Funny thing about war

[WinkOsmosis]

Originally posted by: Fatt

Originally posted by: Jellomancer


Former military personnel is one thing... veterans are another.
Yeah I was overgeneralizing.. but anyone who has lived through a real war like the Vietnam knows that war IS hell. So I wasn't talking about miniwars like the Gulf War. Remember the song "born in America"?
Attacking Iraq is an act of aggression and will be seen as such by the rest of the Arab world.. I'm not talking about the liberal leaders like the Saudi royal family, but the people.

a) "Former military personnel is one thing... veterans are another."
Do you even know what a veteran is?

b) "Remember the song "born in America"?"
I remember "Born in the USA" which is about disaffected vietnam veterans in the 1970's. What the heck are YOU talking about?

c) "Attacking Iraq is an act of aggression and will be seen as such by the rest of the Arab world.."
LOL, do you REALLY think the other arab states have any love for saddam? They're mostly worried that we'll do another half-assed job like we did in 1991. Don't confuse public statements made for internal political reasons with actual reality.



Now let me tell you something as a veteran of war:

The longer you wait to attack an enemy, the higher the cost will be. War isn't fun and it isn't pretty.
However, if someone had stepped up in 1938 and told hitler NO, then ww2 wouldn't have occured, 20 million people wouldn't have been executed in death camps, japan wouldn't have been nuked and the cold war wouldn't have occured, meaning that most of the nonsense we are dealing with now wouldn't be happening.

Saddam is a loose canon with a lot of deadly weapons, including biological and chemical weapons. He is trying hard to get nukes. Why do you think that is? So he can hang one over his fecking fireplace?

There are TWENTY THREE documented instances where Iraq used poison gas against the Iranians.
There are several (I don't recall the number) of instances of him using it against his own citizens.

He needs to go. Period.
The sooner the better.

Yes "Born in the USA". Slip of the fingers. It's late and I apologize to Bruce.
When I said "veteran" I meant WAR VETERAN. Not some kid who joins the navy to get college money. I consider such a person inexperienced in war. War is still ideology.

I didn't mean other Arab states would join Iraq in a Jihad against America. That is the general opinion among those aganst war, but other nations know better than to fight the most well armed nation on earth. I meant that there is a good chance of massive political instability in those countries as a result of a war. Whether the leaders, or the majority of people like it or not, many people WILL decide it is time for a Jihad. And as we know, crazed lunatics can cause major damage.

 

[Kadarin]

Originally posted by: Jellomancer

The problem in Iraq isn't the Iraqis, but the tyrant who's got them under the heel of his boot. It's not about whether the Iraqis like us or not; given a chance to express themselves, the people there would probably be just fine with Americans, but who knows?

I didn't make any comments regarding economic stability, so what are you asking me there?

I wasn't directing the economic stability responses at you, I just didn't want to do another quote.

The problem in Iraq IS Saddam Hussein, but the Iraqis like him don't they? In general, these poor people don't know anything other than what he wants them to know, so they have no choice to be fine with Americans.

Part of the nature of totalitarian dictatorships is that the leader(s) can govern without the consent of the governed by maintaining iron control over institutions such as the military, law enforcement, secret police, media... So it's possible (even likely) that the Iraqis would welcome Saddam's ouster.

 

[WinkOsmosis]

Part of the nature of totalitarian dictatorships is that the leader(s) can govern without the consent of the governed by maintaining iron control over institutions such as the military, law enforcement, secret police, media... So it's possible (even likely) that the Iraqis would welcome Saddam's ouster.

That's completely true, but consider the Iraqis hatred of the USA caused by Hussein's propoganda regarding the UN trade sanctions. If they hate Saddam, they probably hate us just as much. Also consider the tendency of people to support their leaders during hard times. For all we know, they could believe their leader's fascism is necessary for their safety from big, bad, imperialist USA. That may seem absurd to us, but they have lived for years under completely different conditions.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: Jellomancer

Part of the nature of totalitarian dictatorships is that the leader(s) can govern without the consent of the governed by maintaining iron control over institutions such as the military, law enforcement, secret police, media... So it's possible (even likely) that the Iraqis would welcome Saddam's ouster.

That's completely true, but consider the Iraqis hatred of the USA caused by Hussein's propoganda regarding the UN trade sanctions. If they hate Saddam, they probably hate us just as much. Also consider the tendency of people to support their leaders during hard times. For all we know, they could believe their leader's fascism is necessary for their safety from big, bad, imperialist USA. That may seem absurd to us, but they have lived for years under completely different conditions.

No. You have it all wrong. They don't hate us as much as Saddam. Really. They want a change of leadership. If it takes the US or the UN to do it then so be it. The iraqi people don't really care one way or the other. Lots of iragi citizens fought during the Gulf War and saw how humane we were. You think they don't remember? You think they didn't talk about it? Saddam's days are numbered and he will be taken out by either his people or the US/UN. More than likely both will have a hand in it.

The military has always had civilian leaders. Do you not know why?

 

[WinkOsmosis]

Yes Hussein will/must be got rid of eventually, but thought needs to be put into how this will be done, along with the process of rebuilding Iraq. For example, do we put another dictator in power like we have done in the past? Do we hold an election? Who will be the candidates? You can't just overthrow a leader, no matter how evil he may be, then pull out. War is bad, and you don't start a war for the sake of humanity without a clear method off repairing the damage caused by the war. But then again, you don't defeat an army bent on conquest only to leave the leader alive for 11 years to fight again.

 

[etech]

Originally posted by: Jellomancer
Yes Hussein will/must be got rid of eventually, but thought needs to be put into how this will be done, along with the process of rebuilding Iraq. For example, do we put another dictator in power like we have done in the past? Do we hold an election? Who will be the candidates? You can't just overthrow a leader, no matter how evil he may be, then pull out. War is bad, and you don't start a war for the sake of humanity without a clear method off repairing the damage caused by the war. But then again, you don't defeat an army bent on conquest only to leave the leader alive for 11 years to fight again.

"Yes Hussein will/must be got rid of eventually"
We agree on that point.

"but thought needs to be put into how this will be done, along with the process of rebuilding Iraq. but thought needs to be put into how this will be done, along with the process of rebuilding Iraq. For example, do we put another dictator in power like we have done in the past? Do we hold an election? Who will be the candidates? You can't just overthrow a leader, no matter how evil he may be, then pull out. "
How do you know that thought has not taken place and plans are not drawn up for the rebuilding of Iraq. There is a group of high level Iraqi defectors that would probably compromise an interim government.(My thoughts only). They would rule only until elections could be set up.

"But then again, you don't defeat an army bent on conquest only to leave the leader alive for 11 years to fight again"

Do you know the history of why the Alled forces did not take out Saddam? From that statement it is apparent that you don't even though it has been explained in this thread.
The UN mandate was to free Kuwait, it did not authorize taking out Saddam
The Arab states that we were allied with would not sanction taking out one of their Arab brothers even if he is a tyrant, dictator and mad man.

Blame it on the true causes and people involved. The US in the Gulf War listened to the UN and the Arab states and tried diplomancy. Now the world is having to deal with him again and the same people are dragging their feet. The longer he is left in power the more innocent Iraqis that will die. The longer he is left in power the stronger he will be.