NG's, Reservists and more Marines going to Iraq

HappyPuppy

Lifer
Apr 5, 2001
16,997
2
71
Yep, the War's over, but we keep mobilizing more troops to mop up. How many more mothers and fathers, sons and daughters are going to be maimed or die before this is over?

We are not going to cram Democracy and Freedom down the throats of the Iraqis. We tried it once before and it didn't work. We kept throwing more personnel and bombs at them and, in the end, we pulled out and left them to their own ends.

Freedom and liberty, self determination and free choice are things a people have to want enough to fight for themselves. It can not be given to them.

It is sad that we can't ensure what we have for all humanity, but it is reality. We can have a positive effect on those societies that are ready, willing and able to accept our way of life, but we will never have the capacity to change entire diverse societies.

Just a few thoughts on Thanksgiving eve.

God bless our troops and may they all come home safe and sound.

Happy Thanksgiving, everybody.
 

Genesys

Golden Member
Nov 10, 2003
1,536
0
0
you cant pull out now, otherwise you let the reminants of the Baathist party come back, and if that happens, they be pissed off. And if that happens, you know there will be a crackdown on all dissenters and then life will go back to the way it was.

No, we have to have the fortitude and will to see this one to the end.
 

mastertech01

Moderator Emeritus Elite Member
Nov 13, 1999
11,875
282
126
I would hope you could see that the guys who are over there now need to be relieved by fresh troops. You cant do that without mobilizing their replacements. NO?
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,265
126
The problem is that the Iraqis were myred in quicksand, and we jumped in to help them.

The troops need to be relieved, and we can't pull out. The longer we stay, the worse it will get, and the worse it gets, the less we can afford to leave. This was a problem that should have been forseen before the invasion. The only reason to remove Saddam from a justifiable US standpoint was if he presented a clear and immediate threat to us. Obviously, this was not true. Now, Saddam is gone, and we have conquered the country. Unfortunately, conquering does not equal submission.

So, we will keep sending in troops for whatever purpose, and they will keep dying a few at a time, and when we leave, Iraq will hold together about as well as the Balkans did.

I posted this quote before the war (which I publically opposed) from Churchill

"Never, never, never believe any war will be smooth and easy, or that anyone who embarks on the strange voyage can measure the tides and hurricanes he will encounter. The statesman who yields to war fever must realize that once the signal is given, he is no longer the master of policy but the slave of unforeseeable and uncontrollable events."

This administration did not anticipate a difficult occupation. They expected a more difficult war, but as they have done so many times before, vastly superior forces were not met with all out resistance. They were allowed in, and the door locked behind them.

Well, I hope for a peaceful day for our troops.
 

TallBill

Lifer
Apr 29, 2001
46,044
62
91
at least we're actively hunting and killing again... wondering when my time will come that i get to head over to iraq..

<-- arm;y reserves
 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,530
3
0
Originally posted by: TallBill
at least we're actively hunting and killing again... wondering when my time will come that i get to head over to iraq..

<-- arm;y reserves
Yeah so much for the Promise not to be a Nation Builder and the World's Policeman

 

XMan

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
12,513
49
91
Originally posted by: mastertech01
I would hope you could see that the guys who are over there now need to be relieved by fresh troops. You cant do that without mobilizing their replacements. NO?

 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,265
126
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
We need more troops there to protect the ones that are already there.

I disagree. Putting more troops merely increases our stake in the area. LBJ thought this the solution to VN. All we would be doing is supplying more targets for the opposition. If they were uniformed troops in a conventional war, then it would make sense. This is a conflict where the enemy looks like friendlies. If a hundred thousand dint know who to shoot, how will twice that know?
 

miguel

Senior member
Nov 2, 2001
621
0
0
Yep, the War's over, but we keep mobilizing more troops to mop up. How many more mothers and fathers, sons and daughters are going to be maimed or die before this is over?

Whoever said the war was over? I distinctly remember being told that this would be a long process (fighting global terrorism)...
 

charrison

Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
17,033
1
81
This is a troop rotation, total number of troops in iraq is going down. By the time these 3000 marines to get to iraq, the total number of american troops in iraq will be down by 1/3 from the peak 150,000.
 

Gaard

Diamond Member
Feb 17, 2002
8,911
1
0
Originally posted by: miguel
Yep, the War's over, but we keep mobilizing more troops to mop up. How many more mothers and fathers, sons and daughters are going to be maimed or die before this is over?

Whoever said the war was over? I distinctly remember being told that this would be a long process (fighting global terrorism)...

I agree with you that this war isn't over. I disagree, however, that this war is part of the WoT.

 

miguel

Senior member
Nov 2, 2001
621
0
0
Originally posted by: Gaard
Originally posted by: miguel
Yep, the War's over, but we keep mobilizing more troops to mop up. How many more mothers and fathers, sons and daughters are going to be maimed or die before this is over?

Whoever said the war was over? I distinctly remember being told that this would be a long process (fighting global terrorism)...

I agree with you that this war isn't over. I disagree, however, that this war is part of the WoT.

I can respect that Gaard. The reason I say it's part of the WoT is because that's what it was sold as. Bush went into Iraq saying it was part of the WoT. Others said it wasn't. I mean, if he said it was part of the WoB or something else, and now says it's part of the WoT, then I would agree with you that it was not part of the WoT. Wow, that was confusing to write...