Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
It's Official: Iraq More Violent Than Ever  
User currently offlineTurbo7x7 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 266 posts, RR: 5
Posted (7 years 11 months 4 days ago) and read 2553 times:

From the front page of Saturday's WaPo:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...le/2006/09/01/AR2006090100610.html

This is straight from the Pentagon, not just media hype. Here's a few quotes from the article:

Executions, kidnappings and other sectarian attacks targeting Iraqi civilians have soared over the past three months, contributing to a 51 percent rise in casualties among the population and Iraqi security forces, the report said. More than 3,000 Iraqis are killed or wounded each month, and by July, 2,000 of the casualties were the result of sectarian incidents, it showed.

. . .


Overall, the number of weekly attacks in Iraq escalated to nearly 800, the highest level since the Pentagon began gathering the statistics in April 2004, the report said. Statistics collected by defense experts, however, indicate that the level is higher than at any time since the U.S.-led invasion overthrew the Saddam Hussein government in April 2003.


In other words, Iraq has experienced THREE 9-11s in the past three months. In fact, since Iraq's population is not as large as the U.S., we can extrapolate and say it's worse, except obviously the WTC attacks had much stronger economic effects. A lot of the educated non-violent Iraqi middle-class has already left the country to safer regions so it will be harder than ever to rebuild the country without those people.


Also, in Sunday's NY Times, an article stating opium production in Afghanistan greater than ever:

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/03/wo...388ba1e0d&ei=5094&partner=homepage


Bush's idea of taking the battle to the terrorists is NOT going too well!

Should he. . .

A) increase taxes and reinstitutue the draft to compel Americans to get with the anti-terror program and support his agenda to spread democracy all over the Arab world

B) pull out of Iraq like some Dems say (I am a Dem, but I do NOT think that's a good idea)

C) split Iraq into semi-autonomous regions so Kurd, Sunni, & Shia can have their space and stop killing each other (I think this is the best chance to get out of this clusterf*** with some dignity intact IMHO).

D) stall, and dump the problem on the next president. . .


Why do I have the funny feeling that the answer is D?  Wink

32 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineDw9115 From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 449 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (7 years 11 months 4 days ago) and read 2547 times:

The Washington Post and New York Times are full of sh*t liars on any thing that deals with Bush. Now I am not saying things in Iraq are going great but they both either make things completely outlandish or out right lie to bash Bush. I also think there extremely declining subscription #'s explains a lot and most people are sick and tired of these two papers thinking whatever they say is the word of god!

User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21530 posts, RR: 55
Reply 2, posted (7 years 11 months 4 days ago) and read 2527 times:

Quoting Turbo7x7 (Thread starter):
A) increase taxes and reinstitutue the draft to compel Americans to get with the anti-terror program and support his agenda to spread democracy all over the Arab world

He has built so much of his presidency on making tax cuts permanent that he would never be able to raise taxes without losing all credibility. As for the draft, Congress will never go along with that, and I doubt the American people will either.

Quoting Turbo7x7 (Thread starter):
B) pull out of Iraq like some Dems say (I am a Dem, but I do NOT think that's a good idea)

This would also be an about-face of policy. I'm not convinced it's a good idea either.

Quoting Turbo7x7 (Thread starter):
C) split Iraq into semi-autonomous regions so Kurd, Sunni, & Shia can have their space and stop killing each other (I think this is the best chance to get out of this clusterf*** with some dignity intact IMHO).

I agree that this is the best way to get some order in there, but unfortunately it's not at all realistic. In fact, it's impossible. Sunnis have lived in Shia areas for a while, and vice versa, and forcing them to relocate isn't going to make many friends.

Quoting Turbo7x7 (Thread starter):
D) stall, and dump the problem on the next president. . .

This does look like what it's going to be. However, I don't think Bush is legitimately trying to dump everything on whoever holds the office next - it's just that that's what's happening.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineUH60FtRucker From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (7 years 11 months 4 days ago) and read 2525 times:

Quoting Turbo7x7 (Thread starter):
In other words, Iraq has experienced THREE 9-11s in the past three months.

It's true. It's so sad. I talked about this recently in another thread... but these people are tearing themselves apart. The level of violence is numbing. I have seen more dead/injured Iraqis in the last two months, than the 5 months before them.

And they're not even heavily targeting Americans anymore. They're going nuts and killing each other simply because they are different religious sects!

Quoting Turbo7x7 (Thread starter):
A lot of the educated non-violent Iraqi middle-class has already left the country to safer regions so it will be harder than ever to rebuild the country without those people.

The only thing holding this country together is the allied force. We're trying our damn hardest to keep things together. The truth is, there are quite a few Iraqis who want to see a brighter tomorrow... but the insurgents (supported by both local religious clerics and clerics from Iran and Syria) kill/intimidate anyone trying to make a difference. The insurgents only tolorate Iraqis who support them or fear them enough not to support the Americans.

It's sad. They're not fighting Americans/Brits/Aussies because they truly think we're colonizing Iraq... they fight us because we make life better in Iraq and that deminishes THEIR power.

Quoting Turbo7x7 (Thread starter):
ncrease taxes

I have said this before - but I agree with this, but ONLY if the funds go to military spending. We're strained and we honestly need more funding. At the end of the Gulf War there were over 800,000 soldiers in the US Army alone... now we're down to 400,000.

Quoting Turbo7x7 (Thread starter):
reinstitutue the draft

Hell no! What a disaster that would be!

I serve with people who WANT to be here! I couldn't imagine serving along side some of my fellow a.netters who were drafted!!!  Wink

Quoting Turbo7x7 (Thread starter):
pull out of Iraq

No. You mentioned Iraq is experiencing three 9/11s every month... without us I dare not imagine how many more would be dead.

This is the wild west, folks. And like it or not, the allied force is the "sherriff" in town.

Quoting Turbo7x7 (Thread starter):
split Iraq into semi-autonomous regions so Kurd, Sunni, & Shia can have their space and stop killing each other (I think this is the best chance to get out of this clusterf*** with some dignity intact IMHO).

This is the one I want to talk about the most.

The invasion of Iraq was a huge success. We pushed north to Baghdad in a stunningly short time and suffered low casualities. It was a model of the overbearing presence the American military can make when we fight conventionally.

But one of biggest mistakes after major combat was not understanding the Iraqi people. And when people say, "We need to split up Iraq" they are making the same fatal flaw of not understanding the vast complexity of Iraq.

Sure it's easy to say we should split Iraq up between the Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds... but what you don't understand is how interwoven these people are. They occupy the same cities, work along side each other in the same jobs, drive along side each other on the same roads, etc.... Can you split NYC up between Catholics, Jews, Muslims?

Splitting up Iraq would give them just another reason to fight each other! Especially the Shiites and the Sunnis. You see... the Kurds, they're cool. They pretty much keep to themselves up in the north, but they won't hestiate to get a piece of that Sunni/Shiite ass if the opprotunity avails itself.

We need to stay committed. We need to keep working with the Iraqi police force and self defense force (which they are HONESTLY coming along quite well). We need to putting more attention on Abu Graib/Haditha and focus more on the overall picture.

The administration NEEDS to better convey to the American people what we're doing here. I dunno... bring back the old fireside chats. Go on television with maps, images, interviews, etc... and make the American people apart of this war. Right now it's just a distant annoyance. That needs to change.


Quoting Dw9115 (Reply 1):
Now I am not saying things in Iraq are going great but they both either make things completely outlandish or out right lie to bash Bush.

Ok, when it comes to A.net - I am one of the biggest supporters of the military and of the war effort. Hell - I am neck deep in the war! And when I say, "Iraq is tearing itself apart" it's no joke. I'm no fan of the WP - but they're right... the violence is insane. You cannot fathom some of the grusome things I have seen in the last two months. It's bone chilling.

-UH60


User currently offlineJutes85 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (7 years 11 months 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 2517 times:

Let them kill eachother. There is nothing we can do about it now, and it shows.

User currently offlineCfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (7 years 11 months 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 2500 times:

Quoting Turbo7x7 (Thread starter):
C) split Iraq into semi-autonomous regions so Kurd, Sunni, & Shia can have their space and stop killing each other (I think this is the best chance to get out of this clusterf*** with some dignity intact IMHO).

Options A and B are both unrealistic and suicidal. But your option C might well be the path that some people might like.

But I would remind them that spitting up a formerly united country into its ethnic components is just what happened to Yugoslavia, and it led to a decade long war, complete with ethnic cleansing as each "tribe" tries to lay claim to territory - with one exception. Yugoslavia had no oil to fight over. That fact alone will ensure that an Iraqi civil war will no end nearly as easily as the Yugoslav wars (and they weren't easy at all).

My prediction if Iraq splits into Sunni/Shiite/Kurd nations, or if general civil war breaks out, is a 10-15 year war with 2-3 million deaths. I think we should try to avoid that.


User currently offlineKlaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 21418 posts, RR: 54
Reply 6, posted (7 years 11 months 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 2467 times:

Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 3):
You see... the Kurds, they're cool. They pretty much keep to themselves up in the north, but they won't hestiate to get a piece of that Sunni/Shiite ass if the opprotunity avails itself.

One should never forget, however, that the kurds see themselves as one people forcibly split across the three countries they're divided into (Iraq, Turkey and Iran). And at least in Turkey, they've long suffered oppression and persecution and they have long been fighting back (the recent bomb attacks in Turkey were apparently committed by kurdish extremists).

If Iraq was divided between the population groups, it would have to be expected that kurds in Turkey and Iran would eventually rise up with the goal of secession from those countries in favour of one united Kurdistan.

Turkey is mortally afraid of that happening, and the violence of the oppression of the kurds has one of its reasons there. It probably was one of the reasons why Turkey had been opposed to the Iraq invasion - Saddam's oppression of the kurds constituted a status quo which was probably seen as in the interest of Turkey in several ways.

Anyone advocating the division of Iraq would automatically intrude into the vital interests of its two neighbouring countries as well, with potentially disastrous results. The same kind of ignorance that preceded and accompanied the Iraq invasion would be fatal there.

The iraqi kurds have had an unprecedented level of freedom and prosperity since the creation of the northern no-fly-zone and the accompanying independence measures; That is why they're relatively peaceful. But don't expect that to persist in case of an actual partition of Iraq.

Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 3):
We need to stay committed. We need to keep working with the Iraqi police force and self defense force (which they are HONESTLY coming along quite well).

Good to hear. it's difficult to recognize from the outside so far...

Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 3):
We need to putting more attention on Abu Graib/Haditha and focus more on the overall picture.

Indeed. But that would mean first and foremost installing a new mentality of accountability top to bottom. With the current US political leadership that looks unlikely to say the very least.

If you want a recipe for civil war, it's this: Make absolutely clear that might makes right as the only valid premise and that there is no real accountability, then leave enough room for rivaling groups to gain ground.

It doesn't take much more than that.

And unfortunately the US leadership has followed that recipe almost to the letter, starting with the steamrolling of the UN and the global community and consistently denigrating any approach other than the military one. The idiotic "war against terror" misrepresentation is merely a case in point.

Stability absolutely requires accountability. But as long as this US government is in place, they "cannot" risk facing the consequences of their actions and negligence. And as a consequence, cover-ups and denial will probably remain the primary modus operandi of their dependent institutions downstream - unless people start resisting the peer pressure and the explicit and implicit orders from above.

It's a crappy deal, no doubt about it.

Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 3):
The administration NEEDS to better convey to the American people what we're doing here. I dunno... bring back the old fireside chats. Go on television with maps, images, interviews, etc... and make the American people apart of this war. Right now it's just a distant annoyance. That needs to change.

If we civilians make decisions, we need to confront the consequences as well. But truthfully presenting the current state of affairs to the public would also imply facing the consequences of US government policy. It would only heighten the awareness of the comparison propaganda vs. reality, and I don't see the Bush administration voluntarily doing that until they have absolutely no other way out.

They're more scared of true accountability than they are of anything else, actual US interests be damned.


User currently offlineTurbo7x7 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 266 posts, RR: 5
Reply 7, posted (7 years 11 months 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 2449 times:

Quoting Dw9115 (Reply 1):
The Washington Post and New York Times are full of sh*t liars on any thing that deals with Bush.

Oh, I'm sure the Wash. Times, Faux News, Rush, and Coulter are soooo much better.  Yeah sure

And by the way, did you read the part that said this is coming from a report released from the Pentagon? I guess the Pentagon is "full of sh*t liars"  Smile Keep drinking that Kool Aid!

Quoting Dw9115 (Reply 1):
I also think there extremely declining subscription #'s explains a lot and most people are sick and tired of these two papers thinking whatever they say is the word of god!

That has more to do with the internet taking over as people's main source of news. Most newspapers are suffering declines in sales and the smaller less prestigous ones are actually the ones in greater danger of going out of business. . .

Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 3):
Hell no! What a disaster that would be!

I serve with people who WANT to be here! I couldn't imagine serving along side some of my fellow a.netters who were drafted!!!

I mentioned the idea only in jest, but unfortunately, it is true that recruiting has taken a downturn recently and it's getting harder for the armed forces to enlist qualified people. That is not a good trend as I'm sure you know better than me.

BTW, I have tremendous respect for the very tough job you're doing over there. I have a cousin that spent a year in Iraq and will soon be in Afghanistan next. He was the one who told me about the resurgence of the Taliban in Afghan. MONTHS before the press was talking about it over here. He is the toughest mofo I know but when he starts to talk about some of the things he's experienced, it looks like he's going to break down and cry!

Godspeed to all of you who serve.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 6):
They're more scared of true accountability than they are of anything else, actual US interests be damned.

Ay, there's the rub. . .  banghead 


User currently offlineAirCop From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (7 years 11 months 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 2432 times:

Quoting Dw9115 (Reply 1):
I also think there extremely declining subscription #'s

Information obtained from a Washington Post article:
Among those adding subscribers was the New York Times, which reported weekday circulation of 1,136,433 and Sunday circulation of 1,680,582. Its weekday circulation is up 0.2 percent from the same period last year.

Wall Street Journal down 0.8%, Washington Post down 2.7%
Do you care to reevaluate your statement.


User currently offlinePadraighaz From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (7 years 11 months 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 2411 times:

Quoting Dw9115 (Reply 1):
The Washington Post and New York Times are full of sh*t liars on any thing that deals with Bush. Now I am not saying things in Iraq are going great but they both either make things completely outlandish or out right lie to bash Bush. I also think there extremely declining subscription #'s explains a lot and most people are sick and tired of these two papers thinking whatever they say is the word of god!

Except you are choosing to go off on a tangent rather than face the fact the story about how badly things are going in Iraq is coming from the pentagon.


Padraig Houlahan


User currently offlineDw9115 From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 449 posts, RR: 2
Reply 10, posted (7 years 11 months 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 2396 times:

Quoting Turbo7x7 (Reply 7):
Oh, I'm sure the Wash. Times, Faux News, Rush, and Coulter are soooo much better

Coulter is a nut. Rush does have some good ideas but he does need to look at both side of a story the same way the Times and Post need to. the Washington Times is a very good paper and if the amount of viewers proves anything Well then Fox News good be called god.

Quoting Turbo7x7 (Reply 7):
That has more to do with the internet taking over as people's main source of news. Most newspapers are suffering declines in sales and the smaller less prestigious ones are actually the ones in greater danger of going out of business. . .

the Times and Post have gained readers from the net but they are still far behind other papers like the Wall street Journal and you can blame the decline on the net but if they put things out there that people want to read they would not have lost as many subscribers as they have.

Quoting AirCop (Reply 8):
Information obtained from a Washington Post article:

Look at your source.


User currently offlineTurbo7x7 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 266 posts, RR: 5
Reply 11, posted (7 years 11 months 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 2368 times:

Quoting Dw9115 (Reply 10):
but if they put things out there that people want to read they would not have lost as many subscribers as they have.

It's more basic than that. It's the Napster effect. Most people are not news junkies, if you can get the basic news for free and that's enough to satisfy your need for info, why pay for a paper that you're not going to read most of?

Quoting Dw9115 (Reply 10):
Look at your source.

And I suppose yours are impeccable. . .?  Yeah sure


User currently offlinePar13del From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 7075 posts, RR: 8
Reply 12, posted (7 years 11 months 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 2355 times:

UH60FtRucker in reply 3 has some good points, I would add some more.

1. Yugoslavia was held together by a strongman who did nothing to address
the internal conflicts that existed. When democracy was introduced, no
one thought those repressed feelings would surface, big mistake.

2. Presently Sunnis and Shiites are killing each other, collectively, they are not
helping the authorities identify "instigators" of violence who basically live
amongst them.

3. With various factions controlling Govt. Depts. the civil service itself is
being run along "party lines", does not help nation building.

4. During colonial times, people had to show that they were capable of
governing themselves before their demands for freedom were considered,
presently, the Kurds are displaying this, should they not be rewarded.
At least granting them more autonomy may distract the other factions from
killing each other and focus on the loss of a third of the country. If this
is done, a buffer force would have to be placed between the Kurds and
the rest of Iraq.

5. To their credit, the Kurds in general recognize the "sensitivities" of their
situation and they are not really pushing the independence button.

6. Roughly 1,000 were just killed in Lebanon and Israel over a one
month period, and it made huge headlines, new UN resolutions, donor
conference, peacekeeprs etc. etc. 1,000 Iraqis are being killed monthly and
not by Americans, so do we assume no one cares about the Iraqi people?


User currently offlineAA777 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 2544 posts, RR: 28
Reply 13, posted (7 years 11 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 2348 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Dw9115 (Reply 1):
The Washington Post and New York Times are full of sh*t liars on any thing that deals with Bush. Now I am not saying things in Iraq are going great but they both either make things completely outlandish or out right lie to bash Bush. I also think there extremely declining subscription #'s explains a lot and most people are sick and tired of these two papers thinking whatever they say is the word of god!

Yes, these horrible figures are not based in reality, they must be faked. Because its all a conspiracy to get Bush. They arent lying about what is happening. And if you are that blinded by neoconservative rhetoric that you cannot see that what is going on in Iraq IS in fact, a DISASTER, then it is you who is being lied to by the government which you seem to so graciously support without second thought.

Declining subscriptions have been that way for years- its called the internet, and simply decreased readership. Why get wasteful paper and pay for it, when you can go to www.washingtonpost.com and click on 'print edition' and get the same thing? Its NOT about people feeling they are being lied to.


User currently offlineCfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (7 years 11 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 2348 times:

Quoting Par13del (Reply 12):
1. Yugoslavia was held together by a strongman who did nothing to address the internal conflicts that existed. When democracy was introduced, no one thought those repressed feelings would surface, big mistake.

Well that sounds pretty damned familiar...

But that raises the question - was it wrong to introduce democracy and remove the strong-arm fascist government?

Frankly I no longer think that the Sunnis and Siites in Iraq are capable of living together in peace. They are both simply too culturally immature.


User currently offlineKlaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 21418 posts, RR: 54
Reply 15, posted (7 years 11 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 2345 times:

Quoting Par13del (Reply 12):
5. To their credit, the Kurds in general recognize the "sensitivities" of their situation and they are not really pushing the independence button.

The iraqi kurds currently aren't. The more extreme ones among the turkish kurds are busy planting bombs in tourist places. The iranian ones are probably too scared of retribution from their central government.

I very much doubt it's a question of intention rather than one of opportunity. Things could change very rapidly if an opportunity presented itself.

Quoting Par13del (Reply 12):
6. Roughly 1,000 were just killed in Lebanon and Israel over a one month period, and it made huge headlines, new UN resolutions, donor conference, peacekeeprs etc. etc. 1,000 Iraqis are being killed monthly and not by Americans, so do we assume no one cares about the Iraqi people?

A major foreign deployment is already there. And the US leadership has repeatedly refused any outside "interference" with their actions in Iraq. So what good would it do to ask for a UN resolution at this point (besides the US veto in the UNSC)?

If Israel hadn't finally accepted an outside intervention, there wouldn't happen anything in Lebanon either, I'm afraid.


User currently offlineGreasespot From Canada, joined Apr 2004, 3078 posts, RR: 20
Reply 16, posted (7 years 11 months 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 2327 times:

Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 3):
Ok, when it comes to A.net - I am one of the biggest supporters of the military and of the war effort. Hell - I am neck deep in the war! And when I say, "Iraq is tearing itself apart" it's no joke. I'm no fan of the WP - but they're right... the violence is insane. You cannot fathom some of the grusome things I have seen in the last two months. It's bone chilling.

That is the most telling statement. You can Bash Bush or be his appologist I do not care. This is from someone who is actually there seeing the shit. The invasion happenend. Would Iraq fallen into disaster when Saddam died or was killed, probably. The invasion and war just hastened it.


If anything i think we are getting the sanitized version over here. That is why it is easy for people from both sides to speculate as to how positive or negative it is going. The truth is NONE of us know. I know that my news (center left) sources are biased to my point of view. That is why i read it. And the right's news sources are biased to their point of view. When the fact is only the people there know how bad or good it is.

GS



Sometimes all you can do is look them in the eye and ask " how much did your mom drink when she was pregnant with you?"
User currently offlineGilligan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (7 years 11 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 2323 times:

It's answer D and has been since Jan 02. In his state of the union speech that year the President defined the axis of evil and also stated quite plainly that this war would go on long after he had left office. You can disagree about the axis of evil but the war started in '93, we just didn't really get into the fight until after 9/11.

User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 36
Reply 18, posted (7 years 11 months 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 2306 times:

In the past there was almost always an 'answer' to political issues - and voting for the guy who promised to apply it tended to produce results in the end. But I simply can't think of a way out of this mess.

Partition of Iraq won't work, because the oil resources are located in the Shia area and on the borders of the Kurdish area, respectively. On the other hand, according to Riverbend in Baghdad, the place is 'partitioning' itself, in that (for example) the Sunnis are being driven out of Baghdad (or out of Iraq altogether), and no doubt the same thing is happening in reverse to Shias in Sunni areas.

"Residents of Baghdad are systematically being pushed out of the city. Some families are waking up to find a Klashnikov bullet and a letter in an envelope with the words “Leave your area or else.” The culprits behind these attacks and threats are Sadr’s followers- Mahdi Army. It’s general knowledge, although no one dares say it out loud. In the last month we’ve had two different families staying with us in our house, after having to leave their neighborhoods due to death threats and attacks. It’s not just Sunnis- it’s Shia, Arabs, Kurds- most of the middle-class areas are being targeted by militias.

"Other areas are being overrun by armed Islamists. The Americans have absolutely no control in these areas. Or maybe they simply don’t want to control the areas because when there’s a clash between Sadr’s militia and another militia in a residential neighborhood, they surround the area and watch things happen."


http://riverbendblog.blogspot.com/

Quoting Gilligan (Reply 17):
In his state of the union speech that year the President defined the axis of evil and also stated quite plainly that this war would go on long after he had left office

It looks as if that is what is going to happen. But my sympathies lie with the serving troops in Iraq, for whom just 'drifting along' involves dire consequences. It astonishes me that US forces alone are losing around 15 killed and 100 wounded per WEEK, and no-one in the USA seems to notice or care.

http://icasualties.org/oif/

It's a misnomer to call it a 'war.' A war implies that there is a formed and identifiable enemy that you can locate and destroy. Further, if anyone asks soldiers to fight, they owe them three things; a clear plan, the resources to carry it out, and identifiable objectives. None of those things apply in Iraq; the 'plan' is only some sort of woolly waffling about 'democracy and freedom,' all the peacetime armies in the Coalition are far too small effectively to occupy/control a place the size of Iraq, and the only 'objective' for the grunts seems to be to survive to the end of their tours of duty........

The Iraqi army, police, and civil service should never have been disbanded; and rebuilding them now seems an impossible task because of sectarianism and corruption. And even a well-conceived 'hearts and minds' campaign, even if it started now, would take years to produce any results in terms of securing the goodwill of any useful proportion of the Iraqi population; if it ever did, given the depth of the bitterness on all sides.

Any 'military' solution would involve the draft, because there is no other way of achieving the numbers required to give the blokes half a chance of 'restoring order' by patrolling alone. And, as has been said, there is no political chance of the draft being re-introduced.

I can't see any alternative to pulling out. Just leaving a handful of soldiers there and letting things drift will be just 'reinforcing failure.' At a continuing, daily, high cost in terms of dead and wounded, for no gains whatever.

The whole venture was badly-planned from the beginning. We've just plain lost; and we ought to realise that simple fact, and stop wasting lives and resources in a hopeless cause.



"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
User currently offlinePadraighaz From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (7 years 11 months 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 2306 times:

Quoting Greasespot (Reply 16):
The truth is NONE of us know. I know that my news (center left) sources are biased to my point of view. That is why i read it. And the right's news sources are biased to their point of view. When the fact is only the people there know how bad or good it is.

I think casualty reports and other ones like the recent one from the Pentagon do give some useful information. It's really is an overstatement to conclude we are totally without information. In addition to casualties, we have information that there is sectarian violence; that the Iraqi government isn't able to stop it; that no one here is declaring victory anymore; we can experience the absurd security levels at airports; we can think about whether it is appropriate to compare dissenters to nazi-appeasers, or to compare the insurgents and Iran to nazism (as the CNN commentator Beck did this afternoon.) We also have information that many in the military feel unfairly put upon to be called up in the back-door draft that's going on. There's lots of information in my opinion.

Regards,

Padraig Houlahan.


User currently offlineUH60FtRucker From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (7 years 11 months 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 2302 times:

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 18):
It looks as if that is what is going to happen. But my sympathies lie with the serving troops in Iraq, for whom just 'drifting along' involves dire consequences. It astonishes me that US forces alone are losing around 15 killed and 100 wounded per WEEK, and no-one in the USA seems to notice or care.

I understand your point and it's valid: we shouldn't forget the sacrifices our troops make on a daily basis.

But... in terms of casualities... we lose more US troops per year in car/motorcycle accidents than the war. So if we really want to save the lives of troops - get them to stop engaging in "high risk" activities while state side!

-UH60


User currently offlineCfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (7 years 11 months 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 2294 times:

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 18):
It's a misnomer to call it a 'war.' A war implies that there is a formed and identifiable enemy that you can locate and destroy.

Well... traditionally speaking, yes. But I would answer that whenever you have a large number of people who are actively doing everything they can to destroy your nation and your culture, it's a war, regardless of whether you can easily pick them out of a crowd or not.

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 18):
I can't see any alternative to pulling out. Just leaving a handful of soldiers there and letting things drift will be just 'reinforcing failure.' At a continuing, daily, high cost in terms of dead and wounded, for no gains whatever.

And what would you do when civil war breaks out in Iraq, eventually dragging in Iran, Jordan and Syria and 10-20,000 killed per month? Continue to ignore it?


User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 36
Reply 22, posted (7 years 11 months 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 2287 times:

Quoting Cfalk (Reply 21):
And what would you do when civil war breaks out in Iraq, eventually dragging in Iran, Jordan and Syria and 10-20,000 killed per month? Continue to ignore it?

You misunderstand my point, CFalk. Even if all those things do actually eventuate, there is nothing that our tiny Western peacetime armies could do about it.

Iraq appears already to be in the grip of a 'revolution,' rather than a civil war. It's ironic that Bush sought to teach them all about 'democracy', i.e. 'majority rule.' The Shias ARE the majority and they are in process of taking total power. The end result will probably be that they achieve their objective of a despotic, Shia-dominated islamic republic, which will proceed to persecute the Sunnis and largely 'cut the Kurds loose,' while seeking to hold on to the Kirkuk oilfields.

And there is no way the West can stop them.



"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
User currently onlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16825 posts, RR: 51
Reply 23, posted (7 years 11 months 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 2278 times:

The biggest problem with how the US is going about things in Iraq, the War on terror and just how we do business in general is our PR.

The Bush administrations PR sucks, the President can't speak in public, the Vice President and Defense Secretary sound like grumpy old men who don't have a clue, and everyone else just sounds like either apologists for the President or cool aide drinkers.

We need to wage a campaign war, we need to use our advantage to undemine Islamic Fundamentalists messages.

They hate our culture, well then park some satelittes above the Middle East and pump free Sirius and XM satelite radio down to them, seriously. Have the crew from Howard Stern and other shock jock comedians etc to broadcast to the Arab world, counterbalance Al Jazera and the other media outlets.

Set up pirate radio broadcasts all over Iraq, Afghanistan and pump music and talk radio into Iran. Have Jessica Simpson, Christina Aguleira videos running fro free onto the Tvs of the Iranin and Iraqis.

The people love American culture, music, clothes etc..

Give it to them and stop appologizing for it, the Iron Curtain collapsed in part because the East was envious of the Wests Lifestyle. The same can be done in the Arab world.

You can have guys splice Bin Laden or the President of Irans speeches to say whatever you want, then you can use the recordings to prank phone call people.

Seriously guns and bombs are one way to fight, not the only way. We should fight the culture war head on, give the youth of the Middle East access their leaders deny them. Let them hear gangster rap, Heavey Metal, EMO, Ricky Martin, Shakira, Jessica Simpson, let them watch American Idol, Survivor, the Simpsons.

Beam American culture into their living rooms.



Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 2216 times:

I think the Bush administration fully misunderstood the complexity of the situation in Iraq. Massive protest´s around the world were dismissed as left wing, misunderstanding, proterrorists etc.

Now Iraq has turned into a horrible mess. WMD & AQ & OBL proved to have nothing to do with it.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060913/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq

A painfull reality to admit and worse to solve..


25 L-188 : You are speaking of the 1st gulf war right? Hell my brother is going guard and couldn't even make it to Basic before he busted up his leg and collarb
26 ME AVN FAN : - you might make your mind up. Are you talking about Afghanistan ? or are you talking about the Arab World ? not only this. A division would mean tha
27 Post contains links AerospaceFan : Have you noticed that the media haven't been covering U.S. casualties as much, however, in the last several months? That's because, except for a shar
28 Post contains links AerospaceFan : All this talk of numbers of casualties is distasteful in the extreme, whether it be American, Coalition, or Iraqi. However, still, it may need to be s
29 ME AVN FAN : a bit of a generalisation. There since 1919/20 when Iraq was established, has never been as much violence in that country as now. Not even the bloody
30 AerospaceFan : I was actually referring to post-liberation Iraq. I should have been clearer.
31 ME AVN FAN : whenever the Iraqis indeed WERE liberated from a tyrant, I would nevertheless speak about "post-occupation Iraq" .
32 Bushpilot : Back to the top, Ill throw in some thoughts and ideas of my own and make a few comments. Raising taxes is a non-starter, but I would like to see it, a
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Americans More Isolated Than Ever posted Sat Jun 24 2006 02:50:07 by Diamond
It's Official Then: No More Planet Pluto posted Thu Aug 24 2006 15:50:26 by Myt332
U.S. Generosity: Now, More Than Ever posted Mon May 22 2006 17:42:36 by AerospaceFan
It's Official: Women Fart Smells More... posted Fri Mar 18 2005 12:45:25 by Pe@rson
It's Official: Girls High School Basketball Sucks! posted Fri Dec 1 2006 20:37:58 by S12PPL
Conservatives Give 30%more 2 Charity Than Liberals posted Thu Nov 30 2006 02:11:57 by OU812
Cottage Cheese: Can It Get Any More Exciting? posted Wed Oct 18 2006 04:51:40 by Iamcanadian
It's Official! Jessica Is Available Again! posted Sat Jul 1 2006 03:22:09 by Dc10s4ever
Ultra Religious Freaks: Bolder Than Ever! posted Sun May 7 2006 18:33:30 by S12PPL
It's Official...Hollywood Is Out Of Ideas posted Tue May 2 2006 03:26:47 by DeltaGator