NationStates Jolt Archive

Bush tells us that we are at war w/ Islamic extremists but i'm not so convinced. I've been to the front of this so called war and i have to tell you that i'm not seeing it. If we really need to mobilize the entire armed forces of the strongest military power in the world to fight a bunch of uneducated, unclean morons who can't shoot straight then i'm not sure we're all that we're cracked up to be. I say we finish up training iraqis (which is a whole other problem) and end this fantasy war.

Bush tells us that we are at war w/ Islamic extremists but i'm not so convinced. I've been to the front of this so called war and i have to tell you that i'm not seeing it. If we really need to mobilize the entire armed forces of the strongest military power in the world to fight a bunch of uneducated, unclean morons who can't shoot straight then i'm not sure we're all that we're cracked up to be. I say we finish up training iraqis (which is a whole other problem) and end this fantasy war.

It's not so much a war that will essentially involve large conventional forces deployed to fight foreign wars.

It's more like the Cold War, where it's a war of ideas and ideologies.

Not usually conducive to being resolved by showing up and shooting people.

we are at war with a loose idealogy with many seperate, diverse aspects. What bush's speeches are attempts to turn an unorganized force into a single, cohesive boogeyman.

we are at war with a loose idealogy with many seperate, diverse aspects. What bush's speeches are attempts to turn an unorganized force into a single, cohesive boogeyman.

Yes, there are diverse aspects. It doesn't change the fact that the threat exists.

Nominally, it would be possible to exploit a Sunni/Shia split, and have them wage nuclear war on each other (eventually).

Not all of it is unorganized, either. Iran and its proxy, Hezbollah, are extremely well organized.

Different kind of war. We need to wage a public relations war globally but in particular in the Muslim world to make the people see the terrorists as scum and us as decent folks. Maybe we need to build up the ability to assassinate individual leaders and feed disinformation into terrorist networks.

Isn't this "war" on terrorism not a war where you use a sledgehammer of an army? We need a scalpel in this case, special forces teams would work much better.

Bush tells us that we are at war w/ Islamic extremists but i'm not so convinced. I've been to the front of this so called war and i have to tell you that i'm not seeing it. If we really need to mobilize the entire armed forces of the strongest military power in the world to fight a bunch of uneducated, unclean morons who can't shoot straight then i'm not sure we're all that we're cracked up to be. I say we finish up training iraqis (which is a whole other problem) and end this fantasy war.

Are we at war? Unquestionably.

Should we be at war? Yes.

Are we at war with the enemy who attacked us 5 years ago? Complicated. Yes, to some extent, but but the current US leadership has myopically ignored the enemy and expanded the war in a percipitous, dangerous, and anti-strategic fashion; all the while down playing those we should be at war with.

Isn't this "war" on terrorism not a war where you use a sledgehammer of an army? We need a scalpel in this case, special forces teams would work much better.

Actually, unless you're willing to consider genocide...

you probably need what DCD mentioned - a PR campaign
accompanied by clandestine assassinations of key figures

Economic aid to certain nations.

Not sure any of this would work on Iran or Hezbollah though.

Different kind of war. We need to wage a public relations war globally but in particular in the Muslim world to make the people see the terrorists as scum and us as decent folks.

we're trying:
http://www.alhurra.com/
al hurra, an arabic language news network, funded and created by the US gov't, staffed by vet. journalists from the ME. Its shown in the US and in the Me, where available.

we're trying:
http://www.alhurra.com/
al hurra, an arabic language news network, funded and created by the US gov't, staffed by vet. journalists from the ME.

Weak, at best.

We're dammed if we do, even more dammed if we don't.

Actually, unless you're willing to consider genocide...

you probably need what DCD mentioned - a PR campaign
accompanied by clandestine assassinations of key figures

Economic aid to certain nations.

Not sure any of this would work on Iran or Hezbollah though.

All Muslims aren't going to be terrorists so I don't get the genocide comment.

PR always helps and assassinating terrorist leaders would accomplish alot. As long as we are talking about actual terrorists and not heads of state. Supposively that is illegal.

Aid is always needed, if Iraq actually got enough funds to rebuilt the infanstructure we destroyed then perhaps there wouldn't be as much desire to join the insurgency.

Iran's youth wants democracy, if nothing else we can just sit back and wait for them to take over when the fanatics die out.

I think the people who treated it as a war in the first place, failed to understand the problem.

It's not so much a war that will essentially involve large conventional forces deployed to fight foreign wars.

It's more like the Cold War, where it's a war of ideas and ideologies.

Not usually conducive to being resolved by showing up and shooting people.

Indeed.

PR always helps and assassinating terrorist leaders would accomplish alot. As long as we are talking about actual terrorists and not heads of state. Supposively that is illegal.


Those laws were rescinded immediately after 9-11 in the US.

Other countries might object, however.

Those laws were rescinded immediately after 9-11 in the US.

Other countries might object, however.

So thanks to Bush it is legal for the U.S. to assassinate heads of state. Wonderful. Perhaps we will go back to killing leaders of democracies to install friendly dictators.

Surprisingly, I agree with Deep Kimchi for once. Not enough is being done about winning the hearts and minds of the people in Iraq, Afghanistan etc. but there sure is a lot of oil-field grabbing etc.

I think of the Iraq situation a bit like this:

A policeman runs into a house owned by a man who beats and rapes his wife. He beats the man senseless and has him carted off to jail. Then he rapes the woman, but unbenownst to him he left the door wide open. Then a bunch of other men come in and start fighting over the woman amongst themselves and the policeman. The policeman knocks out a few, but they regain consciousness whilst the policemen is fighting the others. The woman is raped between bouts. Ultimately, the policeman has to retreat, and the other men kill each other till one stands alone. He then rapes the woman again.

Alternatively:

A policemen runs into a house owned by a man who beats and rapes his wife. He beats the man senseless and has him carted off to jail. He shuts the door and gives the woman first aid. The policeman later gets the women to hospital to get treated for the trauma. When she feels rested, he asks her on a date. Long story short, it takes longer, but the policeman gets some lovin'.

Are we at war? Unquestionably.

Should we be at war? Yes.

Are we at war with the enemy who attacked us 5 years ago? Complicated. Yes, to some extent, but but the current US leadership has myopically ignored the enemy and expanded the war in a percipitous, dangerous, and anti-strategic fashion; all the while down playing those we should be at war with.

We are not at war until an islamic extremist group gets to the level where it could actually challenge us in any way. One attack is not a war, it is a crime. We should not be at war because we have nothing to gain and everything to lose. Even acknowledging that they are strong enough to fight us is a loss for us. We can't gain anything or make anything better in the time we have to do it. I give us 2.5 years left in iraq tops. That's not enough to change their culture of laziness and indifference. In fact, the only reason i don't advocate an immediate pull out of iraq is so that we can give them the tools to win (a military) so that when they lose it's not entirely our fault.

A policemen runs into a house owned by a man who beats and rapes his wife. He beats the man senseless and has him carted off to jail. He shuts the door and gives the woman first aid. The policeman later gets the women to hospital to get treated for the trauma. When she feels rested, he asks her on a date. Long story short, it takes longer, but the policeman gets some lovin'.

But if the woman would rather be raped then recover and go on a date there's not much you can do.

But if the woman would rather be raped then recover and go on a date there's not much you can do.

Well in that case, if the women doesn't want to go on a date despite what the policeman did, then that should be fine.

America doesn't get the oil. They were going in their to "assert freedom and democracy" right?

Well in that case, if the women doesn't want to go on a date despite what the policeman did, then that should be fine.

America doesn't get the oil. They were going in their to "assert freedom and democracy" right?

Mabye i should have emphasized the recovery part more. The iraqis think it is someone elses job to make their lives good and the iraqis that think it is their job are corrupt. Very few of them have the work ethic to make something of their country.

Mabye i should have emphasized the recovery part more. The iraqis think it is someone elses job to make their lives good and the iraqis that think it is their job are corrupt. Very few of them have the work ethic to make something of their country.

I suppose you personally went to post-war Iraq and did a survey on people's persuasion to work?

I suppose you personally went to post-war Iraq and did a survey on people's persuasion to work?

I'm a Captain in the USMC and i have served for 6 months in iraq and 12 in afghanistan. During my tour in iraq i worked closely w/ iraqis and those are my findings and the findings of most americans in iraq.

I'm a Captain in the USMC and i have served for 6 months in iraq and 12 in afghanistan. During my tour in iraq i worked closely w/ iraqis and those are my findings and the findings of most americans in iraq.

Wow. If that's true then I am very sorry. I'm just used to people talking about such and such a country without ever having stepped foot inside it's borders.

Wow. If that's true then I am very sorry. I'm just used to people talking about such and such a country without ever having stepped foot inside it's borders.

No problem

In the end, we'll find we were only at war with ourselves.

Bush tells us that we are at war w/ Islamic extremists but i'm not so convinced. I've been to the front of this so called war and i have to tell you that i'm not seeing it. If we really need to mobilize the entire armed forces of the strongest military power in the world to fight a bunch of uneducated, unclean morons who can't shoot straight then i'm not sure we're all that we're cracked up to be. I say we finish up training iraqis (which is a whole other problem) and end this fantasy war.

From another vet, amen. Babysitting isn't what I was trained for.

Mabye i should have emphasized the recovery part more. The iraqis think it is someone elses job to make their lives good and the iraqis that think it is their job are corrupt. Very few of them have the work ethic to make something of their country.

Indeed. I cannot understand how the iraqis didn't learn ethics after Abu Ghraib. You gave them a lesson there on how, right?

Indeed. I cannot understand how the iraqis didn't learn ethics after Abu Ghraib. You gave them a lesson there on how, right?

There's a big difference between work ethics and the ethics you're describing.

There's a big difference between work ethics and the ethics you're describing.

Indeed, I am sorry.

Enron is the example of the ethics I should be looking for, right?

Mabye i should have emphasized the recovery part more. The iraqis think it is someone elses job to make their lives good and the iraqis that think it is their job are corrupt. Very few of them have the work ethic to make something of their country.

They have more social and cultural problems than just a problem with the work ethic.

The iraqis think it is someone elses job to make their lives good and the iraqis that think it is their job are corrupt. Very few of them have the work ethic to make something of their country.


Getting bombed from the air, invaded and occupied, seeing their country laid to waste and its assets seized by a foreign power based what many suspected at the time and what we all know now was a lie would tend to demoralise a country.

Many of them have lost family and friends and no longer have jobs or homes. You can't blame them for not jumping up and down with joy to make something of their country. They had a country which they worked for, that country’s now destroyed and you blame them for having no work ethic. I would imagine it's less a case of them thinking it's someone else’s job to make their lives good and more a case of wishing the coalition didn't interfere and ruin their lives in the first place. A nation has been destroyed based on a deliberate lie that they were a threat to the U.S. or in anyway connected with 9/11. I think it’s a bit much to have a go at Iraqi moral after the coalition broke it in the first place.

Also, I can see people in Iraq having a damaged work ethic considering they must be so demoralised since a lot of their country is destroyed and continuing to be destroyed. There's a lot of infrastructure that's still not been repaired in Iraq since the war.

They are occupied by a foreign force that alienates itself from them. Building contracts etc. could have been given to local companies and worked on by local people. Instead, you have American companies such as Halliburton "winning" contracts then exporting their own inadequate work-force, doing a half-assed job, then running off with the money anyway.

If you think about it, how can it be possible for Iraqi's to develop a "good work ethic" once more?

Getting bombed from the air, invaded and occupied, seeing their country laid to waste and its assets seized by a foreign power based what many suspected at the time and what we all know now was a lie would tend to demoralise a country.

Many of them have lost family and friends and no longer have jobs or homes. You can't blame them for not jumping up and down with joy to make something of their country. They had a country which they worked for, that country’s now destroyed and you blame them for having no work ethic. I would imagine it's less a case of them thinking it's someone else’s job to make their lives good and more a case of wishing the coalition didn't interfere and ruin their lives in the first place. A nation has been destroyed based on a deliberate lie that they were a threat to the U.S. or in anyway connected with 9/11. I think it’s a bit much to have a go at Iraqi moral after the coalition broke it in the first place.
Wow, you really have no idea. They had shit for a country before the war and they still do because they are not going for their big chance to make something of themselves. At any workplace you go to at least half of the workers will be sitting around sipping down tea instead of working. They won't do anything unless forced to and even then its not a safe bet. A man who breaks down after one bad thing and blames the world for his not recovering is not a good man deserving of any respect. Anyway, it seems to not have demoralized them enough to wage jihad. Go figure.

Anyway, it seems to not have demoralized them enough to wage jihad. Go figure.

Not all Iraqi's are Islamists.

Wow, you really have no idea. They had shit for a country before the war and they still do because they are not going for their big chance to make something of themselves. At any workplace you go to at least half of the workers will be sitting around sipping down tea instead of working. They won't do anything unless forced to and even then its not a safe bet. A man who breaks down after one bad thing and blames the world for his not recovering is not a good man deserving of any respect. Anyway, it seems to not have demoralized them enough to wage jihad. Go figure.

A lot of it stems from an odd fatalism that seems to surround Islam.

Nothing happens that isn't God's will. For instance, you win or lose in battle not because you were skilled, but because it was God's will.

You hear that a lot from the guys sitting around sipping tea and smoking cigarettes. They're waiting for Allah to do it for them (or someone else).

Wow, you really have no idea. They had shit for a country before the war and they still do because they are not going for their big chance to make something of themselves. At any workplace you go to at least half of the workers will be sitting around sipping down tea instead of working. They won't do anything unless forced to and even then its not a safe bet. A man who breaks down after one bad thing and blames the world for his not recovering is not a good man deserving of any respect. Anyway, it seems to not have demoralized them enough to wage jihad. Go figure.
What's this big chance you talk about? The country and its infrastructure are destroyed and foreign companies are getting all the contracts. I find your attitude very strange when you say "A man who breaks down after one bad thing and blames the world for his not recovering is not a good man deserving of any respect". Seriously, "one bad thing" are you nuts. They are not worthy of respect? I don't think anyone who blames the Iraqis for the state of their country as been worthy of respect. Their country might not have been perfect before the occupation but they did have a working population and relatively safe environment compared to what we have now. I think it's a bit much for the invader to belittle the population he has destroyed and tell them they should just get over it and don't be such a big baby.

And about the resistance and civil war you speak of, any casual observer could have told you that guerilla war fare would break out once Hussein was removed from power. The war was wrong, it was badly planned and an obvious disaster waiting to happen. Now you blame the Iraqi people for having no moral. I am genuinely shocked by your statement.

What's this big chance you talk about? The country and its infrastructure are destroyed and foreign companies are getting all the contracts. I find your attitude very strange when you say "A man who breaks down after one bad thing and blames the world for his not recovering is not a good man deserving of any respect". Seriously, "one bad thing" are you nuts. They are not worthy of respect? I don't think anyone who blames the Iraqis for the state of their country as been worthy of respect. Their country might not have been perfect before the occupation but they did have a working population and relatively safe environment compared to what we have now. I think it's a bit much for the invader to belittle the population he has destroyed and tell them they should just get over it and don't be such a big baby.

And about the resistance and civil war you speak of, any casual observer could have told you that guerilla war fare would break out once Hussein was removed from power. The war was wrong, it was badly planned and an obvious disaster waiting to happen. Now you blame the Iraqi people for having no moral. I am genuinely shocked by your statement.

Do you really think that we destroyed the population? Do you really think that it is okay to just call it quits and not work even if it means everyone in your family and the nation suffers from it? Iraqis wouldn't have a problem if they didn't carry out the insurgency, loot and generally reject all coalition help. The men sit in their houses all day and then go out, get drunk and rape women at night. And when they don't see any improvement in their lives it's either our fault or its "inshallah" which means the will of god. Even after the worst of hurricanes in the U.S. people rebound and continue their lives. I don't see why it should be different for iraqis. And don't say its b/c of unemployment b/c this shit happens in wealthy and well employed neighborhoods.

Not all Iraqi's are Islamists.

I havn't met one iraqi who wasn't a muslim. :rolleyes:

Reflex answer would have been to say "No".

But Deep Kimchi is right, there is something to be fought. I do prefer our society and ideology to 'theirs'. I would clearly prefer our way of life to triumph, and I do think that people in oppressive Islamic countries would be better off with a bit more Western liberalism. I mean, Turkey seems to manage, wouldn't you say?
It just can't be fought by shooting people. It's more of a war in the minds of people.

And it would be decidedly silly to say that the US didn't have a role to play in that conflict.

I havn't met one iraqi who wasn't a muslim. :rolleyes:
You should look around more. :p

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Iraq
Religions: Muslim 97% (Shi'a 60%-65%, Sunni 32%-37%), Christian or other 3%

So I guess they're hiding somewhere...

I havn't met one iraqi who wasn't a muslim. :rolleyes:But you probably have met some that weren't Islamists (http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/islamist). (see second definition)

You should look around more. :p

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Iraq
Religions: Muslim 97% (Shi'a 60%-65%, Sunni 32%-37%), Christian or other 3%

So I guess they're hiding somewhere...

Yea, not in fallujah.

But you probably have met some that weren't Islamists (http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/islamist). (see second definition)

That's pretty much Sunni

What's this big chance you talk about? The country and its infrastructure are destroyed and foreign companies are getting all the contracts. I find your attitude very strange when you say "A man who breaks down after one bad thing and blames the world for his not recovering is not a good man deserving of any respect". Seriously, "one bad thing" are you nuts. They are not worthy of respect? I don't think anyone who blames the Iraqis for the state of their country as been worthy of respect. Their country might not have been perfect before the occupation but they did have a working population and relatively safe environment compared to what we have now. I think it's a bit much for the invader to belittle the population he has destroyed and tell them they should just get over it and don't be such a big baby.

And about the resistance and civil war you speak of, any casual observer could have told you that guerilla war fare would break out once Hussein was removed from power. The war was wrong, it was badly planned and an obvious disaster waiting to happen. Now you blame the Iraqi people for having no moral. I am genuinely shocked by your statement.

Yeah... I guess it wasn't all THAT bad. I mean, I would work too if I had a gun pointed at my head. And hey, being gassed by your own leader or being shot on trumped up charges of treason isn't a terrible fate right?

Yeah... I guess it wasn't all THAT bad. I mean, I would work too if I had a gun pointed at my head. And hey, being gassed by your own leader or being shot on trumped up charges of treason isn't a terrible fate right?Well, back then you did have the security of knowing how to behave to avoid getting shot. Now all that needs to happen is that you're a member of one of the ethnic groups and at the wrong place at the wrong time during a vendetta.

Bush tells us that we are at war w/ Islamic extremists but i'm not so convinced. I've been to the front of this so called war and i have to tell you that i'm not seeing it. If we really need to mobilize the entire armed forces of the strongest military power in the world to fight a bunch of uneducated, unclean morons who can't shoot straight then i'm not sure we're all that we're cracked up to be. I say we finish up training iraqis (which is a whole other problem) and end this fantasy war.


You have been to the front and call this a fantasy war? I have my suspicions about you actually going to Iraq or Afghanistan.

You have been to the front and call this a fantasy war? I have my suspicions about you actually going to Iraq or Afghanistan.

What do i need to do for you so that i can take away those suspicions? I was calling the war on terror a fantasy war, not iraq.

I don't care about what the president and congress say. They may be at war, but I am not.

Well, back then you did have the security of knowing how to behave to avoid getting shot. Now all that needs to happen is that you're a member of one of the ethnic groups and at the wrong place at the wrong time during a vendetta.

Fair enough.

I think the people who treated it as a war in the first place, failed to understand the problem.
Ummmm, I think you meant to say that they continue to fail to understand?

Nominally, it would be possible to exploit a Sunni/Shia split, and have them wage nuclear war on each other (eventually).one of the things we could do is is get the CIA to bomb a Shia Market.. then a Sunni Mosque.. then a Shia Mosque then a Sunni Achool.. and after a couple those.. they will snowball into a full scale religion War.

one of the things we could do is is get the CIA to bomb a Shia Market.. then a Sunni Mosque.. then a Shia Mosque then a Sunni Achool.. and after a couple those.. they will snowball into a full scale religion War.

Oh..yes.

Thats a good idea.

No bloodshed quite as good as an ol' fashioned Crusade is there?

No it is not a war. At least not here in Europe and in Britain. The terrorist threat is treated as exactly what it is - criminality. These men are criminals breaking the law of the land and are dealt with by the police and security forces, not the military. Here in Britain we learn't that lesson fighting the IRA. If you view the fight against terrorism as a war, you legitimise their cause. They stop being criminals in a trerrorist conflict and become soldiers in a war.

Yeah... I guess it wasn't all THAT bad. I mean, I would work too if I had a gun pointed at my head. And hey, being gassed by your own leader or being shot on trumped up charges of treason isn't a terrible fate right?


If you actually read the bit you highlighted you will notice I said "relative to now". That’s what happens when America supports and supplies weapons and training to dictators and terrorists, eventually they stop being your friends. e.g. Saddam Hussein and bin laden were both supported by America when it suited the US. I don't remember much complaining about their tactics when they worked in favour of the US. The fact of the situation is that security of workers is in a worse state now than it was before and it was obviously always going to be worse once the state was removed and the country's infrastructure destroyed and civilians killed. I find it very hard to believe that analysts in Washington didn't foresee an insurgency, civil war situation and general unstable and unsafe environment after the war, but then again they did get the oil so who cares ;)