If you Believe the War is "Going Well" for the Coalition, you may not like this Thread . . .

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

apoppin

Lifer
Mar 9, 2000
34,890
1
0
alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: Alistar7
I likethe story of a busload of Iraqis crossing paths with american troops, apparently they were aware we were rationing MREs, so they stopped their bus, and prepared a feast with meat, goat, lamb, chicken, and fresh bread, vegs, and fruits. The people helping to build the water pipeline in Basra is another great story. When the Iraqi people feel SAFE enough to speak ther mind most I've heard are a bit weary of our resolve to finish the job, but hoping we will this time. The CROWDS helping our soldiers and essentially hanging out and BS'ing with them are a good indication of the majority I feel. Reports of Iraqi citizens recieving BASIC first aid, then telling their family and friends it was the most extensive and best medical treatemnt they ever recieved...
rolleye.gif
also make me feel we will easily win over the hearts of the IRaqi people.

We will rebuild their once great nation, their oil will be put to use for THEIR BENEFIT, they will enjoy their freedom just as much as their prosperity. The immediate $$$$ potential makes them unlike Afghanistan, or even Japan. During WW2 Japan's industrial base was invested in wartime production, and consequently bombed continously. There is already a pipeline in place for all the Iraqi liquid investment capital, you just have to pull the ships up to the offshore oil pumping dock and cash the checks. World class schools for their children, top notch hospitals for the old and sick. Good jobs in a stable propersous economy, nice house, car, the right to live, speak, and think what you wish within reason of course. Yes I can see the reason they wouldn't want to change from the wonderfull lifestyle they enjoy now.

Wait till they are FREE, then they can speak for THEMSELVES...it's been their struggle, their families slaughtered and oppressed, I think the decision should be left up to them.

I think the US should make every effort to capture Saddam alive and place him on the ballot, two times. One for President, the other for public execution......

I forone can't wait to watch CNN as the Iraqi people go into voting booths with the ability to freely and anonymously cast their vote without fear of reprisal.



And we will even send some vote counters from Florida to make sure they get it right....:D
I sure love a "best case scenario" every now and then. I think just ONE ballot with two CLEAR choices for Saddam's future seems right . . . no chance of Hanging Chad. :D

I am hoping you are even half right. :)

 

CaptnKirk

Lifer
Jul 25, 2002
10,053
0
71
Good greif Al-7, you are the Uber-Optomist ! I liked the story of the Viet Cong who welcomed our presence so much that they armed their 8 year olds and fed us poison - while their
12 year old daughters could blow us up so they could be free of the opression that the French had laid on them. You can't force a foriegn lifestyle on anyone no matter how well intentioned it 'Feels-good-at-the-time' appears to be. If those Iraqi's are getting houses and cars as a perk in the reconstruction, we better start looking for inner city neighborhoods that we can 'Improve' right here in the USA ! Berkely comes to mind - but so does Cleveland. Health care for their aged ? We don't even do that for ourselves, except for the Acients of the Congress, who are set for life. Allah chose them to sit atop the 'Sands of Wealth' so they could have the final say as to whether or not you get to drive your SUV at 80 on the highway.

I for one can't wait for the election where all those people get to vote for Jeb Hussein.

Oh god! so much bait ! so little flame !

We've got a ways to go on this, but we'll pay forever.

Go Litton/Raytheon !

I just love leting it run together without tabbing back !
maybeI'lljustruneverythingtogetherbynotusingthespacebar!
 

Alistar7

Lifer
May 13, 2002
11,983
0
0
Originally posted by: CaptnKirk
Good greif Al-7, you are the Uber-Optomist ! I liked the story of the Viet Cong who welcomed our presence so much that they armed their 8 year olds and fed us poison - while their
12 year old daughters could blow us up so they could be free of the opression that the French had laid on them. You can't force a foriegn lifestyle on anyone no matter how well intentioned it 'Feels-good-at-the-time' appears to be. If those Iraqi's are getting houses and cars as a perk in the reconstruction, we better start looking for inner city neighborhoods that we can 'Improve' right here in the USA ! Berkely comes to mind - but so does Cleveland. Health care for their aged ? We don't even do that for ourselves, except for the Acients of the Congress, who are set for life. Allah chose them to sit atop the 'Sands of Wealth' so they could have the final say as to whether or not you get to drive your SUV at 80 on the highway.

I for one can't wait for the election where all those people get to vote for Jeb Hussein.

Oh god! so much bait ! so little flame !

We've got a ways to go on this, but we'll pay forever.

Go Litton/Raytheon !

I just love leting it run together without tabbing back !
maybeI'lljustruneverythingtogetherbynotusingthespacebar!

who pissed in your cornflakes? seems my optimism is being rewarded though...
 

RossGr

Diamond Member
Jan 11, 2000
3,383
1
0
I can't help wondering what all the anti war people, and even the other Arab nations will say 5 years from now, to the free Iraqi who asks, "Where were you?"
 

apoppin

Lifer
Mar 9, 2000
34,890
1
0
alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: RossGr
I can't help wondering what all the anti war people, and even the other Arab nations will say 5 years from now, to the free Iraqi who asks, "Where were you?"
Gee, that same thing was being said in 1970-73 about the Viet Nam war . . . We "lost" that one. :p

rolleye.gif


And IF the war is a DISASTER, what will the Pro-war people be saying? ;)
 

BaDaBooM

Golden Member
May 3, 2000
1,077
1
0
Originally posted by: apoppin
Originally posted by: apoppin
rolleye.gif


And IF the war is a DISASTER, what will the Pro-war people be saying? ;)

Uhh... It has been just over 2 weeks and they are in Bagdad already and like it was posted above the majority of the people want Sadam out when they are able to speak freely. I don't think it will be a disaster. I mean, it's not over yet but there would have to be some ridiculously improbable turn arounds for Sadam for it to become a disaster.
 

apoppin

Lifer
Mar 9, 2000
34,890
1
0
alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: BaDaBooM
Originally posted by: apoppin
Originally posted by: RossGr
rolleye.gif


And IF the war is a DISASTER, what will the Pro-war people be saying? ;)

Uhh... It has been just over 2 weeks and they are in Bagdad already and like it was posted above the majority of the people want Sadam out when they are able to speak freely. I don't think it will be a disaster. I mean, it's not over yet but there would have to be some ridiculously improbable turn arounds for Sadam for it to become a disaster.
It's a "what IF" and you didn't answer it. :p

*UPDATE* Charle Rose - Saddam is Likely to Unleash WMD at his end. This QUALIFIES as a DISASTER. it is certainly possible and I think the Pro-war guys are too AFRAID to even CONSIDER the possiblity of the war becoming a disaster for everyone.
rolleye.gif


You are forgetting that - although the Arab world hates Saddam, they hate US even more for "invading" Iraq. ;)
 

BaDaBooM

Golden Member
May 3, 2000
1,077
1
0
Originally posted by: apoppin
Originally posted by: BaDaBooM
Originally posted by: apoppin
Originally posted by: apoppin
rolleye.gif


And IF the war is a DISASTER, what will the Pro-war people be saying? ;)

Uhh... It has been just over 2 weeks and they are in Bagdad already and like it was posted above the majority of the people want Sadam out when they are able to speak freely. I don't think it will be a disaster. I mean, it's not over yet but there would have to be some ridiculously improbable turn arounds for Sadam for it to become a disaster.
It's a "what IF" and you didn't answer it. :p

*UPDATE* Charle Rose - Saddam is Likely to Unleash WMD at his end. This QUALIFIES as a DISASTER. it is certainly possible and I think the Pro-war guys are too AFRAID to even CONSIDER the possiblity of the war becoming a disaster for everyone.
rolleye.gif


You are forgetting that - although the Arab world hates Saddam, they hate US even more for "invading" Iraq. ;)

What IF pigs fly out my a$$ and start eating people? The only real what if is if Saddam uses WMD... and I will answer that what if:

It will be a disaster, but the war would not have been a disaster. It would be caused by Saddam and would VALIDATE the very reason that we went in there! The entire world will see that the "pro-war" (not pro-war, pro removing saddam) people were right to want to do this. It will be a tragedy for those that die from it and I hope their families get to take it out on Saddam when they find him.
 

RossGr

Diamond Member
Jan 11, 2000
3,383
1
0
Originally posted by: BaDaBooM
Originally posted by: apoppin
Originally posted by: RossGr
rolleye.gif


And IF the war is a DISASTER, what will the Pro-war people be saying? ;)

Uhh... It has been just over 2 weeks and they are in Bagdad already and like it was posted above the majority of the people want Sadam out when they are able to speak freely. I don't think it will be a disaster. I mean, it's not over yet but there would have to be some ridiculously improbable turn arounds for Sadam for it to become a disaster.

Hey guys, please be careful when you edit quotes! I am being credited with saying something here that was actually a response to me.


What if the war is a disaster! Get real, militarily the only disaster is the Iraqi defense. We have the capability to go where we please when we please. Naturally because our force commanders have some brains there will be places they choose not to go. If the 3rd Inf Div. choose to pack up and drive to Basra today there is no way the Iraqis could stop it. As it is they choose to take selective tours of Baghdad. Again there is no way the Iraqis can interfere with their movements. There will be no military disaster.

Yes the use of WMD in urban Baghdad would be a disaster, but not for our forces.

Now politically, that is a different story, of which only the first pages are being written and we cannot possible know how it will unfold at this point in time.
 

apoppin

Lifer
Mar 9, 2000
34,890
1
0
alienbabeltech.com
How about the Russian military analysys?
Military analysts believe that today and tomorrow will decide the outcome of the attack on Baghdad that begun two days ago. If the coalition forces fail to break the Iraqi defenses, then by the weekend the US will be forced to curtail all attacks and to resort to positional warfare while regrouping forces and integrating them with the fresh divisions arriving from the US and Europe. Such a tactical pause in the war, although not a complete halt in combat operations (the coalition command will continue trying to use localized attacks to improve its positions), may last seven to fourteen days and will lead to a full re-evaluation of all coalition battle plans

The Battle Plan for Baghdad? by MSNBCThe Battle Plan for Baghdad?
A secret Pentagon report sketches seven scenarios.

You "experts" have closed your minds. :p{

rolleye.gif
Yes the use of WMD in urban Baghdad would be a disaster, but not for our forces.

That is a RIDICULOUS comment!

Use of WMD wouldn't be "bad" for OUR forces?
rolleye.gif
 

BaDaBooM

Golden Member
May 3, 2000
1,077
1
0
Originally posted by: RossGrHey guys, please be careful when you edit quotes! I am being credited with saying something here that was actually a response to me.

Oops, I guess apoppin miss-quoted and I didn't notice it so it followed with me. Fixed. :eek:
 

apoppin

Lifer
Mar 9, 2000
34,890
1
0
alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: BaDaBooM
Originally posted by: RossGrHey guys, please be careful when you edit quotes! I am being credited with saying something here that was actually a response to me.

Oops, I guess apoppin miss-quoted and I didn't notice it so it followed with me. Fixed. :eek:
That's what happens when you hit "quote". :p

rolleye.gif


If the Pro-war bigots would READ my posts they might have a clue to what I am really saying.
 

BaDaBooM

Golden Member
May 3, 2000
1,077
1
0
Originally posted by: apoppin
How about the Russian military analysys?
Military analysts believe that today and tomorrow will decide the outcome of the attack on Baghdad that begun two days ago. If the coalition forces fail to break the Iraqi defenses, then by the weekend the US will be forced to curtail all attacks and to resort to positional warfare while regrouping forces and integrating them with the fresh divisions arriving from the US and Europe. Such a tactical pause in the war, although not a complete halt in combat operations (the coalition command will continue trying to use localized attacks to improve its positions), may last seven to fourteen days and will lead to a full re-evaluation of all coalition battle plans

The Battle Plan for Baghdad? by MSNBCThe Battle Plan for Baghdad?
A secret Pentagon report sketches seven scenarios.

You "experts" have closed your minds. :p{

I fail to see why this means it is going poorly. They say it is bad but from what I understand that is the plan. They aren't fighting like they could because they are trying to avoid collateral damage. These forces are only holding up because we let them; we don't want to level the towns.
 

apoppin

Lifer
Mar 9, 2000
34,890
1
0
alienbabeltech.com
I didn't say it was "going poorly".

Look at this topic's title - there is a BIG difference between something "not going well" and "going poorly".

All I am trying to do is stimulate DISCUSSION of the "world-view" of the Iraq war.

EDIT: Only a TINY percentage of the US population even thinks we will have more than a thousand Coalition casualties.
 

BaDaBooM

Golden Member
May 3, 2000
1,077
1
0
Originally posted by: apoppin
Originally posted by: BaDaBooM
Originally posted by: RossGrHey guys, please be careful when you edit quotes! I am being credited with saying something here that was actually a response to me.

Oops, I guess apoppin miss-quoted and I didn't notice it so it followed with me. Fixed. :eek:
That's what happens when you hit "quote". :p

rolleye.gif


If the Pro-war bigots would READ my posts they might have a clue to what I am really saying.

hey pal, you're the one that quoted it wrong to start. I read your content, just didn't notice it had the wrong name on it. And personal attacks aren't necessary.

big·ot
n.
One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ.

I'm not intolerant of you, just saying you are wrong. I would say someone who is intolerant would be calling the other side a bigot. ;)
 

Marshallj

Platinum Member
Mar 26, 2003
2,326
0
0
Originally posted by: apoppin

That is a RIDICULOUS comment!

Use of WMD wouldn't be "bad" for OUR forces?

It's always bad, but our forces have the gear to protect themselves. Civilians don't.

If nerve gas was used in the city there would be thousands of civilian deaths, while our troops will mostly be protected. Sure, some will be caught offguard, but it won't affect us as much as it affects the people.
 

Marshallj

Platinum Member
Mar 26, 2003
2,326
0
0
Originally posted by: apoppin
EDIT: Only a TINY percentage of the US population even thinks we will have more than a thousand Coalition casualties.

Do you think we'll have more than that?


 

apoppin

Lifer
Mar 9, 2000
34,890
1
0
alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: Marshallj
Originally posted by: apoppin
EDIT: Only a TINY percentage of the US population even thinks we will have more than a thousand Coalition casualties.

Do you think we'll have more than that?
I SURE HOPE NOT!

However, if Saddam unleashes his WMD inside Baghdad as his world is about to end - I fear it is possible.
 

Marshallj

Platinum Member
Mar 26, 2003
2,326
0
0
Originally posted by: apoppin
I SURE HOPE NOT!

However, if Saddam unleashes his WMD inside Baghdad as his world is about to end - I fear it is possible.

Yeah. Let's just hope it never comes to that.
 

RossGr

Diamond Member
Jan 11, 2000
3,383
1
0
Originally posted by: Marshallj
Originally posted by: apoppin

That is a RIDICULOUS comment!

Use of WMD wouldn't be "bad" for OUR forces?

It's always bad, but our forces have the gear to protect themselves. Civilians don't.

If nerve gas was used in the city there would be thousands of civilian deaths, while our troops will mostly be protected. Sure, some will be caught offguard, but it won't affect us as much as it affects the people.

Thanks for saying it for me!

As far as I know Iraq does not have a nuclear bomb, now THAT would be a diaster.
 

apoppin

Lifer
Mar 9, 2000
34,890
1
0
alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: RossGr
Originally posted by: Marshallj
Originally posted by: apoppin

That is a RIDICULOUS comment!

Use of WMD wouldn't be "bad" for OUR forces?

It's always bad, but our forces have the gear to protect themselves. Civilians don't.

If nerve gas was used in the city there would be thousands of civilian deaths, while our troops will mostly be protected. Sure, some will be caught offguard, but it won't affect us as much as it affects the people.

Thanks for saying it for me!

As far as I know Iraq does not have a nuclear bomb, now THAT would be a diaster.
"Dirty Bomb" Nukes ;)

*COUGH, COUGH*

That would also be pretty "UNconventional". :Q

 

apoppin

Lifer
Mar 9, 2000
34,890
1
0
alienbabeltech.com
A good read from MSNBC.comMuslim world torn over war in Iraq

Hatred of Saddam Hussein curbs anger toward the West
LONDON, April 6 ? For Muslims throughout the world, the war in Iraq has set off a wave of anger, sadness, frustration and despair.

WHAT IT hasn?t done, so far at least, is produce a flood of jihadist recruits willing to die for President Saddam Hussein?s cause, or a backlash strong enough to topple Arab governments with close ties to the West, according to interviews conducted over the past week with Muslims around the world.
The televised daily scenes of civilian casualties, humiliated Iraqi prisoners of war and triumphant American warriors rolling through southern Iraq have left a bitter taste in the mouths of millions. But political Islam, a potent if divided force, appears torn between its fear and suspicion of the West and its long-standing hatred of Hussein, who is perceived as one of the most secular and totalitarian of Arab leaders.
?Muslims are depressed and angry, and many are praying not just for an end to the war but for America to be defeated,? said Azzam Tamimi, director of the Institute of Islamic Political Thought here. ?But that doesn?t mean they support the regime ? Islamists have always hated Saddam, although some of them may begin to see him as a hero because he is fighting the Americans.?

From London to Cairo to Jakarta, these raw, divided emotions were on display this past week as Muslims sought to respond to the carnage of war. While some Muslims in the Middle East sought unsuccessfully to make their way to Baghdad to fight and die alongside their Iraqi brethren, the vast majority there and in Europe and Asia sat by helplessly.
Two decades ago, the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan inspired a generation of Islamic warriors ? trained and funded by Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and the United States ? to launch a jihad, or holy war. The Afghan mujaheddin brought about the Soviet defeat in Afghanistan. And led by Osama bin Laden, some veterans of that struggle participated in the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks on the United States.

NO GOVERNMENT ASSISTANCE
This time, no major government appears prepared to help a new generation of jihadists take on the West. Instead, government crackdowns following the Sept. 11 attacks have made it harder for radicals to preach, raise funds or recruit followers.

At the same time, the wave of popular opposition to the war outside of the United States and the huge antiwar protests of recent months have created new ties between Muslims and mainstream communities in Europe, and eased the Muslim sense of alienation.
?Despite language barriers and cultural barriers, people did come together and found they shared a huge common ground,? said Anas Altikriti, 28, an Iraqi native who does volunteer work for the Muslim Association of Britain. ?This was enormously positive for Muslims all over Europe, especially young people who otherwise might be extremely alienated.?
Security officials in Britain, France and a host of other nations say they have seen no signs yet that the war has produced a new wave of recruits or activity on behalf of the al Qaeda terrorist network. But there is little doubt that the war has created new sympathy for the organization among Muslims. Ramazan Ucar, imam at the Centrum-Mosque in Hamburg, Germany, the city where some of the Sept. 11 attacks were planned, had publicly condemned the terror attacks. Now, he says, he feels differently.
?I prayed for the victims after the 11th of September,? he said, ? but today I would say if something like this attack happens again in the U.S.A., I would not pray for them.?

INTERNAL STRUGGLES
Some of the more radical positions taken by Muslim clerics reflect internal struggles between rival Islamic groups. In Russia, for example, a top Muslim leader this week declared holy war against the United States, but was immediately rebuked by a rival Muslim cleric who urged Russia?s 20 million Muslims to confine their opposition to prayer and charitable donations.
Still, many analysts expect a sharp increase in terrorism. A Western diplomat in Riyadh said popular anger and anti-American sentiment have raised the potential for terror attacks against Western targets in Saudi Arabia to a higher level than has been seen in ?a long, long time.? Others experts warn of attacks against pro-American leaders in Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Kuwait and Oman in response to what one radical here called ?the treachery of the self-appointed rulers of the Arabian Peninsula.?
In Jakarta, Robin Bush, director of the Islam and Civil Society program for the Asia Foundation in Jakarta, said: ?The anger against the United States is very strong and is widespread across the board. The repercussions will be felt for a long time.?

What follows are portraits from three capitals ? Cairo, London and Jakarta ? that reflect both the rising anger and limited actions that have so far marked political Islam?s response to the war.

Correspondent Sharon LaFraniere in Moscow, staff writer Carol Morello in Riyadh, and special correspondents Caroline Huot in Paris, Alia Ibrahim in Beirut, and Souad Mekhennet and Shannon Smiley in Berlin contributed to this report.

© 2003 The Washington Post Company

The Coalition is on a "tightrope" now.
 

conjur

No Lifer
Jun 7, 2001
58,686
3
0
Yeah....a tightrope for sure. The actions taken by the U.S. in the post-war Iraq will be very critical.

But, if you look at Al Jazeera, they sure seem to be fanning the flames of unrest against the U.S. by reporting news from the Iraqi gov't at face value.
rolleye.gif