Good morning, COL Gene! Always happy to engage this early in the AM.

The Bad news for Bush in that the Shiite religious bloc has a big lead which could result in an Iraq that will be governed by Moslem law and not secular democratic principals.

But it's a government chosen by the people, majority (Shi'a) rule. The Sunnis knew their days were numbered the minute the bombs started falling in 2003. Saddam, as a Ba'athist Sunni, favored his boys, despite the fact that they only made up 20% of the population.
The Shi'a will do a fine job of running their own country, with a lot of coaching from the US and the world community. The UN is much more comfortable dealing with a self-elected and self-governed Iraq than the current government, propped up by the US.

Thus, the specter of another Theocracy, like Iran, or a civil war looms in Iraq.

In my humble opinion, once the elected Iraqi government gets on its feet, they will reach out to the UN and ask for help. That way they will act on their own behalf without causing the US to have to ask the UN for backup, hat in hand. But that's just my thought.

No question this is the type of government the vast majority in Iraq want. The impact of new government on the U S and the West will be how that new government operates. If they operate like Iran or Syria, the Bush policy will have created another danger not made the area safer for America. If a Civil War develops, we first have the safety of our troops to consider and then wait and see what type of government results AFTER the Civil War is over.

Wow, COL. You've got something here that seems reasoned and doesn't appear kneejerk. :CONGRATS:

On Wednesday the UN said the preliminary Iraq Election results should stand.

Seems that something's working over there.

The Bad news for Bush in that the Shiite religious bloc has a big lead which could result in an Iraq that will be governed by Moslem law and not secular democratic principals.

This one ... I'll have to take a "wait and see" attitude on. While there are indications that they may do so, it's not written in stone, yet. At the very least, it will be a government decided by a majority of the people. That's what a democracy does. Establishes a government as chosen by the people in the government.

This has sparked angry demonstrations by Sunni Arabs that had demanded a new vote in Iraq.

They're upset because after 30+ years of dominance, they're suddenly faced with just the amount of power that they should have based their percentage of the population.

In the short run the more dangerous outcome would be the outbreak of civil war while we have our troops in Iraq!

Having people caught in the middle of a civil war is always dangerous, but it wouldn't be the first time for US soldiers (anyone remember Kosovo?).

I remember Kosovo but in Iraq we are talking about a country of 27 million people. A civil war in Iraq with 150,000 American Troops would be a serious problem. Just to extract our forces that are spread all over the country would be a real problem. We better hope Bush has a well thought out plan as to how that would be done should civil unrest develop in Iraq. If the 20% of the population decided they have no future in the new government, all hell could break out. Let’s pray that DOES NOT HAPPEN!

Wow, COL. You've got something here that seems reasoned and doesn't appear kneejerk.

...now all you've got to do is begin attacking topics without Bush being at the center of them.

Given the fact that the President is at the center of most important issues, HOW would one remove him?

Col, now you are trying to see into the future. This is all a "lets see whats gonna happen now" situation. We all knew this was going to happen. In times like these we should give the benefit of the doubt that things will work out. Instead you are already putting in peoples heads that this is going to happen. No matter how you look at it, you are determined to believe that muslims just can't live in peace. That there is not way they will be able to change to a better lifestyle. You have no faith, but that is more because of your hatred towards Bush than the belief that muslims don't know what peace is.

No question this is the type of government the vast majority in Iraq want. The impact of new government on the U S and the West will be how that new government operates.

Exactly and since no one really knows what the impact will be no one can be cirtain of anything. But that's not what you sound like here, you sound like you have already seen the future and it's a bad one. In fact, you saw the future a long time ago, since you started posting here. Talk about a negative mentality.

I remember Kosovo but in Iraq we are talking about a country of 27 million people.

Yes, where part of them are children and part are also women. What, do you believe that all 27 million will fight? Please.

A civil war in Iraq with 150,000 American Troops would be a serious problem.

For a man who has a Col for a military title you sure don't seem to know jack about wars. Do you not think the military has a plan if a civil war was to break out? I highly doubt we will involve ourselves in the civil war cause that will only add to the chaos that would be underway by making one or more of the groups believe we are siding with one of them. That would also make us look bad everywhere else. God, I can't believe you don't think of these things first. It's so obvious.

We better hope Bush has a well thought out plan as to how that would be done should civil unrest develop in Iraq.

I'm surprised your putting any hope at all on Bus. Maybe there is still hope for you.

If the 20% of the population decided they have no future in the new government, all hell could break out. Let’s pray that DOES NOT HAPPEN!

Agreed.

Given the fact that the President is at the center of most important issues, HOW would one remove him?

By focusing on the issue and finding ways to fix the problem. Then we can relay the info to the Govt. You don't fix problems by bashing the Govt. First you find what you believe might be a solution and discuss it. But if everytime you try to discuss the problem your gonna start bashing Bush, even when he's not part of it, then it gets boring and stupid.

What I have done is to focus on issues and document what has taken place during the past especially during the past 5 years under the Bush policies. When I document anything that some look at as negative such as the Federal deficit or the trade deficit, I am said to be Bush Bashing. No, what I am doing is telling it like it is with data that comes from official Federal Government sources.

I have then offered alternate approaches to solving issues that have either not been resolved or have gotten worse under the policies we have been following since January 2001. When I offer policy suggestions that do not follow what Bush and the conservatives approve, I am Bush Bashing.

My experience as a business executive and Army Officer have shown me that when an approach does not produce a positive result you look for an alternate approach not just keep going in a direction that is not working.

My experience as a business executive and Army Officer have shown me that when an approach does not produce a positive result you look for an alternate approach not just keep going in a direction that is not working.

You should have also learned that in order to do the right thing sometimes thinghs have to get worse before they get better. Can't always try something new and if it starts out bad just drop it and start something else. Not everyone who starts a new business starts out making money, that doesn't mean they should just give up.

It's called taking risk, we do that everytime we vote for someone. We never really know what that person has instored for us if they win, we don't even know what if the other person wins.

When it comes to the deficit, I will not argue that he is right. That's obvious even to those who follow him or believe in him. But you just simply think that everything he does is wrong and that everything that goes wrong in this country is somehow connected to how stupid you think he is. That is what the people here are trying to tell you.

It's time for us to take responsability for our own actions instead of blaming Bush for everything that goes wrong here.

Almost everything I have written about are policies that Bush and his supporters in Congress are the prime movers on and for which they are responsible for the results. Many of the issues facing our country were in need of solutions when GWB took office. Examples of these areas include: Trade, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and border security, lack of health coverage, deteriorating infrastructure, education, jobs and energy independence. What I look for is, “Have these problem areas improved over the past five years?" Then there are new issues that were not problem areas in January 2001. Issues such as the Iraq War and the Annual Budget deficit.

The above areas that were problems have all gotten worse which means Bush and his supporters in Congress have not followed policies that were effective in dealing with these issues. The new issues were created as a result of the policy changes that Bush and his supporters implemented since January 2001. I would be happy to give Mr. Bush credit for ANY areas that he has resolved or made better. The problem is that when you compare the situation in 2001 with 2005, every one of these issues has become MORE of a problem for America and he added the Iraq war and the annual deficit. I would be happy for ANY of you to document how GWB and his policies that Congress have enacted into law have improved ANY of these issues!

Given the fact that the President is at the center of most important issues, HOW would one remove him?

That's very true, the Presidency touches upon many issues and can be applied to most any, but framing every single issue around the Presidency and seating every topic within the lap of the president is incredibly narrow and disallows you the flexibility to argue points, persuade audiences, etc., etc. .

I think you're already feeling a bit freed...grab your wings.

The issues I have addresses are the major policy initiatives that Bush has proposed and his conservative base in Congress passed into law. Bush also signed all those laws. It is his policy in Iraq, his tax and spend policies, his trade policies; his Iraq War policy, his energy policy that were passed because of his GOP controlled Congress (yes and some Democrats on the War). One could say both Bush and GOP members of Congress are responsible for almost every major issue getting worse during the past five years if that makes you feel better. The end result is the same. Only the wealthy are truly better off since Bush became president in 2001. The poor are poorer and the middle income family is just slightly worse off. We have fewer manufacturing jobs and many employers have either cut or eliminated many benefits. Pension plans are in trouble. There are many more non-living wage jobs. Yet we are told how great the economic growth has been. Tell that to a worker that lost a job paying $25 per hour and now is working for less then $10 per hour without health coverage.

Check, Please!

Def -

Cheers,