Robert Novak: Quick Exit is Likely

[MaryH]

http://www.suntimes.com/cgi-bin/print.cgi I can't get this to work. But it is Robert Novaks column.

Sorry if this is duplicate! Didn't see it.

Quick exit from Iraq is Likely

Inside the Bush administration policymaking apparatus, there is strong feeling the US troops must leave Iraq next year. This determination is not predicated on success in implanting Iraqi democracy and internal stability. Rather, the officials are saying: Ready or not, here we go>"

And then we leave the county to fall into Civil War.

Is this not amazing. We start the war, demolish the country, then cut and run and leave it to civil war.

[StClone]

1. Pre-election lies

We are in Iraq for years the post above has more on why.

[MaryH]

3. I'm not so sure

I have heard military men say that the only way Iraq will settle down is if we leave. But if we do that there is no telling what will evolve out of this chaos.

"Getting out now would not end expensive US reconstruction of Iraq, and certainly would not stop the fighting. Without US troops, the civil war cited as the worst-case outcome by the recently leaked National Intelligence Estimate would be a reality. It would then take a resolute president to stand aside while Iraqis battle it out.

The end product would be an imperfect Iraq, probably dominated by Shia Muslims seeking revent over long oppression by the Sunni-controlled Baathis party. The Kurds would remain in their current semi-autonomous state. Iraq would not be divided, reassuring neighboring countries--esp. Turkey-that are apprehensive about ethnically divided nations.

This messy new Iraq is viewed by Bush officials as vastly preferable to Saddam's police state, threatening its neighbors and the West. In private some officials believe the mistake was not in toppling Saddam but in staying there for nation building after the dictator was deposed."

[Media_Lies_Daily]

41. Halliburton is building 14 permanent bases in Iraq....

...what does that signal to you?

[K-W]

42. This isnt about whether leaving is clearly the right thing to do,

it is about whether this administration would ever even consider it as an option.

[Ready4Change]

7. I agree.

This is a Rove press-push. Expect the message to follow to be "Kerry vote=Draft. Bush vote=Get out of Iraq."

In my opinion there will be a draft no matter who wins this election. However, a Kerry administration will care about fixing the situation in Iraq. A second Bush term will mean the "war on Terror" will move on to Iran, or perhaps one of the other nations on the PNAC list.

[Cronus Protagonist]

31. True. He's shilling for the Bush junta as usual

Now that the draft issue has been raised, he's trying to build a smoke screen and fog the issue so the spin doctors can claim they're not going to draft.

http://bushspeaks.com/

[Coventina]

2. Novak: Douchebag for freedom

I believe is what Jon Stewart calls him.

I would treat his opinions like the trash he is.

[krkaufman]

43. Correct... Bob Novak, "Douchebag of Liberty"

Here's a great Daily Show video clip from a few weeks back:

http://home.comcast.net/~krkaufman/douchebag.wmv

If left-clicking doesn't work; try a right-click/Save As..., and then open in Windows Media Player.

edit: I expect Novak is simply trying to influence the vote of those who think Bush has been too extreme

[Cat Atomic]

4. LOL- Sure, Bob. Whatever.

There's a reason US troops are still in Iraq right now. It's because guys like Dick Cheney make alot of money when they've got US troops sitting on foreign oil reserves.

The situation in Iraq is exactly what the Neocons wanted. They've got permanent military bases and US corporations control the oil reserves. All other considerations don't rate for them.

If the Bush team wasn't willing to cut their oil heist short to help their bid for reelection, why the hell would they cut it short after winning the election?.

Bob Novak is a shill, and a shitty one.

[Mandate My Ass]

5. strong steady leadership...rrrrriiiiiiiiiiiiiight.

Funny how this comes out of left field right after Kerry announces he has plans to get our troops out of Iraq and wants to implement them immediately after taking office.

[Javaman]

6. More like 2006 if anything...

We are so intrenched there it will take at least a year to rotate everyone and everything out of there. If we left quickly, there would be such a vacuum, that morons worry about Iran coming in and taking over would be reality. Personally, like others who have stated on here, we are there for a looooooooong time. That whole region is now so completely unstable because of morons war.

[blindpig]

8. disinformation. n/t

[nostamj]

9. yeah, right...

and the fourteen military bases???

[Rhiannon12866]

10. Here's the article

I thought of posting it, as soon as I heard about it, but wondered if I'd be considered a troll, LOL! Novak may be a bottom feeder, and totally creeps me out, but this is a very good story and important news.:shrug:

http://www.suntimes.com/output/novak/cst-edt-novak20.html

[EST]

19. Much as I hate to admit it, that old fart is making sense, for once.

I am certainly no foreign policy specialist and certainly no great admirer of Novak, but it has seemed to me for many moons, now, that the only practical policy would be to stand aside and let 'em fight. Other than maybe putting a double strand razor wire barricade around the country with a single road out, air cover and heavy border guards, and a policy of letting non-combatants exit unarmed, either to a neighboring country (maybe Afghanistan), or to a relief camp (BIG problem with 2 or 3 million refugees), we CAN'T just keep killing the people we came to "liberate" and invading and conquering Fallughah for the umpteenth time. What the hell else is there to do? I refuse to accept the possibility of multiple thousands of American deaths. WTF

[Rhiannon12866]

27. I agree

We need an exit strategy and have for a long time. We cannot keep killing the people that we went there to "liberate." I'm sorry, Mr. Bush*, they don't want your democracy. They may have hated Saddam, but now they really hate you. You have created another generation of terrorists. We should reinstate their essential services, like water and electricity, which were destroyed by this terrible war, and just get out, which sounds like is the only course of action proposed, as with Vietnam. I have no better solution and it doesn't sound as if this administration does. This whole debacle is such a tragedy, and at such a cost of human lives.;(

[K-W]

35. That is... crazy.

We do need to pull out, we should not 'let them fight'

We need to pull our occupation troops out and then the UN needs to get involved and immediately open up talks and arrange some sort of ceasefire, move UN peacekeepers in and work on talks unhindered by US interference. And of course even then there is a strong chance of war, but we need to treat this like the volitale situation it is and let the international community do its job.

I dont know if Kerry is enlightened enough to put the fate of Iraq in Iraqi hands with the aid of the UN. I sure hope so. Those bases need to go. This insane race to disaster needs to stop.

[Rhiannon12866]

54. Your solution sounds like a good one to me

Certainly better than anything that this illegal, irresponsible, warmongering administration has come up with.

I also agree that we shouldn't "let them fight." The U.S. is responsible for creating this bloody mess and we owe it to the Iraqi people that we came to "liberate" not to leave them with a much bigger problem than they had before, like a civil war. Bush* keeps referring to the "mass graves" left by Saddam as one of the many reasons for launching this preemptive war. But how many people have already died as a result of Bush*'s war and how many more would die if this situation degenerated into civil war?

That the U.S. needs to get out is unquestionable. That they are seething with hatred towards the U.S. is proven everyday, especially in this most violent week of beheadings and car bombings. But we just can't abdicate responsibility for the mess we've created as we did with Vietnam. Neutral parties have to be brought in to fix what Bush* broke. I think that Sen. Kerry's smart enough to realize this. We just have to get him into the White House. I hate like hell that he's left with this unconscionable mess. He's going to have a whole lot of cleaning up to do.:-(

[serryjw]

56. They can fight all they want...ALL we care about is protecting the oil....

We would never let them torch the oil fields...thats why we invaded in the first place.

[OneTwentyoNine]

22. Total BS,pimping up the "light at the end of the tunnel" for Chimp...

Go back to the VN days and the BS election speech's by candidate Nixon. Let's see...."Any President who can't get us out of VN in four years shouldn't be President"

Well...he didn't but was re-elected in 1972.


David

[barb162]

50. yeah, I this is what I think he is doing. He knows darn well

Bush has no plans to get out of Iraq fast

[Was_Immer]

11. Im a bit confused

Its obvious Novak is a concervative. But Im wondering if Bob Woodward a liberal, concervative, or straight in the middle?

I ask cause I just watched Larry King and he was on, and Im confused.

[Rhiannon12866]

12. I just watched him on Larry King, as well

Bob Woodward is neither liberal nor conservative, but a journalist in search of the truth. He's been labeled as a liberal, because he, with Carl Bernstein, broke the Watergate story, in The Washington Post, and he has criticized this sitting administration for not telling the truth, either. But he is a journalist, not a politician, with no agenda except looking for a good story and telling the truth. That he would be critical of the lying that has come from this current administration should come as no surprise.:shrug:

on edit: Welcome to DU, Was_Immer! Glad to have you with us, and, please, keep asking these kinds of questions!:hi:

[Swamp Rat]

14. It's VERY easy. Robert Novak is a douchebag traitor.

Didn't you hear that he won the 1st place award for being the "Douchebag of Liberty?"







Welcome to DU! Good luck! :-)

[Rhiannon12866]

15. Yes, I certainly heard this and I certainly agree

but this is an important story. He seems to have access. If we are going to abandon Iraq, as we did Vietnam, after all the effort and rhetoric and losses, this is a huge story, and the people need to know.:shrug:

[Swamp Rat]

16. Of course I know this is important. I have family there.

:hi:

[Rhiannon12866]

23. I am so sorry

If it had been up to me, we would never have gone there. It was an exercise in futility, and at the expense of so many lives. We need to formulate an exit strategy and then just get out. Bush* cannot continue to spin on this. It is, as you say, just too important, and lives hang in the balance.;(

[Rhiannon12866]

52. I also saw him named this on "The Daily Show," LOL!

He totally creeps me out, but I do think that this is an intriguing story! :shrug:

[newyawker99]

32. Hi Was_Immer!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[K-W]

13. Robert Novak is a liar, and this is a lie EOM

[EST]

29. Yesss

Your acumen is tantalizingly accurate!

[radfringe]

17. when asked about CIA report

bush* pooh-poohed it

Bush Dismisses Gloomy CIA Report on Iraq
Tue Sep 21, 2004 05:28 PM ET
http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=6296762

NEW YORK (Reuters) - President Bush, determined to put an optimistic face on deadly conditions in Iraq, said on Tuesday that the CIA was just guessing when it said the war-racked country was in danger of slipping into civil war.

"The CIA laid out several scenarios. It said that life could be lousy, life could be OK, life could be better. And they were just guessing as to what the conditions might be like," Bush told reporters during a picture-taking session with Iraqi Prime Minister Iyad Allawi.

============

this is the same CIA that bush* was confident about regarding WMDs in Iraq. At that time bush* backed the CIA 100% -- now he pooh-poohs it because it doesn't match up with his fantasy world-view

[EST]

18. Uh- that wasn't the CIA...

The CIA was pretty uncertain about everything, it was the Office of Special Plans that cherry picked the intelligence and presented a lop-sided story to Cheney&co, who then took it to the CIA and pressured them to go along since the admin was going to war, no matter what.

[REP]

20. Since When Is No-Facts a Reliable Source?

When he's leaking what the WH wants him to leak?

[OneTwentyoNine]

21. The Oil ran out already?? If not the US is not going to leave.....nt

[annabanana]

24. Sheesh......I saw the thread title and thought NOVAK was leaving..........

(wishful thinking, I know)

[GreenPartyVoter]

25. They are paving the road for an exit from Iraq into Iran.

[Strelnikov_]

26. They Are Not Going To Pull Out Of Iraq, And Leave All That Oil Behind

no matter what Novak says.

It has always been about the oil.

Crude Dudes
The Toronto Star
Sep. 20, 2004

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1095545411401&call_pageid=968332188854&col=968350060724
. . .

Gheit just smiles at the notion that oil wasn't a factor in the U.S. invasion of Iraq. He compares Iraq to Russia, which also has large undeveloped oil reserves. But Russia has nuclear weapons. "We can't just go over and ... occupy (Russian) oil fields," says Gheit. "It's a different ballgame." Iraq, however, was defenceless, utterly lacking, ironically, in weapons of mass destruction. And its location, nestled in between Saudi Arabia and Iran, made it an ideal place for an ongoing military presence, from which the U.S. would be able to control the entire Gulf region. Gheit smiles again: "Think of Iraq as a military base with a very large oil reserve underneath .... You can't ask for better than that."

. . .

One reason that regime change in Iraq was seen as offering significant benefits for Big Oil was that it promised to open up a treasure chest which had long been sealed — private ownership of Middle Eastern oil. A small group of major international oil companies once privately owned the oil industries of the Middle East. But that changed in the 1970s when most Middle Eastern countries (and some elsewhere) nationalized their oil industries. Today, state-owned companies control the vast majority of the world's oil resources. The major international oil companies control a mere 4 per cent.

The majors have clearly prospered in the new era, as developers rather than owners, but there's little doubt that they'd prefer to regain ownership of the oil world's Garden of Eden. "(O)ne of the goals of the oil companies and the Western powers is to weaken and/or privatize the world's state oil companies," observes New York-based economist Michael Tanzer, who advises Third World governments on energy issues.

. . .

[faithnotgreed]

57. you got that right

[IkeWarnedUs]

28. Don't fall for it - DO NOT spread this story around

This is so typical. Start a story, but without any accountablility.

On the one hand, Novak doesn't speak or write a word that doesn't come straight from the Republican spin machine. So, if it is from Novak it must be "inside information", right?

On the other hand, he has no authority to enforce such a statement.

Perfect scam.

Now, picture this. It's a year from now. We hit the 2000 mark on American casualties. The draft is in place. Bush is giving Iran specific ultimatiums and preparing to attack.

All over America are people saying, "But he said he would pull out of Iraq if he won. What happened?" And Novak (finally) retires to spend more time with his family - on his Haliburton pension.

[EST]

30. Primer on Douche admin

1.Douche administration always lies
2.Novak is part of Douche admin
3.Novak always lies
4.Always translate admin remarks-opposite
5.Douche says does not suck big weenie
6.What do you think?

[AntiFascist]

33. If this is true.....

then it means that conservatives in the government are winning out over neo-cons, probably due to the ever increasing war deficit. This would mean that the neo-con PNAC policy in Iraq is a total failure and Bush has, effectively, WASTED hundreds of billions of dollars! Don't expect this fact to be brought to light anytime soon.

[K-W]

34. It would mean quite a bit more than that. It would signal a coup.

That for the first time since Reagan was elected president, the republican party had been significantly reformed to the point where they forced the president and administration to aquiesce.

It would be so improbable right before this election you might as well consider it impossible.

[AntiFascist]

37. I don't know....

I'm listening to Sen. Joe Biden on Chris Matthews' show, and he's on fire!!
:mad:

[K-W]

38. The entire point of going to Iraq was to get bases there.

A total pullout is impossible.

A partial pullout is a sham.

Sure, some conservatives are getting uncomfortable with Iraq, but others want to go right into Iran. I havent seen anything that would signal such a drastic change in policy in the administration or any significant loosening of thier control over the party. Bush is still doing too well in the polls for that. The idea that the administration is going to just say, "ah well, that didnt work" and just pull out of Iraq is rediculous.

I think the point of this is to make people less afraid of Bush, because he might pull out, and this way nobody associated with Bush has to say it. Novak is totally unaccountable for what he says.

[AntiFascist]

48. Either way....

people need to be made aware that Bush fails, regardless.

If he pulls out then his whole rhetorical argument is misguided: we are abandoning the Iraqi people and they are left with insurgents who are more disruptive and oppressive than they could ever have imagined under Saddam.

If he stays, then America can look forward to more military sacrifices, beheadings, a possible draft, and an ever-increasing Federal deficit that will eventually take its toll on the stock market, accelerating interest rates, .... oh and how has the value of the American dollar been doing?

Our only hope is for Kerry to rally the world to our side and save face by making Bush and his administration look very, very evil!

[The_Casual_Observer]

36. Right, and leave the oil and airbases behind??

Not too likely.

[wrate]

39. Let me guess...Military are exiting via Iran? n/t

[Media_Lies_Daily]

40. Nice try, Novak. By the way, Bobbie-boy...

...how's that Plame investigation going? Are you going to be able to stay out of prison, or is that why you've looked like hell for the last several months?

[GodHelpUsAll2]

44. Like father like son

[mzmolly]

45. My ass. They're planning to invade Falluja ect after the election

and a draft.

[Owlet]

46. This scenario....in their drea,ms

"The end product would be an imperfect Iraq, probably dominated by Shia Muslims seeking revenge over long oppression by the Sunni-controlled Baathist Party. The Kurds would remain in their current semi-autonomous state. Iraq would not be divided, reassuring neighboring countries -- especially Turkey -- that are apprehensive about ethnically divided nations."

The Sunni's didn't rule what's now Iraq in one form or another for the past 800 years by rolling over for anyone. I sure wouldn't bet against them in any civil war.

[cidliz2004]

47. THE ULTIMATE FLIP FLOP!

WHAT A JOKE

[kpete]

49. we are there for the long haul

I am new and go everywhere for info (even freeperland) where I got a story from www.americandigest.org. I do not know anything about them sounded pretty hawkish to me. Anyway, according to this article, we have no intention of leaving (20-30) years. We need bases there, and in Afghanistan in order to surround Iran. We cannot be in Saudi Arabia and Iraq gives us a perfect place for staging future attacks in the region. Also they claim Iraq is the only middle-eastern country with enough water. This sounds like a neo-con long term commitment to me but I have suspected that since they are not talking about it much, it is probably true.

[AntiFascist]

51. I agree....

and welcome to DU kpete! I've felt for a long time that the main purpose in being in Iraq was to setup the bases. I also can't stress strongly enough that in order to have any chance of success the next administration needs to distance itself from PNAC and from the name "Booosh" as far as possible.

[VOX]

53. "Stay the course," my ass! Oh, and Nixon had a plan to exit Vietnam in '69

Not. Same-old, same-old -- the right wing **always** promises the moon, then mires us deeper in the shit.

[Pallas180]

55. Why isnt Novak under arrest for treason? & why is he still on air

[Rhiannon12866]

58. Apparently, this is also Rumsfeld's exit strategy

"Any implication that that place has to be peaceful and perfect before we can reduce coalition and U.S. forces I think would obviously be unwise, because it's never been peaceful and perfect and it isn't likely to be. It's a tough part of the world. Our goal is to invest the time and the money and the effort to help them train up Iraqis to take over those responsibilities,' Rumsfeld said."

http://www.rferl.org/featuresarticle/2004/09/cd15156e-1a37-43c8-92eb-912f9f30abe9.html