Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
moon

Iraq

Recommended Posts

It is planned to allow elections in Iraq during the summer, after which , some say, coalition forces should leave and let them get on with it. Meanwhile, terrorists are targeting pro-western Iraqis, soft targets, in an effort to terrorise the general population into reverting to something akin to the deposed Ba'athist state. Having rescued the general Iraqi population from one tyranny should we leave Iraq in the summer and expose them to another ?

 

On Monday a US military spokesman, Brig Gen Mark Kimmitt, revealed that documents had been seized in Baghdad showing that al-Qaeda planned to target Shia Muslims in order to fan sectarian conflict.

 

"There is clearly a plan on the part of the outsiders to spark civil war, commit sectarian violence, try to expose fissures in society," he said.

Latest atrocity

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The West terrorised soft Iraqi targets in order to force the general population into reverting to something 'other' than the party then in power.

 

What difference does it really make? The ordinary Iraqi is just a football to be kicked by either us Westerners or their own countrymen. I say pull out and let them find their own watershed. No matter how hard the Ba'athists try, they will not manage to kill as many Iraqis as the so called liberators did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, the coalition should stay there until the Iraqi's have their own security set up. If they could get the Iraqi people to see that these terrorists don't want the Iraqi's to have any freedom of having their own representative government it might help the coalition get more support from the civilians.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No matter how hard the Ba'athists try, they will not manage to kill as many Iraqis as the so called liberators did.

:lol: They managed to kill 400,000 before we got there.

 

Reckon you've got it right , 'enry. Stand by for the economist response. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suppose sticking around so they can kill us rather then each other is a good idea, after they have to kill someone it may as well be our troops. :mrsgreen:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's the same problem I have with telling everyone else what to do. Most people aren't as smart as I am so they don't understand what is good for them No matter how I tell them, force them, threaten them. They just don't seem to smarten up. So do I just keep kickin their #%^*! or do I let them make their own mistakes and let others kick their #%^*!. Let me see. You know it's hard being so smart. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...or we could back off, allow them to get organised so they can kill our civilians instead. :mrsgreen:

Before we decided to bomb, and destroy their country, how many of our civilians did the Iraqi's kill? ;)

 

How many are being killed now? ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What difference does it make , as long as they are Moslem and we are Christian, there will be no peace or alliance . We were duped into this , now our president does not even believe his own intellegence (not meaning his own, he has none) . Moslem nations are not going to accept any part of us. THEY HATE US !!! So as long as they don't mess with us , let them do or kill whoever they wish . :censored: 'em . We had a general idea where Bin Laden was after 9/11 , all we had to do is drop one small nuclear bomb in that vicinity. If we got him good if not , simply tell the Moslem nations "look untill we get him we will continue this untill we do" I think we would have had him long ago. We don't need to be the world's peacekeepers or do we have the right to say what countries can have what weapons. We don't curtail Isreal . And we especialy do not need lied to by our government. Who died and made us world rulers anyway ?? Let them live their lives as they wish, just don't :censored: with us.

Edited by THE ROACH

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, ain't you the hard man. Are you just blowing off steam or would you really decimate a couple of million innocent people and a large chunk of the world's heritage and art treasures in some sort of blackmail gambit in order to locate one scumbag ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure got some wacko's around here. :lol:

 

 

We will be there for quite a while yet,, but I want the whole thing turned over to the native population as soon as feasable. maybe a year?? two more likely. ;) v

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Call it what you like, I'm against war with a nation that did nothing to us . And as far as getting the one responsible for 9/11 , I said "a small nuclear device" as apposed to bombing the he!! out of a whole nation , including innocent people. Whty do you think the world hates us . Travel overseas once and open your mouth, as soon as they recognize where your from , your like the plauge. One small bomb as opposed to killing thousands of women , children and people who have nothing to do with 9/11 , seems a better deal than what we are doing now. Which is grooming the next generation of terrorist, like we did fourteen years ago . Check the age of the terrorist ? Better to let them govern themselves, it's their country not ours ! What gives us this right ? Or is it all about the oil? That's what they think . When Bush gave his SOU speech they asked the Iraqis what they thought ,most responded " I don't know , we still have no electricity " or "I wish you would just take our oil and leave " More than 3,300 women and children were killed or injured in Iraq. What was the toll for 9/11?????

And there were NO Iraqis on those planes. How did we go from getting Bin Laden to getting Iraq? It make no sense at all !! It's not even rational . So yeh , if we'd dropped one SMALL bomb, we would have had him , they would have given him to us . And if we would have done it immediatly after 9/11, the world would have been behind us. My God , even Canada isn't with us . What give us the right ???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok , Wacko ? that's fine . One of my best freind's son is in Baghdad , you should see the anguish in his eyes . And what's bad is thst his son tells him that no one over there knows why they are there . They have reservist that have no training for what they are doing , the suicide rate is higher / ratio than any other conflict we've been in. Two more years ?? great that's another 1,060 American lives , if nothing escalates that is . The least thing we could do is answer a soldier's & father's question of WHY . So yeah, V , I guess I am a WACKO , thank you. :mrsgreen:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Funny ....watching the history channel tonight when the( under Carter) US nearly launched against the USSR (5 min from pressing the button) after a training programme computer tape was loaded into the NORAD mainframe by mistake ...It plotted a massive strike against the USA from the Russian silo's

 

Buttons were pressed ,Nuclear B52's armed and took off..........Ballistic subs raced to launch position....... Then somebody decided to see if anything blew up before total commitment ......

 

Then the Russians were deliberately stoked up while a test deployment of Nuclear Pershing missiles in Germany was taking place.......

 

Judging by the state of US intel 2 decades later ....just who should the world be worried about

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The OIL situation may be eased as Gaddafi's has now become everyone's butty boy .....He needs the dollar ..US needs the oil .......Blair to make a visit to Libya , to show what the new shiny whiter than white reformed enlightened "elder states man" Gaddafi's has become...... (Italy's prem already been but he loves the camera even more than B'liar )

 

All sins forgotten..IRA weapon support, Lockerby, terrorist training camps ,plus on Gaddafi's side the murder of his nice and some other members of his family , by a failed attempted assassination by Reagan

 

this has been touted as a spin off from Iraq .........but in actuality it has come about because the US has removed the "diplomatic" pressure to allow this ....

 

It may also enable a limited withdrawal from Iraq......

 

But my bet is ...not from the north ...stating that the Kurds still need support ...(but the US still needs an airbase)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Before we went to war in Iraq I said that we should wait for international support. That was not an option after Bush alienated every conceivable Allie. He was working on alienating Britain (saying we didn't need them) when the war started & Britain was in theater.

 

I expressed he following concerns- That we could not spend the years occupying the country that would be required to establish a viable govt., a concern that Iran would try to take advantage and exploit the turmoil to implement a radical Muslim theocracy, concern that Turkey would would try to exploit the turmoil to preemptively deal with "the Kurdish problem". Fortunately some of this has not come to pass.

 

What has come to pass is that we are in a country that is in turmoil, that requires more financial support than was predicted, that has less infrastructure than was expected, that does not appear to have the WMDs that we went to war to neutralize, that has on going terrorist attacks that are more common and deadly than Israel is experiencing (I think the current record holder), that has foreign agitators attacking Americans and trying to start civil war against various indigenous peoples, a goal of turning over the country to Iraqis in 4 months which is generally regarded as politically motivated and untenable for a stable democracy, a prominent religious leader pressuring for open elections with a goal of establishing a theocracy.

 

I think that leaving now will result in a worse situation than we had with Saddam in control but contained. Leaving now will probably result in a radical Muslim theocracy killing Iraqi citizens just as the Tallibahn did in Afghanistan and the Muslim Clerics did/do in Iran. In addition such a govt. could cause the Kurds to try and form their on country, which, I think, Turkey is already on record as saying will be unacceptable. Of course another Radical Muslim Theocracy will provide yet another haven (with oil) to support radical Muslim groups.

 

If we stay there is no reason to think that the frequency of attacks will decrease and if the current rate of deaths among the military and civilian Iraqi population we have lost this occupation. There are people, probably many in Iraq that want us there. Unfortunately there are also a lot of people that do not want us there. They are violent and are likely to continue to move sentiment away from the US. This is not ideological it is simply a desire to be able to live.

 

I guess we are between a rock and a hard place. In retrospect the Bush goal of transforming the middle east may succeed but presumably in the opposite of the desired.

 

I see no good option and no good outcome from our occupation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The United States had the right to go into Afghanistan and clear them of terrorists. The United Nations regulations clearly states that when a country is attacked on their soil they are able to counter-attack. Afghanistan was a very acceptable war that was and should have been sponsored by the rest of the world.

 

Iraq on the other hand was totally unprovoked and totally unacceptable. Bush had made it seem as if Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden were somehow connected and that they had carried out the attacks mutually. He was playing on the fear of Americans, this policy is further known as the Bush Doctorine, taking a proactive response to possible threats. In the previous years with the Truman doctorine they had a containment policy where they still took a proactive approach with the enemy but rather then blowing the hell out of them they would prevent exposure to that culture and contain them.

 

The United States has no choice now, they have to remain in Iraq just as long as it takes to establish a government and then they need to get the hell out of there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Iraq on the other hand was totally unprovoked and totally unacceptable.  Bush had made it seem as if Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden were somehow connected and that they had carried out the attacks mutually.

hmmm with the amount of resolutions he didnt follow regardless of anything else an attack was justified...it was justified the first time they targeted a plane in the no-fly zone it was justified when he threw out the inspectors the first time.

 

and people keep saying that about Bush Saddam and Osama yet ive never heard such a thing...people connect their own dots sometimes which I tend to think is what happens here. All ive ever heard was Saddam supports terrorist groups..which he did. I wont disagree that AlQ may have been mentioned at various times in the same speach but I never really heard him say "Saddam and Osama are buddies and they blew up wtc together"

 

I dont wish for occupation but if we leave too early Iraq will become just like afganistan in which we were blamed for abandoning it. Iraq is the line in the sand...if we can succeed the terrorist networks around the world will be seriously hampered...but if we fail... :mrsgreen:

Edited by one2gamble

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the un obviously wasn't going to enforce their own resolutions.  :rolleyes:

Are we now the enforcers of all UN resolutions? Or just selective ones? ;)

 

If we are the new enforcers of all UN resolutions we have allot of countries to start bombing, starting with some of the biggest offenders which of course are some of our strongest allies. Isreal for one has violated a whole slew of UN resolutions, why aren't we dropping bombs on them?

 

To attack another country on that basis alone, and let others continue to violate resolutions is nothing more then the biggest form of hypocracy, and self serving bull #%^*! !

 

Editted for language

Edited by Countrydave55

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We will be there for quite a while yet,, but I want the whole thing turned over to the native population as soon as feasable. maybe a year?? two more likely

At the rate things are going, you'll have a couple thousand dead soldiers by then. If it was someone from my family going there, I'd be saying #%^*! that.

 

You Americans know a thing or two about popular revolution to break away from a controlling government. If the population isn't willing to stand up, then your lads better duck.

 

It breaks my heart to see your young people dying.

 

Editted for language

Edited by Countrydave55

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...