When the U.S. abandoned Vietnam because of the lies of people like John Kerry I believed those lies and thought them the truth. It took the Swift Boat Veterans to reveal the truth. Our soldiers were not eating dead burnt babies. They were attempting to protect the South Vietnamese from the ungodly murderers of the Chinese supplied North Vietnam.

When we left Vietnam is when the real atrocities were commited by the south's 'brothers' from the north. MILLIONS WERE MURDERED as a result of the U.S. leaving and the U.S. left because the war then was micromanaged by Congress just as our current Congress is trying to micromanage our current war.

Let the generals run the war. YOU know nothing about how to run a war. YOU have never studied warfare or you would not have voted the way you did.

The same thing as happened in Vietnam WILL happen if the U.S. pulls out of Iraq too soon. Millions will be murdered and TERRORISTS WILL GET CONTROL OF IRAQI OILFIELDS!!!

You may disagree with how we got there and why we are there but you cannot disagree with the fact that if we pull out now it will be a repeat of Vietnam and Cambodia.

Countries surrounding Iraq (read Iran and Syria) will fill the void the U.S. leaves with violence that pales in comparison to what they have now. Those who befriended the U.S. will be the first to lose their lives. - Their blood will be on your hands! -

Your vote was an error and hopefully those in your district will rectify the matter next time your name is on a ballot.

Welcome Cogressman Johnson! Glad to see you posting here at GWH. Thanks also for your reasonable post. Although I disagree with you on the issue, I'm still glad that you took the time to write. Don't be a stranger.

Warner and timothy-

Iran has benefitted by supporting terrorists in Lebanon and Israel by appearing to be pro-Arab and being anti-Semite. Iran has been insulated from the instability by geography. Iraq is fundamentally different. It is right on Iran's border. It shares vital geography in the Persian Gulf and a very prosperous and exceedingly confident Kurdish minority.

If Iraq's instability leads to conflict in the Gulf or pro-separatist feelings within the Kurdish communities, then Iran loses. Or if Al-Qaeda gains a foothold in Iraq, Iran would also lose since they are apostate Shia and not proper Sunni Muslims.

Iran will help establish a satellite state within Iraq, undoubtedly. However, that isn't the fault of the withdrawal. It if the fault of history, colonialism, and a poorly thought out invasion.

As per timothy's concerns....how is that different than what we have today? Constant terror and attacks on US troops is the norm. Saying that terror and attacks will happen if we leave is really not looking at what is happening now.

prying1-

I believe this is the 3rd time I've asked for you to back up your statements. That is the general ground rules at GWH. When you make assertions, you need to back them up with facts (links preferably). If we wanted the standard partisan talking points, we'd stick to our own partisan websites.

I've dealt with the issue of why Iran doesn't want instability on its border. It is very different than instability in Israel or Lebanon.

I am familiar with President Ahmadinejad's statements and they are certainly concerning. However, he is only a figurehead. The real power in Iran rests with the Ayatollah and the Grand Council. They haven't expressed any interest in expanding their borders.

Unless you believe we are fighting a proxy war with Iran in Iraq, the question is...does being in Iraq make us better or worse prepared for dealing with Iran? I would argue that it makes it worse. We are tied down and unable to truly offer a military option when threatening Iran over their nuclear weapons. A withdrawal would free up 100,000 soldiers to stiffen any threat over the use of force.

As far as your claim "Anyplace you find a war on this planet there are extremist Muslums murdering innocents." - you are totally wrong.

According to GlobalSecurity.org, there are 14 major conflicts (wars) going on in the world today. Only 5 of them involve Muslims (2 of which are the Afghanistan and Iraq wars). Muslims aren't out to kill me and my family. A small few might want to, but they are a small, small percentage of the Muslim population. Just like skinheads are a small percentage of the American population.

Expat,

The Iranian government acquires power from instability on its borders. The Iranian government needs fear to sustain itself and instability is useful to that end. (I can’t wait for the comparisons to the Bush administration!).

Iran has a border dispute with many of its neighbors (e.g., Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Turkmenistan, and Azerbaijan). It is hardly isolated from instability. I mean Expat, just look at the map. How many stable, friendly governments border Iran? Your “insulated from instability by geography” statement is nonsense. And to the extent that you mean only the Arab-Israeli conflict, your statement is irrelevant.

You say “If Iraq's instability leads to conflict in the Gulf or pro-separatist feelings within the Kurdish communities, then Iran loses.” And, then you say “Iran will help establish a satellite state within Iraq, undoubtedly.”

There are already pro-separatists feelings within the Kurdish communities. And, remarkably, you seem to be arguing that if instability in Iraq continues or increases after our surrender, Iran will step in to avoid “losing” by allowing Kurdish separatist inclinations to gain traction. How exactly will the Kurdish desire for complete autonomy be mitigated by Iranian attempts to establish Iraq as a satellite state?!? Unbelievable.

But the Kurds are not likely to be alone in opposing Iranian intervention. The Sunnis and I suspect the majority of Shias in Iraq are not going to roll over either. Also, I doubt that Syria will turn a blind eye to the creation of an Iranian satellite state on its border.

Expat, quite the contrary is more likely to be true. Increased turmoil and instability in Iraq benefits Iran. And increased turmoil and instability is exactly what Rep. Johnson and others would give them.