What else has to happen in Iraq before the USA finally give control to back to the Iraq people?
I don't want to here vague things like Iraq had to be able to stand on its own.
What specifically does it mean for them to stand on their own?
Does it mean 100,000 Iraq men in the Iraq military?
Does it mean 50,000 Iraq men in the police force?
Does it mean certain areas have to be 100% secure?
Does it mean ALL terrorists have to be forced out of Iraq?

Everyone agrees that the war on terrorism is a global issue.
Does the USA really think that they can remove all the terrorists out of Iraq?
The USA Military is not just fighting Terrorists in Iraq that have come from other countries.
They are also fighting Iraq men that want the USA out of their country

I want to start a new discussion that deals with the present and future on this war in Iraq and the War on Terrorism.
I want pro war advocates to tell us specifically what has to happen before the USA pulls out.

I want those opposed to the war to tell us of a specific pull out plan.
Do the USA soldiers simply pull out on a certain date?
What still has to happen specifically before the Iraq people can have their country back without USA controlling certain parts?

Where does the war on terrorism go next?
Afghanistan war on terrorism is still not finished? Does the US forces re-deploy there?
Does the USA go and liberate another dictators country that is threatening the US?
If so, what country and why?
We have debated what Saddam had and didn't have to no conclusions.
What does Iran have right now that would justify invading than country?
What about North Korea?
I would like to debate current situations and specific details on the situations on these topics.

Uhh......FAR too many subjects in there. You gotta break it down, start a specific thread with a specific question or two and then a Link to help start off the discussion. Better still----there are already threads on many of these issues that you can join.

You might as well have said...."Let's discuss the entire world in this thread."

__________________
"This is a time for a national imperative not to fail in Iraq." Condoleeza Rice, January 11, 2007

Ok. ignore the questions on the war on terrorism.
What about specifically in Iraq.
Other thread are discussing bush's lies in the past.
I want to know what specifically has to still happen in Iraq for the USA to give control back to the Iraq people.

No, I think that Bush said the goal was to take over Baghdad where the Shiite insurgents are in control. Also some province where al-Qaeda has control (too lazy to look it up).

Most people in the administration have said we should start to see tangible results in a few months. That is the time when the Iraqi army must say to themselves, "I'm going to kill ALL the bad guys, not just the ones who are a different sect of religion than I am."

Actually, it seems like a fair short term goal. If THIS doesn't work, then nothing will in Iraq. If this works, then the strategy can focus on the long term, with perhaps support from a majority of American people. It is a good test.

My guess is the insurgents will temporarily move out of Baghdad and don't give anybody a clean shot. The Iraqi Army will not have to prove itself, because the Bad Guys are on vacation for a couple months. I suspect they will move elsewhere and continue to blow up a few dozen people a day. I haven't got a clue what Bush will do then. At some point the American soldiers are going to get really, really tired.

__________________
Hobo
Charter member of 'Republicans Who Hate Bush" Club

Question: are not these Shiites actually Iraq people born in that country?

Take Control of Baghdad?
In two years, they have not been able to secure a few acres of "Green Zone." now they want to take the whole city? And a whole province?

Is this really the plan before USA military pulls out?

You want to know specifically what has to happen to return control of Iraq to the Iraqi people.

That would be to wait 2 years for Bush to end his presidency.

Bush does not want the failure to end up on his watch. So he will spend blood and money to supress the civil war in Iraq until he is gone from office. That way his legacy will not be the pictures of the helcopters leaving from the roof of the embassy to use a vietnam analogy.

Especially considering that Bush has claimed there are "benchmarks" that the Iraqi government needs to make, but has failed to define what they are. The solution in Iraq needs to be solved by Iraqis. There needs to be negotiation and resolution to outstanding issues that are plaqueing the country. For instance, the distribution of oil wealth needs to be defined, so that the sunni areas feel they will benefit for a properous future. The security of various areas needs to be trusted, even if that means sunni police sunni areas and shiite police shiite areas. This very well may mean revising the constitution to allow more independent states. Then there is the basic fact that the presence of the US is disrupting in many ways. I personally think that the US needs to leave before the country can stabilize to begin with. There will certainly be some factions that want a democracy to fail and a radical Islamic government to take over. Even after our departure, there factions will still revolt against the central government. If the majority of the people and the central government can then contain this revolt, the establishment of the new government will be complete and the reasons for much of the violence will stop. But the government needs to resolve the issues that are preventing it from being as widely supported as it should be.