CaP'N GRuNGe Posted April 11, 2008 Share Posted April 11, 2008 This isn't meant to be political but to discuss policies. I grew up during the Vietnam police action(not a declared war). In 1968 Nixon was elected to end the war but didn't. Instead he started a program called Vietnamization where we would train them to win the war, we'd pull out and leave certain advisors. Those we trained really never did well. Nixon's refusal to pull out resulted in over 20,000 soldier deaths and really didn't help the outcome. It really reminds me of Iraq. Now as I see Iraq there are a lot of groups vying for power and control. It's a lot more than Suni VS Shia VS Al Qaeda VS whatever. There are warlords, militia like AlS adr's and smaller ones that are protecting neighborhoods and stockpiling weapons for when we leave(if we leave). We have been training these guys for over 3 years. In the recent fight 1000 deserted and we had to send aircover and troops because the Iraqi's couldn't defeat Al Sadr's militia(not exactly a state of the art unit). We are paying many of these groups to provide security. 2 days ago in the Senate hearings Crocker was asked since the Iraqi economy is doing well, has a surplus can we have future rebuilding expenses become a loan. He hedged and hawed and it was obvious that wouldn't fly. They don't seem to want us there and building this militia seems just like what Nixon did to save face. My question is this- Since the Iraqis aren't coming up with politcal solutions is it worth to lose a few more thousand excellent soldiers in a war that won't be better when we leave? If we leave in 2 years and they battle it out for power is it worth the effort? If the decision were mine I would do what Murtha has suggested and move troops out of the city set up refugee areas and let the sides battle it out. Give them time to come up a solution but if they can't or won't do it contain the fighting and let them settle their civil war themselves. Another option would be Joe Biden's plan to have local control and a loose federal government that settles certain disputes. I don't want anyone to die if this isn't going to result in a political solution. Any other ideas. Hey I'm open to whatever works. Maybe when we went in we should have paid everyone in the country. We'll pay you a weekly paycheck but you can't bomb or steal anything. Shlt have them sweep streets. I saw on the news the other day we are paying $10/day to 90,000 non-militia type Iraqis called "Sons of Iraq" to help keep the peace. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaP'N GRuNGe Posted April 11, 2008 Share Posted April 11, 2008 You surrender cowards need to get some perspective:http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1207873435...in_commentaries You people and the need for immediate satisfaction, you need to realize things worth doing take time. You know nothing more than what the cnn tube tells you to think, or hitlery telling you the war is over and we lost. Well why don't you try listening to the guys who are over there, the guys actually doing the dirty work. Who are we surrendering too? All we are doing is providing security to a puppet government that is not very loyal at all. Seriously. Al Qaeda is a tiny presence in the country. Interestingly, I heard a commentator say that if we want stability in the region we should be supporting Sadr and not Maliki. Apparently Maliki's Shia army was trained in Iran back when Saddam was in power and Sadr is more of an Iraqi nationalist that would be a check on Iran from coming in ala Saddam. Of course that doesn't hash with the fact that Sadr was just in Iran doing religious studies and supposedly Iran stepped in to help negotiate with Sadr to have him stand down recently. Look, the whole country is a mess. Multiple factions battling each other for power. There is no logical place for us there. Yes, leaving will potentially cause even larger short term problems. But staying isn't doing anything either except kill our young men and women and drain our treasury. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H8tank Posted April 11, 2008 Share Posted April 11, 2008 Randi rhoades and hitkery want to leave, Petraus and McCain want to stay. Hmmm, I wonder who is more credible... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaP'N GRuNGe Posted April 11, 2008 Share Posted April 11, 2008 Randi rhoades and hitkery want to leave, Petraus and McCain want to stay. Hmmm, I wonder who is more credible... Gee I don't know, maybe that bipartisan commision that Bush put together a while back whose recommendation was to drawn down our forces and leave? You know, the one that the Administration has completely ignored? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Posted April 12, 2008 Author Share Posted April 12, 2008 "When the president does it it is not illegal" They were planning torture on individual detainees in the White House. They ordered former White House employees to ignore subpoenas and the Justice Dept to ignore orders they are duty bound to enforce. I never lived in a fascist state before. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yo mama Posted April 12, 2008 Share Posted April 12, 2008 No, we shouldn't leave. I do, however, think that every federally elected official who isn't already a military veteran should be required to serve at least one tour of duty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Holy Roller Posted April 12, 2008 Share Posted April 12, 2008 (edited) No, we shouldn't leave. I do, however, think that every federally elected official who isn't already a military veteran should be required to serve at least one tour of duty. Let's make it a requirement for office. ETA- Not that being a veteran guarentees any more competence. Just more likely to give a broader perspective. Edited April 12, 2008 by The Holy Roller Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yo mama Posted April 12, 2008 Share Posted April 12, 2008 Let's make it a requirement for office. ETA- Not that being a veteran guarentees any more competence. Just more likely to give a broader perspective. Well, I was coming at it more from the angle that serving one's country ought to be a necessary prerequisite to running it. And being a career politician shouldn't count towards earing those stripes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DemonKnight Posted April 12, 2008 Share Posted April 12, 2008 If we leave, Iran moves in and takes over, al queda has a permanent base of operations. Oil will be $200/barrel, meaning $8/gallon gasoline, kuweit can be taken over again, goodbye isreal.... lots of new places to continue irans very aggressive nuke campaign, which is pretty much inevitable anyway. The list goes on and on. I can think of many, many reasons not to surrender and give up on iraq, but hey, what do I know. Obama himself said iraq is the front line of thier battle, can you acknowledge that it is? OMFGIt's raining men! Hallelulah! It's raining men!!!1!! I'm so scared I almost shlt myself!!!1 Seriously, why are we spending TRILLIONS fighting these people? Bring your "terrorism", bring your bombs. I saw the Pentagon the day it was hit. I have friends that lost fathers in that building. I did charity work feeding the workers restoring the pentagon. So, trust me, it hit home for me. Afghanastan was one thing. That was a mess we made and needed to clean up. Iraq? A business opprotunity for those "in" with the administration. I dont think in the history of the grand adventure that is our America has there been such disregard for the morals, policies, popular will and checks and ballances that the true patriots, founders and visionaries put in place. You right wing "Patriots" give me dirreah with the bullshlt ":surrender" nonsense. WE ARE NOT AT WAR. We are paying for your demented, self-rightous and evil "leaders" to get rich and and retire with mad l00tz for them and thier families. H8, you and you're ilk are the biggest suckers to ever get pwnd. Why? Is you're life and the future of you're children will inhabit going to be better off if we remain in Iraq or not? Are you that worried that big bad Al Kadia Will run a plane into the K-Mart you work in some day? Or maybe it will be a plane that will dust all our major cities with anthrax. Yeah fucin right. These people dont have armies. They pose no real threat to our country other than thier control of OIL. Just diversify our energy production and leave the middle east to rot for all I care. Oh yeah, I forgot, 400 Horsepower and the ability to fill up anywhere you are are more important than the lives of our service men and women. Some of the most ambitious and intelligent individuals that could be innovating and revolutionizing our world are dying daily. I was in the Army. I signed on the dotted line that I would die to protect OUR country. The service men and women I worked with were great people (the hottest chick I ever banged was in AIT ) H8, you should be banned from using the american flag emoticon on the huddle. You are no supporter of freedom and you certianly should never call youself a patriot. This administration is exactly what our founding fathers feared. I guess in 200 years its pretty easy to figger out the loopholes. You're either some kind of filthy fascist or you impersonate one real well. er up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Posted April 12, 2008 Author Share Posted April 12, 2008 Let's make it a requirement for office. ETA- Not that being a veteran guarentees any more competence. Just more likely to give a broader perspective. Or at least have advisors that do. Serving in war at least would give perspective how fubar it is. I think serving in battle not just in the military. What bothered me about these guys is they thought they could run a clean war and everything would go well. They didn't even bother to lock down the armories. What generals allow guns and explosives to be looted easily? They are used against their own people. There was a video from a Minn TV station of troops opening the most dangerous explosives cahes in the world(the UN had it monitored) and just leaving it unlocked, No way any decent general would allow this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Posted April 12, 2008 Author Share Posted April 12, 2008 If we leave, Iran moves in and takes over, al queda has a permanent base of operations. You can't be serious. Iraq has millions of Shia that fought against the Iranians in the Iran/Iraq War. Iran is persian Iraq arab. No understanding of this part of the world and making comments like this is what got us in this mess. You guys kept saying those of us trying to understand the fight were giving comfort to the enemy. They aren't going to let Iran march into their country anymore than Canada would let us march into theirs. That shows little understanding of the fight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimC Posted April 12, 2008 Share Posted April 12, 2008 (edited) Is get out now and nuke the region an option? And yes, I'm serious. We used to beat people into submission and they obeyed. Like your kids today, now we coddle and hug them. They laugh at you and don't listen instead. What a joke and a bunch of pansies we as a nation have become. Beat these people back to the Stone Age (about 10 years without oil) and be done with the area. Include Iran, Saudi Arabia, Israel, Syria, Afghanistan. F 'em all. Edit: And I've been for this since Day One. I never wanted the war. I'm sure if they were still around, BJ could find me wanting to nuke Iraq back in '01. Our kids lives aren't worth this region's garbage. Edited April 12, 2008 by TimC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H8tank Posted April 12, 2008 Share Posted April 12, 2008 They aren't going to let Iran march into their country anymore than Canada would let us march into theirs. Wait, are they incompetent or are they a badass who can fight off Iran? The only chance the Iraqi army has of keeping iran at bay is if they use some of their WMD's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtomicCEO Posted April 12, 2008 Share Posted April 12, 2008 Wait, are they incompetent or are they a badass who can fight off Iran? Both. They can't get their government together, and they are still killing American soldiers. It's like a riddle, huh? Hard to fit in your head? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Posted April 12, 2008 Author Share Posted April 12, 2008 (edited) Wait, are they incompetent or are they a badass who can fight off Iran? The only chance the Iraqi army has of keeping iran at bay is if they use some of their WMD's. Maybe we can get them to take over and ruin their economy. Sure there is oil, but the rest of the country is a mess. Edited April 12, 2008 by Randall Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.