RRC Archives

From the Online Edition of the Wall Street Journal:

Jolie:
"My visit left me even more deeply convinced that we not only have a moral obligation to help displaced Iraqi families, but also a serious, long-term, national security interest in ending this crisis.

Today's humanitarian crisis in Iraq--and the potential consequences for our national security--are great. Can the United States afford to gamble that 4 million or more poor and displaced people, in the heart of Middle East, won't explode in violent desperation, sending the whole region into further disorder? . . .

As for the question of whether the surge is working, I can only state what I witnessed: U.N. staff and those of non-governmental organizations seem to feel they have the right set of circumstances to attempt to scale up their programs. And when I asked the troops if they wanted to go home as soon as possible, they said that they miss home but feel invested in Iraq. They have lost many friends and want to be a part of the humanitarian progress they now feel is possible.

It seems to me that now is the moment to address the humanitarian side of this situation. Without the right support, we could miss an opportunity to do some of the good we always stated we intended to do."

WSJ:
"It's quite a contrast with the attitude of Democratic presidential front-runner Barack Obama, who said last summer that even preventing genocide was not a sufficient reason for a continuing presence in Iraq. What does it say about the Democratic Party that it seems poised to nominate someone who, on the most pressing concern of the day, is less morally serious than a Hollywood starlet?"

If we put billions of dollars into food, shelter, etc for the people instead of for trying to figure out how to kill a small segment of the population we wouldn't have a problem with them killing each other because they would be too busy eating and fucking and thinking what a swell country the US is.

Wish it was that simple.

ya dude ask Day about Iraq he knows.

Well, at least Angelina knows more about Iraq than Obama does. Unfortunately, she's not about to be elected.

Doesn't the majority of Iraqis want us to leave completely and never come back? I don't know if this is true. Is it?

Not true, more when I have the time.

i'm fairly ambivalent (mixed emotions, not the same as apathetic) on the matter of whether we should leave iraq or stay. it's because i don't personally know what it's like over there and i don't have much understanding of all the economic and social implications of the opposite decisions. as for what someone else thinks i want to know their "assumptions" and "logic" behind their final decision. angelina's seems to be based on a moral obligation which i completely respect. as someone running for president of the U.S. on the other hand perhaps they are trying to do what is best for the U.S. in which case I think pulling out of iraq is the correct move.

i'll just say i'm glad i'm not the one who has to make those decisions and then go to sleep at night; sometimes it just seems like a lose/lose. however, if i were making those decisions i would want to visit first hand the people involved, soldiers and iraqi's alike, and then ponder those feelings alongside the "other" issues.

sometimes human emotions get in the way of the "best" decisions... on the other hand maybe i'm wrong and it's the other way around.

Jammer wrote:Doesn't the majority of Iraqis want us to leave completely and never come back? I don't know if this is true. Is it?

I know many men I served with that say the majority of iraqis want us there and welcome our efforts. don't belive everything you see on mainsteam media. contoversy sells.....

a whole paragraph and you didn't say anything