similar. Our troops aren’t going to be routed on the battlefield. We just won’t see the point of keeping them there to get shot at when there’s no compelling reason for them to stay.
Pretty much. I doubt the embassy will factor in greatly in our staying or going…nor is it any kind of sign of anything except optimism on Bush’s part. I certainly don’t see how its a factor on the military side of the equation
I got it. We pull back all our troops into the compound. It has 16 thick foot walls. Then we wait it out while the Iraqis kill each other. Once some resolution is achieved we come back out and mop up. it is a brilliant plan.
Normally if someone said this, I would assume it was tongue in cheek (despite the fact there was no smiley). With you however I can only HOPE you were kidding here. :dubious:
Put another way: It is pessimism to assume we will need such a huge, fortified embassy for diplomatic purposes. It is optimism to assume (as the Admin probably is assuming) that it will ever be useful for any other purposes.
You bet, since we are demostrably not being chased out. Unless, of course, you define “one side is fightin back” as being chased out. In that case, we (and every other nation) were “chased out” everytime we went to war, and that term ceases to have any operative meaning.
No, it wouldn’t. And it’s certainly disputable whether we’re “losing” or not. I wouldn’t say that we are, but it’s pretty meaningless anyway. One side will either win or lose, and that’s all that matters in the end.
We are not leaving . We are escalating. We have two aircraft carriers in gulf near Iran. Long way to go for a training exercise. How far the American Militants will go I do not know. But nothing will surprise me. There is speculation from good sources that Bush and Israel will bomb the hell out of Iran soon. God I hope not.
