olyclimber Posted May 12, 2004 Posted May 12, 2004 The Iraqi's seem to deeply respect strength through arms. Individual acts of kindness are simply that. An act of kindness towards a fellow human being. I believe that if Bush gets reelected there will be harsher responses regarding murders of soldiers and Americans. I also believe the military will step up operations to defeat insurgency. I don't like the idea of pulling out without setting the record straight. Having said that, I think we need a tougher strategy and an exit plan. I don't make policy, and I am only speculating. My opinions could be echoed amongst the halls of power however. GD, so do you think we will end up running the country much like Saddam did (in regard to people in the country who don't want us there)? I'm not referring to the prison thing, obviously that will be something that will be fixed (hopefully). Just in terms of ruling with an iron fist. Quote
gotterdamerung Posted May 12, 2004 Author Posted May 12, 2004 Oly, Â I have heard it said before that Saddam understood how to control the various factions here. With 3 major religious groups, many tribal factions, ongoing terrorist pressure and influence, and many open questions regarding our exit strategy here it is hard to call. I do not envision large scale Big Army type operations, but a coordinated effort by intelligence and SOF to eradicate this country of it's terrorist influence. The Iraqi's will have to deal with lawlessness and things of that nature with their police forces and continue to develop their military to fortify their borders. Quote
Mal_Con Posted May 12, 2004 Posted May 12, 2004 What we are seeing is inevitable. It has happened in all wars from the time of Joshua and Homer. Atrocities always occur civilians are killed and maimed. There has never been a civilizing war. What is different is this was a war of choice. Our leaders are either hopelessly romantic idealists of truly cynical bastards who have so much disdtain for the American public they think they can get away with anything. Nothing will come of it but more death and destruction. Same as it ever was. Quote
gotterdamerung Posted May 12, 2004 Author Posted May 12, 2004 Your elected congressional leaders who represent you voted to fund and sustain the war based on intelligence that may or may not have existed. I for one did not believe in the case to go to war here, but I felt like it was a duty to represent my country here right or wrong. Peace through withdrawal and appeasement will hurt us badly. Â To quote George Clooney in "Oh Brother Where Art Though". "Damn, we're in a tight spot!" Quote
olyclimber Posted May 12, 2004 Posted May 12, 2004 Oly, I have heard it said before that Saddam understood how to control the various factions here. With 3 major religious groups, many tribal factions, ongoing terrorist pressure and influence, and many open questions regarding our exit strategy here it is hard to call. This is an interesting point. If our exit strategy is going to be extremely difficult, because as soon as we leave, the factions will most likely step up again. Like the Serbs and the Croats or the Isrealis and the Palestinians, the struggle almost seems unending, barring genocide. Regardless of who is in the Whitehouse, this problem is going to continue on. SOF=Soldiers of Fortune? Who will be paying these people? What interests will they represent? Quote
gotterdamerung Posted May 12, 2004 Author Posted May 12, 2004 SOF=Special Operations Forces. Delta, SEALS, SF, USMC spec ops. Â The Middle East is a deeply divided region along religious lines which makes it difficult to find common ground. A good read is "The Age of Sacred Terror" by 2 former NSA brain types. Religion plays so deeply into the mindset here it is truly terrifying what we are facing. Quote
olyclimber Posted May 12, 2004 Posted May 12, 2004 SOF=Special Operations Forces. Delta, SEALS, SF, USMC spec ops. Â The Middle East is a deeply divided region along religious lines which makes it difficult to find common ground. A good read is "The Age of Sacred Terror" by 2 former NSA brain types. Religion plays so deeply into the mindset here it is truly terrifying what we are facing. Â I see. Well, if we've got to be there, it really doesn't make sense to have a big standing army there (basically a big target), so the "SOF" route does make the most sense. As far as an exit strategy, it seems like the Iraqi people aren't going to buy it unless there is a truly elected (and not appointed or psuedo-elected) Iraqi official in place that really represents the Iraqi people (and not the US). I don't see that happening anytime soon...and so I don't even see the possiblity for an exit strategy. I'll have to check out that book. Thanks. Quote
RobBob Posted May 12, 2004 Posted May 12, 2004 Unfortunately those people aren't going to settle down until a rock-solid force imposes its will on them harshly. Walking away almost garantees that it'll be reduced to a Taliban-style government or another Saddam. Soooo...do we "handle" it, or leave it to cluster-fuck into a Taliban situation? Nice choice we're faced with. Quote
j_b Posted May 12, 2004 Posted May 12, 2004 good short read link  "So far, however, the collateral damage has been quite minor."  >10000 iraqi civilians murdered over the last year is minor? it's when one reads things like this (and the rest of the drivel in that "good short read"), that the extent of deceit becomes obvious. the neocons have no shame. Quote
Martlet Posted May 12, 2004 Posted May 12, 2004 good short read link  "So far, however, the collateral damage has been quite minor."  >10000 iraqi civilians murdered over the last year is minor? it's when one reads things like this (and the rest of the drivel in that "good short read"), that the extent of deceit becomes obvious. the neocons have no shame.  I'll start believing the liberals are on a higher moral horse when you link old posts from you denouncing the slaughter of kurds. Quote
j_b Posted May 12, 2004 Posted May 12, 2004 cut the crap, hypocrite. rumsfeld was shaking hand with saddam while the kurds were being murdered. all administrations have supported the turkish military in their bloody drive to squash the kurds. Quote
Martlet Posted May 12, 2004 Posted May 12, 2004 cut the crap, hypocrite. rumsfeld was shaking hand with saddam while the kurds were being murdered. all administrations have supported the turkish military in their bloody drive to squash the kurds. Â You're the one yammering about "no shame". I'm assuming you aren't a hypocrite, therefore you'll have no trouble showing me a few of you posts decrying the actions of such evil dictators. Â Just 3 or 4. You don't need to show me ALL the ones I'm sure you've written. Quote
rbw1966 Posted May 12, 2004 Posted May 12, 2004 The US pulled out of the first Gulf war and stood by as Saddam killed hundreds of Kurds. Quote
Martlet Posted May 12, 2004 Posted May 12, 2004 The US pulled out of the first Gulf war and stood by as Saddam killed hundreds of Kurds. Â Yep. Ok, I'll accept that, too. Show me a few links where you were outraged that the US pulled out of Iraq and allowed Saddam to slaughter the Kurds. Quote
Martlet Posted May 12, 2004 Posted May 12, 2004 yawn  Just as I thought. This is getting far too easy. Quote
Martlet Posted May 12, 2004 Posted May 12, 2004 yawn  I could have fun with this. It's actually the only liberal moonbat that isn't spewing lies. Quote
j_b Posted May 12, 2004 Posted May 12, 2004 suddenly you have nothing else to say about the kurds? Â i am not in question here and on the basis of my posting history, nobody with any integrity would question my motives. however, what is in question is the continual lies about the consequences of predatory foreign policy. it is obvious to the entire world that you, warmongers, can't win in iraq. yet, you'll attempt by any means necessary to make it not appear that you have been defeated. even if it kills countless more people. foul! Quote
Peter_Puget Posted May 12, 2004 Posted May 12, 2004 J_B –  Have you no shame! In 1991 the Iraq news agency claimed that 1.6 million Iraqis died because of the sanctions. That’s 160,000 per year. 41% of these were children. During the first year of the war you claim a bit over 10,000 casualties.  By the way Kling is hardly a neocon. Whatever it is you are smoking, it must be good.  PP Quote
RobBob Posted May 12, 2004 Posted May 12, 2004 What the fuck is a moonbat? That is the most pussified version of name-calling that I have heard in awhile. Quote
Peter_Puget Posted May 12, 2004 Posted May 12, 2004 Hmmm predatory forgeign policy? Ever heard of Pax Romana? Quote
Martlet Posted May 12, 2004 Posted May 12, 2004 suddenly you have nothing else to say about the kurds? i am not in question here and on the basis of my posting history, nobody with any integrity would question my motives. however, what is in question is the continual lies about the consequences of predatory foreign policy. it is obvious to the entire world that you, warmongers, can't win in iraq. yet, you'll attempt by any means necessary to make it not appear that you have been defeated. even if it kills countless more people. foul!  Just as I thought. Just sit there and brew in your hypocrisy. You cry about 10000 killed by the US, but don't have a single bit of you crying when saddam killed them. So you only get upset when certain people kill civilians? Other times it doesn't bother you? \  Just 2 or 3 examples, please, you don't need to show me all of your writing. 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.