Home > Bush refuses to withdraw troops from Iraq
Wars and conflicts International Governments USA
WASHINGTON, The refusal of Bush to withdraw troops
from Iraq, in spite of the pain of families who have lost their sons
in the war is today highlighted by U.S. media.
Confronting the increased casualties and a fall of support for the
war, Bush said that it was too soon to talk of withdrawal, The New
York Times reported.
CNN for its part, reported Friday after an analysis of the situation
that the Iraqi crisis is weighing heavily in the minds of United
States citizens regarding the 2006 elections and is becoming a serious
concern for Republicans.
The meeting the president held with his national security team in
Crawford, Texas, is proof that the subject of Iraq predominates over
other issues in the country.
This time, near the ranch where the president relaxes, there is a
mother from California who lost her son in Iraq standing guard on the
premises and refusing to move until he receives her.
Cindy Sheehan, the mother, today is considered a joining force of a
broad national movement of those opposed to Washington’s insistence
on maintaining its troops in the Persian Gulf nation.
The day before, about fifty people joined Sheehan, set up tents in
the neighboring area of Bush’s ranch and placed signs with antiwar
slogans.
Although surveys strongly support withdrawal, "that would be a
serious mistake for the security of this nation and its capacity
to set the bases for long term peace", Bush claims.
The president categorically denied rumors about a prompt and gradual
withdrawal of troops for the coming spring before the half term
elections of 2006 in the United States.
This Friday, USA Today printed a broad analysis of the number of
deaths reported the previous month in the National Guard and Iraqi
Reserve.
During the first 10 days of August 32 soldiers died, more than any
other month since the beginning of aggression in 2003.
Also, the rush to complete a new constitution and the growing
harassment against the occupying troops in Iraq, heating up the
vacations of President Bush in Texas. (PL)
A CubaNews translation by Ana Portela
Edited by Walter Lippmann
Forum posts
16 August 2005, 04:01
My name is Norman Morein. I saw combat in WWII, was wounded in action, awarded the Combat Infantry Badge, the Purple Heart, and the Bronze Star with an Oakleaf Cluster. I saw many young men, comrades of mine killed and so many more severely wounded. None of that I realize qualifies me as an expert on today’s geopolitical problems but does I think, lend a little weight to my opinions regarding this crucial question.
We ought to remember the horrendous number of casualties Americans throughout history have been willing to endure when called to some cause most thought right and worthy. One casualty, this woman’s son, is no less precious than the hundreds of thousands that came before him. He should be enshrined in the national memory along with the hosts who preceded him.
But her concern, and the blatant exploitation of it by the media and others hostile to the administration’s leadership is no reason for this reelected (during this present war) president to deviate now from his purpose.
I say this as one who twice did not vote for this beleagered man. But we the majority of us did place him in command knowing his purpose and the reasons for it. I deeply believe we should assure him in every possible way of our support. We should not cut and run because of the exploitation by an irresponsible faction in the national media of the number of casualties sustained thus far. No one enjoys the prospect of further casualties. But we ought to assure the president we will endure them as Americans always have throughout all our historical trials.
16 August 2005, 07:29
So what you are saying is, that we should continue to support a man, whose documentated lies are raining down on us like cat, dogs, and pet goats.
The fact that he continues to do so about conditions in Iraq, and said he has never made a mistake, in his life is the person we should trust.?
I commend you for your gallant WW 2 service.
My father won a lot of metals as well in WW 2 before he was killed within weeks of finally victory. I have no problem about the necessity of fighting war WW 2.
But there is one thing I promised myself and that was to subject rhetoric to reality, especially when it came to going to war.
The present reality in Iraq cannot be sustained by rhetoric , and "cut and run" doesn’t cut it when you check out how and why we went to Iraq.
I and a majority of others are now finally observing the reality GWB sees. That reality bears little resemblance to the known facts.
Again thank you for fighting in WW2 otherwise we may not be having this chat.
This nonsense about fighting (them? ) "over there, so we don’t have to be fighting them here" is to absurd to comment on..but it has a kind of a heroic ring to it......as you know Iraq had nothing to do 911...why are we not finishing the task in Afghanistan...that where our problem came from.
16 August 2005, 21:49
Norman, you sound [and your expressed thinking is] so White.
You can honor Bush as much as you want, but tell me, what of your God?
Think before you try to answer.
Your worship of Bush [as the end of your myopic focus] should alert you to your shortcomings.
You and people like you are a major reason that America has waged war so frequently in her short history. But by all means, let Bush think for you and right or wrong you go on supporting him.
By your own admission you have already played your part in taking someone else’s life. I wish you live to the age of 140 — perhaps, then you will have had time to see, think and distill what you have seen of the world until now.