REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Opinion on Iraq has changed recently.

POSTED BY: KANEMAN
UPDATED: Friday, July 28, 2006 07:54
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 1087
PAGE 1 of 1

Thursday, July 27, 2006 9:26 AM

KANEMAN


Just read a piece in the local paper interviewing local troops in Iraq. These men and women clearly have no idea why they are there. They all felt like they are just riding around waiting to get blown up. They also believe that Iraq will have a civil war the moment we leave. If this the case, shouldn't we just withdraw now?

One soldier replied, when asked about morale, " It's like taking what you hate most about your job..doing it five hours a day, in 120 degree heat, getting shot at doing so, and sand in your underwear to boot...than ask yourself about morale!...All for what? we don't know..none of us gives a (expletive - expletive) whether or not Iraq is a democracy. So one side has to win. Be it Shiite, be it Sunni. I don't care. It's apparent, these people have made it obvious they can't live in unity."

I thought for awhile we should be there, lately? not so much.)

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 27, 2006 9:33 AM

PENGUIN


I agree completely that there will be a civil war as soon as we leave. There may even be one while we're there. Then what do we do? Who's side do we back?

We were idiots to invade (yes, invade) a country and think we could bring it democracy. Hell, democracy barely works here in the US with only 300+ years of history. How arrogant of us to believe that a county with thousands of years of history and thousands of years of feuding factions could be made to accept democracy!

Stupidity starts at the top...


NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 27, 2006 9:36 AM

CHRISISALL


From the beginning, it was done the wrong way.
We got Saddam; good on us. But the Iraq war is massive chemotherapy where surgery and immuno-building techniques might have worked better.
(Too much time on the medical thread...)

We're meddling. And getting more Americans wounded and killed to do it.

My two credits Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 27, 2006 10:34 AM

KANEMAN


Would it be better to just split the country into two nations?

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 27, 2006 10:46 AM

CHRISISALL


Worked with Germany...sort of...

No history credentials Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 27, 2006 11:20 AM

SOUPCATCHER


I don't know enough about Iraq to say whether or not splitting the country would work. From some of what I've read I've gotten the opinion that neither Sunni or Shiite are homogenous categories.

Some of the big questions in my mind are: do we want permanent military bases in Iraq? Does the Administration have a plan beyond "staying the course?" Will we make substantive changes before 2009?

I think the majority of Americans would be sympathetic to the Murtha plan if it was ever given an accurate airing (based on polling data - http://www.pollingreport.com/iraq.htm ). However, it doesn't matter what the majority of Americans think. What matters is what this Administration decides because, let's face it, Congress hasn't shown any inclination to challenge the President.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 27, 2006 12:00 PM

SIMONWHO

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 27, 2006 12:02 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


I continue to vote for splitting it in three (don't forget the Kurds). And in ther future, when it looks like we may have created a "Shiite crescent" (Syria, Iran, Iraq) while our internally-threatend "allies" like Saui Arabia are muttering expletives under their collective breath, splitting Iraq may look like an attractive alternative. Better that Iran get only a third of Iraq than the whole thing.

(Unless of course Bush wants Iran to get "bogged down" on Iraq. Or possibly wants all the Shiites to coalesce so he can bomb them all in one fell swoop....)

---------------------------------
Don't piss in my face and tell me it's raining.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 27, 2006 1:31 PM

KANEMAN


Quote:

Originally posted by SoupCatcher:
I don't know enough about Iraq to say whether or not splitting the country would work. From some of what I've read I've gotten the opinion that neither Sunni or Shiite are homogenous categories.

Some of the big questions in my mind are: do we want permanent military bases in Iraq? Does the Administration have a plan beyond "staying the course?" Will we make substantive changes before 2009?

I think the majority of Americans would be sympathetic to the Murtha plan if it was ever given an accurate airing (based on polling data - http://www.pollingreport.com/iraq.htm ). However, it doesn't matter what the majority of Americans think. What matters is what this Administration decides because, let's face it, Congress hasn't shown any inclination to challenge the President.



From what I read permanent bases is not an option...I think we have already stated we will leave..Question becomes when?

Good point about Kurds and three.

As far as North and South Korea. At least half is civil. And the other is isolated...not really turmoil ya know? Iraq is also in the middle of a powder keg. where as Asia is pretty stable.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 27, 2006 1:40 PM

CITIZEN


Quote:

Originally posted by chrisisall:
Worked with Germany...sort of...

No history credentials Chrisisall

Except the reasons it 'worked' in Germany was because the world’s two largest allied groups (Warsaw Pact and NATO) invested their militaries and the threat of global nuclear war.

That simply is not, and cannot, happen in Iraq. It's something that should have been done instead of forming Iraq in the first place, the Western powers carved up the area after the First World War like Europe mark two.

Firstly Europe took hundreds of years and two world wars to reach a point where we weren't constantly at each others throats, and that's without the problems that inevitable arise from just arbitrarily drawing lines on a map and calling it a nation, just look at Africa for a practical demonstration of what happens there.

I don’t think splitting Iraq in two (besides you’d need three not two new countries, Kurds Shiites and Sunnis) would work. For a start there’s no superpower in the other half like there was for Germany, and you need MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction, I just thought the abbreviation needed to be stated) in order to stop one side going for the other. I have few doubts that if it wasn’t for the bomb hanging over our heads like the sword of Damocles there would have been a Third World War already originating in Germany.

The Sunnis hate the Shiites, and the Shiites hate the Sunnis and everyone hates the Kurds. Any splitting of Iraq on religious grounds will just end with two or more countries at each others throats, if you doubt this just look at India and Pakistan.



More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 27, 2006 1:43 PM

CAUSAL


Quote:

Originally posted by Penguin:
I agree completely that there will be a civil war as soon as we leave. There may even be one while we're there. Then what do we do? Who's side do we back?

We were idiots to invade (yes, invade) a country and think we could bring it democracy. Hell, democracy barely works here in the US with only 300+ years of history. How arrogant of us to believe that a county with thousands of years of history and thousands of years of feuding factions could be made to accept democracy!

Stupidity starts at the top...



While I do agree that it was a terrible idea to invade, please note that the Japanese had all the same things (years of history, feuding factions) and they took to democracy. Jury's still out on Iraq, but people also said it would never work in Japan. I realize it's not a one-to-one correspondence (as some will no doubt angrily point out), but the point remains.

________________________________________________________________________
I wish I had a magical wish-granting plank.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 27, 2006 1:45 PM

FREMDFIRMA


Again, you can't "give" people freedom at the point of a gun, they don't want it, will not keep it, and will resent you for upsetting the established order.

The only way effectively create or depose a government in lasting fashion is for the locals themselves to take up arms and spill enough blood to MAKE it happen, like we did in 1776.

Honestly, it looks to me like a lot of em are doin that right about now, yep indeedy, we surely got them interested in putting together a new government all right - and they damned sure DO NOT want us, or our little string puppets to be part of it, golly-gee-whiz, what a surprise..

I notice when these fools say "Stay the Course" they don't even KNOW what the course is, if there is a course, and what it is supposed to be... Duurrrrr....

Oh yeah, that's a plan - I say we get the hell out of there, now, while we still CAN extract without massive casualties, before some second coming of Saladin rises up and mops the floor with us.

-Frem.

PS. (Afghanistan too, I put my face in my hands and groaned when we stuck our noses into that, did we learn NOTHING from what they did to the Soviets ??!)

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 27, 2006 1:57 PM

KANEMAN


I agree "Stay the course" is a ridiculous mantra. When there is no "course". If it were a "course" we are failing that "course"...are GPA went down. Afganistan, I think is different it seems to be going quite well considering the time.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 27, 2006 2:43 PM

GINOBIFFARONI


Quote:

Originally posted by kaneman:



From what I read permanent bases is not an option...I think we have already stated we will leave..Question becomes when?




Not so

http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0930/p17s02-cogn.html

They won't come out and say it for political reasons, but anything put out by the " think tanks " who really come out with much of policy.... it will happen


I read somewhere that Iraqi government... well the appointed by the US Iraqi government had already signed a deal to that effect. Historicly once your in, it takes much effort to get rid of you... the Japanese recently paid you off to relocate some bases, and Cuba... think they really want you there ?




" Fighting them at their own game
Murder for freedom the stab in the back
Women and children and cowards attack

Run to the hills run for your lives "

http://www.darklyrics.com/lyrics/ironmaiden/liveafterdeath.html#12


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 27, 2006 4:25 PM

STINKINGROSE


It's just International Brotherhood Week over there, isn't it?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 27, 2006 8:03 PM

KANEMAN


Quote:

Originally posted by GinoBiffaroni:
Quote:

Originally posted by kaneman:



From what I read permanent bases is not an option...I think we have already stated we will leave..Question becomes when?




Not so

http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0930/p17s02-cogn.html

They won't come out and say it for political reasons, but anything put out by the " think tanks " who really come out with much of policy.... it will happen


I read somewhere that Iraqi government... well the appointed by the US Iraqi government had already signed a deal to that effect. Historicly once your in, it takes much effort to get rid of you... the Japanese recently paid you off to relocate some bases, and Cuba... think they really want you there ?




" Fighting them at their own game
Murder for freedom the stab in the back
Women and children and cowards attack

Run to the hills run for your lives "

http://www.darklyrics.com/lyrics/ironmaiden/liveafterdeath.html#12





Hey stop with the "you you you" stuff. Yes it is true when America makes a deal with a country it holds that country to it. Lose your standing army? Okanowa. Must I go on? Cuba..I'm in...South Korea?..I'm in...Germany,England,Francussy,Spain,Canada etc!!!....I'm in...Iraq? don't think I should be in.


NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 27, 2006 8:15 PM

GINOBIFFARONI


Quote:

Originally posted by kaneman:
Quote:

Originally posted by GinoBiffaroni:
Quote:

Originally posted by kaneman:



From what I read permanent bases is not an option...I think we have already stated we will leave..Question becomes when?




Not so

http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0930/p17s02-cogn.html

They won't come out and say it for political reasons, but anything put out by the " think tanks " who really come out with much of policy.... it will happen


I read somewhere that Iraqi government... well the appointed by the US Iraqi government had already signed a deal to that effect. Historicly once your in, it takes much effort to get rid of you... the Japanese recently paid you off to relocate some bases, and Cuba... think they really want you there ?




" Fighting them at their own game
Murder for freedom the stab in the back
Women and children and cowards attack

Run to the hills run for your lives "

http://www.darklyrics.com/lyrics/ironmaiden/liveafterdeath.html#12





Hey stop with the "you you you" stuff. Yes it is true when America makes a deal with a country it holds that country to it. Lose your standing army? Okanowa. Must I go on? Cuba..I'm in...South Korea?..I'm in...Germany,England,Francussy,Spain,Canada etc!!!....I'm in...Iraq? don't think I should be in.




The point I'm trying to make is that what do the Japenese have to do to get you to leave.... start up the war again ?

or Cuba.... invade a country, install a dictator, then have him sign a treaty " in perpetuity "

only a war will get them out



And how many " deals " has America go back on when they decide they don't like how it is going ?






" Fighting them at their own game
Murder for freedom the stab in the back
Women and children and cowards attack

Run to the hills run for your lives "

http://www.darklyrics.com/lyrics/ironmaiden/liveafterdeath.html#12


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 27, 2006 8:26 PM

KANEMAN


Short answer.....America protects just about every "free" country in the world. If you don't believe that you are delusional. I've said it before ..might as well say it again ...if you do not like America's taking of the free world's reigns..take the UN (funded by the US) and stick it where the sun doesn't shine...Bye Bye NYC here comes? What? I may disagree on some American foreign policy, but for the most part thank god for the.....UUUUUUUUUUUSSSSSSSSSSOFAAAAAAAAAAA!

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 28, 2006 3:22 AM

HERO


Quote:

Originally posted by GinoBiffaroni:
The point I'm trying to make is that what do the Japenese have to do to get you to leave.... start up the war again ?


Japan does not want us to leave, neither does South Korea. Our troops are a check on Chinese and North Korean aggression.

If we left Japan would be forced to invest tens of billions in a military buildup to secure its interests and security. To do otherwise would invite aggressive militaristic neighbors to fill the vaccum.

H

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 28, 2006 6:09 AM

FREMDFIRMA


Fine by me.

Let em do it on their own dime for once, cause I am sick of paying for all this imperial lunacy.

-Frem

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 28, 2006 7:45 AM

GINOBIFFARONI


Quote:

Originally posted by Hero:
Quote:

Originally posted by GinoBiffaroni:
The point I'm trying to make is that what do the Japenese have to do to get you to leave.... start up the war again ?


Japan does not want us to leave, neither does South Korea. Our troops are a check on Chinese and North Korean aggression.

If we left Japan would be forced to invest tens of billions in a military buildup to secure its interests and security. To do otherwise would invite aggressive militaristic neighbors to fill the vaccum.

H



Some of these links are 10 years old, it shows a pattern and I say while the governments in some of these places tolerate US bases, but the people really don't want them their... this causes resentment and a general dislike for the US, its troops and its policies

http://edition.cnn.com/WORLD/9511/okinawa_lease/index.html
" Okinawan landowners are refusing to extend the leases on some U.S. military bases."

http://www.iht.com/articles/2003/01/14/edstein_ed3_.php

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Korea/FB04Dg01.html

http://www.ericmargolis.com/archives/2004/08/the_sun_will_ne.php






" Fighting them at their own game
Murder for freedom the stab in the back
Women and children and cowards attack

Run to the hills run for your lives "

http://www.darklyrics.com/lyrics/ironmaiden/liveafterdeath.html#12


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 28, 2006 7:54 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

These men and women clearly have no idea why they are there. They all felt like they are just riding around waiting to get blown up. They also believe that Iraq will have a civil war the moment we leave. If this the case, shouldn't we just withdraw now?

One soldier replied, when asked about morale, " It's like taking what you hate most about your job..doing it five hours a day, in 120 degree heat, getting shot at doing so, and sand in your underwear to boot...than ask yourself about morale!...All for what? we don't know..none of us gives a (expletive - expletive) whether or not Iraq is a democracy. So one side has to win. Be it Shiite, be it Sunni. I don't care. It's apparent, these people have made it obvious they can't live in unity."

Can fragging* be far behind?

For those too young to remember Vietnam:
Quote:

"Frag" is a term from the Vietnam War, most commonly meaning to assassinate an unpopular member of one's own fighting unit by dropping a fragmentation grenade into the victim's tent at night. A hand grenade was used because it would not leave any fingerprints, and because a ballistics test could not be done (as it could to match a bullet with a firearm). A fragging victim could also be killed by intentional friendly fire during combat. In either case, the death would be blamed on the enemy, and, due to the dead man's unpopularity, no one would contradict the cover story. .... During the Vietnam War, fragging was surprisingly common. At least 600 American officers were murdered by their own troops in documented cases, and as many as 1,400 other officers' deaths could not be explained[1]. As many as 25% of all officer casualties during the war were due to fragging.

During the Iraq War, there have been two instances of fragging: the murders of Captain Phillip Esposito and Lt. Louis Allen by Staff Sgt. Alberto Martinez and the murder of two officers in Kuwait by Hasan Akbar.






---------------------------------
Reality sucks. Especially when it contradicts our cherished ideas.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

FFF.NET SOCIAL