Iraq war a success

[Doryman]

Re: RE: Iraq war a success

WOW guys, the point of tha pic of post-allied-firebombing Dresden being???


... To show you that destruction happens in every war. Just because Iraq is facked up doesn't mean it' necessarily a failure.

is THAT what failure in Iraq would look like, cos if so that's kinda what a lot of it looks like

Thats what success in Iraq would look like.. therefore...

BTW I have hundreds of reconnaisance pics from WW2, REAL ones, not google searched I can't see how this has ANYTHING to do with Iraq... The mission in WW2 was for one side to totally SMASH another, "regime change" in Iraq and going tooth and nail with another counrty (or group of same) in a winner-take-all war is different

No it isn't. We went to war to destroy Hitler and the Nazi party entirely. The yanks went to war to destroy Saddam and the Baath party entirely. Done. Now comes the clean-up, just like in merry olde Deutschland.

SO WHAT would failure look like again?? without using talking points (see "failure would be if we got out of the place we have no place being" that makes NO logical sense and doesn't say what failure would look like at all, just a spin on a very real option IMO... when is an option not an option anyways, and why can there be only one resolution to such a complex problem??)

Failure would look like a pull-out, where the american Military, instead of cleaning up the mess like in germany, would pack up, go home and leave Iraq in the midst of the Shite-Show Extraordinaire!!! If you don't want to hear that,too bad.


But just to be fair, lets hear your side. Some anti-war types like to say that continued occupation is not an answer, but we never hear what the answer should be. So dish. Don't say the americans shouldn't have went to war in the first place, because history cannot be fixed. Don't cry foul at the Corporate involvement, because frankly, that's irrelevant.

Just tell us poor ignorant war-heads... What should be done?

 

[aeon]

Re: RE: Iraq war a success

WOW guys, the point of tha pic of post-allied-firebombing Dresden being???


... To show you that destruction happens in every war. Just because Iraq is facked up doesn't mean it' necessarily a failure.

is THAT what failure in Iraq would look like, cos if so that's kinda what a lot of it looks like

Thats what success in Iraq would look like.. therefore...

BTW I have hundreds of reconnaisance pics from WW2, REAL ones, not google searched I can't see how this has ANYTHING to do with Iraq... The mission in WW2 was for one side to totally SMASH another, "regime change" in Iraq and going tooth and nail with another counrty (or group of same) in a winner-take-all war is different

No it isn't. We went to war to destroy Hitler and the Nazi party entirely. The yanks went to war to destroy Saddam and the Baath party entirely. Done. Now comes the clean-up, just like in merry olde Deutschland.

SO WHAT would failure look like again?? without using talking points (see "failure would be if we got out of the place we have no place being" that makes NO logical sense and doesn't say what failure would look like at all, just a spin on a very real option IMO... when is an option not an option anyways, and why can there be only one resolution to such a complex problem??)

Failure would look like a pull-out, where the american Military, instead of cleaning up the mess like in germany, would pack up, go home and leave Iraq in the midst of the Shite-Show Extraordinaire!!! If you don't want to hear that,too bad.


But just to be fair, lets hear your side. Some anti-war types like to say that continued occupation is not an answer, but we never hear what the answer should be. So dish. Don't say the americans shouldn't have went to war in the first place, because history cannot be fixed. Don't cry foul at the Corporate involvement, because frankly, that's irrelevant.

Just tell us poor ignorant war-heads... What should be done?

easy, get the coalition troops home, cause iraq belongs to iraqies, oil belongs to iraqies,they can take their future on their hand, they reconstructed their countries in less than 4 month after the first gulf war, and then some barbarian came back and destroyed their water infrastructure, which had deadly consequences on iraqies.


http://www.harpers.org/CoolWar.html?http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bordeaux.com%2Ft_sa-harpers.html

According to Pentagon officials, that was the intention. In a June 23, 1991, Washington Post article, Pentagon officials stated that Iraq's electrical grid had been targeted by bombing strikes in order to undermine the civilian economy. “People say, 'You didn't recognize that it was going to have an effect on water or sewage,'” said one planning officer at the Pentagon. “Well, what were we trying to do with sanctions-help out the Iraqi people? No. What we were doing with the attacks on infrastructure was to accelerate the effect of the sanctions.”

 

[EagleSmack]

War for Oil... Why am I paying so much at the pump?

Another conspiracy. ::yawn::

 

[cortez]

because they havent quite got control of the country yet-- i think that oil production is still below pre-war levels---

what do you think this war is about

freedom

haahahahaahahahah

how can the industrialmilitaryfascists give you freedom...

let them invade themselves

 

[darkbeaver]

And in any event he's not going to get a break at the pumps.

 

[Toro]

Re: RE: Iraq war a success

War for Oil... Why am I paying so much at the pump?

Another conspiracy. ::yawn::

Yup.

But at least its partly credible.

Unlike the bizarre Invade-Iraq-to-stop-them-from-trading-oil-in-Euros conspiracy the Fringe likes to go on about.

 

[aeon]

Re: RE: Iraq war a success

War for Oil... Why am I paying so much at the pump?

Another conspiracy. ::yawn::

Look at that, which coorporation are in iraq??

halliburton, which cheeney worked for, chevron and exxon, which condi rice, worked for, BP and SHell which are from UK, and you say this is another conspiracy??


8O

 

[aeon]

Re: RE: Iraq war a success

War for Oil... Why am I paying so much at the pump?

Another conspiracy. ::yawn::

Yup.

But at least its partly credible.

Unlike the bizarre Invade-Iraq-to-stop-them-from-trading-oil-in-Euros conspiracy the Fringe likes to go on about.

Partly credible?? damn where were you in the last 3 years??

 

[mabudon]

What SHOULD happen, in my view (sorry for the time-delay, I only generally get online in the AM most days)

And I ain't calling anyone names, BTW, no worries

What WOULD be a good thing??? Well, for one, allow the current gov't (IF it ever gets formed and "underway", which would be in the best interests of Iraq and not so much for the occupiers) to get to business... allow them to Re-privatize the many state-run industries and take control of thier own affairs (this is before full-scale military pullout, and if this ACTUALLY happened, transparent and obvious for ALL to see I think it would have almost immediate effects on the situation in that country) and kick out all the foreign investors who were criminally given access to pretty much the entire country under the rules as written up by the CPA. Might as well add "stop making the permanent US military bases in Iraq" to this list, since that's bound to cause troubles for many many years and is totally obvious in the actual goal being sought there, to boot

TWO- cancel all the phoney debts accrued by the totally fiscally incompetent invasion (like those accrued for paying 10 times or more the real "worth" for concrete imported from Turkey since the newly privatized Iraqi concrete industry was too dangerous to run)

THREE- get the HELL out of the country, after having honestly "handed over sovreignty" by actually GIVING THE STOLEN COUNTRY BACK TO THE CITIZENS and let the chips fall where they may...

I really truly do not believe that the violence would escalate, and the neighboring countries would be able to keep a lid on things well enough (they're doing a fine job so far)

If Iran sweeps in and takes over, well then that's too bad, from what I understand they wil basically run things by proxy if the US actually allows the pending govt to be formed anyhow.... basically I see the US occupation in a "terry schiavo" kind of light now... you could spend lots of money keeping it alive, and bray on and on about all the altruistic reasons for it, but in reality it is BRAIN DEAD and on lifesupport (BILLIONS of dollars worth a month, too) and it will remain braindead and on lifesupport until someone finally pulls the plug...

If the US really wanted to get out of this, they could almost still do so saving face at the same time (I was shocked when Katrina didn't turn out that way- a graceful exit of sorts as the Pres makes a "tough decision" between maintaining foolish pride abroad or actually maintaining the "sanctity of life" in his own country)

But staying there, all they can do is keep calling folks who have VERY legitimate problems with the occupation as "crazies/insurgents/terrorists" and killing them off until the survivors are all too scared to even look outside, too sick from malnutrition to get out of bed, and ready to just knuckle under and accepot the fact that the US has WON, not against Saddam the Terrible, but against EVERY PERSON still alive in that poor country

(and if there's time, get the "Iraqi army" to go at Iran again, but that's gonna take a lot more manipulation of the cherished "democracy" that's installed there now)

 

[Doryman]

Re: RE: Iraq war a success

You'd gladly let Iraq undergo another major war with an avowed enemy so soon after this one? 8O That's a little harsh, isn't it?

And four months to get back on their feet without help is a little naive. Somalias been in the same state for about ten years, and it doesn;t look like its getting better soon.

 

[Doryman]

Re: RE: Iraq war a success

You'd gladly let Iraq undergo another major war with an avowed enemy so soon after this one? 8O That's a little harsh, isn't it?

And four months to get back on their feet without help is a little naive. Somalias been in the same state for about ten years, and it doesn;t look like its getting better soon.

 

[mabudon]

I think Somalia and Iraq are kinda hard to compare- Turkey and Iran would likely keep each other in check...

And sure it may take a long time, but delaying the removal of the occupation is just adding time to that period...

Would you not agree, at least, that revoking a lot of the HIGHLY QUESTIONABLE (I would call it downright illegal) foreign "investment" and "free market" clauses/laws/whatever-they-are put in place by the CPA could go a long way towards proving the supposedly noble intentions of the US???

I honestly bellieve that some indication of "fair play", REAL actual fair, transparent "we really TRULY don't want to steal your country" intentions might cool dow the heat, and if not it is the "kill all who oppose us" strategy which will work eventually but will likely be too much for the US economy to bear, especially once the impact starts getting acute for more and more fols in the US

 

[Jay]

Re: RE: Iraq war a success

I really truly do not believe that the violence would escalate, and the neighboring countries would be able to keep a lid on things well enough (they're doing a fine job so far)

If Iran sweeps in and takes over, well then that's too bad, from what I understand they wil basically run things by proxy if the US actually allows the pending govt to be formed anyhow....

So the USA is there right now and they need to get out hell or high water, but if Iran "sweeps in and takes over, well then that's too bad"?

Why does everyone on the left fight for Saddam and the Iranians?

 

[mabudon]

no, I said it would be "too bad" that's hardly standing up and cheering "Shah Shah Shah!!!!!"

I am not "fighting for Saddam"

I am not "fighting for the Iranians"

That is ridiculous

 

[Jay]

How about we compromise...the US troops stay and we won't have to worry about Iran.

Iran is next on the hit list anyways (if they keep it up), soon you won't have to worry about them.

 

[JoeyB]

Change doesn't happen overnight. I think people are expecting too much too soon from a peacekeeping role that the coalition forces are now playing throughout the middle-east.

If people expect a peaceful and harmonious resolution to the current situation, then they should prepare themselves to be there for another 10-15 years. This kind of 'get troops home now' crap from the well-meaning 'I want my freedom but I won't do anything for it' demographic insults the intelligence of people who have been working to achieve stability in the region. Not only that, to make them leave now, sure do it... but watch all the wasted taxpayer dollars add up, and then see them complain about that next, and forget that iraq and peace ever existed. I am sure the shoe would be on the other foot if it was your country that was under a dictatorial regime for decades and you were crying for freedom and help.

Give these poor bastards a fighting chance to rebuild their country, and stop thinking about your own selfishness is my message to those who cannot justify their reasons for wanting the coalition out of Iraq.

Noone said Bush went in there on the right premise, but now that we are all there, aiding a country and helping people to restore their lives, don't pull the rug out from under them.

 

[Jay]

John Hawkins: In your opinion, if someone like Ronald Reagan or George W. Bush had been in the White House instead of Johnson, would we have won in Vietnam?

Ann Coulter: Probably. More importantly, liberals wouldn't be able to call every military action in defense of the nation since then: "the next Vietnam".

John Hawkins: What is the most important lesson Americans can learn from our experience in Vietnam?

Ann Coulter: If you can possibly avoid it, do not go to war when the Democrats control either the executive branch or the legislative branch.

John Hawkins: When you look back at the Clinton, Carter, & Johnson Presidencies, it becomes obvious that the Democrats have an abysmal record on foreign policy. Why do you think the left has such a difficult time dealing with foreign policy issues?

Ann Coulter: There's always a conflict of interest when people who don't really like America are called upon to defend it.

The real reason the left wants us out of Iraq, they want a new phrase as they have worn out the old one.

 

[aeon]

Re: RE: Iraq war a success

So the USA is there right now and they need to get out hell or high water, but if Iran "sweeps in and takes over, well then that's too bad"?

Why does everyone on the left fight for Saddam and the Iranians?

Iran taking over iraq, would only be a normal behavior, the most respected clirics in iraq is an iranie, iraq and iran are the only arab nation that shiite are the majority,90% in iran, and 60% in iraq, the rest of arab nation are mostly sunni.


By the way , what is wrong with iran??

they havent attacke anyone since the 80, tell me what is wrong.

 

[Jay]

HA, ha, ha.....I rest my case.

 

[aeon]

Re: RE: Iraq war a success

How about we compromise...the US troops stay and we won't have to worry about Iran.

Iran is next on the hit list anyways (if they keep it up), soon you won't have to worry about them.

Dont worry my friend , iran are damn ready , and the problem with the us and the whole coalitions of the ignorant, they arent even able to control insurgent in iraq with a already devastated country like it is,now how will they be able to control insurgent in iraq, and at the same time conducted a war against iran??


Only in your dream.