Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Iraq, What Next?  
User currently offlineZak From Greenland, joined Sep 2003, 1993 posts, RR: 8
Posted (10 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 1472 times:

with the rapidly changing situation in iraq, i wondered what you guesstimate will happen in the next month there?


10=2
34 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineKilavoud From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (10 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 1453 times:

When somebody stir up inside a ant-hill with a stick, only ants know how long it will take for them to feel comfortable again.

Cheers. Kilavoud.


User currently offline727LOVER From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 6407 posts, RR: 17
Reply 2, posted (10 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 1453 times:

What situation? The war is OVER. Bush said so on the carrier, remember?

MISSION ACCOMPLISHED.  Insane



Listen Betty, don't start up with your 'White Zone' s*** again.
User currently offlineGoingboeing From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 4875 posts, RR: 16
Reply 3, posted (10 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 1442 times:

727Lover....I posted that on another board, and was told that it was obvious that I "just don't understand military ops"...the sign was there because the CARRIER had accomplished it's mission. But it WAS a nice photo op. But now, apparently we have our 90 days to "wrap things up" and put the "mission accomplished" sign back up in the Oval office. Problem is - IMHO, we'll be seeing a nice little civil war pop up in Iraq. The liberated Iraqi's, who welcomed the liberators with open arms and toppled a statue of Saddam for the news cameras will be left to fend for themselves....after all, we rebuilt their power plants...what more could they possibly want? And when that happens, the local terrorist recruiting office will most likely have a line stretching for MILES. All because we decided that we must remove the WMD's (oops scratch that)...or get rid of the nuke threat (did we say that??)...no wait, we must liberate the Iraqi people from the evil dictator ruling their country...yeah...that's it....give them freedom. Bush, Rummy, and Cheney didn't look at the LONG TERM implications of their rush to war. Now, the whole world is going to pay the price.

User currently offlineAlpha 1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (10 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 1437 times:

IF the situation keeps unraveling, I don't care what Paul Bremer says, it will seriously jeopardize the handover of soverignty to Iraq on June 30th. It can't but help jeopardize that "deadline" (which was put in to give Bush a boost before the election, not as any indication of the reality in Iraq to begin with).

My fear is that, seeing how any casualties the insurgents are inflicting on our troops, the insurgency will become more generalized throughout the country, and will lead to the U.S. having to reconquer the nation for a second time.

Secondly, and less importantly, it has serious reprecussions for the election. Iraq was to be the centerpiece, as part of the War on Terror (even though Iraq had nothing to do with that war), for his re-election campaign. Well, if your centerpiece is falling apart at the seems, it doesn't bode well for Mr. Bush.

But again, that is secondary to finding a way to quash these uprisings, bringing some calm to these areas, and getting back on track so the Iraqi's can do what THEY choose with their country. This not only threatens U.S. troops, but is threatening the future of Iraq, whatever that future may be.


User currently offlineZak From Greenland, joined Sep 2003, 1993 posts, RR: 8
Reply 5, posted (10 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 1421 times:

i think the most interesting development is that recently, the shia and sunni have forgotten all differences and on a broad basis seem to declare that they are brothers and they must unite against the u.s. invasion.
if there is more to it then just words, the u.s. troops might in fact have the real war on iraq still ahead of them. i would even go as far as to say that the u.s. will be forced to witdraw if such scenario does happen, considering the fact that traditionally, the shia muslims are those who sacrifice themselves in suicide missions etc. this is also frightening when you consider that there are far more shia in iraq then sunni, and looking at the problems the occupation forces already have with those "fringe insurgents", one can only guess that a full force opposition based on overwhelming support from both shia and sunni, the u.s. determination to stay in iraq will be on not too firm grounds.

i still stand by my estimate for the only viable solution that i pointed out in another thread:

- full authority to iraq must be handed over to u.n. under security council supervision
- massive peacekeeping forces must be deployed in iraq ASAP, preferably from other arab league and muslim nations such as indonesia or countries in africa
- full acknowledgement of a palestine state by the world on the green line borders with mandatory acceptance of existing states(israel and filistin) by all parties involved including arab countries accepting israel and israel and usa accepting filistin to send a strong message to the people that there is determination for a solution in the u.n.
- withdrawal of any troops of countries involved in the invasion as soon as possible with u..s air support from quatar and carriers if situation requires




10=2
User currently offlineAviationMaster From Switzerland, joined Oct 1999, 2479 posts, RR: 34
Reply 6, posted (10 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 1411 times:

I think Zak raised some good points there, although in my opinion, the situation in Iraq won't change even under the supervision of the UN.

User currently offlineAlpha 1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (10 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 1400 times:

I don't think, Zak, it was a mutual decision between Shi'a and Sunni. Trust me, when we leave, I think you'll see a Civil War between them, so great is the old hatreds. But I think they're feeding, for their own reasons, off the successs of the insurgency in Fallujah to go after an invading, occupying force.

Unless this insurgency is stopped, and qucikly, I fear it will escalate so far out of control, that our only option may be withdrawl of all forces, something that will only lead to a bigger bloodshead.


User currently offlineKEno From Malaysia, joined Feb 2004, 1842 posts, RR: 27
Reply 8, posted (10 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 1382 times:

IF the situation keeps unraveling, I don't care what Paul Bremer says, it will seriously jeopardize the handover of soverignty to Iraq on June 30th.

This handover of sovereignity is a joke. Of course America will remain in Iraq and the new Iraqi president would be nothing but a puppet to the American administration.


User currently offlineMt99 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 6573 posts, RR: 6
Reply 9, posted (10 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 1374 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I think it is now obvious that what is being done in Iraq is not working. It is time to get everyone on board and end this sh*t once and for all. I never supported the war, but bringing back troops would be terrible.

They need to accept that thing are falling appart, send more troops (not just US) give control to the UN (it will distance the blame of being an "ocupation force" from the US).

Ill steal a line from our friends at the AA

"The first step is admiting that you have a problem"

This would probably kill any chances for Mr. Bush's reelection.

Pride is the hardest thing to swallow



Step into my office, baby
User currently offlineEA CO AS From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 13517 posts, RR: 62
Reply 10, posted (10 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 1361 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

The Iraqis may not realize it, but being peaceful and stomping out the insurgency is probably in their best interest.

Why? Assume for a moment that things keep going in this manner - the President's poll numbers drop steadily, and he loses in November.

This gives him two months as a lame-duck President. This is very very dangerous for the Iraqis, since the President will have no need to worry about public opinion at that point, and could possibly start a "Scorched Earth" campaign in places like Fallujah and other towns where the citizenry just doesn't play ball.

In other words, they pull out the troops and break out the Daisy Cutters and MOABs.




"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan
User currently offlineMt99 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 6573 posts, RR: 6
Reply 11, posted (10 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 1347 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

"Scorched Earth" campaign in places like Fallujah and other towns where the citizenry just doesn't play ball.

Woundnt that be considered as a crime against humanity?



Step into my office, baby
User currently offline777236ER From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (10 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 1336 times:

Why? Assume for a moment that things keep going in this manner - the President's poll numbers drop steadily, and he loses in November.

This gives him two months as a lame-duck President. This is very very dangerous for the Iraqis, since the President will have no need to worry about public opinion at that point, and could possibly start a "Scorched Earth" campaign in places like Fallujah and other towns where the citizenry just doesn't play ball


Are you seriously saying the President of the US would commit mass murder and genocide simply because of falling approval ratings?


User currently offlineEA CO AS From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 13517 posts, RR: 62
Reply 13, posted (10 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 1328 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Are you seriously saying the President of the US would commit mass murder and genocide simply because of falling approval ratings?

No, you said that.

What I said was that the President could (not will, but could) order troops to pull out and start using larger weapons to eradicate the pockets of resistance rather than deploying U.S. and coalition troops in far more dangerous house-to-house urban combat.

It wouldn't be genocide, which is the systematic and planned extermination of an entire national, racial, political, or ethnic group.

It wouldn't be murder either, as the terrorists there have already killed dozens of U.S. troops and hundreds of their own countrymen. This would be a retaliatory strike against armed insurgents, and any innocent people killed, while horrific, would be collateral damage - unintentional casualties of war.

To avoid the possibility of this happening, the Iraqis would be better off by rising up to crush the insurgency within their own country.




"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan
User currently offlineN754pr From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (10 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 1321 times:

Just as posted the other day


THE VIETNAM FOR GEORGE BUSH.....


User currently offline777236ER From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (10 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 1319 times:

It wouldn't be genocide, which is the systematic and planned extermination of an entire national, racial, political, or ethnic group.

He would be bombing whole groups of people - the majority of whom are innoncent - because they live in the wrong place. That's about as close to genocide as you can get.

And while I'm possibly one of the most anti-Bush people on here, I can't believe he'd actually do something like that.

I understand what you're saying, I just don't think it'd go so far as pulling all the troops out and annexing the place.


User currently offlineEA CO AS From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 13517 posts, RR: 62
Reply 16, posted (10 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 1310 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

For what it's worth, I don't think he'd do that either - but then again, it remains a possibility, since he could try to justify it in the name of:

- saving lives of U.S. forces
- qwelling the uprising in Fallujah once and for all

And since such a move would be amazingly unpopular, it won't happen unless there were no negative repercussions, such as having the election already behind us.

But again, I just don't see it happening - even though it's a slim possibility.



"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan
User currently offlineCedarjet From United Kingdom, joined May 1999, 8060 posts, RR: 54
Reply 17, posted (10 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 1304 times:

I hope it's only another Vietnam. Because a serious uprising in Iraq combined with Bush's reckless economic policies could make have the same effect on the USA as Afganistan did on the USSR. I know some people think God is watching over the USA or it's in some other way immune but really the same rules apply to the US as to the USSR, French empire etc all.


fly Saha Air 707s daily from Tehran's downtown Mehrabad to Mashhad, Kish Island and Ahwaz
User currently offlineLucky727 From Canada, joined Sep 2003, 602 posts, RR: 2
Reply 18, posted (10 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 1290 times:

As soon as the US pulls out, wait about 5 seconds for a civil war to start. With their common enemy out of the way, the Sunni & Shia rivalry will erupt big time & it'll be a bloodbath until the Sunni minority is gone [read: dead], unless they have some sympathetic neighbours (Iran?) who jump into the fray.

Until then, anywhere from 5 to 30 Americans will perish DAILY (4 yesterday, 12 today, tomorrow...?) Personally, I think the US will leave at the end of June with their tails between their legs. Unless Bush can suddenly trot out OBL in handcuffs, who is varyingly rumoured to have been captured sometime in the last 6 months, he's got egg all over his face & will be a one-term president, (one can only hope).

He told the UN to go f*ck themselves a year ago & decided to go it alone - so it'll be time to reap what he's sown. The Iraq war was never about terrorism, it has probably inspired MORE terrorism & anti-US sentiment than existed previously, and has undoubtedly made the world a more dangerous & unstable place.



··· [·] oooooooo [·] oooo oo ooooo [·] ooooooooooooooooooo [·]
User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29791 posts, RR: 58
Reply 19, posted (10 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days ago) and read 1241 times:

He told the UN to go f*ck themselves a year ago

No, he told them to actually enforce their sanctions and resolutions or they would lose creditbilty.

Guess what, they didn't, so they have no creditbility.



OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
User currently offlineZak From Greenland, joined Sep 2003, 1993 posts, RR: 8
Reply 20, posted (10 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 1212 times:

latest news says it seems that coalition troops were captured by shiites and are now held hostage


10=2
User currently offlineLucky727 From Canada, joined Sep 2003, 602 posts, RR: 2
Reply 21, posted (10 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 1206 times:

L-188 ~ so, what've they found, then? [thanks for the quote] Your children's-children's-children will be paying for it, so DO pass on your wishes for a Disney ending...

[Edited 2004-04-08 11:34:49]


··· [·] oooooooo [·] oooo oo ooooo [·] ooooooooooooooooooo [·]
User currently offlineZak From Greenland, joined Sep 2003, 1993 posts, RR: 8
Reply 22, posted (10 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 1203 times:

"No, he told them to actually enforce their sanctions and resolutions or they would lose creditbilty.

Guess what, they didn't, so they have no creditbility."

i think the only people on the plane that share your view are conservatives in the u..s and the odd pro bush guy in other countries.

it is interesting that bush supporters always say the u.s. is enforcing u.n. ruling.
this is not the case since there is no security council mandate to the use of force. you do aswell know that the u.s. and u.k. tried to get such a resolution but it was not accepted at all, hence it is still an illegal offensive war.



10=2
User currently offlineAlpha 1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (10 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 1187 times:

No, he told them to actually enforce their sanctions and resolutions or they would lose creditbilty.

No, L-188, the original premise-that he told the UN, and the rest of the world, for that matter, to go fuck themselves, is correct. The UN's own inspectors were finding no weapons, but was that enough to stop Mr. Bush and his War of Fame? Hell no. He was going to to go war even if nothing was found, and he proved that.

Again, you put the blame squarely where it doesn't belong, and not a whipser out of your mouth about who is REALLY to blame-President Bush. Again, the fact your incapable of criticism of this man who has gotten us into this mess is more telling than any words you choose to utter, and speaks with complete dishonor.

The ONLY good news, if this keeps up, is that this man you dare not criticize could soon be living back at Crawford full time. Hell, he spends more time there than at the White House anyway. Not like his life will be much different if he's not elected.


User currently offlineZak From Greenland, joined Sep 2003, 1993 posts, RR: 8
Reply 24, posted (10 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 1175 times:

@alpha1

you are just not able of understanding the great strategy behind the iraq war.
it just appears to unfold now:

- bush invaded iraq with the grand plan
- extremists and terrorists from all over the region go to iraq to fight the u.s.
- the harsh living conditions turn huge numbers of moderates into extremists
- u.s. troops accidentially inflict collateral damage on mosques etc further escalating the situation
- u.s. casualties force kerry to pull out of iraq in spring 2005
- all out war in that region by summer 2005 with nuclear weapons use by israel and iran, contaminated desert and random savage tribes is all that is left
- contamination of the area makes it necessary to drill oil fully automated with equipment provided by halliburton and kbr
- kerry gets impeached in 2007 due to his poor handling of the situation, jeb bush becomes president of the u.s.a.
- fidel castro dies, cuba becomes the next state of the usa
- contaminated former gulf states join the usa in a democratic process with the votes of the 500 halliburton employees there
- 2010 jeb bush announces the united states of freedom, where terrorism is not an issue anymore due to rfid tags on everything, providing perfect government control and perfect security
- canada joins the U.S.F. with over 90% votes, using bechtel voting machines, only quebec resists, still using pen and paper voting
- 2012 canadian republic of quebec joins the EU, starting the next cold war since the U.S.F feels threatened by those "french euros in canada and europe" who refuse to use RFID to provide universal safety and security. EU becomes a new safeheaven for terrorists according to führer jeb and his national republican party of freedom and security

brave new world!



10=2
25 Post contains images KEESJE : Back to todays reality : (Reuters) Iraqi volunteers drive with supplies towards areas under siege by U.S. forces in the restive town of Falluja, from
26 Go Canada! : Whats Next? Well blind panic for a start it seems.Any one with half a brain cell could have worked out that there was bound to be one shia upstart lea
27 Zak : ".Any one with half a brain cell could have worked out that there was bound to be one shia upstart leader willing to cause trouble.why this wasnt real
28 Alpha 1 : Well blind panic for a start it seems. Blind panic-and the feeding of panic and fear by the Bush Administration is what lead us to go to war in Iraq i
29 Goingboeing : it was one of the main points raised by germany and france in the pre war phase. This is so very true. Before the war started, Time magazine had an in
30 Diesel1 : It's just as well the US has got the UK standing next to it then - there's huge support here for what's going on in Iraq... well huge support from one
31 Go Canada! : " 'were the Iraqi people better off under Saddam's rule, rather than the US occupation?'..." errm no, because the answer is easy.Under Saddam 300 000
32 Diesel1 : Well let's hope the result is the introduction of a democracy within Iraq, and that the people get all the rights associated with this. Go Canada you'
33 PHX-LJU : If you do an a.net search, you'll find that, weeks before the war in Iraq, I (along with millions of other people around the world) warned that, if Bu
34 Post contains links and images Klaus : Remember army general Shinseki? He knew and said beforehand that "several hundred thousand" troops would be necessary for the Iraq occupation. As a re
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...
It Appears My Car's Paint Is Ruined, What Next? posted Mon Sep 25 2006 13:53:09 by UTA_flyinghigh
W.'s Constitutional Escapades.. What Next? Gay... posted Sat Jun 24 2006 18:05:34 by TedTAce
What's Next With Google? posted Sat Feb 4 2006 23:28:56 by Aseem
I Just Got In A Car Wreck! What Next? posted Fri Dec 23 2005 20:13:02 by Cadet57
For The Survivors: What's Next? posted Sat Sep 3 2005 04:30:21 by TedTAce
What Next For Gay Civil Rights Movement In Canada? posted Fri Jul 29 2005 19:53:50 by KLMA330
What Next After Rover Bankruptcy? posted Mon Apr 18 2005 09:34:59 by UTA_flyinghigh
Iraq: What's That? posted Fri Oct 8 2004 21:06:03 by Derico
Joe Millionaire....what Next? posted Wed Nov 12 2003 05:01:26 by TheGov
What's Next? Concentration Camps? posted Tue May 22 2001 21:01:32 by Cfalk