NationStates Jolt Archive

Winning wars is very nice and all, but occupations aren't much fun for anyone.

So here is a new thought:

Let's withdraw from Iraq, and leave the shiny guns and radio's to the Shiites.

They won't mess about with 'Insurgents' and summarily eradicate anyone who dislikes the New Ayatollah Order.

Some folks may call that genocide, but what other countries do in their own sovereign territory is not necessarily our problem, is it?


Benefits:
-less Americans coming back in bodybags.
-occupation ends.
-we save quite a lot of dollari.
-Al Qaeda In Mesopotamia gets a very rough ride.
-troops home.
-liberals happy.
-hanging about will not alter the fundamental outcomes of the internal powerstruggles within Iraq.

Negative effects:
-for us, nuffin much.
-er, Bush looses a reason to ban recreational sex?
-nasty civil war ( but their civil war does not really threathen us)
-a future nutjob overthere might pose a risk to us.
-we may not have accomplished our original objective.

Winning wars is very nice and all, but occupations aren't much fun for anyone.

So here is a new thought:

Let's withdraw from Iraq, and leave the shiny guns and radio's to the Shiiites.

They won't mess about with 'Insurgents' and summarily eradicate anyone who dislikes the New Ayatollah Order.

Some folks may call that genocide, but what other countries do in their own sovereign territory is not necessarily our problem, is it?


Benefits:
-less Americans coming back in bodybags.
-occupation ends.
-we save quite a lot of dollari.
-Al Qaeda In Mesopotamia gets a very rough ride.
-troops home.
-liberals happy.

Negative effects:
-for us, nuffin much.

I think if you are serious, then this is so close to flamebait, its smoking a little.

The problem is, there is no mass-moblisation of national unrest, like in the 60s. Until that happens, the government will maintain the status-quo

I think of you were serious, then this is so close to flamebait, its smoking a little.


I'm quite serious. I don't like this war much, and I really fail to see the point of hanging about.

What happens after we leave is not our concern unless it damages our interests.

60% of those Iraqis are Shias.
They'll end up in charge.
For all the rhetoric, no Shiite was involved in 911, 7/7, Madrid, Bali.
Those folks are NOT our enemy.

I'm quite serious. I don't like this war much, and I really fail to see the point of hanging about.

What happens after we leave is not our concern unless it damages our interests.

60% of those Iraqis are Shias.
They'll end up in charge.
For all the rhetoric, no Shiite was involved in 911, 7/7, Madrid, Bali.
Those folks are NOT our enemy.Well, the Republican party in the US would lose any sort of argument against nonprocreative sex on grounds of "responsibility"...

That's a major blow to their doctrine, so I'm sure they'll wait until a Democrat is in office in order to pull the "irresponsible Democrat" line again.

Well, the Republican party in the US would lose any sort of argument against nonprocreative sex on grounds of "responsibility"...

SNIP.


*adds drawback*

*adds drawback*

Does it really belong under negative?

We shouldn't leave Iraq until we achieve our initial objective.

We shouldn't leave Iraq until we achieve our initial objective.

We had an objective?

I'm quite serious. I don't like this war much, and I really fail to see the point of hanging about.

What happens after we leave is not our concern unless it damages our interests.

60% of those Iraqis are Shias.
They'll end up in charge.
For all the rhetoric, no Shiite was involved in 911, 7/7, Madrid, Bali.
Those folks are NOT our enemy.


Lets assume we back out right now, and leave the country to its own devices, and they fall into civil war.
The current Iraqi government has somethng like 125,000 green-as-Hell troops, whos loyalty may easily be swayed.

So..some other nutjob douchebag like Hussein, or WORSE takes over?

More importantly, theres LOTS of oil there.
I dont believe abandoning such oil reserves in a good idea, even if I dont believe starting a war over them is a good one either.

Make no mistake, we took over Iraq to have a foundation to launch warfare in the Middle-East, in order to secure oil, and future oil supplies.

We CANT just leave now, as much as I hate that fact, and every exscuse given for starting it in the first place, to leave now could jeapordize a lot of peoples futures.
Yours, mine, all of us.

We had an objective?

I have no idea.

I have no idea.

So we should wait in Iraq until we've achieved our initial objective...


...which we have no idea what it is...

So we should wait in Iraq until we've achieved our initial objective...


...which we have no idea what it is...

That seems to be the plan and I support our President. I figure the initial objective was top secret. It probably had something to do with a buried stargate.

So we should wait in Iraq until we've achieved our initial objective...


...which we have no idea what it is...


Assault, conquer and secure Iraq for its rescouces, and use as staging base for mid-east miltary actions.

Iraq isnt yet "secure".

Mission results pending.

Winning wars is very nice and all, but occupations aren't much fun for anyone.

So here is a new thought:

Let's withdraw from Iraq, and leave the shiny guns and radio's to the Shiites.

They won't mess about with 'Insurgents' and summarily eradicate anyone who dislikes the New Ayatollah Order.

Some folks may call that genocide, but what other countries do in their own sovereign territory is not necessarily our problem, is it?


Benefits:
-less Americans coming back in bodybags.
-occupation ends.
-we save quite a lot of dollari.
-Al Qaeda In Mesopotamia gets a very rough ride.
-troops home.
-liberals happy.

Negative effects:
-for us, nuffin much.
-er, Bush looses a reason to ban recreational sex?

Just like old times, eh? Go in there with guns blazing, fuck everything up and piss off back home leaving a smoldering mess behind.

That seems to be the plan and I support our President. I figure the initial objective was top secret. It probably had something to do with a buried stargate.

Ahhhh! I wonder when Bush plans to unveil the Stargate program. Only when it is public can we defeat Apophis!

Ahhhh! I wonder when Bush plans to unveil the Stargate program. Only when it is public can we defeat Apophis!


Unfortunately, Bush wasnt smart enough to hire James Spader.

Or even James Woods, for that matter.

Unfortunately, Bush wasnt smart enough to hire James Spader.

Or even James Woods, for that matter.

Pffffft. We just need to capture some o' dem Replicator thingies! Then we'll see who's a-bitchin'...

Lets assume we back out right now, and leave the country to its own devices, and they fall into civil war.
The current Iraqi government has somethng like 125,000 green-as-Hell troops, whos loyalty may easily be swayed.

So..some other nutjob douchebag like Hussein, or WORSE takes over?

More importantly, theres LOTS of oil there.
I dont believe abandoning such oil reserves in a good idea, even if I dont believe starting a war over them is a good one either.

Make no mistake, we took over Iraq to have a foundation to launch warfare in the Middle-East, in order to secure oil, and future oil supplies.

We CANT just leave now, as much as I hate that fact, and every exscuse given for starting it in the first place, to leave now could jeapordize a lot of peoples futures.
Yours, mine, all of us.

Like HECK we can't leave!

A civil war is NOT my problem unless it actually concerns me.

Shiites subjecting Sunnis to the Pact of Omar is no problem of mine.

Whether or not some nutjob runs the place only is a matter of concern when such a nutjob threathens our interests.

Does it really belong under negative?


Not sure. I added a question-mark.

Not sure. I added a question-mark.

And I thought you'd gone.

HA!

*goes off in a stop*

:p

Just like old times, eh? Go in there with guns blazing, fuck everything up and piss off back home leaving a smoldering mess behind.

So you want to volunteer for 3 years of nation-building?

There's recruiters for the US Army - who will be happy to have you.

Winning wars is very nice and all, but occupations aren't much fun for anyone.

So here is a new thought:

Let's withdraw from Iraq, and leave the shiny guns and radio's to the Shiites.

They won't mess about with 'Insurgents' and summarily eradicate anyone who dislikes the New Ayatollah Order.

Some folks may call that genocide, but what other countries do in their own sovereign territory is not necessarily our problem, is it?


Benefits:
-less Americans coming back in bodybags.
-occupation ends.
-we save quite a lot of dollari.
-Al Qaeda In Mesopotamia gets a very rough ride.
-troops home.
-liberals happy.

Negative effects:
-for us, nuffin much.
-er, Bush looses a reason to ban recreational sex?
-nasty civil war ( but their civil war does not really threathen us)
-a future nutjob overthere might pose a risk to us.

I have to admit, I do agree.

They'll run the place how they want when we leave anyway, so why do it sooner rather than later. Let them get on with it.

I have to admit, I do agree.

They'll run the place how they want when we leave anyway, so why do it sooner rather than later. Let them get on with it.

Yep yep yep!

Democratic choices cannot be delayed indefinetely.
How many soldiers shall we sacrifice while waiting for the Iraqis to decide WHICH Ayatollah becomes Supreme Leader?

Yep yep yep!

Democratic choices cannot be delayed indefinetely.
How many soldiers shall we sacrifice while waiting for the Iraqis to decide WHICH Ayatollah becomes Supreme Leader?

You cant make a country run the way you want it to run so that it benefits you in the long run.

They'll do what they want when they want to.

They're not idiots (contrary to popular belief) they can sort out their own shit.

stropps a little less

You cant make a country run the way you want it to run so that it benefits you in the long run.

They'll do what they want when they want to.

They're not idiots (contrary to popular belief) they can sort out their own shit.

stropps a little less


It all becomes ever so poll-able.
I'm waiting for more reason to hang around in Iraq.

Then I'll ask for a straightforward up-and-down vote.

Stay the course with Bush or Leave the burning mess behind with Dean. *shrug*

It all becomes ever so poll-able.
I'm waiting for more reason to hang around in Iraq.

Then I'll ask for a straightforward up-and-down vote.

Stay the course with Bush or Leave the burning mess behind with Dean. *shrug*
Thats the spirit

:fluffle:

So you want to volunteer for 3 years of nation-building?

There's recruiters for the US Army - who will be happy to have you.

I don't think they'd be happy to have me. You see, I don't have the kind of passport which grants me a hunting-license on brownskins in the middle east. I'm from a tiny Scandinavian country which doesn't have an army, isn't addicted to oil and hasn't invaded anything since viking times.

It's not my mess. I didn't bomb the crap out of those people, you did. You are responsible for the political and humanitarian crisis, not me.

I don't think they'd be happy to have me. You see, I don't have the kind of passport which grants me a hunting-license on brownskins in the middle east. I'm from a tiny Scandinavian country which doesn't have an army, isn't addicted to oil and hasn't invaded anything since viking times.

It's not my mess. I didn't bomb the crap out of those people, you did. You are responsible for the political and humanitarian crisis, not me.

I did not get to vote over it either.
I would have voted to stay the fiddlesticks out.
Actually, one of the leftists has me sigged as saying:
'This (iraq)war is a mistake, and we told you so!'

Meanwhile, having another passport does not disqualify you from joining the US Army - lots of foreigners do and get a green card + later Naturalisation that way.
So rest assured: you will be welcome to sign up for the US Army.
( Same way as us Brits took on foreigners to serve on HMS Victory at Trafalgar. )

Meanwhile, I don't endorse pissing away the lives of our British troops away over squabbles as to WHICH Ayatollah gets to call the shots.

I did not get to vote over it either.
I would have voted to stay the fiddlesticks out.
Actually, one of the leftists has me sigged as saying:
'This (iraq)war is a mistake, and we told you so!'

Meanwhile, having another passport does not disqualify you from joining the US Army - lots of foreigners do and get a green card + later Naturalisation that way.
So rest assured: you will be welcome to sign up for the US Army.
( Same way as us Brits took on foreigners to serve on HMS Victory at Trafalgar. )

Meanwhile, I don't endorse pissing away the lives of our British troops away over squabbles as to WHICH Ayatollah gets to call the shots.

Me joining the US army is about as likely as me being the first male in the world to give birth to siamese twins.

And as I said earlier, it's not my mess. Iceland has no troops there and hasn't dropped any bombs. It is up to the people who caused this mess to solve it. Some of the taxes I pay are allready going into humanitarian aid over there.

Me joining the US army is about as likely as me being the first male in the world to give birth to siamese twins.

And as I said earlier, it's not my mess. Iceland has no troops there and hasn't dropped any bombs. It is up to the people who caused this mess to solve it. Some of the taxes I pay are allready going into humanitarian aid over there.


Cool.
Now, lets all be as sensible ( and cool ) as Iceland,
and have no troops in Iraq.

Cool.
Now, lets all be as sensible ( and cool ) as Iceland,
and have no troops in Iraq.

Too late for that, you guys weren't very sensible when you bombed and invaded the place to begin with. Now you must deal with the consequences.
Leaving this place a smoldering heap in a state of civil war would not be the ethical thing to do.

Too late for that, you guys weren't very sensible when you bombed and invaded the place to begin with. Now you must deal with the consequences.
Leaving this place a smoldering heap in a state of civil war would not be the ethical thing to do.


Wise man says: Sue Me

Wise man says: Sue Me

:rolleyes: Ah, right. You guys should just abandon humanity, regard for life and compassion alltogether.

:rolleyes: Ah, right. You guys should just abandon humanity, regard for life and compassion alltogether


I have never pretended to share humanitarian values at all.
Not in 4000+ posts.

:rolleyes: Ah, right. You guys should just abandon humanity, regard for life and compassion alltogether.

Let's start from the center and work outwards. Like, say, the crime in DC.

Typical. The US can't just enter a country screw it up, and leave it in Civil War. While the presence of troops is hardly a positive thing for the innumerable insurgents....stood at 72 groups last April. How would that leave the country and its civilians? On the way out perhaps the US troops could be nice and dig open graves....it might be easier (note sarcasim)

I have never pretended to share humanitarian values at all.
Not in 4000+ posts.

Don't worry, I wasn't accusing you of having regard for human life.

I guess I'm just one of those "crazy" people who think people shouldn't be killed.

Don't worry, I wasn't accusing you of having regard for human life.

I guess I'm just one of those "crazy" people who think people shouldn't be killed.


Oh good!

And having lotsa infidels walking around Najaf definetely saves human lives.

How many casualties in the first 6 months, including iraqi civilians?

how about no
if anything we need more troops in afghanistan and iraq
these people need to realise that we are not to be messed with
and housing terrorists will not do
i dont know if u guys are american or not but im british, these are my views and if we pull out its like letting the terrorists win , whoever suggests such a thing is (what the yanks would call) a pansy in my book

how about no
if anything we need more troops in afghanistan and iraq
these people need to realise that we are not to be messed with
and housing terrorists will not do
i dont know if u guys are american or not but im british, these are my views and if we pull out its like letting the terrorists win , whoever suggests such a thing is (what the yanks would call) a pansy in my book
I think he's got a point. The most important thing for us to do is make sure that the terrorists think we're badass. Because nothing in the world, including human life, is more important than avoiding looking like a pansy.

Seriously, lads, can't y'all just go buy penis-shaped sports cars or something? What if I got you a ton of really huge cigars, some nice steaks, and a few naked women you could objectify while congratulating each other on being super-duper-uber manly? Then could we please stop shooting people to prove how butch we are?

loss of human life is always sad but for those who are religious its all part of gods controle, punishment and test plan
controle the population
punish the rule breakers
test the faithful
its the same in all religions

I think he's got a point. The most important thing for us to do is make sure that the terrorists think we're badass. Because nothing in the world, including human life, is more important than avoiding looking like a pansy.

Seriously, lads, can't y'all just go buy penis-shaped sports cars or something? What if I got you a ton of really huge cigars, some nice steaks, and a few naked women you could objectify while congratulating each other on being super-duper-uber manly? Then could we please stop shooting people to prove how butch we are?
u know sarcasum is the lowest form of witt

u know sarcasum is the lowest form of witt
And nobody knows funny like an adolescent British lad who can't spell "sarcasm." I guess I should give up my dreams of taking this act on the road.

u know sarcasum is the lowest form of witt

1) You.
2) Sarcasm.
3) Wit.
4) Incorrect. Sarcasm is know as "the lowest form of humour but the highest form of wit"

civilisation is breaking down
the poeple with the poewr are mostly corupt
the youth have no respect and do not think about their actions
i hate my generation

the only way to fix this is to go into politics and try to fix things
starting with terrorism
im afraid we cant show any weakness
id like to think we could all sit down and come up with a solution
but its not gonna happen
people just dont think the same way

i predict a civil war in britain
and a 3rd world war within my lifetime
caused by the oil crisis and the disruption in the middle east

all the sensible people in this world must work together or things will only get worse

civilisation is breaking down
the poeple with the poewr are mostly corupt
the youth have no respect and do not think about their actions
i hate my generation

the only way to fix this is to go into politics and try to fix things
starting with terrorism
im afraid we cant show any weakness
id like to think we could all sit down and come up with a solution
but its not gonna happen
people just dont think the same way

i predict a civil war in britain
and a 3rd world war within my lifetime
caused by the oil crisis and the disruption in the middle east

all the sensible people in this world must work together or things will only get worse

Ugh...It literally hurts my eyes to read that. Who knew capitalization was so important?

civilisation is breaking down
the poeple with the poewr are mostly corupt
the youth have no respect and do not think about their actions
i hate my generation

the only way to fix this is to go into politics and try to fix things
starting with terrorism
im afraid we cant show any weakness
id like to think we could all sit down and come up with a solution
but its not gonna happen
people just dont think the same way

i predict a civil war in britain
and a 3rd world war within my lifetime
caused by the oil crisis and the disruption in the middle east

all the sensible people in this world must work together or things will only get worse

Oh, I get it. It's like a new kind of haiku, right? Or that...whadayacallit..."freeform" poetry. Crazy beatniks.

And nobody knows funny like an adolescent British lad who can't spell "sarcasm." I guess I should give up my dreams of taking this act on the road.
u kno me so well

u kno me so well
In deed eye due. Eye halve enquontred yore ilk be for.

im gettin flamed by american idealists 2x my age
its quite ironic

it gets funnier when you tear my spellin to pices
but i dont care much

In deed eye due. Eye halve enquontred yore ilk be for.
http://media.urbandictionary.com/image/large/hahaimusingtehinternet-4228.jpg

In deed eye due. Eye halve enquontred yore ilk be for.
in deed eye du . eye hafe encawnturd yur leyek b4

im gettin flamed by american idealists 2x my age
its quite ironic

it gets funnier when you tear my spellin to pices
but i dont care much

I also assaulted your grammar.

in deed eye du . eye hafe encawnturd yur leyek b4

...You have no idea what she said do you?

im the last of my kind

i dont think there are any british patriots under the age of 15 who can argue aswell as me
and have no fear of death (that only appeared recently)

im gettin flamed by american idealists 2x my age
its quite ironic

Yes, it is ironic when people who cannot speak their native language are roundly mocked on internet forums.

Or wait. That's not what the word "ironic" means. I think you meant to say, "It's quite expected in every way."


it gets funnier when you tear my spellin to pices

Wait, are you talking smack about Pices now? Look, I was willing to forgive you people for that whole "Age of Colonization" bullshit, but if you start stepping to astrological water signs then we're gonna have to have words.


but i dont care much
Yes, your continued griping is clear evidence of your lack of caring.

pices lol
i missed that
im taurus my self:p

your always welcome in my world

Yes, it is ironic when people who cannot speak their native language are roundly mocked on internet forums.

Or wait. That's not what the word "ironic" means. I think you meant to say, "It's quite expected in every way."


Wait, are you talking smack about Pices now? Look, I was willing to forgive you people for that whole "Age of Colonization" bullshit, but if you start stepping to astrological water signs then we're gonna have to have words.


Yes, your continued griping is clear evidence of your lack of caring.



i found my beliefs
www.britishpatriot.com
i wish it worked

Wait, are you talking smack about Pices now? Look, I was willing to forgive you people for that whole "Age of Colonization" bullshit, but if you start stepping to astrological water signs then we're gonna have to have words.

Aquarius is equally enraged.

(not actually a water sign, but, yanno, water-bearer, I feel a certain comraderie)

i can speak my native language well enough
not so good at spelling
coz my english teacher is from south america

i can speak my native language well enough
not so good at spelling
coz my english teacher is from south america

Your english teacher stops you from using the shift key on your keyboard?

Your english teacher stops you from using the shift key on your keyboard?
If we use our shift keys, the terrorists will, ironically, think we're a bunch of pansy Piceses.

If we use our shift keys, the terrorists will, ironically, think we're a bunch of pansy Piceses.

...Of course, it is incidentally the age of Pisces

Well, one reason for staying is: You made a mess, you clean it up.

Meanwhile, having another passport does not disqualify you from joining the US Army - lots of foreigners do and get a green card + later Naturalisation that way.
So rest assured: you will be welcome to sign up for the US Army.
( Same way as us Brits took on foreigners to serve on HMS Victory at Trafalgar. )
Really? I didn't know that. Would they help with the trip to US as well or do I have to pay that myself?
It'd be good to at least try to do something instead of just talking about it.

I'd prefer to join the Canadian or British forces though.
I'd probably fail the political security screening in the US forces.

and have no fear of death (that only appeared recently)
Oh you will learn to fear death, kiddo. Trust me on that.
You don't feel very cocky when you're pinned down by supressive fire in a bad position.

Heh, not that it takes something that extreme to get a, ah, "healthy respect" for death.

Like HECK we can't leave!

A civil war is NOT my problem unless it actually concerns me.

Shiites subjecting Sunnis to the Pact of Omar is no problem of mine.

Whether or not some nutjob runs the place only is a matter of concern when such a nutjob threathens our interests.

I do wish you'd stop saying "we" and "our" as though anyone who reads your words is necessarily on your side.

I'm an Australian. My nation is an ally of your nation. Both of our nations have troops deployed in Iraq, and I don't want Australians to die there, fighting a war I have opposed from the start. I'm not ashamed to admit that I opposed invading Afghanistan too.

You and I have some common interests. That does not give me the right to present my position as "ours."

Muster a little objectivity, at least in your form of words, or else you will never have any credibility. Even someone you agree with wholeheartedly will dread having you speak for their side. It's not a big deal, just say "the Coalition" or "the USA" instead of "us" or "we" or "our."

I'm quite serious. I don't like this war much, and I really fail to see the point of hanging about.

What happens after we leave is not our concern unless it damages our interests.

60% of those Iraqis are Shias.
They'll end up in charge.
For all the rhetoric, no Shiite was involved in 911, 7/7, Madrid, Bali.
Those folks are NOT our enemy.

exactly, you have a good point, its sorta like veitnam a war you can never win,

If we use our shift keys, the terrorists will, ironically, think we're a bunch of pansy Piceses.

Piceans? Pickaxes? Wha?

You are either a lot more literate than I, or you've been drinking! Naughty Bottle!

Piceans? Pickaxes? Wha?

You are either a lot more literate than I, or you've been drinking! Naughty Bottle!
Forgiveness, please! I don't know the correct plural for "Pices," so I applied the plural form that is used for "octopus."

Forgiveness, please! I don't know the correct plural for "Pices," so I applied the plural form that is used for "octopus."

You're a lot more literate than I, AND you've been drinking! Good Bottle!

BTW, I only just realized what's going on. The OP has quit, and we're spamming his thread! Count me in!

Forgiveness, please! I don't know the correct plural for "Pices," so I applied the plural form that is used for "octopus."

I thought it was "Pisces" (My birthday is March 19th..so I am one)

Long time no see Bottle, hope all is well with you. :)

Peace - Stephanie.

I thought it was "Pisces" (My birthday is March 19th..so I am one)
...


You are very close to the cusp. I know that only because I am close to the same cusp.
EDIT: isn't that a wonderful word? Cusp. Like custard, spat out. Cusp. One more time: cusp. Mmm.

You are very close to the cusp. I know that only because I am close to the same cusp.

Yeah, I believe it changes to "Aries" March 21st..

Should we return to the subject? The Iraq thing? I'm easy.
EDIT: Easy, as in 'at ease with.' I didn't come here to make fun of BogM, but for the subject. I haven't seen such a thread yet, and want to form an opinion. On the other hand, I'm always open to opportunities to pissfart around. It's all good.

Should we return to the subject? The Iraq thing? I'm easy.

I don't argue on NS anymore. But if you want my opinion on Iraq.. well, in short, it was one of the stupidest possible things the American government has done to date.. at least in my opinion. (Which I might add has been my opinion since they started this stupid war on my birthday in 2003).. Well, and before, when it was still just in the "thinking" stages.

I knew they were lying.. there was just no way to prove it. And sometimes that's life... I knew the truth would come out sooner or later. How a few short years gives people such a clearer perspective. Well, except the "true believers" who wouldn't admit that Bush did anything wrong if their lives depended on it of course..lol! Just my two cents.

I do wish you'd stop saying "we" and "our" as though anyone who reads your words is necessarily on your side.

I'm an Australian. My nation is an ally of your nation. Both of our nations have troops deployed in Iraq, and I don't want Australians to die there, fighting a war I have opposed from the start. I'm not ashamed to admit that I opposed invading Afghanistan too.

You and I have some common interests. That does not give me the right to present my position as "ours."

Muster a little objectivity, at least in your form of words, or else you will never have any credibility. Even someone you agree with wholeheartedly will dread having you speak for their side. It's not a big deal, just say "the Coalition" or "the USA" instead of "us" or "we" or "our."


Wow. A semantics game.

As they used to say in 'Living Colours' : Homey don't play that game.

WE can leave.
WE don't have to stay.
The number of Iraqis dying after WE leave is not OUR concern.
What happens to OUR troops is OUR concern.

I don't do objectivity - I define things in terms of OUR interests, which is to say:
with openly and clearly expressed subjectivity.

Well, one reason for staying is: You made a mess, you clean it up.


Really? I didn't know that. Would they help with the trip to US as well or do I have to pay that myself?
It'd be good to at least try to do something instead of just talking about it.

I'd prefer to join the Canadian or British forces though.
I'd probably fail the political security screening in the US forces.


You'll have to pay for the trip yourself. The French ( Foreign Legion ) are as far as I know the only outfit still to pay for a journey to a recruitment session.
( Paying foreign nationals to apply for your own Army is sort of badly frowned upon.
Poaching outside your own pond and all that. )

Lots of foreigners are using the Army Road into citizenship.
Mostly Latinos.
The tradition of using the Army of a country to gain citizenship was already old when Marius reformed the Legions of the Roman Republic.

I suppose there might be active political screening to get into the US Army - but I severely doubt it.
(They're more likely to screen your sexual preferences these days. )

Wow. A semantics game.

As they used to say in 'Living Colours' : Homey don't play that game.

WE can leave.
WE don't have to stay.
The number of Iraqis dying after WE leave is not OUR concern.
What happens to OUR troops is OUR concern.

I don't do objectivity - I define things in terms of OUR interests, which is to say:
with openly and clearly expressed subjectivity.

you make me :D

you make me :D


I have a bit of a grim laugh when certain folks try to make me to conform to a standard which I rather expressly denounce.
One might as well try to condemn me for failing to stick to the standards of, say, Hinduism.

EDIT Follows Stephistan's post. Stuff happened.
Hmm. You don't argue any more? No irony: that's interesting.

This might be a very dull discussion, since I agree with you. But if we keep posting, the thread will get hot and attract Israel/Anti-Israel folks, and US/Anti-Israel folks, and then it will be business as usual. BM will be pleased.

I'm torn between thinking that the US is the de-facto governor of Iraq, and wanting to believe in the new government the US is protecting. I'm not bound by my opposition to the US occupation in the first place.
I want to form my opinion based on hearing arguments for and against. I admit my ignorance, being informed by newspapers and TV like most people. But at the moment: I want a democracy in Iraq. I want the Iraqis to be able to elect anyone they like, be they baathists, pro-Iran US haters, whatever. It won't be a democracy until the people have experienced the effects of their own choices, good or bad, and it won't be a good democracy for decades. There will be coups, in all likelihood, and I agree with BM in that: it's their problem.

I have a bit of a grim laugh when certain folks try to make me to conform to a standard which I rather expressly denounce.
One might as well try to condemn me for failing to stick to the standards of, say, Hinduism.

um, sorry then?

*skulks off*

That seems to be the plan and I support our President. I figure the initial objective was top secret. It probably had something to do with a buried stargate.
Nope, we already found the stargate.

Hmm. You don't argue any more? No irony: that's interesting.

This might be a very dull discussion, since I agree with you. But if we keep posting, the thread will get hot and attract Israel/Anti-Israel folks, and US/Anti-Israel folks, and then it will be business as usual. BM will be pleased.

I'm torn between thinking that the US is the de-facto governor of Iraq, and wanting to believe in the new government the US is protecting. I'm not bound by my opposition to the US occupation in the first place.
I want to form my opinion based on hearing arguments for and against. I admit my ignorance, being informed by newspapers and TV like most people. But at the moment: I want a democracy in Iraq. I want the Iraqis to be able to elect anyone they like, be they baathists, pro-Iran US haters, whatever. It won't be a democracy until the people have experienced the effects of their own choices, good or bad, and it won't be a good democracy for decades. There will be coups, in all likelihood, and I agree with BM in that: it's their problem.


You are torn.
I reckon most people are.

You would not hear anyone saying things like ( a bit ofFoxQuoting ) 'I support our great President, so I want to stay the course in Iraq' unless the people expressing those sentiments were aware that they themselves have a dilemma that defies a quick and clear fix.

So you have a dilemma:
A] To stay, come what may
or
B] To wash your hands and walk away.

I'm very clearly opting for B.

But how say you?

um, sorry then?

*skulks off*

*tickles and fluffles*

*tickles and fluffles*

*slaps and pinches*

Just like old times, eh? Go in there with guns blazing, fuck everything up and piss off back home leaving a smoldering mess behind.

IIRC, when the Allies "liberated" Europe, they bombed Germany into rubble, and occupied it by force.

The Allies didn't exactly piss off back home leaving a smoldering mess behind.

They stayed, and I believe that in a historical sense, it was a good thing.

It's also good that the German insurgency that arose after WW II didn't amount to much, and only lasted four years.

Then again, no one was calling for US troops to come home after a few insurgent attacks ("German Occupation A Mistake, Says New York Times"), nor did anyone hold the French to account for shelling villages in Germany in reprisal for any and all insurgent attacks.

Nor were any Soviet soldiers held to account for "the rape of Berlin". No, that was the work of heroes, by the contemporary accounts.

I find it interesting that the same people who believe that organized militaries should never be allowed to do violence, and should always be castigated and severely reproved for any military action (even if in self-defense), are the same people who say, "it's OK if terrorists or insurgents bomb, rocket, or kill people, because they are just from a society with more primitive standards, or they're desperate, so we should always forgive their atrocities and never shoot back."

I have a bit of a grim laugh when certain folks try to make me to conform to a standard which I rather expressly denounce.


Grim laughing is probably something you do well.

Where are your friends? Where on this board is one person who you name as an ally, who when asked will not equivocate?

I'd have been your friend. I've have tried to see things from your point of view, give you the benefit of the doubt when you have not expressed yourself too clearly, but no. You have apparently decided I am the enemy, like everyone else.

Completely seriously: in the two weeks I've been here, you've got more angry and hostile towards everyone. Is something happening in your real life which you'd like to talk about?

Really, I don't hate you. I doubt many do.

Grim laughing is probably something you do well.

Where are your friends? Where on this board is one person who you name as an ally, who when asked will not equivocate?

I'd have been your friend. I've have tried to see things from your point of view, give you the benefit of the doubt when you have not expressed yourself too clearly, but no. You have apparently decided I am the enemy, like everyone else.

Completely seriously: in the two weeks I've been here, you've got more angry and hostile towards everyone. Is something happening in your real life which you'd like to talk about?

Really, I don't hate you. I doubt many do.

Hobo, I like you, but that's a bit harsh.

I've never seen him get hostile and angry.. he just debates. If other people get emotional over it then that's there beef.

You two debate really well, I enjoy reading them a great deal :)

and i said before, i actually agree with him on this to a point.

Would be great to leave Iraq- problem is the war was wrong- how do you re-stabalise the country its in a mess- we dont want another Iran do we??

EDIT Follows Stephistan's post. Stuff happened.
Hmm. You don't argue any more? No irony: that's interesting.

This might be a very dull discussion, since I agree with you. But if we keep posting, the thread will get hot and attract Israel/Anti-Israel folks, and US/Anti-Israel folks, and then it will be business as usual. BM will be pleased.

I'm torn between thinking that the US is the de-facto governor of Iraq, and wanting to believe in the new government the US is protecting. I'm not bound by my opposition to the US occupation in the first place.
I want to form my opinion based on hearing arguments for and against. I admit my ignorance, being informed by newspapers and TV like most people. But at the moment: I want a democracy in Iraq. I want the Iraqis to be able to elect anyone they like, be they baathists, pro-Iran US haters, whatever. It won't be a democracy until the people have experienced the effects of their own choices, good or bad, and it won't be a good democracy for decades. There will be coups, in all likelihood, and I agree with BM in that: it's their problem.

Oh, I use to argue, boy did I use to argue..lol

Now I stay nice and calm..getting too old to worry about being right. I actually don't think I've even posted on NS in months and months.

However, to your point about democracy.... I'm not sure that the American government gave enough thought to the idea of spreading democracy to ALL parts of the world. Quite frankly it won't work in all places. Also sometimes it doesn't exactly turn out the way you might think... Look at Palestine! That was a democratic election and it was free and clean with huge voter turn out. I base that opinion of Jimmy Carter's observations of the election. (He was on the ground at the time)

I guess perhaps I just think that Bush's idea of "spreading" democracy was some what short sighted in the sense that he didn't really look further than elections, with no real plan for democracy past that. There is a hell of a lot more to democracy than elections.

Of course this is an over simplification of a very complex issue. However I didn't really feel like writing a small novel.. ;)

Winning wars is very nice and all, but occupations aren't much fun for anyone.

So here is a new thought:

Let's withdraw from Iraq, and leave the shiny guns and radio's to the Shiites.

They won't mess about with 'Insurgents' and summarily eradicate anyone who dislikes the New Ayatollah Order.

Some folks may call that genocide, but what other countries do in their own sovereign territory is not necessarily our problem, is it?


Benefits:
-less Americans coming back in bodybags.
-occupation ends.
-we save quite a lot of dollari.
-Al Qaeda In Mesopotamia gets a very rough ride.
-troops home.
-liberals happy.
-hanging about will not alter the fundamental outcomes of the internal powerstruggles within Iraq.

Negative effects:
-for us, nuffin much.
-er, Bush looses a reason to ban recreational sex?
-nasty civil war ( but their civil war does not really threathen us)
-a future nutjob overthere might pose a risk to us.
-we may not have accomplished our original objective.


It seems we are in the middle of negotiations with the Sunni's and they along with others DO NOT WANT us to leave yet..some fear Iran will fill the void left by departing US troops ..and that is VERY likely and others fear they will be targeted by radical Shiites..We need to have troops on the ground for a bit longer ..until we sort out Iran and whatever is left of the insurgency .
There are only 150,000 or less troops in all of Iraq..pop. 26 million...so they certainly do not see an occuping force ...more like something caught in the mouth of a whale ..but they appreciate the danger they face from Persia and radical elements and expect the US to finish what they started and leave them able to defend themselves .

Grim laughing is probably something you do well.

Where are your friends? Where on this board is one person who you name as an ally, who when asked will not equivocate?

I'd have been your friend. I've have tried to see things from your point of view, give you the benefit of the doubt when you have not expressed yourself too clearly, but no. You have apparently decided I am the enemy, like everyone else.

Completely seriously: in the two weeks I've been here, you've got more angry and hostile towards everyone. Is something happening in your real life which you'd like to talk about?

Really, I don't hate you. I doubt many do.

I am moving expressly into a very clear and openly parochial analysis of our global situation: the world is divided in Us, Them, and The Statistics.

It is a matter of applying Game Analysis: one must be very clear WHOSE geopolitical side one is on, and who the other fellers are.

You define proponents and opponents in terms of individuals:
my political philosophy pays ZERO attention to the existence of the individual, and only to aggregates.

To know then, what one wants to do is defined by asking the standard questions of Lenin: who, whom?
Who is affected by event X, and of the various parties affected by event X, whom do we support?

Grim laughing is probably something you do well.

Where are your friends? Where on this board is one person who you name as an ally, who when asked will not equivocate?

I'd have been your friend. I've have tried to see things from your point of view, give you the benefit of the doubt when you have not expressed yourself too clearly, but no. You have apparently decided I am the enemy, like everyone else.

Completely seriously: in the two weeks I've been here, you've got more angry and hostile towards everyone. Is something happening in your real life which you'd like to talk about?

Really, I don't hate you. I doubt many do.

If there is one thing I do find rather unattractive in many posters, it is the tendency to work with moral relatives.
While they are certainly correct in stating that Grey exists, the choice between two shades of grey should be dead-easy.

So shades exist. That is absolutely no excuse not to chose one or the other. Given the choice between being hung and beind drowned, one must either choose, or be mute forever.

What happened to the kid who can't find the shift-key is rather interesting: a play about rules or packing, rather than about content.

Some folks may call that genocide, but what other countries do in their own sovereign territory is not necessarily our problem, is it?

Why were we there in the first place?

Why were we there in the first place?

To satisfy a fool who does not know one type of gas from the other?

The why is irrelevant. What we do about it matters. Leave introspection for ones autobiography.

Oh good!

And having lotsa infidels walking around Najaf definetely saves human lives.

How many casualties in the first 6 months, including iraqi civilians?

Infidels? :rolleyes:

Also, I never said the invasion or the occupation was a good thing, it's quite the opposite. And I don't believe anyone is doing anything to make it better either. But not dealing with the situation you've created won't make it better either.

Infidels? :rolleyes:

Also, I never said the invasion or the occupation was a good thing, it's quite the opposite. And I don't believe anyone is doing anything to make it better either. But not dealing with the situation you've created won't make it better either.


Will dealing with it make it better? In your terms, our presence is not achieving anything worthwhile.

So the question is simple:
do we stay in the absence of concrete results due to us staying
or
do we leave in the absence of concrete results due to us staying.

Face facts: Osama got extra-p'd off because infidels walking around HIS holy sites was sacrilege.
Sadr gets p'd off because infidels walking around his holy sites is sacrilege.
They both consider the other as infidel - and wish the other feller as dead as dead can be.

What seems to be not understood is that people cannot really get along with folks of other persuasions, and that wisdom, therefore, does involve minimising extra-cultural contacts.

I thought it was "Pisces" (My birthday is March 19th..so I am one)

Bleh. I'm happy to be an easily-spelt Cancer.


Long time no see Bottle, hope all is well with you. :)
And with you, I hope!

The idea of immediately, completely, and permanently pulling out is all pros, not a single con. We should do it at once.

You are torn.
I reckon most people are.

You would not hear anyone saying things like ( a bit ofFoxQuoting ) 'I support our great President, so I want to stay the course in Iraq' unless the people expressing those sentiments were aware that they themselves have a dilemma that defies a quick and clear fix.

So you have a dilemma:
A] To stay, come what may
or
B] To wash your hands and walk away.

I'm very clearly opting for B.

But how say you?

Well, I'm biased by the "I told you so" factor, in that I thought it was a bad idea in the first place. +1 Walk away.

I think it's a peacekeeping scenario now. The presence of 100,000+ US troops makes the place look like a protectorate, and it's democratically elected government a puppet regime. Not to me, but to the insurgents and probably the Iraqi people. +1 Walk away.

The only other body which would put troops on the ground to protect the Iraqi government is the UN. 100,000 UN troops (unlikely) wouldn't be as effective as the US troops. +1 Stay. And +1 the US should stop dissing the UN.

Fewer Iraqis are dying now than under Saddam, per year. But the west is noticing them more, because we (yep, I say that) feel responsible for those deaths. It's criminals, not the "law enforcement" of saddam, doing the killing, and therefore plays bigger in the media. +1 stay.

End result: 0. I'm in this debate because my opinion is neutral, rather than to fight one side or the other.
But I'm not vague, or "oh, it's not my problem." It stresses me, but I'm not washing my hands of it. I think I'm roughly average too, if it makes sense to compare an individual opinion with a statistical average of the population.

Will dealing with it make it better? In your terms, our presence is not achieving anything worthwhile.

The whole war isn't achieving anything.
But, for what it's worth, the military presence is the only thing that prevents a full-scale civil war at this point. But considering that the Americans created this risk of a civil-war, as well as killing and injuring countless people or doing weird things to them in prison camps, it can't really be said to be an act of kindness, can it?

I did not get to vote over it either.
I would have voted to stay the fiddlesticks out.
Actually, one of the leftists has me sigged as saying:
'This (iraq)war is a mistake, and we told you so!'



If that was me, not anymore. I would object to being called leftist but around here I'm kinda stuck with that badge *shrug*

The whole war isn't achieving anything.
But, for what it's worth, the military presence is the only thing that prevents a full-scale civil war at this point. But considering that the Americans created this risk of a civil-war, as well as killing and injuring countless people or doing weird things to them in prison camps, it can't really be said to be an act of kindness, can it?


Then you must merely weigh 4 things.

1. How much is the value of preventing that civil war?
2. What is the cost of it - definetely including the human cost.
3. How much badness ( say, 'good old fashioned American pornography' according to Rush Limbaugh or 'roadkilling' a quantifiable number of freedomfighters/terrorists) is the result of staying?
and finally 4: how do you re-weigh matters in accordance with the side you're on.

And then you come to a conclusion.

That that occupation was begun for questionable reasons ( or highly laudable reasons if you think so ) in the past has no relevance whatsoever in determining the future merit.

If that was me, not anymore. I would object to being called leftist but around here I'm kinda stuck with that badge *shrug*

Sowwy on calling you left.

I don't view sigs, so I tend not to follow who quotes what much.

Oh, I use to argue, boy did I use to argue..lol


Whatever happened to your radio show?

Lets assume we back out right now, and leave the country to its own devices, and they fall into civil war.
The current Iraqi government has somethng like 125,000 green-as-Hell troops, whos loyalty may easily be swayed.

So..some other nutjob douchebag like Hussein, or WORSE takes over?

More importantly, theres LOTS of oil there.
I dont believe abandoning such oil reserves in a good idea, even if I dont believe starting a war over them is a good one either.

Make no mistake, we took over Iraq to have a foundation to launch warfare in the Middle-East, in order to secure oil, and future oil supplies.
WOW!! You sure have changed an awful lot since I first started posting here. :(

We CANT just leave now, as much as I hate that fact, and every exscuse given for starting it in the first place, to leave now could jeapordize a lot of peoples futures.
Yours, mine, all of us.
I believe the exact reverse. The longer the US stays, the worse that it will get. And it is getting worse.

Whatever happened to your radio show?

Oh, I still have it. In fact it will be on at 11 AM EDT. In about ten minutes..lol

I had to re-do it though..lol When I did it on Monday I was a little tipsy to say the least..lol.

So I re-recorded it last night..lol.. Only problem is by re-doing it I had to go solo as my guest was not able to re-do it with me. But will have a guest next week again.

The site is down right now for upgrades (bzoo.org).. but the radio is still working if you go to my website (it's in my sig) click "About" you can click whatever option to listen to it you like... if you miss it , it will be re-aired Thursday & Friday again (at different times) It runs four times a week. :)

Oh, I use to argue, boy did I use to argue..lol

Now I stay nice and calm..getting too old to worry about being right. I actually don't think I've even posted on NS in months and months.

However, to your point about democracy.... I'm not sure that the American government gave enough thought to the idea of spreading democracy to ALL parts of the world. Quite frankly it won't work in all places. Also sometimes it doesn't exactly turn out the way you might think... Look at Palestine! That was a democratic election and it was free and clean with huge voter turn out. I base that opinion of Jimmy Carter's observations of the election. (He was on the ground at the time)

I guess perhaps I just think that Bush's idea of "spreading" democracy was some what short sighted in the sense that he didn't really look further than elections, with no real plan for democracy past that. There is a hell of a lot more to democracy than elections.

Of course this is an over simplification of a very complex issue. However I didn't really feel like writing a small novel.. ;)
Hey Steph!! :)

Sure is good to see your name here on the boards again!!

Sure do miss you and Zep!! :(

Hey Steph!! :)

Sure is good to see your name here on the boards again!!

Sure do miss you and Zep!! :(

Ditto Canuck! :)

Zep is just not into it anymore... I'm not that much either really. But it had been a while, so I thought I'd stop by and say hey to old friends. Good to see quite a few are still around. :)

Peace - Stephanie.

Winning wars is very nice and all, but occupations aren't much fun for anyone.

Benefits:
-less Americans coming back in bodybags.
-occupation ends.
-we save quite a lot of dollari.
-Al Qaeda In Mesopotamia gets a very rough ride.
-troops home.
-liberals happy.
-hanging about will not alter the fundamental outcomes of the internal powerstruggles within Iraq.

Negative effects:
-for us, nuffin much.
-er, Bush looses a reason to ban recreational sex?
-nasty civil war ( but their civil war does not really threathen us)
-a future nutjob overthere might pose a risk to us.
-we may not have accomplished our original objective.
Bad idea. Firstly, it is America and Britain's responsibility to clean up the mess they made.

More importantly, pulling out now would just create another country of people angry with the west, which means another generation of bin Laden-types, and another spate of 9/11-type atrocities a few years in the future.

Well, one reason for staying is: You made a mess, you clean it up.


Really? I didn't know that. Would they help with the trip to US as well or do I have to pay that myself?
It'd be good to at least try to do something instead of just talking about it.

I'd prefer to join the Canadian or British forces though.
I'd probably fail the political security screening in the US forces.

Political security screening?

"Have you ever been a member of a group calling for, or planning the violent overthrow of the United States Government?"

"...no"

"Alright, onto the medical portion..."

Bad idea. Firstly, it is America and Britain's responsibility to clean up the mess they made.

More importantly, pulling out now would just create another country of people angry with the west, which means another generation of bin Laden-types, and another spate of 9/11-type atrocities a few years in the future.


What if the mess can't be cleaned up by Britain and the US?

As Cromwell told the long Parliament:
For sake of the Lord, leave this house!
What good have you done while you were here?

Ok guys, how about this:

We nuke Mecca!
That would be really hilarious. Then we pull out and kill everyone we can on the way out. Then we deport all arabs and watch as they are completely unable to hurt us. Then they'd just get pissed and invade Israel or something. If they cut off our oil supplies we could just blockade them and bomb their piplelines so that their oil is no good to them unless they give it to us. I'd like to see them make the Haj to a smoldering radioactive pit.


In reality this war is about creating a crisis in the Middle East to drive up oil prices due to speculation, creating a huge oil price bubble and record-breaking profits for oil companies. If you look at it the oil companies are the only ones benefiting from U.S. policy in the Middle East. They have the connections, they have their buddy Bush in office, they have the money. There is no way this whole mess could be an honest mistake. It must have been intentional. If this is true there's going to be a huge collapse in oil prices sometime in the future, and Bush will probably leave his successor with a far more serious crisis in the Middle East than the current one.