A US soldier of 3rd Battalion, 320th Field Artillery Regiment, looks toward Iraqi soldiers pushing forward during a joint patrol in a market area in Mahmudiyah. Click the Play Button to see what Jack and out viewers had to say. (PHOTO CREDIT: GETTY IMAGES)
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
A new report out today from the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction.
The Iraqi government is keeping thousands of dead, injured and missing soldiers and policemen on the payroll. Let me just run that past you again. The Iraqi government is using your money to pay thousands of dead, injured and missing soldiers and policemen as a way of compensating or caring for their families. This completely outrageous news comes from a report by the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction. It also says Iraqis have a shortage of officers and still rely on coalition forces for substantial logistical support.
The Iraqi army was supposed to be able to stand on its own two years ago. We're now being told they might get around to it by September of 2009.
This program to train Iraqi soldiers - and continue to pay the dead and missing ones - is costing American taxpayers $20 billion dollars. The report comes as Congress prepares to take up President Bush's request for another 108 billion dollars for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
And the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff today is accusing Iran of increasing arms and training support to insurgents in Iraq.
These news items were not known when a new USA-Today Gallup Poll was taken that shows sixty three percent of Americans say that the United States made a mistake in sending troops to Iraq. That's the highest "mistake" percentage Gallup has ever measured for an active war involving the United States.
Only Sixty-one percent of Americans in May 1971 said the Vietnam War was a mistake.
Here’s my question to you: Are the presidential candidates going to have to spend more time talking about Iraq?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
Praetorian from Ft. Myers writes:
The last thing that Clinton and Obama want to talk about is Iraq. As Commander-in-Chief, their stance will have to be much different than on the campaign trail and they don't want to make any promises to the liberal audience that as president he or she will not be able to keep. They're very happy letting Mr. Bush take all the heat.
Courtney from South Windsor, Connecticut writes:
Of course! Many of the current issues facing our nation can be in some way associated with the debacle in Iraq. But the candidates alone are not to blame, the press have started to gloss over the horrific events taking place there. Agenda setting does take place in the media and I'm baffled at how moronic debate questions have usurped the importance of American lives overseas.
Ralph from New York writes:
Only in terms of bringing our troops home, spending no more money there, and showing the Iraqi government we will not be handling their responsibilities.
If we were getting facts from all angles, like this story, we would remain interested in the details of the Iraq war and would not reach brain freeze when the topic comes up. Sadly, it is human nature to lose interest in a problem the more it is in the press.
Rosalynd from Florida writes:
1.Presumptive Nominee Obama would be happy to discuss Iraq.
2.Loser Clinton wants to whine about more debates and loses on the issue of Iraq with her vote for war
3.McCain would surely want to skip this discussion since he and Bush are tied at the hip on the issue.