How do we solve the current quagmire in Iraq?

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: Steeplerot

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: Steeplerot
problem is your historical perspective and reality is nil.

Sure Steepletot. Everybody is wrong except for you.

:roll:

see first link in sig

Cartoons?

How appropriate for the left as they often act so cartoonish.

How about some historical perspective and reality? Feel free to show me where the rebuilding of Japan and Germany went quickly and without a hitch or problems.

Of course, you can't, because they didn't. It took YEARS and YEARS and had plenty of issues throughout, along with the standrd whining and sloganeering of the left, headed by the NY Times as crybaby #1 about the situation. But keep pretending I have no historical perspective or grasp of reality.

Comments like that show precisely who here is grounded in reality and perspective and who is not.

 

[Steeplerot]

difference is we helped those people, not blew them up and literally sh1t on them and their country/culture.
(except for fluffer feel good media here in the states to distract us from reality -which didn't fool a lot of us for a second)

once again your historical basis is out of touch no parallel to be drawn.

 

[TRUMPHENT]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
[.

The process would be helped along as well if the left and the media used a bit of historical perspective on the situation and didn't expect some immediate gratification and didn't have this unrealistic demand for absolute perfection. They are both acting like cheerleaders for the insurgents, unwittingly or not, and it's screwing over the average Iraqi in the proces. That's sad too because it originates from partisan political BS and they are allowing their personal hatred of the US admin to push death and destruction by the insurgency even further down the path. There's already been enough death and destruction over there. Why foment it even more?[/quote]

My historical perspective: It's a shame that Stanley Kubrick, Peter Sellers and George C. Scott are no longer with us. They would be working furiously on a new version of "Dr. Strangelove". Sellers could play VP Cheney, David Kay, PM Blair, Condi Rice, Paul Wolfowitz and Don Ruimsfeld. George C. Scott would of course play General Franks. James E. Jones would play Colin Powell. Both Saddam Hussein and George W Bush would play themselves. Dick Cheney would get a cameo as Ahmed Chalabi.

Serious fodder for a brilliant movie maker. Invading Iraq has been one of the most bizarre sequences of events ever.

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: Steeplerot
difference is we helped those people, not blew them up and literally sh1t on them and their country/culture.
(except for fluffer feel good media here in the states to distract us from reality -which didn't fool a lot of us for a second)

once again your historical basis is out of touch no parallel to be drawn.

Japan and Germany were utter wrecks after the war. Cities burnt, industry bombed to oblivion, transportation and communication systems heavily damaged. We basically sunk the entire Japanese merchant fleet that was needed to distribute food to the people and blew up most of their key railroad lines. Not to mention vaporizing two major cities with nuclear weapons.

It took more than a decade for them to rebuild, with our full support.

 

[Steeplerot]

regardless we had a agenda to show mercy and caring for the japanesse. They even went through the trouble of learning customs to not offend unlike the half assed effort we made in iraq. The whole thing stinks of a total rush job.

another reason DSM is so damning.

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: Steeplerot
regardless we had a agenda to show mercy and caring for the japanesse. They even went through the trouble of learning customs to not offend unlike the half assed effort we made in iraq. The whole thing stinks of a total rush job.

another reason DSM is so damning.

We blatantly reshaped their government system to our will. Heck, we wrote their constitution.

 

[yllus]

Originally posted by: NeenerNeener
"Doesnt matter what my benchmark is, only what the govt of Iraq's is. "

The government of Iraq doesn't get to choose when our troops leave.

Wholly incorrect. The mandate of the U.S. force in Iraq is to seek permission to remain in the country every 12 months or whenever asked to leave, whichever event happens first.

Originally posted by: NeenerNeener
So...Any ideas?

I think one of the major issues with the military strategy used in Iraq in 2k3 was one that retired Gen. Schwarzkopf noted as a requirement for the campaign he led in 1991. He very specifically did not want to proceed with just the minimum number of troops into the campaign, and he certainly got his wish (President Bush then put more forces at his disposal than he had even requested).

Thus - though perhaps counterinstinctive to those of us who want to see U.S. soldiers leave Iraq instead of send more - the speediest way to tighten up the country and break the back of the insurgents may be to commit more troops to the region.

 

[BBond]

How do we solve the current quagmire in Iraq?

Impeach Bush and his cohorts. Try them on war crimes charges. The effect will be twofold. First, it will show the world that America holds its leaders responsible and no one is above the law, even the president and his top administration officials. Second, it will rid America of the "leaders" who created this unnecessary quagmire and refuse to end it because they are making billions of dollars from it.

The U.S. occupation fuels the insurgency. END IT NOW. Then the world just might come to our aid in fixing all that we've destroyed in Iraq. But America is still responsible for repairing the damage that can be repaired. So we keep spending levels where they are now, 5 to 6 billion dollars per month until Iraq is rebuilt. But we put the Iraqi people to work rebuilding their nation. NOT war profiteering American contractors with no-bid contracts.

When the occupation ends and the Iraqi people get busy rebuilding their own nation the "insurgency" will vanish. It will still take years to undo the damage Bush has done. And there is no way to bring back the 100,000 dead Iraqi civilians Bush has murdered. But at least Iraq will be able to move forward rather than suffering the continuing destruction by the U.S. military and the "insurgents".

 

[NeenerNeener]

"Wholly incorrect. The mandate of the U.S. force in Iraq is to seek permission to remain in the country every 12 months or whenever asked to leave, whichever event happens first."

Your point is well taken, Yllus. Colin Powell was most certainly right when he said "you break it, you own it." I suppose I'll be waiting with the rest of us for that "permission" to leave the country.

TLC, was there an insurgency in Japan or Germany when we were seeking to rebuild? Were foreigners from outside the nations coming in to thwart our reconstruction efforts? I honestly I don't see the parallels to WWII.
Furthermore, I don't agree with this idea that criticizing the administration hurts our (and the Iraqis) chances of winning. Now, the truth coming out about the deception of our leaders indeed does! I think what makes the left so angry and frustrated is that there has been no real accountability in the administration for its transgressions. We all should remember the president in his state of the union address speaking of Uranium from Niger and the V.P. and Condoleeza Rice going on about smoking guns turning into mushroom clouds. Most Americans believed our leaders that these threats were true. Now it seems like they were taking advantage of Americans' feelings of fear and vulnerability after 9/11 in order to further a hidden agenda that had existed before we were attacked. Especially when they spoke of nuclear weapons and trying to reach for a connection between Hussein and our being attacked. They also took advantage of the fact that the ignorant Americans would easily lump all the middle eastern nations together, not seeing the stark differences between the dictator and the international terrorist organization.

For me personally, I supported Bush up until the day he invaded Iraq. Afghanistan was a natural choice to invade following our attack. According to Richard Clark though, they were talking about Iraq THE DAY AFTER we were attacked, and they even needed to be convinced to go after the Taliban first!

In addition to that, I have a map of the Iraqi oil fields and exploration blocks from March of 2001! There were many who wanted Iraq and just needed an excuse.

 

[Tab]

1)Have our administration admit they where wrong.
2)Adminstration Steps down.
3)New Adminstration that wants to work with the rest of the world.

Thats a start.

 

[13rian]

Although the media shows a lot of citizen being joyful that troops are coming in to save the day, I think that they fail to mention when insurgent troops aren't so welcomed in some cities. These people, who know how many, probably still don't understand the situation and are just confused from the excitement. Because of this, they may be easily swayed with the idea that Bush/U.S. is just trying to take over replacing the old dictator with a new foreign one (indirectly using puppets for a new democratic government) and the longer our troops stay, the more they become convinced of this.

I believe the Iraq citizens may be simply misinformed about our presence and this should really be a battle of communication, somewhat like the Cold Wars battle of ideals. Becoming educated and clarifying what's really happening and why might settle the bloodshed, but because the majority of us, the American people, know that the war isn't as heroic as some of us still believe (nay I), the UN need to be informed as well; rather, the UN should demand a clear explanation in an authoritative stand it should be in instead of stay in the dark and sit back. Like many who've already mentioned before, Bush and various government officials have apparently conspired to commit criminal acts much earlier than was officially proposed. Why they haven't properly informed anyone of their true intention or been properly tarred-and-feathered is beyond me.

 

[her209]

Send the politicians to personally distribute food and water. Yeah, go America!

 

[Willoughbyva]

I just want to make a point. I think it is all about the oil for the terrorists. If the Iraqi people want america there then who are they to say otherwise. I think for the terrorist it is about the oil and having a base of operations. That is what I think about the upper tear of the terrorists. For the ones who actually go out and do these horrifying things it might be religious or want more terrioritory that just so happens to be a gold mine of oil. I was thinking of something else, but I forgot.

 

[Willoughbyva]

This thread gave me an idea of a tv show. It would be called brain storming. It would have a host or moderator and it would have guests come on and talk about what they think about solving problems. Something sort of like the old Bill Mahr sho, except it wouldn't be so funny. Also during this show the panelists would be told to use creativity and not to worry about what they say so much. Bill Marh found out the hard way that people are very judgemental. So these people need free space to talk and think. It would sort of be like a thinktank on tv. Wouldn't that be the ultimate reality tv show?

 

[rchiu]

Well, depending on what you define as quagmire. If you are talking about those insurgence targeting American troop, they will be gone after American leave. But if you are talking about the insurgence against current government officials, terrorist acts against police and Iraqi people, that is a problem much harder to solve.

You see, Iraq consists of three main ethnic/religious group, and conflicts between those groups have been going on for hundreds if not thousand years. Saddam Hussien stabilized the country by strong hand tactic, but Bush has to go in and break the balance of power. Well, now America has to take on this conflict that's been going on for ages. This type of ethnic/religious conflict is the toughest conflict to resolve, blood has been spilled for centuries and each group has some grudges against the others built upon centuries of conflicts. And now having an outsider trying to intervene just fuels the fire.

Only ignorant people compare Iraq with Japan and Germany. We never had to deal with internal conflicts within those countries. In Iraq, you establish a government, some group is going to feel left out and try to topple the government. There is just no easy way to stop this internal conflict that?s been going on for a very long time.

 

[her209]

Originally posted by: rchiu
Only ignorant people compare Iraq with Japan and Germany. We never had to deal with internal conflicts within those countries.

Bingo!

 

[Willoughbyva]

Perhaps the best solution is education. Perhaps it might take a generation or two, but it might be a long term solution. I don't know what would be the short term solution. Train the Iraqi people better. Secure the borders. Issue personal ID cards and have visitors use visa or some type of thing to make it known that they are there leagaly. Anyone without a ID or Visa would be questioned. The ID and visa cards need to be computerized. So for a cheap way they could use barcode readers with barcodes on the cards. The computers scanning the card will have english and arebic options so depending on who is trying to get the information they will understand it.

I'm tired I'll try to think up more stuff later.

 

[NeenerNeener]

Sounds like a cool TV show to me.

I disagree that for the terrorists, it is about the oil. We are the ones who need the oil as we consume at least a third of the world's supply. Indeed, oil is power, as we see with the administrations' recent posturing with Venezuela, for instance. I think it is more of the religious zealotry that the terrorist leaders are exploiting to convince people to give themselves over to the jihad. We make an easy target for that. We have military bases in places considered holy by the Muslims. Indeed, one of our greatest offenses, in their eyes, is the military bases we have had in Saudi Arabia since Gulf War I. Keep in mind that most of the $400k used for the 9/11 attacks was funneled through religious donations (see 9/11 commission report). Our mere presence in the middle-east incenses Muslims. It doesn't help that we are seen as crusaders or oil profiteers, since our recent invasion.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: her209

Originally posted by: rchiu
Only ignorant people compare Iraq with Japan and Germany. We never had to deal with internal conflicts within those countries.

Bingo!

"internal conflicts"? What do you mean by that? Why does that mean no comparison can be made even if whatever you mean by "internal conflicts" is true?


***

OP - there is no quagmire. The only thing to fix is the security of Iraq and we are doing that so other reconstruction efforts can move along.

CsG

 

[ForThePeople]

Originally posted by: NeenerNeener
Let's have a spin-off! Our current situation sucks. Let's try to come up with solutions.


Given the gross incompetence and criminality of our leaders' actions, we cannot change the damage they've done. I want Iraq to succeed as a democracy just as much as any Bush supporter. Given that, I would like to offer a solution to our current quagmire.

The Iraqi police that we have been training have sustained more casualties than our own troops. This proves their willingness to fight for their own freedom. In order for America to "succeed" by getting the hell out of there and sustaining the minimum casualties possible from here on out, and for Iraq to succeed in remaining free from tyrannical regimes. These Iraqi police must be put in charge of defending the Green Zone. Any hope of a stable government lies in that zone. We can provide air support, but ground troops must go! Secondly, we need to get our boys the he11 out of there. If the Iraqi police are not seen as merely helping "the occupiers" and instead represent the hope of Iraqi freedom from thugs, IMO, they will not be as under attack as they are now. The Iraqis will need to continue to take democracy into their own hands. Then...maybe, the Iraqis can win.

However, I sense a resistance to our pulling out for the mere reason that then the contractors would need to move out too. Then no more free oil for the profiteers.

So...Any ideas?

I have one idea.

I volunteer cwjerome, CAD, Rip and a few others as infrantrymen. They believe so strongly in Bush's glorious war and the righteousness of freeing Iraqis, it is quite obvious that their recruitment papers got lost in the mail. So I'll resend them so they can go and really support the troops, you know, by actually giving supporting fire and drawing bullets away from other troops.

What's that, CAD, you have a new baby and can't just put your life on hold? Too f'in bad. There's tons of other people in Iraq, right now, who haven't seen their children in years. Sacrifice for the good of your country, teach your kids patriotism of the un-hollow kind.

What's that, you already served? Good. But you may not have gotten the memo... we need you again. So please enlist ASAP.

Or you could do what you do now and let other people get shot at on your behalf. As Bill Maher said "but Bill, I put a support the troops ribbon on my Tahoe, what more can any man do?"

It is immoral to allow other men to get shot at in your behalf. It is immoral to make other people kill on your behalf.

The difference between red and blue states isn't patriotism... it's hypocrisy.

We in the blue states don't think this war is just and don't want to be shot at or killed for Bush... and so we don't want anyone else to be shot at either.

You merely think the war is just as long as other people take the bullets and other families receive the caskets.

How's that for family values? How's that for morals you lying, hypocrital, chickensh*t little bast*rds...

 

[NeenerNeener]

We can't even secure our own borders!

 

[NeenerNeener]

Every state is a mixture of red and blue. Purple states, darnit! I agree with your gist though, Forthepeople. Some guy at work once asked me why I don't join up because he said he would but he was too old. He said it sounded like fun. The ones that bother me are the war cheerleaders that want others to fight for them. I think that term is "chickenhawk". Cheney got five deferments when he could have served in Vietnam, but he had "better things to do", same with John Bolton i.e. "I got better things to do than get my ass shot off in a rice paddie". Yet these guys talk all tough about national security!

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: ForThePeople

Originally posted by: NeenerNeener
Let's have a spin-off! Our current situation sucks. Let's try to come up with solutions.


Given the gross incompetence and criminality of our leaders' actions, we cannot change the damage they've done. I want Iraq to succeed as a democracy just as much as any Bush supporter. Given that, I would like to offer a solution to our current quagmire.

The Iraqi police that we have been training have sustained more casualties than our own troops. This proves their willingness to fight for their own freedom. In order for America to "succeed" by getting the hell out of there and sustaining the minimum casualties possible from here on out, and for Iraq to succeed in remaining free from tyrannical regimes. These Iraqi police must be put in charge of defending the Green Zone. Any hope of a stable government lies in that zone. We can provide air support, but ground troops must go! Secondly, we need to get our boys the he11 out of there. If the Iraqi police are not seen as merely helping "the occupiers" and instead represent the hope of Iraqi freedom from thugs, IMO, they will not be as under attack as they are now. The Iraqis will need to continue to take democracy into their own hands. Then...maybe, the Iraqis can win.

However, I sense a resistance to our pulling out for the mere reason that then the contractors would need to move out too. Then no more free oil for the profiteers.

So...Any ideas?

I have one idea.

I volunteer cwjerome, CAD, Rip and a few others as infrantrymen. They believe so strongly in Bush's glorious war and the righteousness of freeing Iraqis, it is quite obvious that their recruitment papers got lost in the mail. So I'll resend them so they can go and really support the troops, you know, by actually giving supporting fire and drawing bullets away from other troops.

What's that, CAD, you have a new baby and can't just put your life on hold? Too f'in bad. There's tons of other people in Iraq, right now, who haven't seen their children in years. Sacrifice for the good of your country, teach your kids patriotism of the un-hollow kind.

What's that, you already served? Good. But you may not have gotten the memo... we need you again. So please enlist ASAP.

Or you could do what you do now and let other people get shot at on your behalf. As Bill Maher said "but Bill, I put a support the troops ribbon on my Tahoe, what more can any man do?"

It is immoral to allow other men to get shot at in your behalf. It is immoral to make other people kill on your behalf.

The difference between red and blue states isn't patriotism... it's hypocrisy.

We in the blue states don't think this war is just and don't want to be shot at or killed for Bush... and so we don't want anyone else to be shot at either.

You merely think the war is just as long as other people take the bullets and other families receive the caskets.

How's that for family values? How's that for morals you lying, hypocrital, chickensh*t little bast*rds...

I don't see you joining the human sheilds so you can take your asinine whining and shove it.

CsG

 

[Steeplerot]

Originally posted by: ForThePeople

Originally posted by: NeenerNeener
Let's have a spin-off! Our current situation sucks. Let's try to come up with solutions.


Given the gross incompetence and criminality of our leaders' actions, we cannot change the damage they've done. I want Iraq to succeed as a democracy just as much as any Bush supporter. Given that, I would like to offer a solution to our current quagmire.

The Iraqi police that we have been training have sustained more casualties than our own troops. This proves their willingness to fight for their own freedom. In order for America to "succeed" by getting the hell out of there and sustaining the minimum casualties possible from here on out, and for Iraq to succeed in remaining free from tyrannical regimes. These Iraqi police must be put in charge of defending the Green Zone. Any hope of a stable government lies in that zone. We can provide air support, but ground troops must go! Secondly, we need to get our boys the he11 out of there. If the Iraqi police are not seen as merely helping "the occupiers" and instead represent the hope of Iraqi freedom from thugs, IMO, they will not be as under attack as they are now. The Iraqis will need to continue to take democracy into their own hands. Then...maybe, the Iraqis can win.

However, I sense a resistance to our pulling out for the mere reason that then the contractors would need to move out too. Then no more free oil for the profiteers.

So...Any ideas?

I have one idea.

I volunteer cwjerome, CAD, Rip and a few others as infrantrymen. They believe so strongly in Bush's glorious war and the righteousness of freeing Iraqis, it is quite obvious that their recruitment papers got lost in the mail. So I'll resend them so they can go and really support the troops, you know, by actually giving supporting fire and drawing bullets away from other troops.

What's that, CAD, you have a new baby and can't just put your life on hold? Too f'in bad. There's tons of other people in Iraq, right now, who haven't seen their children in years. Sacrifice for the good of your country, teach your kids patriotism of the un-hollow kind.

What's that, you already served? Good. But you may not have gotten the memo... we need you again. So please enlist ASAP.

Or you could do what you do now and let other people get shot at on your behalf. As Bill Maher said "but Bill, I put a support the troops ribbon on my Tahoe, what more can any man do?"

It is immoral to allow other men to get shot at in your behalf. It is immoral to make other people kill on your behalf.

The difference between red and blue states isn't patriotism... it's hypocrisy.

We in the blue states don't think this war is just and don't want to be shot at or killed for Bush... and so we don't want anyone else to be shot at either.

You merely think the war is just as long as other people take the bullets and other families receive the caskets.

How's that for family values? How's that for morals you lying, hypocrital, chickensh*t little bast*rds...

BAM! another chickenhawk neocon knockout!


And yet they keep coming back for more....the power of rush is strong in the dark side yes? foxnews feeds the hate they do... /silly yoda voice

(going to see SW today)

 

[NeenerNeener]

Why would someone join a war they fervently disagree with?