American officers training Iraqi police recruits in Anbar Province, Iraq, in April. Part of American strategy in Iraq has been to train the police and army to take over the roles now played by United States forces.
The "Gates Strategy" alienates more than half of Iraq as the USA lends exclusive support to the Sunni Arabs of An Albar. The Shi'ites of the entire region will only become more radicalized as their preceive threat of the misguided USA 'surge.'
U.S. Troops Clash With Shiite Fighters (click here)
By KIM GAMEL
Friday, Jul 27, 2007 - 03:43:27 pm CDT
BAGHDAD - A fierce gunbattle broke out after a joint U.S.-Iraqi force arrested a rogue Shiite militia leader in Karbala on Friday, leading to an airstrike and the deaths of some 17 militants, the military said.U.S. troops also captured four militants suspected of links to networks that smuggle weapons and fighters from Iran, which Washington accuses of fueling the violence in Iraq with its support of Shiite militias.The U.S. military has promised to crack down on Shiite militias, which have been blamed for thousands of execution-style killings and roadside bombings, as well as on Sunni extremists usually blamed for suicide attacks and other bombings.
THE NOVEL DEBATE: Everyone whom had internet access and wanted to submit a 'loop' for consideration of presenting in a debate was welcome to do so. I think all the nation that was 'able' to see the debate considering it is limited to cable customers saw very bright, intelligent and talented Americans participating in the purest form of democracy. They went one and one with the candidates for President of the United States of America. The questions were wonderful. I understand the need for editorializing and 'choosing' videos that candidates wanted to address and eliminating those that were 'more victimizing and rude.' However, I take issue with some of the 'personal/corporate' agenda of Anderson Cooper and CNN. Where do they get the nerve? I didn't see any of Andy's questions pulled off of 'You Tube.'
The Democrats: They were all great last night. I have no favorite. I want what is best for the United States of America. Not for the corporations now occupying it, but, for the people. I have my opinion of each candidate, but, the closer we get to the primaries the more I'll address each one of them. Only one has asked for a military contingency plan in case the USA military is needed elsewhere. There are times when "The National Guard" might be needed on American soil more than any place else in the world. That is important. The Guard has been abused by Bush.
Each candidate has an important part in any debate. They all have strengths and weaknesses. The question that lingers after the follied elections of 2000 and 2004 is, can Americans of any party 'balance' candidate characteristics to make 'the best' choice. To 'balance' what might seem a preference for one lady candidate at this point, I will say this, I thought Senator Obama was 'best' at cutting to the core of an issue. He is able to articulate 'the core' purpose of a comment or question to the public unafraid of any retribution against himself because he is always ready to address the issue with complete honesty. I admire that of him. The others have long histories of excellant political careers that nearly speak for themselves. So, to the particulars of each candidate, I'll have to postpone that because as time goes on they are revealed to us more and more and I want the nation to have a 'perfect' President 'on balance.'
THE OTHER CANDIDATE, the Republican: The 'rhetoric review' today was to make a pledge to all the Neocons that Bush will persist in his illegal war until they win the elections of 2008 and return both legislative houses to their party. After all, the Republican profound belief is that they lost 2006 as a punishment for Abramoff. There ya go, Rudy, hang your hat on it, honey. Of course, Rudy could always 'do a Ford' and demand redeployment of all the troops out of Iraq NOW. It doesn't take a year to remove troops unless one is willing to lose more of them.
Iraq currently has ALL the power assets of the USA. It's military and that budget. And the fiscal strength that exists or should I say, what is left of fiscal strength of the USA. It's time to retake the country AWAY from those that don't deserve it. We have a country and an infrastructure to rebuild ourselves. Just as a 'huge example' - has anyone been to the site of the Former Trade Towers? I mean if we aren't going to put a skyscraper there then put a memorial ONLY there, but, it's been nearly six years. Hello?
Then there are a lot domestic issues that have been shelved as 'unworthy' of attention; the economy, the education of our children, the huge contribution the USA plays to Human Induced Global Warming and the reduction of that footprint, our nation's populous health (which was grossly neglected at the U-Tube Debate. If the 'concentration' of viewers were seeking answers regarding the nation's health care system then that should have been reflected as same in the number of questions asked RATHER than the Republican focus of Iraq. Democrats are leaving Iraq. Iraq needs to take that seriously.)
We have generations of Americans that need a future and not JUST an empty promise of one. No Republican gives a darn about the people of this country, the economy, the nation's health care system, the education of our children. They ONLY seek to exploit some Godly sense of morality to control the vast 'assets' of the USA and the wholesomeness of it's populous in wanting to improve the quality of life of all people globally, while they represent openly and without regret the dissolution of the USA Constitution.
Democrats sincerely love the United States of America and the Consitution. They never once in any of their answers thought to demise it.
All in all, the debate went well for all the Democrats because they are profoundly FIRST candidates of the people and not of corporations.
We don't belong in Iraq.
We never did.
Oppose the draft.
Bring the troops home now.
Stop Human Induced Global Warming.
