Deseret News | Reader comments: Iraq exit splits Utahns

Reader comments
Iraq exit splits Utahns

Bob | 4:05 a.m. Oct. 13, 2007

Let's look at he issue from the soldiers' perspective. The longer he/she spends on the gound in Iraq, the more his or her chances of getting a bullet, so the faster we exit, the more troops come home alive and/or uninjured. We can save additional lives by exiting sooner rather than later this war based on Bush's lies. People debated an exit strategy during the Vietnam War and wanted additional time. Well, the U.S. spent additional time trying to figure out how to leave "gracefully"(AKA "peace with honor") and instead left with it's tail between it's legs as it's helicopters had to land on the roof of the U.S. embassy as Vietnamese mothers tried to pass their babies off to U.S. soldiers through it's gates. The two incompetent draft dodgers sitting in the White House should never have been trusted to successfully prosecute this war. They have failed us and our brave men and women who serve in the military. It is time to move on.

John | 7:10 a.m. Oct. 13, 2007

This poll is akin to asking "Would you like to increase your income in the next year?"
Most people would agree. But, if you asked "Will you take a second job next year?" most would say no.

Pollsters are clever and can produce whatever results they desire, as in this case.

Many Americans are ill-informed about world news, and few bother to think about the strategic implications of American actions. Also, most ignore thte fact that we are in a war, not of our choosing, but as a result of Islamic attacks on western civilization. "Convert of die" presents a dilemma quite different from "How soon can we leave Iraq".

Meanwhile, back to "American Idol" and similar trite stuff that appeals to more people than national security.

Anonymous | 7:13 a.m. Oct. 13, 2007

"Utah has been Bush's last stand"

Its funny how Utahns are so preoccupied with their perception outside of the state, yet they are the last people to realize Bush's inadequacies, and they speak with pride about being the reddest state of them all. Well there's no one left in this country (outisde of UT) that still supports this president or this war, so needless to say we are not impressed with you.

Comments continue below

Polls leave out important questi | 7:22 a.m. Oct. 13, 2007

The question left out of this poll is "Do you really know anything about the issues you're being asked to comment on?" and if people were honest they'd almost always have no answer "No."

Adam McMillen | 7:32 a.m. Oct. 13, 2007

I am still wondering why we are even in Iraq or Afganistan? Of course, I do not discount the men and women who have given their lives for this great country, but I sincerely wonder why we are in Iraq or Afganistan. Somebody please inform as to why we are there and sacrificing so much in lives and money.

Frederick of Logan | 9:13 a.m. Oct. 13, 2007

My g.g.g.g. grandfather fought in the Revolutionary War. My g.g.g. uncle fought is the Civil War. My g.g.g. William Hyde marched with the Mormon battalion. My father and numerous relatives fought in WW2 with several who never came home. Those wars were different.We had the right reasons for fighting. We didn't have the right reason for going into Iraq and we will not have the right reason for leaving Iraq because the insurgents have every reason to continue the fight. Iran and other Muslin nations will never end their determination to defeat us. It will go on and on and on never ending in victory I am sorry to say.

Cliff | 10:10 a.m. Oct. 13, 2007

I guess this means that a whole bunch of Utahns weren't paying attention when the rest of us were begging them to listen to the experts and military leaders instead of the right-wing family values fear-mongers screaming about Taliban roaming the streets of Bountiful.

I guess Rocky was right and Chris Cannon was wrong. Wrong for America and wrong for Utah.

I dare you to publish this.

Earl | 10:35 a.m. Oct. 13, 2007

John, you lost all credibility when you called the war in Iraq "not of our choosing." Even the administration called it a war of choice. Are you the only one left who doesn't get it?

Northern Utah County Resident | 10:44 a.m. Oct. 13, 2007

Folks who don't realize why we are in the Middle East of anyplace around the world are clueless. We are fighting aggressive tyrannical despots. We have basically never finished any worldwide conflict in the past because of spineless politicians, who wouldn't let the field generals finish past wars, particularly the Second World War. MacArthur and Patton would have shaken hands somewhere is Siberia if they would have been allowed to take care of the business they would been able to do. There would have been no communist Russia or China. This would have saved countless millions of lives of citizens of both of these countries. As to the current circumstances, we fight wars with the filter of politicians hamstringing what would be quicker and better results, if the generals were given the green light to proceed with the business of finishing wars with the fewest American casualties. The results are evident around the world when the politicians do it their way. We are still deployed in places around the world to police the peace because of this practice, rather than wiping out these despots quickly. Attila the Hun had it right about his way of doing it.

John's right | 10:52 a.m. Oct. 13, 2007

John has it right. Islamofaciasm is at war with the west. We are not Sweden, we are the west. There is no clear way out. We did not choose this war, the faciasts did when they committed the atrocity on 911 and before that by hitting us several times. It just happens that Israel is also in their sights. Read Joel 3 and Zecharia 13 & 14. It's the last days folks, whether we like it of not. Running from the enemy will not help. There is no place to hide. Billary, whether we like it or not, if elected Presidenta will have to keep us in Iraq. There is no other choice left for those who care about keeping us, and the rest of the west safe from the Islamofaciasts and the Russians who support them. They are headed toward owning the worlds oil supplies. We have got to open our eyes and learn this. Do you really want that to happen folks?????

Susan | 11:51 a.m. Oct. 13, 2007

I am still not sure why we are there. The reasons that have been given have been changed so many times. If we were to listen to the news in 2001 we would be surprised at the reasons they gave. I don't believe a word that they say anymore and I want to go on record that I was never for this war. It is against all principle. I hope every one in Utah will finally wake up and see what is happening. Bring our troops home today and fixing our own house before we try fixing someone elses.

AZ | 12:02 p.m. Oct. 13, 2007

Well young people.... your parent's failed this country with Vietnam and now you will failed too if you do not take a stand Do you see?

MFM of Utah County | 12:07 p.m. Oct. 13, 2007

To all lilly livers, weak knees, liberals, Harry Reed, Hilary Clinton, et al:

We are in Iraq/Afganistan, and all the other places around the world to protect the interests of the United States of America and our allies. Yes, and part of it reasonable market price and stability/availabilty of petroleum products. One the basic reasons we are in the mess we are in today is because of the lack of backbone of our politicians. Cleaning up this nations' borders is a big part of it. We have an elitist political group who need to come together, or we are going to see more difficulties as we go forward. Had Patton and MacArthur been given the green light to finish WWII, they would have met somewhere in Siberia. There would have been no Soviet Union or Communist China, Korean/Vietnam conflits, and more than likley, no world-wide deployments of U.S. and allied troops. Electing liberals is a huge part of the problem. I am optimistic we can salvage the Iraq/Afganistan conflicts if we stay the course. We can't give up. I don't want to see nukes on our shores. Buck up!

Tew | 12:28 p.m. Oct. 13, 2007

Former BYU physicist Steven Jones blames the Bush administration's "false flag" of 9/11 for allowing the Twin Towers to be attacked. His research suggests either ineptitude, criminal neglect or collusion.

AdjustableSpanner | 12:33 p.m. Oct. 13, 2007

If we were fighting 'aggressive tyrannical despots' we'd be invading Washington DC.

Bruce Van Orden | 1:36 p.m. Oct. 13, 2007

I suggest that my fellow LDS who still support Bush's war to study thoroughly Alma 43 and D&C 98.

"Renounce war and proclaim peace." We should have followed that admonition in 2002 and 2003.

Ted | 1:52 p.m. Oct. 13, 2007

Anonymous: It's easy. The predominamt religion in Utah encourages cookie cutter folks and discourages serious thinking......follow the leader and ask no questions. I think that's the answer in a nut shell.

What will Rush call his soldier? | 2:48 p.m. Oct. 13, 2007

Retired Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez, coalition commander in 2003 and 2004, called the Iraq war "a nightmare with no end in sight," for which he said the Bush administration, the State Department and Congress all share blame.

Sanchez told a group of military reporters in Arlington, Virginia, on Friday that such dereliction of duty by a military officer would mean immediate dismissal or court martial, but the politicians have not been held accountable.

He said the Iraq war plan from the start was "catastrophically flawed, unrealistically optimistic," and the administration has not provided the resources necessary for victory, which he said the military could never achieve on its own.

Senior Citizen | 2:49 p.m. Oct. 13, 2007

It is a tragedy that self-serving rhetoric has replaced impartial and fair-minded political discourse in our society. Driving American citizens apart at a time of national peril from within and without is the surest way for aspiring despots to succeed, whoever they may be. And, who they are may shock and surprise us. It behooves us to keep our eyes, ears, and minds open to the prevailing political winds. I'm not sure I want to go the direction they are blowing.

aver | 2:50 p.m. Oct. 13, 2007

Ted:

President Hinckley encouraged all LDS members to support this war at the start, suggesting that it was a just war, and that we should trust Bush and national leaders as they had more intelligence on the matter. Since then, however, all of the blatant Bush lies that led us into the war have been debunked, and it is telling that President Hinckley has remained completely silent on the subject, indicating that even he had been misled by the subterfuge and now via silence acknowledges the obvious fact that this indeed has been a very unjust war (afterall no one in Iraq posed any threat to the US, and in fact the 911 hyjackers mostly came from Saudi Arabia).

Simi Valley | 6:24 p.m. Oct. 13, 2007

The results of the story are significant although the survey pool was rather small. Coming from perhaps the reddest state in the union, 41 per cent calling for a withdrawal of troops from Iraq within a year is a momentous shift when the nationwide value is more than 1 1/2 times that.

Unfortunately, the end will come later than sooner. The current administration is lobbying for time so that they can exit Washington, D.C. and leave the mess for the next administration (which will most likely be Democratic). Then they will try to blame them for leaving "before the job is done."

What a crock! Only true-believers, as indicated by the 7 per cent of the survey who didn't want to leave under any circumstance, will remain in a state of denial and prefer to stand against the will of the American people. It is courageous that Utahans are coming forward to recognize this mess for what it really is.

The threat by Martians landing in our back yard is greater than that posed by Islamic terrorists launching a full-scale assault on Salt Lake City, even if they bring their own boats to paddle across the Atlantic Ocean.

Keith R. Wood | 8:46 p.m. Oct. 13, 2007

What an IDIOTIC poll. You might as well ask Iraqis if the Legacy Highway is really necessary.

The only people around who can answer the question of whether our troops should be pulled out are OUR TROOPS who have been there. The rest of us (myself included) can only run on the information that we get, and too much of it is filtered through the political arena, either by the government or by the media.

Mark B | 9:53 p.m. Oct. 13, 2007

Well, Mr. Wood and others, it looks as though that day has arrived. The man who ran the whole Iraq operation for awhile ("on the ground", as the president likes to say) declared yesterday that it was fowled up from the start and that there is no end in sight. This presents a new opportunity for some of you true believers in the Bush cause. Americans now favor redeploying by 2-1, our allies are waving goodbye, the supply of soldiers is near exhaustion, and Iraqis themselves (to whom we supposedly brought democracy) now favor us leaving by at least 3-1. You have every right to think you've been lied to a dozen ways. Isn't it time to re-think this whole business? Sure, we'll always have "enemies", and some of those writing here (especially from Utah Co.) will never be happy until the last US opponent has drawn his last breath, but I just don't think that we can kill everyone since the world has a billion Muslims, some of whom are your peaceful neighbors. So whadya say? Can we give peace a (little) chance? If they attack us, we can still respond.

East Mill Creek | 10:35 p.m. Oct. 13, 2007

Perhaps you can understand the frustration of those of us who were against the war in the Iraq from the beginning. We really got tired of being shouted down and accoused of being unpatriotic.

Myself I would really like the "cheer leaders" from the war both politicall, journalistic and broadcast talent to be held accountable someway.

I find it difficult to believe that the constant flow of lies were coincidence.

How many uneducated still believe that Iraq had something to do with 9/11? How did this myth become acceptable thinking for the uneducated?

Could it be that some groups wanted Iraq taken out of the middle east equation?

Some one had to take the time and effort to forge those papers about Iraq's trying to purchase Uranium in Niger. Why would some one do it?

They wanted to waltz us into the war.

The silence of the conservatives about the financing of the war in Iraq is indeed telling.

I'm glad Utah is finally coming to its senses.
I was loosing respect for their intellect.

Bliss Tew | 10:40 a.m. Oct. 14, 2007

In 1990 I oppose the first Gulf War. In 2002, I opposed the war as George W. Bush intended to enforce United Nations resolutions. That was what he told the UN on Sept. 12, 2002. Iraq possed no threat to us. They had not participated in the 9/11/01 terror attacks. They had no navy or intercontinental air force with which to take on the USA. I'm not a democrat, but believe in the Constitution as the standard Presidents and Congress must obey. They haven't obeyed the Constitution with either of these UN enforcement wars. The first Bush said his war on Iraq was to build a new world order. That Internationlism lead to interventionism without true, defensive, moral justification. Utah Republicans blindly followed the party instead of the Constitution. So did Democrats who supported these two linked wars.

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.