Would you prefer we lose the war in Iraq?

my2hands

war is not a "win or lose" situation...everyone loses in war

Abuskedti

my2hands wrote:

war is not a "win or lose" situation...everyone loses in war

We extracted Iraq from Kuwait.. that was a war we won.

Cosmo

slightofjeff wrote:

Regardless of your stance on the war, as an American you really have no other choice but to hope the U.S. wins (If you don't think it's a war, I will say, "hope the U.S. gets the job done.")

Like it or not, Iraq has become the central proving ground in the fight against terror. Go home before the job is done, and the terrorists have won, regardless of what strides have been made.

It would demonstrate -- again -- that tactics of fear and terror work wonders against Americans. They don't like to get their hands dirty. They don't like the smell of their own blood. You can kill a relatively small number of them, and they will lose their nerve.

That's what it shows Al Qaeda. And that makes Al Qaeda all the more dangerous.

We can argue that Iraq wasn't a front in the fight against terror before 2003. I can buy that. But it is the pivotal front now.

...
Then, we should give our guys a fighting chance. Turn them back into soldiers and quit making them cops. Nothing is going to change over there until we secure the place. Civilian rebuilding projects cannot progress unless those worksite are secure.
And if there's a area called the 'Triangle Of DEATH'... I think we should concentrate a massive security crackdown in that area. The borders need to be secured... the oil assets need to be secured... the roadways need to be secured. We need MORE troops over there. And the 'Iraqi Army' doesn't count. I don't care what asshole Rumsfeld or asshole Bush says about 263,000 Trainned Iraqi Forces... they are obviously worthless pieces of shit. We don't need a bunch of pansie assholes we can't trust.
Running this war from behind Rumsfeld's Desk in Washington is NOT going to win shit. We should have learned this lesson in 1969. George H.W. Bush, Colin Powell and Norman Swartzkopf learn them, but I guess Georgie Jr. was too drunk and failed that class.

thankyougrandma

Abuskedti wrote:

We extracted Iraq from Kuwait.. that was a war we won.

you won what? A fucking trophy? my2hands is right, there's no win or lose in a war...

The Illinoisemakers

I'm wondering what all those in favor of packing up and leaving Iraq think a post US military presence Iraq would look like? I'm not trying to be a smart ass I would love to know what people thought.

I'm under the impression that we need to stay and continue to help Iraq rebuild.

I also think that if we packed up and left, things in Iraq would go from bad to really bad and many more thousands of innocent people would die. I'm wondering who liberals/Dems/anti-war people would blame for the genocide that is likely to take place after we left? I mean you would have gotten your wish, an American withdrawl, but something tell me that you would still blame our government.

thankyougrandma

The Illinoisemakers wrote:

I'm wondering what all those in favor of packing up and leaving Iraq think a post US military presence Iraq would look like? I'm not trying to be a smart ass I would love to know what people thought.

I'm under the impression that we need to stay and continue to help Iraq rebuild.

I also think that if we packed up and left, things in Iraq would go from bad to really bad and many more thousands of innocent people would die. I'm wondering who liberals/Dems/anti-war people would blame for the genocide that is likely to take place after we left? I mean you would have gotten your wish, an American withdrawl, but something tell me that you would still blame our government.

Wake the fuck UP!!! The genocide or civil war IS HAPPENING under american watch. Tell me that you don't believe that the USA are rebuilding Iraq please, you can't continue to do something you never started...

Abuskedti

thankyougrandma wrote:

you won what? A fucking trophy? my2hands is right, there's no win or lose in a war...

no trophy .. we won the freedom of Kuwait. We won peace. we showed the world we stood for peace and against violent invasions.

guess we lied

Eliot Rosewater

The Illinoisemakers wrote:

I'm wondering what all those in favor of packing up and leaving Iraq think a post US military presence Iraq would look like? I'm not trying to be a smart ass I would love to know what people thought.

I'm under the impression that we need to stay and continue to help Iraq rebuild.

I also think that if we packed up and left, things in Iraq would go from bad to really bad and many more thousands of innocent people would die. I'm wondering who liberals/Dems/anti-war people would blame for the genocide that is likely to take place after we left? I mean you would have gotten your wish, an American withdrawl, but something tell me that you would still blame our government.

You're exactly right. I for one would still blame our government. But pulling out is necessary. Either way there are going to be many more deaths. Is it our country, or is it the people of Iraq's country? Chomsky talks about this in a recent interview with Juan Gonzalez... here's an excerpt.

AG: Do you believe, Noam Chomsky, in immediate withdrawal, that the troops should withdraw immediately?

NC: I think there is a certain principle that we should adhere to. The principle is that invading armies have no rights whatsoever. They have responsibilities. The prime responsibility is to heed the will of the victims and to pay massive reparations to the victims for the crimes they've committed. In this case, the crimes go back through the sanctions which were a monstrous crime, through the support for Saddam Hussein, right through his worst atrocities, but particularly, those of the invasion. Those are the two responsibilities of an occupying army.

Well, you know, the population has made it pretty clear. Even U.S. and British polls make that clear. Overwhelming majorities want the U.S. to set a timetable to withdraw and adhere to it. Britain and the United States refuse. Reparations, we can't even talk about; that's so far from consciousness in the doctrinal system. Well, I think that answers the question. Doesn't really matter what I think.

What matters is what Iraqis think, and I think we know that pretty well. The reason the U.S. and Britain aren't withdrawing are those I mentioned. You know, the consequences of independence for Iraq would be an ultimate nightmare for them. And they're going to try to do anything they can to prevent Iraqi democracy, as they've been trying in the past.

AG: And the argument that they will just descend into civil war and that the sectarian violence will increase, and the U.S. went in and now has a responsibility not the leave a mess?

NC: Yeah, I mean, the Germans could have given the same argument and occupied Europe, the Russians in the satellites, the Japanese in Asia, and so on. Yeah, they could have all given the same argue: well, we went in, and now we have a responsibility to ensure that terrible things don't happen, and so on. And the argument had some validity. So, when the Germans were driven out of France, let's say, there were thousands, maybe tens of thousands of people killed by -- as collaborators, and in Asia, even more so. But is that an argument for them? No. It's none of their business.

We don't know what will happen, and it's not our decision to make. It's the decision of the victims to make, not our decision. Occupying armies have no right to make the decision. We could have an academic seminar about it, in which we could discuss the likely consequences. But the point is it's not for us to say. Well, until that enters into the discussion, and the critical issues of the war, like what right do we have to invade in the first place, enter into the discussion, the media and the journalism and so on are simply part of the government propaganda system, as I say, like a high school newspaper or like Pravda during the Afghanistan war.

JG: And what of the role of the American people in this process? Clearly, it seems to me that so much of the antiwar sentiments quickly gets channeled into one or another political candidates, rather than into continuing to build a mass movement that, regardless of the political folks in office, will move to extricate the United States from this invasion.

NC: Yeah, you're absolutely right. But that's our problem. I mean, you cannot expect power centers, whether in the government or in the economic system or in the media, which are all closely linked. I mean, they aren't going to try to stimulate popular movements that will be critical of power and try to erode power. In fact, their task is the opposite. So, yes, this has to be done by a popular movement. I mean, that's the way every constructive change has taken place in the past. I mean, how did we get civil rights to the extent that they exist, minority rights, women's rights, the benefits system that does exist, and so on? I mean, these things are not gifts from above; they are won from below. And it's going to be the same on this.

Here's the link to the entire article if anyone is interested. Chomsky is a hero of mine....I love what he has to say.

http://alternet.org/story/34600/

Cosmo

The Illinoisemakers wrote:

I'm wondering what all those in favor of packing up and leaving Iraq think a post US military presence Iraq would look like? I'm not trying to be a smart ass I would love to know what people thought.

I'm under the impression that we need to stay and continue to help Iraq rebuild.

I also think that if we packed up and left, things in Iraq would go from bad to really bad and many more thousands of innocent people would die. I'm wondering who liberals/Dems/anti-war people would blame for the genocide that is likely to take place after we left? I mean you would have gotten your wish, an American withdrawl, but something tell me that you would still blame our government.

...
The same shit that is currently going on... Sectarian Violence (a.k.a. Civil War) between Shi'ites and Sunnis. Wasn't that the excuse du yesterjour for keeping our troops there... to prevent a Civil War? As for the Kurds... I can see them working out a deal with the Shi'ites to create their own seperate state... much to the dismay of Turkey.
The Shi'ites in charge have already begun to form 'Death Squads' to got out and extract vengence on the Sunnis for all of those years of oppression. and can you really blame them? The Sunnis in neighboring countries don't want another Iran in their midst. Muqtada al Sadr got his own loyalists and he has several seats in the Iraqi parliment. That's democracy at work and there ain't shit we can say about it because we're the ones who've installed it. These fuckers are gonna keep on fighting til that meteor slams into the Pacific and puts us all out of our misery.
...
Now... what is YOUR vision of 'Winning The War' and what does Iraq have to look like before we can leave? And please, consider the facts on the ground over there... the culture, history, religion, customs, etc... and avoid the improbable peaches and cream outcome we tend to see through American eyes.

rightondude

Kuwait? a small little warmup war over gaining control of a few oilfields? You think the US won't touch Kuwait?

The war is a farce. What are they at? 300,000 dead Iraqi's now? We gonna stop at a million?

Bush is a fucker....fucking up the world....

fight or blow...this lagging around crap is just one long evil deception.

Like a guy who hangs over a dying body placing his hand over the guys mouth to suffocate him when no one is looking so the guy will die faster....then he can be the first to steal his wallet and jewellry.

f-in sadistic

The Illinoisemakers

chiefojibwa wrote:

dude, stfu. you're just trying to stir the shit with your "liberals, dems, anti war" nonsense.

and, don rumsfeld is telling me the iraqis have 400,000 troops trained...so if that's true (he wouldn't lie, would he?) then they can take care of business, no?

I'm simply asking a question. If it is too hard to answer, which I'm guessing for you it might be, dude. Feel free to excuse yourself from the conversation.

If I'm not mistaken dude, aren't we all stiring the "shit" everytime we post anything on the moving train isn't that the point.

Back to the question. Ok, so put your I'm a liberal or I'm a conservative stuff aside just for a second. I really am curious as to what people think a non US military presence in Iraq would look like. thanks.

Eliot Rosewater

The Illinoisemakers wrote:

I really am curious as to what people think a non US military presence in Iraq would look like. thanks.

Probably similar to what it looks like now, without the attacks on U.S. troops, which is definitely part of the violence......so my answer is I think it would be similar but overall there would be more peace than now. That's my opinion.

RainDog

The Illinoisemakers wrote:

I mean you would have gotten your wish, an American withdrawl, but something tell me that you would still blame our government.

Yes, I would still blame our government. Why? Well, we invaded, didn't we? Hell, we practically created Saddam, didn't we?

As for what the country would look like after we left, I say probably better than it does today. The violence will continue whether we are there or not. The primary difference is, we wouldn't be one of the players.

The Illinoisemakers

Cosmo wrote:

...
The same shit that is currently going on... Sectarian Violence (a.k.a. Civil War) between Shi'ites and Sunnis. Wasn't that the excuse du yesterjour for keeping our troops there... to prevent a Civil War? As for the Kurds... I can see them working out a deal with the Shi'ites to create their own seperate state... much to the dismay of Turkey.
The Shi'ites in charge have already begun to form 'Death Squads' to got out and extract vengence on the Sunnis for all of those years of oppression. and can you really blame them? The Sunnis in neighboring countries don't want another Iran in their midst. Muqtada al Sadr got his own loyalists and he has several seats in the Iraqi parliment. That's democracy at work and there ain't shit we can say about it because we're the ones who've installed it. These fuckers are gonna keep on fighting til that meteor slams into the Pacific and puts us all out of our misery.
...
Now... what is YOUR vision of 'Winning The War' and what does Iraq have to look like before we can leave? And please, consider the facts on the ground over there... the culture, history, religion, customs, etc... and avoid the improbable peaches and cream outcome we tend to see through American eyes.

Great I'm glad you asked. I'll try to stay away from the peaches and cream, though I will admit as a conservative I am fed a lot of it.

I think if we just packed up and left things would go from bad, which they certianly are, to really bad. Someone here earlier was talking about the US military's job not being to act as a police presence. That is absolutely right, yet that is exactly what we are doing. It is not possible to do the things that Republicans want in Iraq, which is the size of Califronia, with only 130,000 troops give or take a few thousand.

To answer your question, I think we should stay we should add more soldiers, we should secure the border, and if that means build a berm around the boarders of Iran, Syria, and Saudi Arabia and place troops along the boarder, then do it. I think adding more soldiers will help to more quickly reach everyone's goal, get our troops home and get out of Iraq.

I'm sure I threw a little peaches and cream in, but you are what you eat. My "amazing plan" is certainly only one piece of the puzzle. To be honest it gives me a headache to think of everything that needs to happen in Iraq.

thankyougrandma

The Illinoisemakers wrote:

Great I'm glad you asked. I'll try to stay away from the peaches and cream, though I will admit as a conservative I am fed a lot of it.

I think if we just packed up and left things would go from bad, which they certianly are, to really bad. Someone here earlier was talking about the US military's job not being to act as a police presence. That is absolutely right, yet that is exactly what we are doing. It is not possible to do the things that Republicans want in Iraq, which is the size of Califronia, with only 130,000 troops give or take a few thousand.

To answer your question, I think we should stay we should add more soldiers, we should secure the border, and if that means build a berm around the boarders of Iran, Syria, and Saudi Arabia and place troops along the boarder, then do it. I think adding more soldiers will help to more quickly reach everyone's goal, get our troops home and get out of Iraq.

I'm sure I threw a little peaches and cream in, but you are what you eat. My "amazing plan" is certainly only one piece of the puzzle. To be honest it gives me a headache to think of everything that needs to happen in Iraq.

US millitary will not achieve this feat. by themselves, first the mentality is not about liberating Iraq, it's about establishing control in a said area. Now if you make the UN step in, maybe they could "help" the americans decision maker to change their mentality about what need to be done and how it must be done (i doubt, highly utopic). Plus having a real coalition would help to achieve what you just said, secure borders, secure civillians etc.

But in the end i question the intentions of the american govt. in Iraq, a govt. has been elected, an army have been trained, but yet the decision are still taken in Washington, i don't get that, weither they lie about their intentions, or they lie about the achievements, that's yours to decide...

Commy

FinsburyParkCarrots wrote:

Winning the war is the last thing the Bush Administration wants. Empires colonise destabilised countries for their material resources, on the pretext of being there for civilising, humanitarian reasons. The longer the situation in the middle east is considered unstable, the louder will be the calls to "stay here until the job is done". They'll stretch this out as long as possible, in pursuit of private profits. The insurgents are, ironically, doing Bush's work for him.

That may be true in the case of the corporate interests...almost indistinguishibale from government's, but they do want to win this war...hegemony is the ultimate goal here. methinks

Commy

IndianSummer wrote:

it will be very spineless to pull out now, after fucking up the country.

well, was it spineless to pull out of vietnam, or should we have stayed a killed few million more?

The US presence in IRaq is only making the situation worse, that should be obvious...since 1991, the US has only made things harder for the average Iraqi...I bet they'd be willing to trade Saddam for the US right about now.

The Illinoisemakers

chiefojibwa wrote:

no, i think the point is to try to have a civil conversation. when you start throwing around the "liberal" or "conservative" bullshit, then it just gets political (and then you try to downplay it by saying "put your i'm a liberal or i'm a conservative stuff aside"...nice touch). i wanna get beyond politics, beyond "stiring" (stirring?) shit. BEYOND TALKING POINTS!!

you want an answer to your little question? it would probably look a lot like it does right now...shitty.

there. i answered your little question. wow, that took so much thought. i think i need a nap.

Thanks, see it wasn't that hard. I had my doubts about you, but not anymore. Your right next time I have a question for a specific group of people I wont ask it. I should instead keep it open ended so everyone can participate. Leason learned.

mammasan

The Illinoisemakers wrote:

I'm wondering what all those in favor of packing up and leaving Iraq think a post US military presence Iraq would look like? I'm not trying to be a smart ass I would love to know what people thought.

I'm under the impression that we need to stay and continue to help Iraq rebuild.

I also think that if we packed up and left, things in Iraq would go from bad to really bad and many more thousands of innocent people would die. I'm wondering who liberals/Dems/anti-war people would blame for the genocide that is likely to take place after we left? I mean you would have gotten your wish, an American withdrawl, but something tell me that you would still blame our government.

I would probably still blame our government simply because it was our invasion that was the catalyst for their problems. If we left Iraq today the situation probably would get worse, mayne even a hell of a lot worse, but their is no certainty that the situation wouldn't deteriorate if we left 10 years from now. There will probably always be sectarian violence in iraq between the Sunni's and Shia simply because it has been that way for thousands of years and us setting up a government there probably will not change that. The Sunni's will be pissed if the Shia control the government and the Shia will be pissed if the Sunni's hold power so now matter how much time we spend on the ground there shit will happen the minute we leave. So we might as well cut our losses and leave and allow nature to take it's course. Eventually peace will prevail in Iraq but it will be on their terms not ours.

The Illinoisemakers

mammasan wrote:

I would probably still blame our government simply because it was our invasion that was the catalyst for their problems. If we left Iraq today the situation probably would get worse, mayne even a hell of a lot worse, but their is no certainty that the situation wouldn't deteriorate if we left 10 years from now. There will probably always be sectarian violence in iraq between the Sunni's and Shia simply because it has been that way for thousands of years and us setting up a government there probably will not change that. The Sunni's will be pissed if the Shia control the government and the Shia will be pissed if the Sunni's hold power so now matter how much time we spend on the ground there shit will happen
the minute we leave. So we might as well cut our losses and leave and allow nature to take it's course. Eventually peace will prevail in Iraq but it will be on their terms not ours.

I agree that if we pulled out the Sunni and Shia violence would get worse then it already is. What do people think about breaking Iraq up into three seperate states for the Sunnis, Shites and Kurds? Is that even realistic?