allthumbs Posted September 7, 2003 Posted September 7, 2003 Question: For those who oppose and are criticizing how the cleaning up/securing of Iraq is going now (much like those who disagreed and criticized how the war was going after 1 or 2 weeks), what would you suggest? What is the military doing wrong? How would you change it? Would you have just won the strategic part of the war (which took 3 weeks, it was no quagmire as suggested by critics after 1 or 2 weeks) and then left the country? In what better way would you operate in a country with remnants of the enemy along with 100,000 newly released criminals abounding? My Thought: We should never have allowed ourselves the possibility of getting into this situation in the first place. Albeit 911 thrust us into the Afghan situation, there was no compelling reason or evidence to make us continue our aggression to other nations beyond that, in my opinion. It is like having to pick up your teen kid from the police station in the middle of the night for some stupid, toilet paper rolling antic one night. You know they were not the career criminal, but just the same, wanted to slap them silly. Not to minimize the events of 9/11, but where do we draw the line on our counter-attacks and aggression without provocation? Have we truly become bullies? First off, we could have been truthful with everyone in the UN, and built a true multi-lateral (meaningful countries) coalition, based upon facts. But the facts were never there. The whole situation was hyped by the administration in order to derive the desired results. From the very beginning, I could (and I assumed every other english speaking American could) pick up on the false innuendos and half-truths that the administration was pandering about the WMD and the true reason for the war. I have read, and in many cases saved literally hundreds of articles that demonstrate contradiction, deception and in-fighting among the administration officials and the President regarding the reasons for war with Iraq. But that is history, and not debatable. It's too late, now that we've pissed off everyone. It is a little too late to be so pious. This was a war of convenience, timing, and intellectual experiment, due to a few men's egos. Not a matter of grave danger, or national security, as they would have had you believe. I'm not that stupid or gullible. We killed, according to the most recent Iraqi count, 37,000 civilians, not to mention untold military men. Now we citizens of the US have to make friends with all the families and friends of the people who we killed (oh, BTW, we don't speak their language), pick up the pieces, beg the UN for support, and hope we can save the lives of the remaining Iraqi's still in the country. Not to mention saving face in light of dissing all of our traditional allies. We also have to take the heat off of our innocent troops, who are being being shot daily. What we have to do now is Win. And I would guess that there is no argument there. We need help, though, I would assume that you also have at least an iota of agreement there. Let's get the UN involved. Get Nato involved. But get someone else involved, and get the cocky little arrogant kids in our administration, who hold a grudge against the rest of world, out of the way. So they think that we now own Iraq and it's land and people unilaterally? And no other country on the planet has a voice in the forcible take-over of another sovereign country? Vote out the dip-shits in office who got us there in the first place. That would be a major victory. Next, open your check book, and bend over. You are in for a Bush-enema like you have never had before. trask- Quote
To_The_Top Posted September 7, 2003 Posted September 7, 2003 Mtn Goat was taken away awhile back by UN black helocopters, so he may not be able to read this. BTW, it hurts but I agree with the traskmaster Quote
Ratboy Posted September 7, 2003 Posted September 7, 2003 For the first time in my life, I agree 100% with something trask has posted. Quote
scrambler Posted September 7, 2003 Posted September 7, 2003 Trask, I don't have any profound political insights but I recall that Dubya declared a allout war on terrorism, kind of like declaring war on all bacteria. Seems that knowing your enemy goes a long way to eradication, like elimination of smallpox, etc. We're dealing with a fluid enemy, which produces a constant drain on our reserves (troop & money) But it really seems that the unmourned casualty will be the erosion of individual liberties, something the public is all too willing to surrender after the shock of a catastrophic event. Is this the price to pay for admission to the brave new (dystopic) world? Is it, just give me enough diversions or leisurely pursuits and an ample credit line, and I don't give a damn if governments use technology to maintain control? Maybe Minority Report is not so far fetched, considering the unusual programs issued from DARPA (e.g., Hacktismo, Hacktismo I suppose if you grow up in an environment of surveillance (smile you're on camera) then you'll accept it. I remember when growing up someone tried to make me believe that God can see everything. Well, I got news for you, it's not God watching. Quote
babnik Posted September 7, 2003 Posted September 7, 2003 has there ever been a war fought for ideal reasons? i cannot think of one. perhaps our first. i am not excusing any of this, but it just seems that thsi has been going on for a long long time. i mean what do you think the civil war war really about? slaves? ne eh. so it almost makes sense for there to be a 'rules of engagement' but for enforcement we would need a 'UN'. This cannot be the current UN as its obsolete policies enable cruel dictators to kill millions and fat cat capitalists to just sit there and watch. I believe that the key to this millenium is the reformation of the UN. This is th only thing that can restrict the actions of major powers of the world and give a virtual solidarity that can diffuse terrorism on a global level. my 2 cents. Quote
murraysovereign Posted September 7, 2003 Posted September 7, 2003 Ratboy said: For the first time in my life, I agree 100% with something trask has posted. Yeah, same here. Kinda ruins my day, actually, but there's no denying I agree with him. A well-articulated argument that entirely coincides with my own thoughts on this issue. From Trask. Who'd a thunk it? Maybe be the rain has him feeling out-of-sorts today, or something. Gotta be an explanation for it... Can someone stop by and check on him? Quote
babnik Posted September 7, 2003 Posted September 7, 2003 murraysovereign said: Ratboy said: For the first time in my life, I agree 100% with something trask has posted. Yeah, same here. Kinda ruins my day, actually, but there's no denying I agree with him. A well-articulated argument that entirely coincides with my own thoughts on this issue. From Trask. Who'd a thunk it? Maybe be the rain has him feeling out-of-sorts today, or something. Gotta be an explanation for it... Can someone stop by and check on him? i think he gave the g/f the ultimadum and he hasn't had his 'breakfast' yet. poor guy. leave him be. Quote
Dru Posted September 7, 2003 Posted September 7, 2003 chance trask wrote it himself 5% chance he cut and pasted it from somewhere on the web 95% Quote
allthumbs Posted September 7, 2003 Author Posted September 7, 2003 Hey Dru, believe it or not, UW grad. w/ one yr. law school; but hated it. I usually don't mention this shit 'cause it doesn't fit the "trask" mold. Also, I don't think my post is particularly well written. I was bored this morning and wanted to stir up shit with mtn. goat. Have the shots helped with the burning drippy dick problem you were telling me about last week? Quote
Scourge Posted September 7, 2003 Posted September 7, 2003 Trash, you ought to know better than to bullshit a bullshitter like Dru. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.