Why no one will say when US troops will withdraw from Iraq

[yellerpup]

I believe that Saddam Hussein will have to be convicted and executed before any time line for withdrawal is drawn. We can't pull out and leave him alive. Think of the hundreds of thousands of Saddam's army who "cut and run" before the advancing coalition forces back in the Spring of 2003 while taking their weapons with them. They took themselves out of play so they could live to fight another day, and now with Baghdad surrounded and "uncontrollable" even inside the Green Zone, it looks like to me that that day is here.

We can't establish a time table as long as there is even a 1% chance that Saddam could be reinstalled as leader, and unless he is stone cold dead, there is always a chance that he could rise again. It is not as if we can just rip our troops out on the fly, either. I don't see CrashCart letting his Halliburton, et al, cronies get stuck having to defend themselves. I'm sure these contractors signed on for loot and booty (oil revenues) and our troops will have to stay on to protect them until they are evacuated at our expense.

This WH crew does nothing unless and until all their buddies are lined up to take a cut. Saddam Husein's trial is supposed to show that the US is concerned with due process--after all we are a nation of laws--and this exposes a bitter irony. While Saddam is getting his day in court in Iraq, Bushco is tearing down the laws that protect American citizens. I'm sure neither B**, Cheney, or Rumsfeld would have any qualms slashing Saddam's throat although I'm equally sure that they would make someone else do the dirty work for them, but they have to let his trial in Iraq by Iraqi's play out.

[DURHAM D]

1. Don't forget - Senator Burns says they have a secret plan.

[yellerpup]

3. This crew has secret everything

and they expect us to pay for it.

[theoldman]

2. I generally am not a betting man but I bet that they let him live.

If Saddham is executed, there will be an uprising greater than anything we have seen so far. Just my opinion.

[yellerpup]

4. They, meaning the US? or They the Iraqis?

We can't hold that country doing what we've been doing and the uprising grows wider and wilder every day.

[Gerardo]

5. Saddam isn't going anywhere

Fast-forward ten years and Saddam will be back in charge, because there's no one else who can do the job. And he'll be propped up by US troops.

[yellerpup]

6. I hope you don't have esp, Gerardo.

But you just may be prescient. :wtf:

[Gerardo]

7. Saddam part deux

Well, seriously, who else can hold this region together? Since President George W. Costanza's plan is to leave this mess to his successor, that leaves the field open to rewrite the rules (such as they are) and take a cold, realistic look at the options for Iraq.

The short answer is, there are no options. If it's not Saddam, it can only be another strongman (read "ruthless despot"). It's not likely someone will simply "arise" from among the Iraqis to do the same job Saddam was doing.

And since the idea of postwar amnesty has already been floated for the insurgents, why not Saddam too?