grant 'em statehood. cheney insists we be there, install him as governor. send him bird-hunting with bin-laden. withdraw the troops. treat them like we treat louisiana and mississippi--ignore them. everybody's happy. no?
With support for this war diminishing rapidly, several years from now, we will quite likey be gone from Iraq. God only knows how many more brave American soldiers will be maimed and killed by then. In all honesty, does anyone think that a regime will be in place that can be considered a friend of the U.S.? I believe it is likely that a only slightly toned down (in terms of anti-Western Islamic fundamentalism) Shiite government (think Iran) will be in place. What will we honestly be able to say we accomplished and at what price in terms of lost American lives, lost hundreds of billions of dollars and fiscal stability, and lost respect throughout the world?
- The forming and growing Iraqi government is truely a democracy, elected without outside influence, for the people, by the people. We will probably be asked to leave, kindly. And will not get much back in return. 80% of Iraqi citizens don't want us there, that's a strong majority. With that much of the population wanting us to leave anyone in office or running for office would have 1 issue above all others, get the Americans out!
- Or if appointing the "overseers" in the government maintains the way Bush/Cheney do things, they'll appoint some fund-raising or big time donor crony who has little to no experience in the task at hand and things will go to hell in a hand basket.
Personally I would like our troops out of there completley within 5 - 7 years. Have Iraq up to par with battle-ready battaltions, running water, electricity, all that jazz. And let the citizens and their government rebuild their country, the way they want, and how they want. Not the way Halliburton wants.
No matter who is elected our next president, they are going to inherit a real mess as far as this Iraq situation goes. It is a no win situation, for the US no matter what course of action we take.
And I agree that we will lose more repspect and prestige world-wide, when we are fianlly out of there.
I agree Re/Max, there needs to be some kind of draw down strategy. I got a feeling that will be left to next administration to deal with. I just don't have any confidence left in Rummy, I will admit I had a lot at one time.
Even then, it would have been better if we never went there in the first place.
I like the idea of granting them statehood. We could offer all the libs the opportunity to move over there and they could solve all the worlds problems from the middle east.
I could then hang out here in the USA with all the rednecks, be relaxed not listen to name calling, and their hatred. I could access all the public lands to ride my off road vehicles and wouldn't have to hear about how I am raping the land and killing the world. We could hunt and fish in peace. Wouldn't have near the poverty level either.
I would also be able to watch the news and see liberals in Iraq trying to talk their way out of getting their dome lopped off by a terrorist. This is where all the extra education they possess comes into play. Libs are deep enough to understand why he is doing this and are sympathetic enough to forgive him for taking their head off. After all it would be the libs fault the terrorist cutting their head off in the first place.
The only problem with this whole idea is that it would only last 4-7 days before the lib utopia would be overthrown, takin away, and dismantled. We rednecks would end up being asked to help them and once we got there started kicking ass, the libs would be leading the propaganda war against us saying we are there illegally and we need to pull out.
Here's what bugs me about what we're doing in Iraq right now;
80% of its citizens don't want us there
45% of its citizens feel its ok to attack Americans
Of course then there's the other side;
1. We don't pay our troops enough.
2. We don't protect our troops well enough or have enough armor on their vehicles
3. The Bush administration ignored the actual amount of time/money it would take to get Iraq's new army battle ready and now there's only 1 battalion that is capable of independent fighting
4. It appears that some of the prisioners over there were tortured, which in my opnion, doesn't help "win over the people."
Remax said-Personally I would like our troops out of there completley within 5 - 7 years. Have Iraq up to par with battle-ready battaltions, running water, electricity, all that jazz. And let the citizens and their government rebuild their country, the way they want, and how they want. Not the way Halliburton wants. #twocents
_________________ Remax-How many more dead or maimed dead Americans in 5-7 years? The supply of radical Islamic fundamentalists willing to go to Iraq to kill Americans is not going to dry up. How many more dead innocent Iraqis? Continue to poor 100's of billions into Iraq's infrastructure while ours goes to hell? I thought Iraqi oil was going to pay for this. It's not covering it. The end result will be the same. We will not have an ally once we are gone. No pro-American regime can stay in power once the U.S. is gone. This is a no-win situation. The comparisons to Viet Nam are legit.
My knowledge of Vietnam consists of what I've read in books and seen on the History Channel. My father was drafted but never went overseas, in many talks with him about it the similarities to Vietnam are there, especially politically.
I also don't think we can just drop the ball here. I didn't want us to invade, but we did, and now there's a mess our administration has caused that needs to be fixed. If the troops left in the next 60 days Iraq would fall into anarchy and the strongest faction would take over. I feel deep sorrow everytime I hear about killed soldiers, I want them home too, but I don't think we can just "drop the baby" here because that would probably cause more harm then good. Also it would probably make our global image even worse, if thats even possible.
My knowledge of Vietnam consists of what I've read in books and seen on the History Channel. My father was drafted but never went overseas, in many talks with him about it the similarities to Vietnam are there, especially politically.
I also don't think we can just drop the ball here. I didn't want us to invade, but we did, and now there's a mess our administration has caused that needs to be fixed. If the troops left in the next 60 days Iraq would fall into anarchy and the strongest faction would take over. I feel deep sorrow everytime I hear about killed soldiers, I want them home too, but I don't think we can just "drop the baby" here because that would probably cause more harm then good. Also it would probably make our global image even worse, if thats even possible.
I'm of your father's vintage and his opinion on Nam is right on. I'm afraid that the anarchy/strongest faction scenario will play out to a significant extent regardless of when we leave. Even now, with us there, death squads are originating from the police and killing Iraqi civilians from rival Muslim sects. We can't make this country over in our image.
Its funny we'll get in conversations about Iraq and it'll turn right into conversations about Vietnam, and back and forth, and the similarities jump out all over the place.
Its funny we'll get in conversations about Iraq and it'll turn right into conversations about Vietnam, and back and forth, and the similarities jump out all over the place.
It's a real stretch to say there are true similarities. We own Iraq and we are in charge there. That never happened in Vietnam.
In about 14 years total 58,000 died in Vietnam.
In 1/3 the time in Iraq we haven't even got to 3,000.
There are fewer deaths every month in Iraq, even with the media bias they have to scrape together a story. Granted they are only reporting the "BAD" things that are happening there. There wasn't enough bad news lately so they had to create a story about Cheney to keep the bad press going towards this administration.
Keep reaching, at least it makes for some billboard material.
- The lack of a visual "us and them" I remember reading a book by Colonel Hacksworth talking about how tough it was to fight the NVA because at many times you wouldn't know who was friend or enemy.
- A region that has a stong insurgency against western culture
- A foreign battlefield that gives the enemy an advantage of "fighting in their home."
- We're fighting a political/religious belief. Communism then, extreme Islam and facism now.
- A nation split over if we should be fighting there or not.
- A president who has made some misleading statements or done questionable things that led us to war.
Here's what bugs me about what we're doing in Iraq right now;
80% of its citizens don't want us there
45% of its citizens feel its ok to attack Americans
Of course then there's the other side;
1. We don't pay our troops enough.
2. We don't protect our troops well enough or have enough armor on their vehicles
3. The Bush administration ignored the actual amount of time/money it would take to get Iraq's new army battle ready and now there's only 1 battalion that is capable of independent fighting
4. It appears that some of the prisioners over there were tortured, which in my opnion, doesn't help "win over the people."
Re/Max.
Trotting out those damn statistics that have NO BASIS IN FACT really do nothing to support your opinion! You don't have to convince the people who agree with you, and you won't sway anyone who doesn't with suspect(being generous) "facts".
Instead of constantly bashing what is done, why don't you tell us what we should do. Do you remember the poll numbers after the attacks on our soil? Do you think we will never get attacked again? What should our response be if we are? How do we prevent it? You are smarter than what you are showing. Cutting and pasting CNN crappola doesn't do anything. Come on man, give me something from the heart. The "talking points" drumbeat just isn't cutting it.
See Re/Max, the problem I have with this stuff is everyone was on board when the conflict began. I won't give you some of those same "stats" you love to use, but I think you would agree everyone wanted a piece of Bin Laden and Hussein. Were you not one of the majority after 911?
I amnot attacking you personally Re/Max, you know that from the number of PM's we have exchanged. I just want to hear from you, not CNN. I can go there if I want that propoganda.
- The lack of a visual "us and them" I remember reading a book by Colonel Hacksworth talking about how tough it was to fight the NVA because at many times you wouldn't know who was friend or enemy.
- A region that has a stong insurgency against western culture
- A foreign battlefield that gives the enemy an advantage of "fighting in their home."
- We're fighting a political/religious belief. Communism then, extreme Islam and facism now.
- A nation split over if we should be fighting there or not.
- A president who has made some misleading statements or done questionable things that led us to war.
GrizWiz, help me out, am I missing more?
We wanted the foreign battlefield. It brings the terrorists from the entire region to us so we can send them to Allah.
I don't buy the split nation thing either. The majority are glad we are there, your just buying into the media blitz. The number that wants us there, from people who are actually there is closer to 70-80%.
I will take their word for it way before the US media's polls.
There would be comparisons with any war in history, but the real agenda behind the Vietnam comparison is the theme that we are losing, and are losing to many soldiers while being there.
First of all after "the attacks" I wanted a piece of Bin Laden, didn't really think a thing about Hussien. And yes I love stats because it speaks from a diverse group rather than 1 or 2 people. Hey my recent "stats" included polls from the Wall Street Journal and Foxnews, nothing liberal there!!!
And for the record I know there is a mountain of differences between Iraq and Vietnam as well. I was just pointing out that there are many similarities.
Ok so what would I do, well regarding what?
Iraq;
5-7 year withdrawl, I'd like sooner, but I fear we'd be "dropping the baby." We get the gov't and it's army prepared to run the country, get proper troop numbers and funding to help the Iraqis build a real battle-ready army. I'd humbly apologize to the UN and parter up with thm, let them run the show, with our help, and let the entire United Nations assist in the cost/man hours of rebuilding Iraq. Although I fear the UN would just say to us, "Its your mess, clean it up."
Of coure I wouldn't have invaded in the first place, but you're asking me what I'd do now, and thats it.
Terrorists;
First of all I'd combine Homeland Security, the FBI and FEMA. It would be in charge of protecting, investigating, preparing for disasters and attacks, and helping coordinate clean up and rescue efforts. It would work within the law as written. No warrantless wiretaps, but wiretaps with authorization. It would also be accountable to congress and the President. Also it's director could not be just be appointed by the president, so he or she could just place some rich financial campaign backer in that spot. The position would be placed much like a Supreme Court Judge, with hearings and Congress approval.
I've got more, but I've also got to run to meet some friends at the Iron Horse to play dominoes, I'll be back!
Here's what bugs me about what we're doing in Iraq right now;
80% of its citizens don't want us there
45% of its citizens feel its ok to attack Americans
Of course then there's the other side;
1. We don't pay our troops enough.
2. We don't protect our troops well enough or have enough armor on their vehicles
3. The Bush administration ignored the actual amount of time/money it would take to get Iraq's new army battle ready and now there's only 1 battalion that is capable of independent fighting
4. It appears that some of the prisioners over there were tortured, which in my opnion, doesn't help "win over the people."
okay... Re/Max... which is it? "We don't spend enough money (troops/teachers, et al) or "The Republicans are running up a huge deficit for our poor children to pay off"? eh?
So you want FEMA combined with the FBI and Homeland security?
Didn't you start a Hurricane thread bashing the governments response/lack there of and how badly they handled the whole thing? Or were you just trying to get another shot in at GWB?
I also can't see how anyone can trust the UN. Have they ever once done anything well, other than stealing all the oil for food money?
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
