So everything's hunky dory in Iraq now then? During the tail end of the ground war and initial occupation the sectarian violence and civilian insurgency hadn't yet begun.
Really? Wow, that's funny because the garbage bags of dismembered Iraqi's I found on the side of the road and numerous attacks on my compound almost nightly seem to me like there was a lot of moving pieces going on.
I wish you could tell that to my dead friends. They'd get a kick out of it.
Really? Wow, that's funny because the garbage bags of dismembered Iraqi's I found on the side of the road and numerous attacks on my compound almost nightly seem to me like there was a lot of moving pieces going on.
I wish you could tell that to my dead friends. They'd get a kick out of it.
The insurgency didn't gather strength until about a year after the invasion. You said you were there at the initial phase of the invasion. So what are you arguing about?
Nice try but incorrect sir, I was there for the tail end of the ground war and initial occupation on an itty bitty forward operating base in the northwestern part of the city which is now closed down and given back to the Iraqi's.
You want to know who's at the green zone? The news agencies and reporters that give you your credible information. Sorry man, not everybody got a chance to put there feet up in Basra.
What exactly is incorrect? I posted an article which explained that Iraq had descended into chaos. Please explain which part of that article is incorrect.
What exactly is incorrect? I posted an article which explained that Iraq had descended into chaos. Please explain which part of that article is incorrect.
Your accusations of me sitting on my ass in the green zone ring a bell?
Your accusations of me sitting on my ass in the green zone ring a bell?
O.k. Apologies for that. I initially got you mixed up with the fella who started this thread. I therefore assumed that you hadn't yet joined the military and so had been in Iraq in some other capacity.
The insurgency didn't gather strength until about a year after the invasion. You said you were there at the initial phase of the invasion. So what are you arguing about?
The first three weeks in country was a breeze, we were greeted as liberators and heroes by the locals, after about a month or so, we started to be attacked, the momentum grew and grew so quickly it cought everyone off guard. So your telling me that every soldier and civilian who died in Iraq between April 03 and 04 don't count because it wasn't in full swing? So what about 500 US soldiers and thousands of Iraq's in 03/04. Just because the numbers are a couple hundred shy of where they are now, the insurgency isn't in full swing? Check the numbers out buddy.
I'd be lying if I said I didn't care to a certain extent, not so much for myself, but for my buddies that are no longer with us. It's hard for a lot of people to understand the truth, I'm not mad at Byrnzie in any way, I just think he's ill-informed. I'm not sure where he gets his pre-concieved notions, but I would love to find out. Byrnzie, I encourage you to find a vet, who fought in Iraq or some other modern day conflict and just shoot the breeze with him about everything. Then do it again and again to get multiple opinions.
I support the war in Iraq for selfish personal reasons, so even I'm a biased source.
I'd be lying if I said I didn't care to a certain extent, not so much for myself, but for my buddies that are no longer with us. It's hard for a lot of people to understand the truth, I'm not mad at Byrnzie in any way, I just think he's ill-informed. I'm not sure where he gets his pre-concieved notions, but I would love to find out. Byrnzie, I encourage you to find a vet, who fought in Iraq or some other modern day conflict and just shoot the breeze with him about everything. Then do it again and again to get multiple opinions.
I support the war in Iraq for selfish personal reasons, so even I'm a biased source.
So your telling me that every soldier and civilian who died in Iraq between April 03 and 04 don't count because it wasn't in full swing? So what about 500 US soldiers and thousands of Iraq's in 03/04. Just because the numbers are a couple hundred shy of where they are now, the insurgency isn't in full swing? Check the numbers out buddy.
Sorry, but at no point did I say that every soldier and civilian who died in Iraq between April 03 and 04 didn't count. I've lost track of what this discussion is about.
It's hard for a lot of people to understand the truth, I'm not mad at Byrnzie in any way, I just think he's ill-informed.
Please feel free to fill me in on what you perceive as 'the truth'. It's what we're here for afterall. I can't even see where we differ in our opinions because as of now, you've been somewhat reluctant to state your point of view on the matter. I presume that your feelings about what's happening over there are coloured largely by what you've been through and by what has happened to your pals. (I could be wrong)
As far as my opinion on the Iraq war, it's pretty simple. I protested prior to the war alongside 2million others on the streets of London because I could see that we were being lied to about the justification for the invasion. I am now against the occupation because I don't believe that Iraqis or American, and British troops should be dying over there. I believe this war to be a war fought to line the pockets of a few fat-bellies in positions of wealth and power in America, and that it's not benefiting anyone else, you included.
And as far as where I get my 'pre-concieved notions' from. I read a lot. Not tabloid, mainstream crap, but articles from indepndent journalists and political commentators who push the envelope. Robert Fisk, George Monbiot, Patrick Cockburn, Chomsky, Alexander Cockburn e.t.c. Above and beyond that, I simply trust my instincts.
And there is no civil war in Iraq. There's sectarian violence, I equivalent it to a nasty fight between bloods and crips. There's no north or south in Iraq, unless your talking about kurds. Shiite and Sunnis and Armenians live amongst eachother throughout the various citys as neighbors day to day. I was in Baghdad for thirteen months and I can tell you that in no way was there an exclusivaley shiite or sunni neighborhood. You're seeing an extremely small percentage of fundamentalists duking it out. But it's not your fault at all, since I've been home I have yet to see a single news agency that hasn't spun or exaggerated the truth to an extent. That includes BBC and NPR.
Other than the fact that I don't understand how "civil war" does not equal "sectarian violence", you may surprised to know that I agree very much with what you are saying. I also highly value your input on this subject because you had been in Iraq for 13 months. I am aware that there are many mixed communities in Iraq where Shia and Sunni have peacefully co-existed. I am aware of this because of mainstream news. These are the enlightened Iraqis that I had previously mentioned. They have not let religion overpower them. I would agree that the fundamentalists in Iraq are the minority. However, I think in troubled times, people who are not fundamentalists will give support fundamentalists if they think it can make their lives better in any way. I mean, almost every day you read a short news story about Sunnis killing Shias or vice versa. However, it seems now Sunnis and Shias are more likely to focus their attack on American soldiers. Poll after poll shows people in Iraq do not want us there... we are plundering them and providing not enough stability. I can't help but notice that the only place where stability exists is in the oil rich south where Shias completely dominate, and in oil rich Kurdistan. The ghettos around Baghdad are not important to the leaders of this occupation. I think the videos in my new blog prove where the priorities of the government lie.
I refer you to all of the revolutionary struggles of the past. The Algerian fight for independence against the French, the Indian fight for independence against the British, the Cuban revolution, the Vietnamese struggle for independence against the french and Americans e.t.c, e.t.c, ad infinitum.
And those were all "fight at will" armies? And wasn't ghandi's disobedience movement a crucial element of India's success in gaining independence? The Vietnamese army surely wasn't a "fight at will" army. And in the case of "fight at will" armies, can they really operate at a level beyond unconventional guerilla tactics?
What I'm talking about is maintaining a vast and complex military that will obliterate the enemy without having to rely heavily on guerilla tactics to "agitate" an aggressor into giving up. I don't see this as being possible with a "fight at will" policy.
Please feel free to fill me in on what you perceive as 'the truth'. It's what we're here for afterall. I can't even see where we differ in our opinions because as of now, you've been somewhat reluctant to state your point of view on the matter. I presume that your feelings about what's happening over there are coloured largely by what you've been through and by what has happened to your pals. (I could be wrong)
As far as my opinion on the Iraq war, it's pretty simple. I protested prior to the war alongside 2million others on the streets of London because I could see that we were being lied to about the justification for the invasion. I am now against the occupation because I don't believe that Iraqis or American, and British troops should be dying over there. I believe this war to be a war fought to line the pockets of a few fat-bellies in positions of wealth and power in America, and that it's not benefiting anyone else, you included.
And as far as where I get my 'pre-concieved notions' from. I read a lot. Not tabloid, mainstream crap, but articles from indepndent journalists and political commentators who push the envelope. Robert Fisk, George Monbiot, Patrick Cockburn, Chomsky, Alexander Cockburn e.t.c. Above and beyond that, I simply trust my instincts.
I will admit we have gotten pretty far off from "joinng the military". My whole underlying point is "you can't pick and choose your fights". So whether he joined 10 years ago, today, or 5 years down the road, it doesn't matter. Joining is joining and I would encourage more wayfaring teens to do it too. I believe the military was the best thing I have ever done in my life to date. If I could go back in time, I wouldn't change a thing, even after the fuckin crazy shit I've seen and done. My experiences are priceless, you can't make that shit up. From stupid dope smoking dipshit who barely graduated high school, to being on the deans list at the University of Washington, the military was the biggest boot up my ass on the planet. I wouldn't recommend it to college bound, smart and studious teens unless they really wanted to serve or travel or something, but it's great for people who want to do better, whether it's higher education, a way to escape your town, get out of the ghetto or just plain feel better about yourself.
I'm not going to tell you why I support the war in Iraq, I'm not saying your stupid, but I just don't think you'd understand. And there personal.
And as far as your news sources, these guys don't know any different than the major news networks. The only people that know the truth in Iraq, are the Iraqi's involved and soldiers on the ground. Unless any of those guys actually get in the economy and report things first hand, your only recieving bullshit. Reporters hang out at the green zone and report rumors and myths all day, these rumors and spun stories then get picked up and used by commentators like you mentioned. There too afraid to leave so your only getting garbage.
Other than the fact that I don't understand how "civil war" does not equal "sectarian violence", you may surprised to know that I agree very much with what you are saying. I also highly value your input on this subject because you had been in Iraq for 13 months. I am aware that there are many mixed communities in Iraq where Shia and Sunni have peacefully co-existed. I am aware of this because of mainstream news. These are the enlightened Iraqis that I had previously mentioned. They have not let religion overpower them. I would agree that the fundamentalists in Iraq are the minority. However, I think in troubled times, people who are not fundamentalists will give support fundamentalists if they think it can make their lives better in any way. I mean, almost every day you read a short news story about Sunnis killing Shias or vice versa. However, it seems now Sunnis and Shias are more likely to focus their attack on American soldiers. Poll after poll shows people in Iraq do not want us there... we are plundering them and providing not enough stability. I can't help but notice that the only place where stability exists is in the oil rich south where Shias completely dominate, and in oil rich Kurdistan. The ghettos around Baghdad are not important to the leaders of this occupation. I think the videos in my new blog prove where the priorities of the government lie.
Your right I do agree with you very much, one reason I think it's "violence" and not war is due to the small amount of people involved in bombing, kidnapping, executing etc. The reason I compare it to a nasty fight between bloods and crypts is because it's only prevalent in bad areas. I'm not talking cities either, but your right, that does play a role. There is a neighborhood in Baghdad called Al Mansur. The entire year I was their, absolutely nothing and I mean nothing happened there. It's the nicest, cleanest most affluent area in the city and possibly the country. The people in the neighborhood, Shiit, sunni's and Armenians all got together and agreed that sectarian fighting is worthless, disgusting, atrocious and not helpful to democracy. Neighborhood leaders wouldn't stand for a single attack or fight or anything their.
And I wouldn't say we're "plundering" them, were the best thing to ever happen to that place in terms of infastructure and the economy. And I'm dead serious. I got a buddy who just got back who's got a scary theory that some "insurgents" are really ICDC soldiers we've trained that have been paid to plant bombs and attack us, so that every extra day were there, the more money gets pumped into the country. I had never thought of this before, we were having some beers and I was just absolutely stunned, it really has some validity and scares the shit outta me.
And as far as your news sources, these guys don't know any different than the major news networks. The only people that know the truth in Iraq, are the Iraqi's involved and soldiers on the ground. Unless any of those guys actually get in the economy and report things first hand, your only recieving bullshit. Reporters hang out at the green zone and report rumors and myths all day, these rumors and spun stories then get picked up and used by commentators like you mentioned. There too afraid to leave so your only getting garbage.
But when we're talking about politics, morality, or anything else, then I'd rather trust intellectuals than military personnel. It's about looking at the big picture. You talk about me 'only receiving bullshit', and 'only getting garbage', and yet you neglect to mention what I've said that's garbage, or what it is that i've read that's garbage. It's o.k to come on and here and say "I've been there and so i know what's 'really' going on. Everything you've been told is bullshit", but it doesn't wash with me. You say that you support the war in Iraq. Fine. But don't tell me that my views on the war are bullshit without backing up your statements with some facts.
Your right I do agree with you very much, one reason I think it's "violence" and not war is due to the small amount of people involved in bombing, kidnapping, executing etc. The reason I compare it to a nasty fight between bloods and crypts is because it's only prevalent in bad areas. I'm not talking cities either, but your right, that does play a role. There is a neighborhood in Baghdad called Al Mansur. The entire year I was their, absolutely nothing and I mean nothing happened there. It's the nicest, cleanest most affluent area in the city and possibly the country. The people in the neighborhood, Shiit, sunni's and Armenians all got together and agreed that sectarian fighting is worthless, disgusting, atrocious and not helpful to democracy. Neighborhood leaders wouldn't stand for a single attack or fight or anything their.
And I wouldn't say we're "plundering" them, were the best thing to ever happen to that place in terms of infastructure and the economy. And I'm dead serious. I got a buddy who just got back who's got a scary theory that some "insurgents" are really ICDC soldiers we've trained that have been paid to plant bombs and attack us, so that every extra day were there, the more money gets pumped into the country. I had never thought of this before, we were having some beers and I was just absolutely stunned, it really has some validity and scares the shit outta me.
So what do you think is a viable solution to the situation over there?
But when we're talking about politics, morality, or anything else, then I'd rather trust intellectuals than military personnel. It's about looking at the big picture. You talk about me 'only receiving bullshit', and 'only getting garbage', and yet you neglect to mention what I've said that's garbage, or what it is that i've read that's garbage. It's o.k to come on and here and say "I've been there and so i know what's 'really' going on. Everything you've been told is bullshit", but it doesn't wash with me. You say that you support the war in Iraq. Fine. But don't tell me that my views on the war are bullshit without backing up your statements with some facts.
When did I ever say your views on the war are bullshit? Re-read my posts, I think you've misinterpeted me when I said "garbage or bullshit", I'm not talking about your views, I'm talking about your sources. You can think and theorize however you want, believe me I don't care, the majority of my friends don't support the war and I don't give them shit about it. I'm merely calling information that isn't necessarily factual or possibly based predominantly on political theory like the forementioned intellectualls you mentioned earlier as not being the best place to interpit and analyze your position. I don't pretend to know what's going on there now, I knew what was going on when I was there 3 years ago, although a lot hasn't changed according to buddies that have recently gotten back. What I have learned, is that the media in every way shape or form, to include commentators all spin in one way or another. BE WARY.
And as far as a solution, I don't know. There are two things I and I think everyone else wants.
1. Troops Home
2. Iraq not FUCKED
I'm not the right person to make that decision, that's why we have "intellectualls" and a congress and committee's. They just put together the one for Iraq, the only name I recognized was Sandra Day O'Connor. In my wildest dreams would I be creative enough to draw up a plan where everything works and everyones represented and happy. I do have my suspicions though on a timeframe.
People ask me all the time how long where going to be out there, to which I always answer with another question.
When did I ever say your views on the war are bullshit? Re-read my posts, I think you've misinterpeted me when I said "garbage or bullshit", I'm not talking about your views, I'm talking about your sources. You can think and theorize however you want, believe me I don't care, the majority of my friends don't support the war and I don't give them shit about it. I'm merely calling information that isn't necessarily factual or possibly based predominantly on political theory like the forementioned intellectualls you mentioned earlier as not being the best place to interpit and analyze your position. I don't pretend to know what's going on there now, I knew what was going on when I was there 3 years ago, although a lot hasn't changed according to buddies that have recently gotten back. What I have learned, is that the media in every way shape or form, to include commentators all spin in one way or another. BE WARY.
And as far as a solution, I don't know. There are two things I and I think everyone else wants.
1. Troops Home
2. Iraq not FUCKED
I'm not the right person to make that decision, that's why we have "intellectualls" and a congress and committee's. They just put together the one for Iraq, the only name I recognized was Sandra Day O'Connor. In my wildest dreams would I be creative enough to draw up a plan where everything works and everyones represented and happy. I do have my suspicions though on a timeframe.
People ask me all the time how long where going to be out there, to which I always answer with another question.
"How long have we been in the Balkans?"
Fair enough. Although I do have a weakness of trusting 'intellectuals' such as Robert Fisk, who has spent much of his life in the middle east and who certainly doesn't follow any party line. These people have their ears to the ground so to speak.
You're right in saying that this thread has gotten away from it's original intention. But then I suppose that was kind of inevitable. These things tend to drift this way on the board.
I was asked on here the other day what i thought would be a viable solution to to the situation over there, and to be honest I don't have an answer. Although what I have said after giving it some thought is that it would not be right/practical for the U.S and U.K to pull out any time soon. Simply because we created this mess and so we should stay and suffer the consequences. If we were to withdraw now then I think we'd see a bloodbath on a scale bigger than that seen in the Balkans, and the repercussions would also eclipse anything we witnessed in the Balkans.
All of this was predicted prior to the invasion. It's a shame that money and greed so often override intelligence.
Fair enough. Although I do have a weakness of trusting 'intellectuals' such as Robert Fisk, who has spent much of his life in the middle east and who certainly doesn't follow any party line. These people have their ears to the ground so to speak.
You're right in saying that this thread has gotten away from it's original intention. But then I suppose that was kind of inevitable. These things tend to drift this way on the board.
I was asked on here the other day what i thought would be a viable solution to to the situation over there, and to be honest I don't have an answer. Although what I have said after giving it some thought is that it would not be right/practical for the U.S and U.K to pull out any time soon. Simply because we created this mess and so we should stay and suffer the consequences. If we were to withdraw now then I think we'd see a bloodbath on a scale bigger than that seen in the Balkans, and the repercussions would also eclipse anything we witnessed in the Balkans.
All of this was predicted prior to the invasion. It's a shame that money and greed so often override intelligence.
You know for the most part, you and I see eye to eye. Stay cool.
Fair enough. Although I do have a weakness of trusting 'intellectuals' such as Robert Fisk, who has spent much of his life in the middle east and who certainly doesn't follow any party line. These people have their ears to the ground so to speak.
You're right in saying that this thread has gotten away from it's original intention. But then I suppose that was kind of inevitable. These things tend to drift this way on the board.
I was asked on here the other day what i thought would be a viable solution to to the situation over there, and to be honest I don't have an answer. Although what I have said after giving it some thought is that it would not be right/practical for the U.S and U.K to pull out any time soon. Simply because we created this mess and so we should stay and suffer the consequences. If we were to withdraw now then I think we'd see a bloodbath on a scale bigger than that seen in the Balkans, and the repercussions would also eclipse anything we witnessed in the Balkans.
All of this was predicted prior to the invasion. It's a shame that money and greed so often override intelligence.
finally something we agree on. very well said response. as you remember I was the one who asked you what should be done in Iraq. I'm sure it was easy for you to blast the current plan without coming up with suggestions yourself.
except that last sentence. had to be somthin,
monday morning quaterbacking is easy. predicating and planning before war is alot easier compared to when it really happens. much like the fuck up of hurricane katrina.
money and greed overriding intelligence is just an opinion.
Comments
Really? Wow, that's funny because the garbage bags of dismembered Iraqi's I found on the side of the road and numerous attacks on my compound almost nightly seem to me like there was a lot of moving pieces going on.
I wish you could tell that to my dead friends. They'd get a kick out of it.
The insurgency didn't gather strength until about a year after the invasion. You said you were there at the initial phase of the invasion. So what are you arguing about?
I think it's unbelievable that you can hear what comes out of my mouth from 3000 miles away.
What exactly is incorrect? I posted an article which explained that Iraq had descended into chaos. Please explain which part of that article is incorrect.
Your accusations of me sitting on my ass in the green zone ring a bell?
I have nothing but the highest respect for you sapperskunk.
O.k. Apologies for that. I initially got you mixed up with the fella who started this thread. I therefore assumed that you hadn't yet joined the military and so had been in Iraq in some other capacity.
To my knowledge. no one on this thread has said anything to the contrary Miller.
The first three weeks in country was a breeze, we were greeted as liberators and heroes by the locals, after about a month or so, we started to be attacked, the momentum grew and grew so quickly it cought everyone off guard. So your telling me that every soldier and civilian who died in Iraq between April 03 and 04 don't count because it wasn't in full swing? So what about 500 US soldiers and thousands of Iraq's in 03/04. Just because the numbers are a couple hundred shy of where they are now, the insurgency isn't in full swing? Check the numbers out buddy.
http://www.icasualties.org/oif/
I wonder how sapper feels about that.
I'd be lying if I said I didn't care to a certain extent, not so much for myself, but for my buddies that are no longer with us. It's hard for a lot of people to understand the truth, I'm not mad at Byrnzie in any way, I just think he's ill-informed. I'm not sure where he gets his pre-concieved notions, but I would love to find out. Byrnzie, I encourage you to find a vet, who fought in Iraq or some other modern day conflict and just shoot the breeze with him about everything. Then do it again and again to get multiple opinions.
I support the war in Iraq for selfish personal reasons, so even I'm a biased source.
well I certainly respect your service and courage
Sorry, but at no point did I say that every soldier and civilian who died in Iraq between April 03 and 04 didn't count. I've lost track of what this discussion is about.
Please feel free to fill me in on what you perceive as 'the truth'. It's what we're here for afterall. I can't even see where we differ in our opinions because as of now, you've been somewhat reluctant to state your point of view on the matter. I presume that your feelings about what's happening over there are coloured largely by what you've been through and by what has happened to your pals. (I could be wrong)
As far as my opinion on the Iraq war, it's pretty simple. I protested prior to the war alongside 2million others on the streets of London because I could see that we were being lied to about the justification for the invasion. I am now against the occupation because I don't believe that Iraqis or American, and British troops should be dying over there. I believe this war to be a war fought to line the pockets of a few fat-bellies in positions of wealth and power in America, and that it's not benefiting anyone else, you included.
And as far as where I get my 'pre-concieved notions' from. I read a lot. Not tabloid, mainstream crap, but articles from indepndent journalists and political commentators who push the envelope. Robert Fisk, George Monbiot, Patrick Cockburn, Chomsky, Alexander Cockburn e.t.c. Above and beyond that, I simply trust my instincts.
Other than the fact that I don't understand how "civil war" does not equal "sectarian violence", you may surprised to know that I agree very much with what you are saying. I also highly value your input on this subject because you had been in Iraq for 13 months. I am aware that there are many mixed communities in Iraq where Shia and Sunni have peacefully co-existed. I am aware of this because of mainstream news. These are the enlightened Iraqis that I had previously mentioned. They have not let religion overpower them. I would agree that the fundamentalists in Iraq are the minority. However, I think in troubled times, people who are not fundamentalists will give support fundamentalists if they think it can make their lives better in any way. I mean, almost every day you read a short news story about Sunnis killing Shias or vice versa. However, it seems now Sunnis and Shias are more likely to focus their attack on American soldiers. Poll after poll shows people in Iraq do not want us there... we are plundering them and providing not enough stability. I can't help but notice that the only place where stability exists is in the oil rich south where Shias completely dominate, and in oil rich Kurdistan. The ghettos around Baghdad are not important to the leaders of this occupation. I think the videos in my new blog prove where the priorities of the government lie.
And those were all "fight at will" armies? And wasn't ghandi's disobedience movement a crucial element of India's success in gaining independence? The Vietnamese army surely wasn't a "fight at will" army. And in the case of "fight at will" armies, can they really operate at a level beyond unconventional guerilla tactics?
What I'm talking about is maintaining a vast and complex military that will obliterate the enemy without having to rely heavily on guerilla tactics to "agitate" an aggressor into giving up. I don't see this as being possible with a "fight at will" policy.
http://forums.pearljam.com/showthread.php?t=272825
I will admit we have gotten pretty far off from "joinng the military". My whole underlying point is "you can't pick and choose your fights". So whether he joined 10 years ago, today, or 5 years down the road, it doesn't matter. Joining is joining and I would encourage more wayfaring teens to do it too. I believe the military was the best thing I have ever done in my life to date. If I could go back in time, I wouldn't change a thing, even after the fuckin crazy shit I've seen and done. My experiences are priceless, you can't make that shit up. From stupid dope smoking dipshit who barely graduated high school, to being on the deans list at the University of Washington, the military was the biggest boot up my ass on the planet. I wouldn't recommend it to college bound, smart and studious teens unless they really wanted to serve or travel or something, but it's great for people who want to do better, whether it's higher education, a way to escape your town, get out of the ghetto or just plain feel better about yourself.
I'm not going to tell you why I support the war in Iraq, I'm not saying your stupid, but I just don't think you'd understand. And there personal.
And as far as your news sources, these guys don't know any different than the major news networks. The only people that know the truth in Iraq, are the Iraqi's involved and soldiers on the ground. Unless any of those guys actually get in the economy and report things first hand, your only recieving bullshit. Reporters hang out at the green zone and report rumors and myths all day, these rumors and spun stories then get picked up and used by commentators like you mentioned. There too afraid to leave so your only getting garbage.
Your right I do agree with you very much, one reason I think it's "violence" and not war is due to the small amount of people involved in bombing, kidnapping, executing etc. The reason I compare it to a nasty fight between bloods and crypts is because it's only prevalent in bad areas. I'm not talking cities either, but your right, that does play a role. There is a neighborhood in Baghdad called Al Mansur. The entire year I was their, absolutely nothing and I mean nothing happened there. It's the nicest, cleanest most affluent area in the city and possibly the country. The people in the neighborhood, Shiit, sunni's and Armenians all got together and agreed that sectarian fighting is worthless, disgusting, atrocious and not helpful to democracy. Neighborhood leaders wouldn't stand for a single attack or fight or anything their.
And I wouldn't say we're "plundering" them, were the best thing to ever happen to that place in terms of infastructure and the economy. And I'm dead serious. I got a buddy who just got back who's got a scary theory that some "insurgents" are really ICDC soldiers we've trained that have been paid to plant bombs and attack us, so that every extra day were there, the more money gets pumped into the country. I had never thought of this before, we were having some beers and I was just absolutely stunned, it really has some validity and scares the shit outta me.
But when we're talking about politics, morality, or anything else, then I'd rather trust intellectuals than military personnel. It's about looking at the big picture. You talk about me 'only receiving bullshit', and 'only getting garbage', and yet you neglect to mention what I've said that's garbage, or what it is that i've read that's garbage. It's o.k to come on and here and say "I've been there and so i know what's 'really' going on. Everything you've been told is bullshit", but it doesn't wash with me. You say that you support the war in Iraq. Fine. But don't tell me that my views on the war are bullshit without backing up your statements with some facts.
So what do you think is a viable solution to the situation over there?
When did I ever say your views on the war are bullshit? Re-read my posts, I think you've misinterpeted me when I said "garbage or bullshit", I'm not talking about your views, I'm talking about your sources. You can think and theorize however you want, believe me I don't care, the majority of my friends don't support the war and I don't give them shit about it. I'm merely calling information that isn't necessarily factual or possibly based predominantly on political theory like the forementioned intellectualls you mentioned earlier as not being the best place to interpit and analyze your position. I don't pretend to know what's going on there now, I knew what was going on when I was there 3 years ago, although a lot hasn't changed according to buddies that have recently gotten back. What I have learned, is that the media in every way shape or form, to include commentators all spin in one way or another. BE WARY.
And as far as a solution, I don't know. There are two things I and I think everyone else wants.
1. Troops Home
2. Iraq not FUCKED
I'm not the right person to make that decision, that's why we have "intellectualls" and a congress and committee's. They just put together the one for Iraq, the only name I recognized was Sandra Day O'Connor. In my wildest dreams would I be creative enough to draw up a plan where everything works and everyones represented and happy. I do have my suspicions though on a timeframe.
People ask me all the time how long where going to be out there, to which I always answer with another question.
"How long have we been in the Balkans?"
Fair enough. Although I do have a weakness of trusting 'intellectuals' such as Robert Fisk, who has spent much of his life in the middle east and who certainly doesn't follow any party line. These people have their ears to the ground so to speak.
You're right in saying that this thread has gotten away from it's original intention. But then I suppose that was kind of inevitable. These things tend to drift this way on the board.
I was asked on here the other day what i thought would be a viable solution to to the situation over there, and to be honest I don't have an answer. Although what I have said after giving it some thought is that it would not be right/practical for the U.S and U.K to pull out any time soon. Simply because we created this mess and so we should stay and suffer the consequences. If we were to withdraw now then I think we'd see a bloodbath on a scale bigger than that seen in the Balkans, and the repercussions would also eclipse anything we witnessed in the Balkans.
All of this was predicted prior to the invasion. It's a shame that money and greed so often override intelligence.
You know for the most part, you and I see eye to eye. Stay cool.
finally something we agree on. very well said response. as you remember I was the one who asked you what should be done in Iraq. I'm sure it was easy for you to blast the current plan without coming up with suggestions yourself.
except that last sentence. had to be somthin,
monday morning quaterbacking is easy. predicating and planning before war is alot easier compared to when it really happens. much like the fuck up of hurricane katrina.
money and greed overriding intelligence is just an opinion.