Blair 'was warned of Iraq chaos' - words cant describe how im feeling.....

BWhite · 2004-09-20 13:41:17

We can't give them the option of a vote and then expect them to vote as we wish, but that is expressly our goal. And it is because of this singular reason that we will fail.

Exactly.

Cobra Commander · 2004-09-20 14:21:23

We're not talking about rebuilding a nation over a matter of decades, preparing for the day when they will be ready to assume their own control. We are planning on giving them a voice in a years time- and we have to in order to maintain any semblance of "victory".

And that's the dillemma, we have to quickly give them the appearance of self rule while maintaining a minimal level of control.

Or we have to create a faction that doesn't much like us, can rally support on that basis, yet has roughly the qualities we want in place. Fight them, and let them win.

Ever play three card monty? The trick is to keep you guessing, to constantly be in motion so you never have time to remember where the card is. "Look, job loss- wait, ORANGE alert!" "Over there, loss of civil liberties- wait, our way of life is threatened by possible WMD's!" "How about that, no WMD's- did you hear, we're here to spread democracy and our way of life!"

So you still maintain you didn't know what cards were in the deck, eh?

Nothing is really a mind-blowing surprise about any of this. Redefining of civil liberties in the wake of the biggest terrorist attack on American soil, military setbacks, whining media, unrealistic timetables blah blah blah. We didn't need a shaman and a dozen chickens to see any of this coming. That's how wars are, particularly when they amount to clashes between civilizations. It doesn't fit neatly in between the regularly scheduled programming.

Either the end of the world, or our salvation? Bleh. We will have a failure of democracy when we fail to sufficiently safe guard our own liberty and choice here at home. I think in that respect, the fact we are so blindly and willingly giving up so much for so little, we may just see the doomsday your suggest. But Iraq won't be a reason, it will merely be a symptom of our own illness.

If we fail in Iraq it will be due in large part to our own unwillingness to see it through, resulting directly from our over-democratizing of how we fight wars. If we fail in Iraq, we have zero credibility for future anti-terrorist operations. We will rightly be seen as a paper tiger, tough when we're lobbing cruise missiles at mud huts but utterly contemptible when we actually have to fight anyone on the ground. If that day comes it's all over, we are the last chance Western democracy has in the world. The UN isn't going to preserve it, the British and Australians can't, the Europeans won't. If we blow this, it's over. It'll take a long time to finally die and longer still for the carcass to rot, but it will be traceble to this one fight.

Or, might I suggest, that we lost those wars, and this one, because it was less than noble, and we fought them for ill conceived reasons. No one really complained when we went into kick Saddam out of Kuwiat. No one really complained when we went into Afghanistan.

Sure they did, the same loons that protested this latest move on Iraq for the most part. Only the Gulf War ended before anyone cared enough to listen to the old hippies and crazed socialists and in the case of Afghanistan most people were still pissed off enough to want some blood spilled.

Not a single terroist was from Iraq. We invaded Iraq before we were through with Afghanistan. Osama was hiding in Pakistan- not Iraq.

Assuming Osama bin Laden is the be-all of Islamic terrorism. One side is fighting terrorists who threaten American interests, the other is looking to put bin Laden on trial.

The "two Americas" are fighting two different battles. The problem is that neither side can see what the other is doing.

clark · 2004-09-20 14:32:33

And that's the dillemma, we have to quickly give them the appearance of self rule while maintaining a minimal level of control.

The problem with charming a viper is that eventually you have to take a breath. When we stop our song, it will strike.

Or we have to create a faction that doesn't much like us, can rally support on that basis, yet has roughly the qualities we want in place. Fight them, and let them win.

Someone who dosen't like us, but we can do business with? I think Saddam's calander is free... And the hamster continues on the perpetual wheel to nowhere...

So you still maintain you didn't know what cards were in the deck, eh?

I ain't tellin.

If we blow this, it's over. It'll take a long time to finally die and longer still for the carcass to rot, but it will be traceble to this one fight.

Put simply, I disagree. [shrug]

Cobra Commander · 2004-09-20 14:38:27

Put simply, I disagree. [shrug]

Of course you do, you're Clark.

clark · 2004-09-20 15:30:12

I don't agree to that.

C M Edwards · 2004-09-20 15:59:11

Which means we should have been and now need to be prepared to have troops there on a timeframe similar to Japan or Germany after WWII. It doesn't mean the fighting will last anywhere near that long, just that the work of remaking the nation will take decades and afterwards we'd do well to watch it and guide them a bit. It's a multi-generation project and I have no problem with that, it's what it takes. But the question is whether we have the stomach to finish the fight, the resolve to finish what comes after and the attention span to remember what the hell we're doing in the first place.

Good heavens, Cobra, we actually agree on a point of military strategy. Who knew?

For the record, I am one of those persons with all sorts of unreasonable objections to invading Iraq. (I hadn't heard the one about Dick Cheney drinking the blood of Iraqi babies, but the tanker of crude pulling up nightly at his residence has been arousing my suspicions for a long time.) It was arrogant. It was without profit (but clearly not without profiteering). It was foolhardy. We should never have done it.

However, for those who haven't been paying attention lately, the question of US involvement in Iraq is no longer about whether or not we should invade.

We must follow through on our actions, or we _and_ the people of Iraq will face far worse. Unfortunately, that means hardship for us, and I'm not just talking about losing soldiers. Rebuilding Iraq is going to take work, and lots of money. If we don't pull out in the next year (possibly the next six months), the United States of American will have to reinstate the Draft to maintain its forces.

And we can't pull out. So, prepare to get drafted.

You guys just think old W has wronged you by making us look bad overseas. Wait until he impresses you into military service and sends you personally.

clark · 2004-09-20 16:04:44

I'll just do my stint in the Alabama National Guard. I don't think I'll be missed...

Grypd · 2004-09-20 17:00:55

I think the US by simply being there has attracted the insurgents and certainly Iran and Syria have their hands in it too. We should accelerate our timeline in Iraq. Elections should take place in October rather than January and once Iraq has an elected leader we should pull our troops off of the streets and put them in well fortified bases and at the airport.
We have to let Iraq find it's own way, their own type of democracy. I'm sure there is still a long and tough road ahead. If the US pulls back it's troops then the Iraqi's will have to step in and fight the insurgents with air/helicopter support from the US. Religious leaders (Al Sadr) will no doubt continue to be a problem, likely attempting to overturn a democratic leader and place himself at the top like in Iran. I don't believe we would allow this but at any rate we need to begin stepping back and Iraqi citizens need to step up and take an interest in their own country to end the insurgency. They need to expel these rebels from their towns and cities

If America falls back to reinforced bases you will get a situation similar to how Vietnam panned out. American troops in fortified fire bases with the woods surrounded by loose flexible skirmishers. The Vietnames insurgents where supplied by other countries that due to political difficulties could not be touched.

The USA and its allies must help the local goverment to deal with these insurgents and that does not take heavily armed Mobile infantry. This is a job for Armed Police with a very very tough backup. This police has to get in with the Iraqi people and develop webs of informers and make the people feel that the Police are mostly on there side. And when the police find a target then comes the heavies to support. Using helicopters to destroy bradleys which have kids jumping up and down on them will make this fail.

Frankly this is very hard to do, But only by this will it solve the problems in Iraq and only a true political solution will allow the groundwork to be there.

Dook · 2004-09-20 18:02:19

Vietnam! Vietnam! Vietnam! Everytime a soldier is sent overseas someone at home screams Vietnam but the fact is each conflict is unique.

As soon as Iraq has an elected leader I would pull the US troops off the streets and expect Iraq to police itself. Iraq should have a few tanks and armored personnel carriers that the police can use. I'm sure we didn't destroy them all. If needed the Iraqi police could call on the US for backup but the Iraqi's need to direct the effort and not run away like they did in Najaf against Al Sadr's insurgents

I don't understand your comment about helicopters and bradleys. Are you saying that the Iraqi insurgents are using helicopters to blow up our bradleys?

C M Edwards · 2004-09-21 07:37:48

I'll just do my stint in the Alabama National Guard. I don't think I'll be missed...

One weekend a month, two weeks a year, three years extended tour in Iraq. Ain't the National Guard grand!

BWhite · 2004-09-21 10:23:00

I'll just do my stint in the Alabama National Guard. I don't think I'll be missed...
One weekend a month, two weeks a year, three years extended tour in Iraq. Ain't the National Guard grand!

I read last year that some Hum-vees in Iraq had a bumper-sticker that read: "One weekend a month, my a$$"

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#26 2004-09-20 13:41:17

Re: Blair 'was warned of Iraq chaos' - words cant describe how im feeling.....

#27 2004-09-20 14:21:23

Re: Blair 'was warned of Iraq chaos' - words cant describe how im feeling.....

#28 2004-09-20 14:32:33

Re: Blair 'was warned of Iraq chaos' - words cant describe how im feeling.....

#29 2004-09-20 14:38:27

Re: Blair 'was warned of Iraq chaos' - words cant describe how im feeling.....

#30 2004-09-20 15:30:12

Re: Blair 'was warned of Iraq chaos' - words cant describe how im feeling.....

#31 2004-09-20 15:59:11

Re: Blair 'was warned of Iraq chaos' - words cant describe how im feeling.....

#32 2004-09-20 16:04:44

Re: Blair 'was warned of Iraq chaos' - words cant describe how im feeling.....

#33 2004-09-20 17:00:55

Re: Blair 'was warned of Iraq chaos' - words cant describe how im feeling.....

#34 2004-09-20 18:02:19

Re: Blair 'was warned of Iraq chaos' - words cant describe how im feeling.....

#35 2004-09-21 07:37:48

Re: Blair 'was warned of Iraq chaos' - words cant describe how im feeling.....

#36 2004-09-21 10:23:00

Re: Blair 'was warned of Iraq chaos' - words cant describe how im feeling.....

Board footer