If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above.
You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.
To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Politics & ReligionWell Since every damn forum has one. Might as well leave it out there. This place is loosely moderated and should not be entered if you're weak of heart.
Victory In Iraq! Possibility or one man's obsession?
Every few months our president tells us we must not give up and eventually we WILL accomplish our goal in iraq.However if you look at the news sites everyday bombs go off,troops and civilians die and it hasnt been reducing either.Although i think its great to be positive and to not give up its also stupid to be delusional and think you will accomplish a goal that is extremely unlikely.
So the question is "Is there really a possibility of a stable and violence free iraq or is this just one man's obsession that is almost impossible to acheive?
__________________
Freedom means having the right to own a gun or to call the president dumb.Removing helmet laws is just plain stupidity and has nothing to do with freedom.
Posts: 9,283
Casino Cash: $18495
Sportbike: Katana - Sold 8/08
Quote:
Originally Posted by umairhashmi
So the question is "Is there really a possibility of a stable and violence free iraq or is this just one man's obsession that is almost impossible to acheive?
No, I don't think you can roll back a thousand years of fighting by fighting one war without enough troops, enough support, or a plan.
Every few months our president tells us we must not give up and eventually we WILL accomplish our goal in iraq.However if you look at the news sites everyday bombs go off,troops and civilians die and it hasnt been reducing either.Although i think its great to be positive and to not give up its also stupid to be delusional and think you will accomplish a goal that is extremely unlikely.
So the question is "Is there really a possibility of a stable and violence free iraq or is this just one man's obsession that is almost impossible to acheive?
Yes yes yes. It sucks bad. Hang in there man, every day is another day closer to 2008.
Actually, the problems go deeper than longstanding history. We deliberately dismantled their army, police and government creating effective anarchy. The real question for military historians will be whether an occupying army can recover from deliberately created anarchy.
Yes yes yes. It sucks bad. Hang in there man, every day is another day closer to 2008.
That's what everyone said before the elections of 2004. Hang on man 2004 is right around the corner. Are you willing to wait another couple of years of death and mayhem and destruction of Bill of Rights to get that psycho out of the white house?
And even when 2008 gets here, assuming we are all still in one piece and haven't been thrust into war with Russia and China, you'll probably be given a choice of a harpee Hillary to continue to lead the country down into the sewer.
__________________
If we don't believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don't believe in it at all.
-Noam Chomsky
freedom is just a word to the middle east. control of the fertile crescent has changed so many hands that a good system that the populace will embrace has not lasted.....
we in america think that freedom is grand, and it is.....
we think the iraqi's want to be free....
do iraqi's really want freedom like in the despised west, maybe....but they sure as hell dont act like it.....if they have no problem killing each other, they'll kill anyone in their way. It took a violent tyrant to control the chaos that dominated the region, its very unlikely a gov't constructed by the "evil" west will gain any acceptance with the populace. chaos will ensue until either the sunni or shiite gain power and suppress the other.....like Saddam had done for so long.
Your question is too vague to answer. "Is there really a possibility of a stable and violence free iraq?" is missing the time component.
Short answer: No, Iraq will NOT become another reunified Germany by 2008.
But wait, how long did German reunification take? 45 FREAKING YEARS, and the Germans were not a population brainwashed from birth by a radical, violent, warmongering, supremely oppressive, death-obsessed religious cult. Oh, and last time I checked, we STILL have a large, permanent military presence stationed in Germany.
No, we will not win this war if we insist on catering to the short attention span of impatient, idealistic, narcissistic 23-year-olds who have no freaking clue about history or the threat of totalitarian ideologies.
Some posters here have pointed out the fact that the barbarians in that part of the world have been murdering and reconquering each other for thousands of years, thanks to their twisted religion. Why? Because their religious beliefs do not permit them to accept people that believe differently, even other factions that are just a slightly different flavor of the same cult.
So please, tell me this: what on earth makes you all think that they will be content to just leave Western culture alone if only we were to just leave them alone?
Study up on the long history of Islamic conquest, and what happens to the lands thus conquered. Tell me what you find out about apostasy in Islam, or the role of women in strict Islamic society. Tell me about Islamic "honor killings". Tell me what you find out about Dhimmitude. Then come back and present the facts supporting your conclusion that we can afford to just ignore it in this day and age.
For those of you that have no idea WTF I am talking about, here's just one simple little example: Egypt. Egypt was conquered by Islam 1300 years ago, and now we have the top Islamic leader in all of Egypt, Grand Mufti Ali Gomaa, issuing a fatwa forbidding sculpture and statues. Egypt, land of an ancient civilization's pyramids and Sphinx, now in the hands of a cult that cannot tolerate its sculpture.
Are any of you paying attention to what is going on with Europe's growing, unassimilated Muslim population? What are your thoughts on this?
Iraq is just a strategic point in the long game of the real war we're in. People really, really need to stop viewing world affairs through the lens of the U.S.A.'s 4-year election cycle. We are still fighting a war that has been going on for over a thousand years.
Oh puleeze. Germany was a conquered agressor. It was dis-unified by plundering victors. There is simply no comparison. Well, except maybe the plundering part...
So please, tell me this: what on earth makes you all think that they will be content to just leave Western culture alone if only we were to just leave them alone?
what makes you think they'll leave us alone if we continue with military options? its the same idea, with the same answer. islam will not cease in its attempt to conquer until it either....
a. conquers all other religions and assimilates the entire world population to islam
b. gets destroyed itself.
we'll simply have this fight for awhile, only it would be nice to....well...ya know....have a real plan, with realistic goals. the american people would not likely be so upset had this war been managed effectively, like we are accustomed to. Get in, kick ass, get out.....
what makes you think they'll leave us alone if we continue with military options?
I never suggested any such thing. No, I don't expect they'll leave us alone. Since they have already demonstrated to my satisfaction that they have no interest in sharing the planet with us peacefully, I conclude that we have two choices: fight it, or surrender. Leaving Iraq now is surrender, case closed. They will most certainly interpret our fleeing Iraq as a victory for them, and they will most certainly NOT just leave us alone afterwards.
bin Laden took note of our hasty departure from Somalia after the "Blackhawk Down" incident, concluded we were a paper tiger with no guts for real conflict, and decided it was time to escalate the jihad. Result? 9/11. What do you imagine they would do in the wake of their victory in Iraq?
Quote:
its the same idea, with the same answer. islam will not cease in its attempt to conquer until it either....
a. conquers all other religions and assimilates the entire world population to islam
b. gets destroyed itself.
we'll simply have this fight for awhile, only it would be nice to....well...ya know....have a real plan, with realistic goals. the american people would not likely be so upset had this war been managed effectively, like we are accustomed to. Get in, kick ass, get out.....
I agree with most of what you said above; you are spot-on with the all-or-nothing, us-or-them conclusion. They established the rules of the game, not us. And yes, we need a plan. Militarily and strategically, I think Iraq was a good start to a long plan.
Invading Iraq, getting rid of Saddam, and establishing a forward post in the heart of the Islamic world IS a plan. An ugly plan, but a plan nonetheless for a situation where there IS NO pretty plan. This dream of creating an instant democracy in Iraq is a bit of a distraction and is an impediment to military objectives, but I understand why it's being attempted.
Unfortunately, the situation demands more than a simplistic, quick, clean, in-and-out asskicking. Islam has been making war with everyone else they've come in contact with for over a thousand years. Why should we think we can put a simple end to it in 8 years?
Let's not blow it now by handing the enemy a victory in Iraq.
Posts: 9,283
Casino Cash: $18495
Sportbike: Katana - Sold 8/08
Quote:
Originally Posted by F&D
No, I don't expect they'll leave us alone. Since they have already demonstrated to my satisfaction that they have no interest in sharing the planet with us peacefully, I conclude that we have two choices: fight it, or surrender. Leaving Iraq now is surrender, case closed.
Yes, because the rest of the world is off-limits.
Leaving Iraq now wouldn't equate to surrendering. Sometimes you have to realize when an investment was a bad decision, and cut your losses. Iraq is one of them. We need to fight a war we have a chance of winning, and you can't win against a movement.
Quote:
They will most certainly interpret our fleeing Iraq as a victory for them, and they will most certainly NOT just leave us alone afterwards.
Even if we manage to stabilize Iraq, they're going to move somewhere else. So why keep throwing troops and money at a situation that we've been on the ass-end of for three years? While we're struggling to stabilize Iraq, the rest of the middle east is mobilizing.
Quote:
bin Laden took note of our hasty departure from Somalia after the "Blackhawk Down" incident, concluded we were a paper tiger with no guts for real conflict, and decided it was time to escalate the jihad. Result? 9/11. What do you imagine they would do in the wake of their victory in Iraq?
Please. You really think that if we stayed in Somolia that 9/11 would never have happened?
I have some hot beachfront property in Wyoming that you might be interested in.
This isn't a localized conflict. Until the US controls every inch of land on the face of the planet, we're not going to stop terrorism abroad.
Quote:
Militarily and strategically, I think Iraq was a good start to a long plan.
Invading Iraq, getting rid of Saddam, and establishing a forward post in the heart of the Islamic world IS a plan. An ugly plan, but a plan nonetheless for a situation where there IS NO pretty plan. This dream of creating an instant democracy in Iraq is a bit of a distraction and is an impediment to military objectives, but I understand why it's being attempted.
We've had presence and influence in the middle east for decades. Ousting Saddam didn't do anything to help us. It created a training ground for more extremists.
Quote:
Unfortunately, the situation demands more than a simplistic, quick, clean, in-and-out asskicking. Islam has been making war with everyone else they've come in contact with for over a thousand years. Why should we think we can put a simple end to it in 8 years?
Let's not blow it now by handing the enemy a victory in Iraq.
Again, "the enemy" isn't localized. "The enemy" is, in essence, an ideal. You can't defeat that by invading countries.
The billions of dollars wasted in Iraq could have been put to better use in foreign intelligence operations and targeted attacks on the leaders themselves, not an invasion of what was basically nothing more than an oil supplier with a lackluster military.
Victory In Iraq! Possibility or one man's obsession?
