How about some debate? Iraq

[apone99]

The fight them over there so we don't fight them over here argument didn't work for the Brits or the Spanish. Believe me Al Qadea can walk and chew gum at the same time.

The real winners of this mess is Iran. Basra and a good deal of southern Iraq are coming under the control of hardline Shia clerics supported by Iran. The Kurds to the north are busy trying to institute Kurdistan to the consternation of Turkey and the Sunni middle is embroiled in a serious insurgency that threatens to turn into a civil war.

I support the phased withdrawal proposed by Murtha. We're not going to win this thing militarily. Looking at our history, we don't do well in guerrilla wars. We can win every battle but without the support of the populace the war is lost.

[squirrel]

Apone99 here is the problem with your argument it that the majority of the Iraqi population supports us. Now I know what you are going to say "recent polls show something like 80% of the Iraqi population wants US troops out of Iraq" That is true would you be happy about foriegn troops maintaining law and order here? No of course not and neither are the Iraqi's. They want to be responsible for their own law and order, but the Iraqi's also realize that they are not ready yet to take over for the US troops. When you ask the same Iraqi's to list in importance things like getting the US troops out of the country, rebuilding infrastructure, rebuilding the education system, getting the government set up, etc. Getting the US troops out of the country comes out 5 or 6 on the list. You also see support for what the US is doing in Iraq from the fact that more and more Iraqis are volunteering for the police and army at great risk to themselves. Also in the fact that over 25% of the 4 million refugees that fled Saddam's regime have returned to the country. New buildings are being built, real estate investment by Iraqis in Iraq is on the rise. These are not the actions of people who are on the brink of civil war. These are the actions of a people that are looking forward to the future in a free and democratic country.

I would also disagree with you analysis that the country is fracturing, true the Kurds, Sunnis and Shias still have to get used to working together I don't think they are on the brink of civil war yet.

As far as guerrilla wars are concerned, I assume you are refering to Vietnam. There our biggest problem was the micromanagement of the war by Washington, and not allowing our commanders in the field to do what was necessary to win the war.

[bulldog]

Ok, I just spent way to much time researching and writing the following, and although it's still pretty rough, I'm gonna stop and post it. To make myself not spend any more time on it, I'm going to cut and run from this engagemnet before any more of my productivity falls in battle. I commend you all on remaining so civil. Shoot me a PM if you need me to see your rebuttles, as I'm going to try really hard not to read this thread anymore...

____________________

The majority of the Iraqi population is Shiite, formerly oppressed by the minority Sunnis. Of course they welcomed the US overthrow of Saddam and the Sunnis. Through the magic of Democracy, they get to vote their radical Shiite imams into power and vote radical Shiite prohibitions into law, turning Iraq into Iran Junior.

Instead of Kurds and Shiites in mass graves you'll have Kurds and Sunnis and woman who go out without a veil on. Is this the country we want to be responsible for creating? All those nice schools we're building will be teaching radical Islam. I'd rather leave them set for a population-reducing civil war than spend American soldiers lives and my tax money building the infrastructure of a country that can't help but end up at odds with American ideals and interests.

Leaving Saddam alone would have had better results than anything you will see in or coming out of Iraq in the next few decades. Turning the place to glass would be the safest alternative, but not really an option for anyone who claims to be "the good guys" to more than jokingly consider. Throwing soldiers' lives away to build Muslim schools and train and arm the Shiite "police" who were burning US flags across the border in Iran the week before signing up is not acceptable either. Getting the heck out- over, say the course of a year- looks bad, but at least that many fewer soldiers will die propping up Iran's de facto new province.

__________________

Iraqis may have met with Bin Laden. You don't think Americans met with him back when he was fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan? We armed him, just like we armed Saddam.

Nobody's disputing that Al Quedda is operating in Iraq now - but before America turned from Afghanistan to Iraq, Bin Laden was calling for the people of Iraq to rise up and overthrow Saddam's secular government.

We've also had "contact" with every premier of the Soviet Union, as well as the leaders of China, North Korea, and Iran. If having contact with the (now) enemy- nevermind supporting their evil behavior- is basis for invasion and overthrowing the government, I present exhibit A:


Maybe the French will come liberate us (again).

Presidents through Reagan created and propped up Saddam and other dictators (The Shaw of Iran, Pinochet, the Saud family, Marcos, Batista, Noriega, Musharraf...) because they were/are not radically Muslim and/or Communists. Their iron and undemocratic rule stabilized their countries and prevented civil war.

____________________________

We knew Saddam, like the rest, used torture, illegal weapons, and mass-murder to keep their countries under control, but as long as he was keeping Iran busy (since that Shaw thing didn't work out for us) we didn't care. Then the Soviets collapsed, and Bush Sr. needed a new Bad Guy. So we set out to top Saddam's record for human rights abuses in Iraq. According to UNICEF,

"The UN has verified that over one million people, more than half of them infants and toddlers, have died since August 1990 from sanctions-related causes. That’s over ten times as many people as those killed between 1979 and 1989 as a result of Iraq’s human rights record, which is calculated by Amnesty International at 130,000 people."

____________________

There were no weapons of mass destruction by 2002. We know Iraq had them at some point, because they bought them from us, but that was the '80s. The UN inspections were mostly working, and the massing of US troops in the area motivated Saddam to make SURE there was nothing to find; memos found after the invasion warned Iraqi field commanders that they would be held personally responsible for any undestroyed proscribed ordinance.

If there had been any WMDs left, buried deeply and secretly in the desert, what was it there for? If the field commanders had any stashes, or Hussain had stockpiles, why didn't they use them to save themselves? Why haven't the Sunni insurgents dug any of it up to supplement their IEDs? Oh that's right, the Iraqi's are willing to give up their lives and their country as part of a grand conspiracy to make George Bush look like either an idiot or a liar.

_______________________

Are the soldiers in Iraq so thin-skinned that we can't criticize our government? I think not. Since the government has kept us almost constantly at war since 1776, that doesn't leave a lot of room for free speech.

Marine: "Oh man, some long-haired hippy living in his parents' basement said he thinks the government should get me home to my family as soon as possible - I guess today when I'm out on patrol I'll just let the hajis shoot me."

GI: "What?!? A Senate committee has discovered The Commander In Chief is an incompetent moron who put me in harm's way to further his psychotic savior-complex? I am truly shocked that the government would waste the lives of its soldiers this way, as they have never done that before - I think I will frag my own squad in protest."

Seal: "We're gonna pull out before we can teach a few million people how to be tolerant, peace-loving and democratically responsible by killing their friends, neighbors, and family members who are either misguided and think we are invaders or got between us and someone who was? That diminishes my sense of self-worth- I'd rather we had stayed and I died and in the end the new "democratic" government elected an Ayatollah and slaughtered all the Sunnis and Kurds the day after we declared "Mission Accomplished" (again). I need a hug."

Air Force Pilot: "Meh, there wasn't anything left big enough to bomb anyhow, and the AC is only keeping the temp in my Saudi barracks down to 75*."

[Hessian Trooper]

These discussions are such a waste of time. No matter what facts you dig up people will always use slippery rhetoric for thier escape of the burdens of freedom.

[Meph]

I was originally going to make a data-specific reply about all this. You know, show links and quotes and all that. But in the end it's really futile. So I'll make this short and sweet...

In the end, no matter what we do, we lose. The middle east (well... really the world) hates us. And they hate each other. They will continue to kill each other and burn american flags in the process. It's a daily routine. 8am wake up, 8:15 grab the paper and drink coffee, 8:30 flag burning, 9am watch 3 stooges on Spike....

There will never be an end to the bloodshed over there. And there will never be an end to the hate (to each other and to us)


So I voted glass.

[squirrel]

"The UN has verified that over one million people, more than half of them infants and toddlers, have died since August 1990 from sanctions-related causes. That’s over ten times as many people as those killed between 1979 and 1989 as a result of Iraq’s human rights record, which is calculated by Amnesty International at 130,000 people."


Here is a quote from the Duelfer Report:

"[Saddam] wanted to end sanctions while preserving the capability to reconstitute his weapons of mass destruction when sanctions were lifted," a summary of the report says.

Duelfer, testifying at a Senate hearing on the report, said his account attempts to describe Iraq's weapons programs "not in isolation but in the context of the aims and objectives of the regime that created and used them."


So according to UNICEF we are killing hundreds of thousands of babies due to sanctions (which is obviously the US's fault and not Saddam's ) but as soon as the sanctions are ended Saddam is going to be making WMD again. Given enough time he will obtain nuclear weapons and then completely destabilize the region. By the way with respect to the sanctions, maybe if the French and Russians had not been lining theirs and Saddam's pockets in the Oil for Food swindle, all those children would not have died.

Meph are you saying that all the people of the Middle East are capable of is Hate? I don't believe that because you could have said the same thing about Germans and the Japanese 60 years ago. But the US went in a rebuilt those countries (with the help of the citizens of those countries, just like what we are doing now in Iraq)

Let me ask you this which would you rather have, the negotiation approach that we are taking in Iran; Where while we continue to negotiate with them, they continue to develope nuclear weapons; or the approach in Iraq? We can negotiate all we want but it will be hard to negotiate when thousands of are fellow citizens are dead from an iranian nuclear weapon exploded by a terrorist orginzation in this country.

[Electricity]

snakeeyes88usmc said:

I vote Sea of Glass and thought that at the very outcome of 9/11.
My thoughts...
Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iranistan, Iraqistan all of them including Isrealistan Turned into one Magnificint outstretching Mirror that Astronouts can see themselves in from space.
Take the Oil and grind any objectioning country to a halt by cutting off thier Petrol supplies.
Whatever happened to belief in Manifest Destiny?
We finish the "Middle East Debate".
We own the Oil.
We rule the World.

While we're at it, lets kill all the jews and blacks in america too, right?

Generaly I've learned my leason, and stay out of these kinds of debates nowadays, but every now and again i read something that makes me want to post. That being one of them. I mean seriously, what kind of response is that? Nuke the entire middle east, what a rediculious suggestion. Its almost to outragous for words.

-E

[Snake Eyes 88 USMC]

squirrel said:

Meph are you saying that all the people of the Middle East are capable of is Hate? I don't believe that because you could have said the same thing about Germans and the Japanese 60 years ago. But the US went in a rebuilt those countries (with the help of the citizens of those countries, just like what we are doing now in Iraq)

A bit off the topic of Iraq but...
Actually we Re-built Japan who actually Bombed us, Then in the 80's gave them half our damn country Via -Economy (Aotumotive-Electronic, Stack market).
Germany however was another story we bombed the piss out of them and left thier populace in ruins and then handed them off to the frekin' Commies!!!
Even though they never actually attacked us and we were involved long before we "Officialy" declared war,
Giving Mercenary groups of fighter pilots to the Brits.

After we gave the Commies a strong hold in Europe we played Cold war games w/them never actually taking action just isolating each other and "Smack Talking". Untill years later the Commies Fat bloated Anti-western government fell and in a mad scramble to stay afloat coupled w/it's Deep rooted anti-American values they sold massive amounts of weponery of all classes to anyone who had the $$.
Thus creating massive amounts of renegade and rouge nations/factions. Leaving the U.S. in it's current state today dealing w/ a world wide threat of fanatical armed attackers from any flank, including w/in our own borders as well.

[Snake Eyes 88 USMC]

electricity said:

snakeeyes88usmc said:

.

While we're at it, lets kill all the jews and blacks in america too, right?
-E

What kind of response is that?
I actually never mentioned anything about any jews or blacks.
Don't see how you could have got that idea of a race war in our country out of tha fact that I do indeed openly advocate the destruction of any enemy of our country.
You may not agree w/my method, but I think you really need to re-eximine yourself before you ever link my post w/any that crap!

[Electricity]

Hey, your the one advocating the annialation of millions upon millions of people to eliminate a couple thousand who are actively against the US.

[Vashthestampede]

Ok guys lets keep it civil

I think what electricity is trying to say is that if being a member of a race is enough to categorize someone as an enemy of our country then it is very similar to any form of ethnic cleansing.

[Snake Eyes 88 USMC]

electricity said:

Hey, your the one advocating the annialation of millions upon millions of people to eliminate a couple thousand who are actively against the US.

This isn't really a few thousand People.
It boils down to entire clash of cultrures-Religous,Moral,And Philosphical.
A clash of cultures that has been brewing for far longer that we admit.
Normally two cultures that don't see eye to eye in a world as large as ours shouldn'e be a big deal.
In this situation w/no end in site and what will undoubtably last for decades upon decades to come untill one succumbes to the other-
My vote is for ending it quickly, if violently and radically yes as ugly as it might be.
This thread is for debate and differences of opinoin and your'e entitled to disagree w/me untill the bitter end- Just don't put words in my mouth.

[jrod]

Remember, let's keep this a civil intelligent discussion!!!

As far as wiping out an entire country, I think that is madness. We are still talking about good vs. evil. If we were to kill millions of innocents (yes, innocents), who would be evil?? Yes, cultures may seem different, and in fact are different. But there are also many similarities. I do want our enemies to be utterly and completely destroyed. But not if it means lowering ourselves to the same level as Hitler, or Stalin, or Hussein, or Bin Laden.

I realize that I am ranting now, but still... this is a battle of good vs. evil. Whose side do you want to be on?

[Meph]

squirrel said:

Meph are you saying that all the people of the Middle East are capable of is Hate?

Towards us? Yes.

[Kreeper X]

millslane said:

Kreeper, thats the "nut shell" version?

Yep. There is a lot of ground to cover. Most "pacifists" and lefties tend to look at the war as a simple matter of "should we have" or "Should we ain't." The TRUTH is that it's a much more complex issue than a "go to war or not" coin toss.

There are MANY factors that led to the war. Not the least of which being the simple fact that Iraq was ordered to disarm, and NEVER proved that they had.

however, at this point, with the enemy hiding more than ever and the death toll of our troops slowly rising, i wish we could make a into a glass lake.

Here is a little context for you.

Soldiers who have died in Iraq since the war began: Aprox. 2130

People murdered in the USA in the last two years for which records are available: 12,658

Living in the United States of America, especially in cities like Washington DC and New York City (which acount for about 1000 murders per year by themselves), costs more lives than the war in Iraq has.

all kidding aside, we have to stay and finish the fight, we have to stay strong, and the more we show out support for the tropps, the better their moral will be. how can we further portray out supprt?

Running from the battle before it's won is called retreat. It's called LOSING. If we leave Iraq before the Iraqi forces are capable of fighting for themselves, it won't take long before Iraq is the new Afghanistan and a base of open and free operations for Osama and his kind.

We can't afford not to finish the fight and that's been the plan all along.

if you disagree, thats fine, but keep quite, or just don't be as vocal about it until its over.
if you agree. keep it up.

I don't agree with this statement, however. There is a legitimate reason for debate and legitimate reason for dissent.

SO long as it's legitimate (read as: not like Kerry and Durbin's actions in the last year) then speak out, because that's what makes this nation strong. If you're going to call out soldiers Nazis or announce to the world that we're losing a war that we are VERY CLEARLY winning because it might score you some political points is akin to treason.

If you look back in history, some of our greatest presidents have very very low approval rating and only time showed just how strong they really were.

Yeah and if you look back, some of those with "so-called" stellar popularity and high approval ratings are often the worst ones we've had...

Anyone remember Andrew Jackson (the original Democrat Jackass) or Bill Clinton?