NationStates Jolt Archive

What if the war in Iraq and Afghanistan could be won? Think about this and really think before you jump to your forgone conclusions. There are more then two ways to look at something so some of you, open your minds and think outside the box.

I will start by saying that no, the war against extremism, hate, radicalism and terrorism will not be won untill every person has the opportunity to live free and be educated on how to live together and have the self-respect to care for others.

But can two countries that have the opportunity to give the majority of the people those rights come of age in an area that is the breeding ground for much of this(and its not a knock against Muslims or Arabs. This is about the lack of freedoms, womens rights, children being HONESTLY schooled and extreme poverty to wealth gaps)? YES. I think so. But it has to start in the local areas. THe average person has to say they are tired of it. But they have to have a leader to show them the way. Think about it if your in that position as many in Iraq and Afghanistan are: you have been living for decades under oppresion and war and extremely strict laws. Suddenly you have the opportunity for freedom but there is crime, fighting and a very hard life all around you. All you are going to care about is survival. But once you have the call from a local Sheik or some political figure steps up and says lets defend ourselves do you do it?

I think more and more will join these forces and eventually in a few more years the Middle East will have a true chance to have peace. The people of these countries have to do it BUT they have to have the breathing room, the training and the infrastructure to succeed. And thats why we are there. IF anyone thinks Americans want to be in the Middle East think again. We don't. We as all free people in the world would love to live in peace and harmony and imagine how great life is. BUT we also know the cost of sitting back and hoping and imaging. It means that it gives your enemies time to recruit, plan, train and attack you.

Think of why Iran and Syria are so damn scared! IF Iraq is successful and people start living in freedom there, OMG people in THOSE countries will start to get restless! The fight will get ugly before its over. But eventually in time it can happen. Those of us who live in a free society owe our forefathers this fight. THey did it for us. Who the heck are we to second guees their sacrifice? If not for the French giving the colonies a hand there would be no USA. Without England and the USA most of Europe would be under tryanical rule. Without NATO the world will still live in a nuclear threatened world of two superpowers. And thats just a small example of free people gathering to fight for what they believe in to help each other AND the oppressed who don't have the ability to fight for themselves.

Call me an optimist, an American, whatever you want. I just know that the alternative, leaving and quiting, means defeat. I was raised to finish what I started and I still believe in those values. I believe in commitment and I think the majority of us stil do, we just forgot how much work it took and how much sacrifice it takes. And the only way to win the freedom of others is by NOT quiting. The world expect to much to fast now. The worst part of Desert Storm was that it was over to fast, much like the Six Day war. People got used and spoiled by quick victories. Those weren't wars that were won people. Those were battles. Because Isreal is no safer and stil faces hopes of elimination from millions who hate its existance. And Kuwait, the UAE, and other 'free' countries and allies to the West in the Persion Gulf are still under threat from Iran, Syria and if Iraq fails, the whole area will be in turmoil. And I also believe that will lead to more attacks on ALL of our homelands. Like it our not, if your not a Muslim AND a Muslim who follows the strict sect of Al-Quida/Taliban then you are an infidel and you deserve death. But hey, you all want to go hold hands with them and sing kumbiya, go for it! i am sure they could use you as a driver. And when you get to your destination, bam! Maybe you might be lucky enough as the young Saudi who was 'tricked' by them and who now is fighting Al-Quidas propaganda in his home country with before and after pictures of his deformed body from the bomb blast he miracously survived.

Think about it. IF the USA and the coalition left Iraq within the next six months or less you don't think Iran would move in to fill the vacuuem if the Iraq government and their Army isn't strong enough? They have already said they will! Iran considers the USA and any one who allies with us the Devil and the Enemy. Whats a better way to put a knife into the side of America and all we stand for then by infiltrating Iraq and have it be a mini Iran.

now some will say that the region does not want democracy. That may be true. But do not even try and tell me that any man, woman or child who has had the taste true freedom will not die to keep it. I know I would.

Thanks for your time and have a great night!

If you really want peace in the MidEast you aren't going to do it through war. You are going to do it through economic development. Hungry people care about freedom from hunger. People with an economic stake care about things like freedom of speech.

An idea from Shimon Peres in his book "The New Middle East".

Take half the money spent on military (this was before the current wars) in the Middle East and build up Gaza. Build schools, roads, water and sewer systems, electricity, telephone, a port, etc. Then give micro loans to entrepreneurs to start businesses. In a few years they will have a stake in peace. In a few decades Gaza will look like Hong Kong.

Then do the same thing on the West Bank. Add in a canal from the Red Sea to the Dead Sea with electrical generation stations along the drop in altitude. This electricity could be used for desalinization to bring water to the region. Then build a high speed rail line from Monaco to India and from Europe to as close to Mecca as allowed. This would bring tourist trade and more business. The line could also be sent south from Cairo into Africa.

The book goes into a great deal of ideas. The point is Peace brings Peace, war brings war. War has been tried for 60 years and hasn't brought one step toward peace.

If you really want peace in the MidEast you aren't going to do it through war. You are going to do it through economic development. Hungry people care about freedom from hunger. People with an economic stake care about things like freedom of speech.

An idea from Shimon Peres in his book "The New Middle East".

Take half the money spent on military (this was before the current wars) in the Middle East and build up Gaza. Build schools, roads, water and sewer systems, electricity, telephone, a port, etc. Then give micro loans to entrepreneurs to start businesses. In a few years they will have a stake in peace. In a few decades Gaza will look like Hong Kong.

Then do the same thing on the West Bank. Add in a canal from the Red Sea to the Dead Sea with electrical generation stations along the drop in altitude. This electricity could be used for desalinization to bring water to the region. Then build a high speed rail line from Monaco to India and from Europe to as close to Mecca as allowed. This would bring tourist trade and more business. The line could also be sent south from Cairo into Africa.

The book goes into a great deal of ideas. The point is Peace brings Peace, war brings war. War has been tried for 60 years and hasn't brought one step toward peace.


QFT.

"Fighting for peace makes as much sense as screwing for virginity." Good idea, until you get an STD.

What the fuck is "winning" anyway? In Iraq, it took about 3 weeks to destory their entire army, implement the occupation force's authority, and send Saddam hiding like an ugly rat in a hole. We "won", we took over their country, we imposed a government on them, and we flooded their streets with soldiers.

And like any logical person would do, they resisted. If "winning" means stopping every last insurgent, you must be out of your mind if you think we can win.

And as for Iran, why can't you see it from their view? If you were an American, and a military force took over and occupied Canada and Mexico, wouldn't you be arming yourself? Why shouldn't Iran arm themselves with one of the largest and most well trained armies on both sides of their border?

my advice..dont make such large posts as nobody actually reads loooong ones..condense your point.

how can anyone talk about winning in Iraq when they don't know what our nations are fighting for.

If there is a problem with Islam in general, if Mohammed's followers are a threat. then rather than surrender your freedoms call for an end..temporarily or indefinidte to muslim immigration. halt any building of new mosques and deport muslims who break laws..

dont punish everyone because Muslims wage jihad on non-Muslims...go for the problem not the rest of us...Islam is the problem not iran..and certainly not some idiot with an rpg in bahgdad..

i agree that 'peace' can bring peace as long as its done right. The USA and the rest of the west basically laid off the area for a long time unless you count our alliance with Isreal. Not untill IRAQ started the first Gulf war did the US and others get involved heavily(yes I know that there was meddling, but not outright battles or wars that the West was directley involved in).

But how can you have peace in an area when Iran, Syria are and Iraq before basically calling for Isreals destruction and also supporting terrorism. Like I said, it would be nice if we could go over there and hold hands and give money and hope they love everyone else. But that doesn't work because the 'love' is never shared evenly.

I am all for us pulling out of Iraq and Afghanistan, but only when those governments have the ability to protect themselves and their citizens. The thing the left and peace lovers forget is that hate of freedom and democracy is real by extremist. That there are religious leaders who have thousands of people in the palms of their hands because they know no better and are ignorant of the true meaning of their own religion. Heck, it even happens in America and other western nations where religion is perverted to support radical ideas like the idiot mofo out of Utah. So until you have a GOVERNMENT that supports freedom and those who want to help themselves and each other will the $ and the education make a difference.

My whole point is that when you start something, no matter how crappy the fight is, you have to fight to the finish. And again, the finish as I see it is when the governments of Iraq and Afghanistan can say thanks for you help but we can handle it from here on out. IF we leave before then, and if you think there are problems now, the world will finally be heading towards a real WWIII. Do you really think that if we just throw money and peace promises at the radical nations and religious sects in the area that they will suddenly love us and support us? Hell no. They will use it against us. You would think you would have learned that from our previous support of radicals in, oh. Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, etc to serve shortsighted purposes(although the Cold War politics had alot to do with much of that).

We don't have to finish it. "Staying the course" isn't good. Pulling out isn't good. Any median between those 2 aren't good. Iraq has no good options. The war was an ill-concieved bloodbath brought about by the most imcompetant regime in American history. The war has no good options. Sometimes in life you have to choose between failures.

I still think the war can be won. It's just a matter of untying the military's muscle from the media and the politicians. Right now the American military is fighting with both hands tied behind its back, and to add insult to injury, its on a short leash. Law of Armed Conflict, embedded reporters, and so on.

In order to win this war we need to respond with such force that the terrorists have no chance in hell of responding. Sniper? Level the block. Road bomb? Block off the city and search everyone. Everyone. Anyone caught with even a hint of suspicion is detained. Any actual terrorists are shot. Period. The only good terrorist is a dead terrorist.

I would not hesitate to drop a nuclear weapon on Tehran, either. That would instantly eliminate the nutcase president, the nutcase mullahs, and the nutcase people who voted him in. (Ahmadinejad was the former mayor of Tehran). Furthermore it would stop the flow of money and supplies to Iraq, if the leadership were to....ahem, suddenly change.

Bottom line: We need to respond with so much force and power that the current terrorists are utterly crushed to pieces, and any terrorists-to-be are scared shitless, and therefore choose a more peaceful occupation.

We don't have to finish it. "Staying the course" isn't good. Pulling out isn't good. Any median between those 2 aren't good. Iraq has no good options. The war was an ill-concieved bloodbath brought about by the most imcompetant regime in American history. The war has no good options. Sometimes in life you have to choose between failures.


i disagree. I think that there is progress being made and that the more the common people of Iraq experience security, freedom and the other things as mentioned in the first reply to this thread then they will FIGHT to be free of the radicals. Its happening in Anbar(which just over a year ago was the triangle of death!) and other parts of Iraq. We would have been alot further along then before if not for the bombing of the main Shiite mosque that started the sectarian killings and led to alot of distrust. It takes time to learn to trust and live together. Look at the end of the Civil War in the USA even. For many years afterwards there was extreme lawlessness, coruption and infighting in the governement as the two sides learned to live together again.

War is never pretty or a 'good option'. I agree with that. It should indeed be the last option. But, and please respect the directness here, I would rather be proactive and be fighting the extemists on THEIR turf then letting them build and plan for another attack on MY homeland. Call me selfish if you like. I call it a will to live in safety in my own country.

I still think the war can be won. It's just a matter of untying the military's muscle from the media and the politicians. Right now the American military is fighting with both hands tied behind its back, and to add insult to injury, its on a short leash. Law of Armed Conflict, embedded reporters, and so on.

In order to win this war we need to respond with such force that the terrorists have no chance in hell of responding. Sniper? Level the block. Road bomb? Block off the city and search everyone. Everyone. Anyone caught with even a hint of suspicion is detained. Any actual terrorists are shot. Period. The only good terrorist is a dead terrorist.

I would not hesitate to drop a nuclear weapon on Tehran, either. That would instantly eliminate the nutcase president, the nutcase mullahs, and the nutcase people who voted him in. (Ahmadinejad was the former mayor of Tehran). Furthermore it would stop the flow of money and supplies to Iraq, if the leadership were to....ahem, suddenly change.

Bottom line: We need to respond with so much force and power that the current terrorists are utterly crushed to pieces, and any terrorists-to-be are scared shitless, and therefore choose a more peaceful occupation.

And crush the civilian population in the process? Great idea. Hundreds of thousands of civilians are dead already.

Nothing like a free democracy with martial law and carpet bombs.

And why did you not respond to my point on Iran? Why shouldn't Iran want to arm themselves with the USA on both sides of its border. Again, if a nation invaded Mexico and Canada, would you not be afraid? Would you not arm yourself against it?

We don't have to finish it. "Staying the course" isn't good. Pulling out isn't good. Any median between those 2 aren't good. Iraq has no good options. The war was an ill-concieved bloodbath brought about by the most imcompetant regime in American history. The war has no good options. Sometimes in life you have to choose between failures.

so true i wish i had written it!

I still think the war can be won. It's just a matter of untying the military's muscle from the media and the politicians. Right now the American military is fighting with both hands tied behind its back, and to add insult to injury, its on a short leash. Law of Armed Conflict, embedded reporters, and so on.

In order to win this war we need to respond with such force that the terrorists have no chance in hell of responding. Sniper? Level the block. Road bomb? Block off the city and search everyone. Everyone. Anyone caught with even a hint of suspicion is detained. Any actual terrorists are shot. Period. The only good terrorist is a dead terrorist.

I would not hesitate to drop a nuclear weapon on Tehran, either. That would instantly eliminate the nutcase president, the nutcase mullahs, and the nutcase people who voted him in. (Ahmadinejad was the former mayor of Tehran). Furthermore it would stop the flow of money and supplies to Iraq, if the leadership were to....ahem, suddenly change.

Bottom line: We need to respond with so much force and power that the current terrorists are utterly crushed to pieces, and any terrorists-to-be are scared shitless, and therefore choose a more peaceful occupation.

lol. now THAT would not work. That would bring about more sympathy from others in the middle east AND may even draw in other nations who dislike us arleady like N. Korea, Syria. You would have a major war on our hands then. The problem is not the short leash. The problem WAS that we would clear an area and then not have a trained and sustainable Iraqi Army force to hold it. The surge has allowed us to be proactive and go after the radical elements and terrorists. But eventually we have to give the hand to the people themselves and that is what is starting to happen now. But your example is just almost as bad of an extremists as those who are calling for an immediate pullout. Ain't going to work and will only make it worse. but thats just my opinion.

I still think the war can be won. It's just a matter of untying the military's muscle from the media and the politicians. Right now the American military is fighting with both hands tied behind its back, and to add insult to injury, its on a short leash. Law of Armed Conflict, embedded reporters, and so on.

In order to win this war we need to respond with such force that the terrorists have no chance in hell of responding. Sniper? Level the block. Road bomb? Block off the city and search everyone. Everyone. Anyone caught with even a hint of suspicion is detained. Any actual terrorists are shot. Period. The only good terrorist is a dead terrorist.

I would not hesitate to drop a nuclear weapon on Tehran, either. That would instantly eliminate the nutcase president, the nutcase mullahs, and the nutcase people who voted him in. (Ahmadinejad was the former mayor of Tehran). Furthermore it would stop the flow of money and supplies to Iraq, if the leadership were to....ahem, suddenly change.

Bottom line: We need to respond with so much force and power that the current terrorists are utterly crushed to pieces, and any terrorists-to-be are scared shitless, and therefore choose a more peaceful occupation.

wow that is so completely wrong i dont know where to start.

you dont "win" an occupation.

lol. now THAT would not work. That would bring about more sympathy from others in the middle east AND may even draw in other nations who dislike us arleady like N. Korea, Syria. You would have a major war on our hands then. The problem is not the short leash. The problem WAS that we would clear an area and then not have a trained and sustainable Iraqi Army force to hold it. The surge has allowed us to be proactive and go after the radical elements and terrorists. But eventually we have to give the hand to the people themselves and that is what is starting to happen now. But your example is just almost as bad of an extremists as those who are calling for an immediate pullout. Ain't going to work and will only make it worse. but thats just my opinion.

We need more men.

I think my idea would work because...well, there would be no extremists left to blow us up.

War is never pretty or a 'good option'. I agree with that. It should indeed be the last option. But, and please respect the directness here, I would rather be proactive and be fighting the extemists on THEIR turf then letting them build and plan for another attack on MY homeland. Call me selfish if you like. I call it a will to live in safety in my own country.

Are you referring to 9/11? 19 out of 20 hijackers were Saudis. Which nation is one of Bush's allies.

And I believe the people of Iraq would rather see the government hunting the terror cells already in America than have their entire country brought to ruin, just so we could kill a few dangerous Islamists.

Iraq is a breeding ground for terror. Us invading was the best thing ever for al-Queda. It gave them propagandha, and it gave them recruits.

Osama's entire goal was based on ending Western influence on Islamic nations. By occupying 2 countries, one of them which has become absolute chaos, it made Muslims who were against/neutral to al-Queda support them and their cause.

And crush the civilian population in the process? Great idea. Hundreds of thousands of civilians are dead already.

Nothing like a free democracy with martial law and carpet bombs.

And why did you not respond to my point on Iran? Why shouldn't Iran want to arm themselves with the USA on both sides of its border. Again, if a nation invaded Mexico and Canada, would you not be afraid? Would you not arm yourself against it?

Iran has ALWAYS been armed against us and those who believe in freedom or support Isreal. Irans president has made it clear he wishes for the destruction of Isreal. Irans threat to us was and always has been over that. Now they are just pissed that a Free country is being established on its doorstep which would show that their theorcey of radical rule is on the slide and they would be worried about a rebellion. Of course if someone attacked Canada or Mexico the USA would be arming it self because those are our allies! We would be at war already. Why do you think Iran is doing it underhanded and hoping for an early US pullout? They have already said and I qoute " we WILL fill the vacuuem when the USA pulls out!" ok more of a paraphrase but you get the point. Iran is not the kind neighbor looking to help its brothers. It is looking after its own self interests and desire of regional dominatin and bringing its own radical style of rule into place in other nations. Do you really think Iran is a 'nice' country with anything but hate for all that even YOU stand for( i am assuming you live in a free country and are not Muslim and subscribe to the idea that all infidels are the devil and must die).

War is never pretty or a 'good option'. I agree with that. It should indeed be the last option. But, and please respect the directness here, I would rather be proactive and be fighting the extemists on THEIR turf then letting them build and plan for another attack on MY homeland. Call me selfish if you like. I call it a will to live in safety in my own country.

too bad thats not true. the extremists who are fighting in iraq are not the ones who are planning the next attack on US soil. they are an entirely different group with different goals.

all we are doing in iraq is to create even more terrorists and extremists who will further destabilize the region. and more people around the world who will be willing to sign onto the bigger goal of attacking the US homeland.

in the meantime your goal to keep extremists away from here is killing thousands of innocent iraqis every year, destroying their lives and sending millions into refugee status.

all to lull you into a false sense of security.

thats a pretty evil goal.

We need more men.

I think my idea would work because...well, there would be no extremists left to blow us up.

killing a few hundred thousand extra innocent iraqis who are just trying to go about their business will create hundreds of thousands of new extremists around the world.

I still think the war can be won. It's just a matter of untying the military's muscle from the media and the politicians. Right now the American military is fighting with both hands tied behind its back, and to add insult to injury, its on a short leash. Law of Armed Conflict, embedded reporters, and so on.

In order to win this war we need to respond with such force that the terrorists have no chance in hell of responding. Sniper? Level the block. Road bomb? Block off the city and search everyone. Everyone. Anyone caught with even a hint of suspicion is detained. Any actual terrorists are shot. Period. The only good terrorist is a dead terrorist.

I would not hesitate to drop a nuclear weapon on Tehran, either. That would instantly eliminate the nutcase president, the nutcase mullahs, and the nutcase people who voted him in. (Ahmadinejad was the former mayor of Tehran). Furthermore it would stop the flow of money and supplies to Iraq, if the leadership were to....ahem, suddenly change.

Bottom line: We need to respond with so much force and power that the current terrorists are utterly crushed to pieces, and any terrorists-to-be are scared shitless, and therefore choose a more peaceful occupation.

Let me guess: You haven't seen "The Fog of War".

Are you referring to 9/11? 19 out of 20 hijackers were Saudis. Which nation is one of Bush's allies.

And I believe the people of Iraq would rather see the government hunting the terror cells already in America than have their entire country brought to ruin, just so we could kill a few dangerous Islamists.

Iraq is a breeding ground for terror. Us invading was the best thing ever for al-Queda. It gave them propagandha, and it gave them recruits.

Osama's entire goal was based on ending Western influence on Islamic nations. By occupying 2 countries, one of them which has become absolute chaos, it made Muslims who were against/neutral to al-Queda support them and their cause.

alls i know is that since 9/11 there have been NO attacks on American soil(knock on wood and hallelujah etc).

Iraq was in ruins before the war. Thousands were dying under the hand of Suddam. Lets not forget that people. The problem is that the country was in SUCH ruin from before and during the war it has taken longer then most thought to bring up the infrastructer and start working on helping the people. And answer me this. Do you think if we had not attacked Iraq and Afghanistan that Al-Quida would just be sitting back saying ahhh, they are so cool they didn't bother us! I guees they learned their lesson. NO. THAT would have emboldened them even more and led to more attacks and more deadly ones in my opinion. Did you hear what Osama said in his last video?!?! He wants US to convert to Islam and then he will stop attacking us! lol. The radical element will never go away, and I am sounding like a broken record here, untill the people they try and recruit have the opportunity to living in freedom and the right to be educated honestly.

What if the moon were made of cheese?

The problem WAS that we would clear an area and then not have a trained and sustainable Iraqi Army force to hold it.

Number 1 lesson we should have learned from Vietnam. The US could take Red Square or Tiananmen Square. The problem is trying to hold it.

Number 2 lesson: Know your enemy before you go to war. There are actually people that have other values than a US puppet government.

Iran has ALWAYS been armed against us and those who believe in freedom or support Isreal. Irans president has made it clear he wishes for the destruction of Isreal. Irans threat to us was and always has been over that. Now they are just pissed that a Free country is being established on its doorstep which would show that their theorcey of radical rule is on the slide and they would be worried about a rebellion. Of course if someone attacked Canada or Mexico the USA would be arming it self because those are our allies! We would be at war already. Why do you think Iran is doing it underhanded and hoping for an early US pullout? They have already said and I qoute " we WILL fill the vacuuem when the USA pulls out!" ok more of a paraphrase but you get the point. Iran is not the kind neighbor looking to help its brothers. It is looking after its own self interests and desire of regional dominatin and bringing its own radical style of rule into place in other nations. Do you really think Iran is a 'nice' country with anything but hate for all that even YOU stand for( i am assuming you live in a free country and are not Muslim and subscribe to the idea that all infidels are the devil and must die).

Of course Iran is looking after itself, that's what I just said!

While I object to the barbaric practices of Sharia Law, I don't believe America has the right or ability to end radical Islam.

You are ideological. You believe that "freedom" and "democracy" and "peace" and "terrorism" have anything to do with the war at all. If those were the intentions at hand, we'd be having an entirely different debate.

Our leaders have failed us, their leaders fail them. And they want to drive us against one another. The people of America must stand up against their leaders, and hopefully soon the people of Iran will do the same.

too bad thats not true. the extremists who are fighting in iraq are not the ones who are planning the next attack on US soil. they are an entirely different group with different goals.

all we are doing in iraq is to create even more terrorists and extremists who will further destabilize the region. and more people around the world who will be willing to sign onto the bigger goal of attacking the US homeland.

in the meantime your goal to keep extremists away from here is killing thousands of innocent iraqis every year, destroying their lives and sending millions into refugee status.

all to lull you into a false sense of security.

thats a pretty evil goal.

WHO is kiling thousands of INNOCENT Iraqis? The USA? Please show me proof of that. Is there collatoral loss in war? of course. but to call it 'thousands' is kind of borderline insulting. And yes, the ones who are fighting in Iraq, um aren't they called 'al-Quida in Iraq' for a reason? They have already been linked to terrorist activity in the Middle East and are now threating European countries and citizens. And al-Sadr is basically an Iranian puppet Sheik who is looking to become president and then ally with them to again, bring their fundelmentalist styly of Islam to the region.

No one ever said war was easy. And again, I am NOT pro-war. But I do believe in finshining what we started and that the purpose of giving the Iraqi people the OPTION of freedom was and still is a good one.

let me ask YOU this. if someone tried to take away your freedom wouldn't you fight to keep it? So my whole point is that as the Iraqis get to know what it is like they will fight to keep it and protect themselves as I mentioned in my previous post examples of Anbar province and now in the South with Shiite Sheiks looking to do similiar things.

Sucks it not part of our quick fix, fast food mentality that this war has lasted 'so long'. Imagine if this was WWII or even worse the Hundred Years War! Hell, we would see three different generations of peace protestors! Star a fight. Finish the fight. Thats my opinion and expectations of my government.

alls i know is that since 9/11 there have been NO attacks on American soil(knock on wood and hallelujah etc).

Iraq was in ruins before the war. Thousands were dying under the hand of Suddam. Lets not forget that people. The problem is that the country was in SUCH ruin from before and during the war it has taken longer then most thought to bring up the infrastructer and start working on helping the people. And answer me this. Do you think if we had not attacked Iraq and Afghanistan that Al-Quida would just be sitting back saying ahhh, they are so cool they didn't bother us! I guees they learned their lesson. NO. THAT would have emboldened them even more and led to more attacks and more deadly ones in my opinion. Did you hear what Osama said in his last video?!?! He wants US to convert to Islam and then he will stop attacking us! lol. The radical element will never go away, and I am sounding like a broken record here, untill the people they try and recruit have the opportunity to living in freedom and the right to be educated honestly.

LOL you so remind me of my cousin. She's 14, and a naive right-winger.

Saddam was an evil dictator. Newsflash, there's hundreds of them out there. And al-Queda was grateful for both wars, it gave them a staging ground for attacks and recruitment.

You think anyone involved in 9/11 did not expect a war to come out of it?

alls i know is that since 9/11 there have been NO attacks on American soil(knock on wood and hallelujah etc).

Iraq was in ruins before the war. Thousands were dying under the hand of Suddam. Lets not forget that people. The problem is that the country was in SUCH ruin from before and during the war it has taken longer then most thought to bring up the infrastructer and start working on helping the people. And answer me this. Do you think if we had not attacked Iraq and Afghanistan that Al-Quida would just be sitting back saying ahhh, they are so cool they didn't bother us! I guees they learned their lesson. NO. THAT would have emboldened them even more and led to more attacks and more deadly ones in my opinion. Did you hear what Osama said in his last video?!?! He wants US to convert to Islam and then he will stop attacking us! lol. The radical element will never go away, and I am sounding like a broken record here, untill the people they try and recruit have the opportunity to living in freedom and the right to be educated honestly.

Been listening to Sean and Rush haven't you?

Might try some factual news. Far more Iraqis have died per year under the US than under Saddam and Saddam only killed criminals, treasoners, their families and supporters. Everyone else had no fear. Children could play with no supervision. People could walk the streets any time day or night with no fear. The crime rate was close to zero. The people had food, clothing, shelter, electricity, automatic guns, and most of the things that civilized nations have.

In Afghanistan the US was attacking those that attacked us. In Iraq the US picked a war for absolutely no justifiable reason. Have you heard anyone in the world say that the US didn't have the right to attack Afghanistan? Have you heard anyone outside of the American far right say that the US had any justification for attacking Iraq?

If the US would have concentrated on Afghanistan the world would praise us. Bet you don't know that France was the first nation to offer help in Afghanistan.

Of course Iran is looking after itself, that's what I just said!

While I object to the barbaric practices of Sharia Law, I don't believe America has the right or ability to end radical Islam.

You are ideological. You believe that "freedom" and "democracy" and "peace" and "terrorism" have anything to do with the war at all. If those were the intentions at hand, we'd be having an entirely different debate.

Our leaders have failed us, their leaders fail them. And they want to drive us against one another. The people of America must stand up against their leaders, and hopefully soon the people of Iran will do the same.

yes, i am optimstic and ideological. I believe that given the chance to live in freedom over tyranny MOST will choose freedom. I do believe that we as a free nation has the right and the obligation to help others who can not help themselves. I do wish it was more even handed and again there was ways to do it without war. And I think we have done that. The US 'won' the Cold War and now thousands live in freedom in what used to be the Soviet bloc. We pressured China and now many there have a chance to live better lives then before(although it is not true freedom, more mix of communism and capatilism that I really don't understand to be honest). Lybia is now a non-nuclear nation as sanctions and thread of military action finally cooled them off. And all that without a single shot being fired really!

The middle east is complex issue with so many different factions and extremes of Islam fighting for what they believe is right. But again, I think the Iraqi people as those in Afghanistan have shown, will fight against the radical elements on their own once they see the 'light' so to say.

But w/e. I am sure we can go round and round. I am not trying to change anyones mind. I would just hope that you and maybe some others who feel the US government failed you would look at the alternative. Clintin tried military strikes and sanction and we got 9/11. Bush goes to war and so far, the USA has been free of a terror attack on its own land. Again, it sucks we have to live in a world filled with hate and distrust, but I gaurenfuckentee that I will fight and support those who fight for MY freedom and that of my son and my family.

um aren't they called 'al-Quida in Iraq' for a reason?

The US created "al-Qada in Iraq". They didn't exist under Saddam. There isn't a dictator in the world that would allow another power in his territory. If he did, they might get powerful enough to overthrow him. Why would a dictator take that chance? He wouldn't and didn't.

Anything al-Quada in Iraq does is because GW created them and gave them a power base and a territory in which to operate.

The US 'won' the Cold War and now thousands live in freedom in what used to be the Soviet bloc.

The US didn't "win" the Cold War. The other side decided to change without the US doing anything. There is not one respected researcher that can find one thing the US did that caused this change.

We need more men.

I think my idea would work because...well, there would be no extremists left to blow us up.

Good thing you're not in the State Department or the Pentagon, because Busheviks like you give Bin Ladin plenty of reason to drop a spooge in his pants with such brilliant ideas.

:rolleyes:

Been listening to Sean and Rush haven't you?

Might try some factual news. Far more Iraqis have died per year under the US than under Saddam and Saddam only killed criminals, treasoners, their families and supporters. Everyone else had no fear. Children could play with no supervision. People could walk the streets any time day or night with no fear. The crime rate was close to zero. The people had food, clothing, shelter, electricity, automatic guns, and most of the things that civilized nations have.

In Afghanistan the US was attacking those that attacked us. In Iraq the US picked a war for absolutely no justifiable reason. Have you heard anyone in the world say that the US didn't have the right to attack Afghanistan? Have you heard anyone outside of the American far right say that the US had any justification for attacking Iraq?

If the US would have concentrated on Afghanistan the world would praise us. Bet you don't know that France was the first nation to offer help in Afghanistan.

lol. I avoid talk radio. I guees your talking about sean hannity and rush limbough? I think Hannity is an idiot and rush is a fucking hypocrite. For the recored I am 36 years old, ex-Navy and voted for Clinton both times and Bush both times, hence I am independent. I vote for who I and I stess "I" feel will lead the country closest to what I believe in.

I agree that we should have concentrated more on Afghanistan. BUT whats done is done. This thread was not about 'should we', its about 'we started it and I think its our right AND responsibility to finish it'. Saddam killed HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS. Sure thousands have died during the war. Thats why its called war. But they are being killed by each other more then we have killed. And how do you know the crime rate was zero? Did you live there or are you going of the sure to be accurate claims of Saddams government and state run media and historical records they kept. I don't remember seeing to many documentories of Iraq before the war where the reporters were giving wide open access to the country...do you? And again, please give me a non-biased sourse for your claim. I am VERY open minded. If you can show me something, please do. I was on this site A long time ago before many of you and know its a liberal love fest on here, along with the idiot neo-nazi crazies so I understand this is failing arguement. BUt i be bored and thought i'd stir the hornets nest. i am actually suprised theres not more out here calling for my head yet :P

WHO is kiling thousands of INNOCENT Iraqis? The USA? Please show me proof of that. Is there collatoral loss in war? of course. but to call it 'thousands' is kind of borderline insulting. And yes, the ones who are fighting in Iraq, um aren't they called 'al-Quida in Iraq' for a reason? They have already been linked to terrorist activity in the Middle East and are now threating European countries and citizens. And al-Sadr is basically an Iranian puppet Sheik who is looking to become president and then ally with them to again, bring their fundelmentalist styly of Islam to the region.

i didnt say that we were killing them. they are dying by the hundreds every month in various bombings nonetheless. YOU are the one who wants them killed by "the terrorists" and that is exactly what is happening. THEY are dying so that YOU can live in the delusion that you dont have to worry about getting attacked here.

"al qaeda in iraq" didnt exist before the war. they only exist because we invaded. they are operating in iraq. the alqaeda that will make the next attack on US soil are not the same people.


No one ever said war was easy. And again, I am NOT pro-war. But I do believe in finshining what we started and that the purpose of giving the Iraqi people the OPTION of freedom was and still is a good one.

let me ask YOU this. if someone tried to take away your freedom wouldn't you fight to keep it? So my whole point is that as the Iraqis get to know what it is like they will fight to keep it and protect themselves as I mentioned in my previous post examples of Anbar province and now in the South with Shiite Sheiks looking to do similiar things.

Sucks it not part of our quick fix, fast food mentality that this war has lasted 'so long'. Imagine if this was WWII or even worse the Hundred Years War! Hell, we would see three different generations of peace protestors! Star a fight. Finish the fight. Thats my opinion and expectations of my government.


i think it needs to be up to the iraqi people. if they want us out, we should go. they know what we are doing. they are the ones who will have to live with the results. if they want us out-- the people, not the puppet government who only has power because we enforce it--then we need to leave.

The US didn't "win" the Cold War. The other side decided to change without the US doing anything. There is not one respected researcher that can find one thing the US did that caused this change.


lol. you can't be serious? I lived in that time frame. I watched the freaking Berlin wall come down on TV(back then there was only CNN). Don't tell me that America and her allies standing up and forming NATO and basically isolating the Soviets didn't have anything to do with it. The countries in the Soviet bloc would NEVER have left if they didn't think that NATO would back them. The Soviet economy failed because of the isolation and it was proof that democracy IS the best form of government. The USA have surrived depresions, Civil War, two wold wars and many conflicts, presidential assinations, etc and yest we are still the strongest, most free and among the most prosperous country in the wold.

its so funny how we forget or desire to change history to fit what some of you wish: that the USA is just evil and mean. Name ONE fucking country that has done more to help with both $ and military action those in need after either a natural disaster or to preserve or gain their freedom.

but this is off topic and i guees its a matter of butting my ead against a brick wall as i suspected :).

Enjoy your night and feel blessed that you have the right to express yourself. I know I do!

lol. you can't be serious? I lived in that time frame. I watched the freaking Berlin wall come down on TV(back then there was only CNN). Don't tell me that America and her allies standing up and forming NATO and basically isolating the Soviets didn't have anything to do with it. The countries in the Soviet bloc would NEVER have left if they didn't think that NATO would back them. The Soviet economy failed because of the isolation and it was proof that democracy IS the best form of government. The USA have surrived depresions, Civil War, two wold wars and many conflicts, presidential assinations, etc and yest we are still the strongest, most free and among the most prosperous country in the wold.

its so funny how we forget or desire to change history to fit what some of you wish: that the USA is just evil and mean. Name ONE fucking country that has done more to help with both $ and military action those in need after either a natural disaster or to preserve or gain their freedom.

but this is off topic and i guees its a matter of butting my ead against a brick wall as i suspected :).

Enjoy your night and feel blessed that you have the right to express yourself. I know I do!

What is it that makes you think the USA is the most free country in the world? Now take a second, don't compare us to North Korea, compare the USA to England, Australia, Canada, Spain, France, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, Japan...etc. What makes us so special? Nothing really, you just have subconscious nationalism flowing through your veins.

Freedom is never given. It is only taken. The only freedom comes is to be won by those who want it.

The USA went from a quiet isolated nation to an iron fist empire throughout it's history. The neoconservatives in power want world domination. Not by conventional means, but by globilization and widespread capitalism. The murder machine that is the WTO.

lol. you can't be serious? I lived in that time frame. I watched the freaking Berlin wall come down on TV(back then there was only CNN). Don't tell me that America and her allies standing up and forming NATO and basically isolating the Soviets didn't have anything to do with it. The countries in the Soviet bloc would NEVER have left if they didn't think that NATO would back them. The Soviet economy failed because of the isolation and it was proof that democracy IS the best form of government. The USA have surrived depresions, Civil War, two wold wars and many conflicts, presidential assinations, etc and yest we are still the strongest, most free and among the most prosperous country in the wold.

its so funny how we forget or desire to change history to fit what some of you wish: that the USA is just evil and mean. Name ONE fucking country that has done more to help with both $ and military action those in need after either a natural disaster or to preserve or gain their freedom.

but this is off topic and i guees its a matter of butting my ead against a brick wall as i suspected :).

Enjoy your night and feel blessed that you have the right to express yourself. I know I do!


you think that NATO would have intervened if the soviets had decided to fight to keep their vassals in line???

i didnt say that we were killing them. they are dying by the hundreds every month in various bombings nonetheless. YOU are the one who wants them killed by "the terrorists" and that is exactly what is happening. THEY are dying so that YOU can live in the delusion that you dont have to worry about getting attacked here.

"al qaeda in iraq" didnt exist before the war. they only exist because we invaded. they are operating in iraq. the alqaeda that will make the next attack on US soil are not the same people.




i think it needs to be up to the iraqi people. if they want us out, we should go. they know what we are doing. they are the ones who will have to live with the results. if they want us out-- the people, not the puppet government who only has power because we enforce it--then we need to leave.


again, HOW do you know al-quida in iraq didn't exist in some form before the war? Was you there? Was there any true openeness in the country during Saddams rule? Of course we never woul have heard about al-Quida in Iraq before because that would have been a thread to Saddams iron fist rule. The man killed his own family to protect his reign. So of course he would never acknowledge publicy an extremist SUNNI cell. Iraq was a Sunni dominated country at the time Saddam ruled. you don't think there were radical element, even in secrecy before the war?

I will say you are right in that it gained momentum but those who are fighting us there would probably have also made the road trip to Afghanistan as well. Lets not forget a good portion of al-Quida in Iraq is foreign fighters from S.A., Syria, etc. just as many of the Shiite extremists are Iranian trained. The elements were there before and yes we gave them a place to fight the USA as they desire. And I was not meangin I would rather see Iraqi innocents die instead of American. I was saying I would rather us have a field to fight in where we can pursue them. The 'cells' in the USA and Europe are not going to come out and fight us. But they sure as hell will when we are on their doorstep in Iraq and Afghanistan.

but thats it for now. i must get some rest and get ready for the week ahead. Good nite for real now!

lol. I avoid talk radio. I guees your talking about sean hannity and rush limbough? I think Hannity is an idiot and rush is a fucking hypocrite. For the recored I am 36 years old, ex-Navy and voted for Clinton both times and Bush both times, hence I am independent. I vote for who I and I stess "I" feel will lead the country closest to what I believe in.

I agree that we should have concentrated more on Afghanistan. BUT whats done is done. This thread was not about 'should we', its about 'we started it and I think its our right AND responsibility to finish it'. Saddam killed HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS. Sure thousands have died during the war. Thats why its called war. But they are being killed by each other more then we have killed. And how do you know the crime rate was zero? Did you live there or are you going of the sure to be accurate claims of Saddams government and state run media and historical records they kept. I don't remember seeing to many documentories of Iraq before the war where the reporters were giving wide open access to the country...do you? And again, please give me a non-biased sourse for your claim. I am VERY open minded. If you can show me something, please do. I was on this site A long time ago before many of you and know its a liberal love fest on here, along with the idiot neo-nazi crazies so I understand this is failing arguement. BUt i be bored and thought i'd stir the hornets nest. i am actually suprised theres not more out here calling for my head yet :PThere are many reports since the "end" of the war as to conditions under Saddam. Remember the only thing they could convict Saddam of was killing treasoners and their supporters. Granted he didn't do it under pre GW US law, (don't exactly know what US limits are today), but he did it under Iraqi law. The US is responsible for every death that wouldn't have occurred under Saddam. That means every car bomb is on us. I'm sure that's the way the citizens of Iraq look at it.

The fact is in the combined intelligence of the US government and their well paid advisors, there is no good way out. The choice is how much money and blood do you want to spend?

The best way out: Pick another strongman, arm him to the teeth, close our eyes, let him clean up the mess.

Odds of getting that done: "0"

Next best plan: declare victory, pull out to surrounding bases, get ready to pull people off the top of the embassy.

Third best: Pull out but be ready to go back in if Iran moves.

Forth best: Stay as long as Nam because America doesn't lose wars.

Fifth best: Stay as long as The Philippines to create a "stable" government. It almost worked there.

again, HOW do you know al-quida in iraq didn't exist in some form before the war? Was you there? Was there any true openeness in the country during Saddams rule? Of course we never woul have heard about al-Quida in Iraq before because that would have been a thread to Saddams iron fist rule. The man killed his own family to protect his reign. So of course he would never acknowledge publicy an extremist SUNNI cell. Iraq was a Sunni dominated country at the time Saddam ruled. you don't think there were radical element, even in secrecy before the war?

I will say you are right in that it gained momentum but those who are fighting us there would probably have also made the road trip to Afghanistan as well. Lets not forget a good portion of al-Quida in Iraq is foreign fighters from S.A., Syria, etc. just as many of the Shiite extremists are Iranian trained. The elements were there before and yes we gave them a place to fight the USA as they desire. And I was not meangin I would rather see Iraqi innocents die instead of American. I was saying I would rather us have a field to fight in where we can pursue them. The 'cells' in the USA and Europe are not going to come out and fight us. But they sure as hell will when we are on their doorstep in Iraq and Afghanistan.

but thats it for now. i must get some rest and get ready for the week ahead. Good nite for real now!


alqaeda wasnt in iraq because saddam hussein and osama bin laden didnt like each other. hussein was too secular for bin ladens fundamentalism and bin laden is too domineering for hussein to put up with.

and all im saying is that it is evil to wish death and destruction on the innocent so that you can pretend that it gives you some measure of safety. there are plenty of islamic extremists to go around. they arent all going to iraq. and, as you might have noticed, we even have some (mostly moronicly stupid) homegrown terror groups more than willing to make plans to attack inside this country.

What is it that makes you think the USA is the most free country in the world? Now take a second, don't compare us to North Korea, compare the USA to England, Australia, Canada, Spain, France, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, Japan...etc. What makes us so special? Nothing really, you just have subconscious nationalism flowing through your veins.

Freedom is never given. It is only taken. The only freedom comes is to be won by those who want it.

The USA went from a quiet isolated nation to an iron fist empire throughout it's history. The neoconservatives in power want world domination. Not by conventional means, but by globilization and widespread capitalism. The murder machine that is the WTO.


i consider us more free from conversations with others who point out higher taxes, police checks when you move from one address to another, gun control, etc. I could go on, but again we are going off topic. And damn right I love the USA. I didn't serve my country just to get a GI bill, lol.

me personally I wish we could be isolated. But the world will NOT let us. If we don't fight to preserve our freedoms and rights, who will? again, anytime we have set back and waited to be attacked by a sworn enemy of ours, we have. I for one would rather strike the first blow once in awhile. Might not be politically correct in todays world but fuck it. I don't believe in doing things so other will love us. I belive in doing things that will protect your people and their rights.

Now for real. good nite!!!! :) :)

lol. you can't be serious? I lived in that time frame. I watched the freaking Berlin wall come down on TV(back then there was only CNN). Don't tell me that America and her allies standing up and forming NATO and basically isolating the Soviets didn't have anything to do with it. The countries in the Soviet bloc would NEVER have left if they didn't think that NATO would back them. The Soviet economy failed because of the isolation and it was proof that democracy IS the best form of government. The USA have surrived depresions, Civil War, two wold wars and many conflicts, presidential assinations, etc and yest we are still the strongest, most free and among the most prosperous country in the wold.

its so funny how we forget or desire to change history to fit what some of you wish: that the USA is just evil and mean. Name ONE fucking country that has done more to help with both $ and military action those in need after either a natural disaster or to preserve or gain their freedom.

but this is off topic and i guees its a matter of butting my ead against a brick wall as i suspected :).

Enjoy your night and feel blessed that you have the right to express yourself. I know I do!

NATO was formed in 1949. Russia invaded Hungary in 1956 to put down a move to change to a democratic government and NATO did nothing. Eastern Block invaded Czechoslovakia in 1968 to put down a move to change to a democratic government, and NATO did nothing. The Berlin Wall was constructed in 1961 to stop the flow of emigration from the east, NATO did nothing. The Wall fell in 1989. There was no action by the West that brought this about. The Soviet Union made the decision based on their own desire to change.

It would help if you would study history.

Good thing you're not in the State Department or the Pentagon, because Busheviks like you give Bin Ladin plenty of reason to drop a spooge in his pants with such brilliant ideas.

:rolleyes:

If I was a Bushevik, I'd let you know, m'kay?

As to the other guy, no, I haven't read Fog of War.

If you really want peace in the MidEast you aren't going to do it through war. You are going to do it through economic development. Hungry people care about freedom from hunger. People with an economic stake care about things like freedom of speech.

An idea from Shimon Peres in his book "The New Middle East".

Take half the money spent on military (this was before the current wars) in the Middle East and build up Gaza. Build schools, roads, water and sewer systems, electricity, telephone, a port, etc. Then give micro loans to entrepreneurs to start businesses. In a few years they will have a stake in peace. In a few decades Gaza will look like Hong Kong.

Then do the same thing on the West Bank. Add in a canal from the Red Sea to the Dead Sea with electrical generation stations along the drop in altitude. This electricity could be used for desalinization to bring water to the region. Then build a high speed rail line from Monaco to India and from Europe to as close to Mecca as allowed. This would bring tourist trade and more business. The line could also be sent south from Cairo into Africa.

The book goes into a great deal of ideas. The point is Peace brings Peace, war brings war. War has been tried for 60 years and hasn't brought one step toward peace.

Most people weould LOVE to do that - trouble is - everytime a 'non-muslim' person tries to do anything there they get shot and their project blowed up. The citizens there either support the murders or are scared of them. IT is like the worst perversion of a gang-turf. So - if we want to do good there we have to eliminate the gangs. Sadly - nations like the former Saddam Iraq, Iran and Syria SUPPORT them! They claim it is for the benefit of the people there - but I don't see any of them building these educational monuments to free thought in their own countries - let alone any others...

. The Wall fell in 1989. There was no action by the West that brought this about. The Soviet Union made the decision based on their own desire to change.

It would help if you would study history.

OMFG! ROFLMAO! :p

If I was a Bushevik, I'd let you know, m'kay?

As to the other guy, no, I haven't read Fog of War.

i dont remember if you said how old you are but if you are over 25 you really should get the dvd. put it on your netflix list, see if its at your local store, whatever. its worth every minute.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fog_of_War

What is it that makes you think the USA is the most free country in the world? Now take a second, don't compare us to North Korea, compare the USA to England, Australia, Canada, Spain, France, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, Japan...etc. What makes us so special? Nothing really, you just have subconscious nationalism flowing through your veins.

Freedom is never given. It is only taken. The only freedom comes is to be won by those who want it.

The USA went from a quiet isolated nation to an iron fist empire throughout it's history. The neoconservatives in power want world domination. Not by conventional means, but by globilization and widespread capitalism. The murder machine that is the WTO.

Actually, the USA does have more freedoms than any of the countries on your list, sorry, try again.

Um..wrong again, freedom is infact given to people, hello......the US? The revolution?!?

Are you insane? How can we be an empire? Granted we may have started a few wars for absolutly no political reason whatsoever, but empire? All of the conqured teritories that we have gained over the course of 150 years have either become independent, or is Puerto Rico, which is in the debate right now. Your comparing us to like the British Empire? (no offense to any britts here ;)) All they did was conquire for expansonalist purposes, not for democracy, which are two compleatly different things.


Our leaders have failed us, their leaders fail them. And they want to drive us against one another. The people of America must stand up against their leaders, and hopefully soon the people of Iran will do the same.

So your saying that we should overthrow our government? Either your an anarchist, or just plain dumb.

Been listening to Sean and Rush haven't you?

Might try some factual news. Far more Iraqis have died per year under the US than under Saddam and Saddam only killed criminals, treasoners, their families and supporters. Everyone else had no fear. Children could play with no supervision. People could walk the streets any time day or night with no fear. The crime rate was close to zero. The people had food, clothing, shelter, electricity, automatic guns, and most of the things that civilized nations have.

In Afghanistan the US was attacking those that attacked us. In Iraq the US picked a war for absolutely no justifiable reason. Have you heard anyone in the world say that the US didn't have the right to attack Afghanistan? Have you heard anyone outside of the American far right say that the US had any justification for attacking Iraq?

If the US would have concentrated on Afghanistan the world would praise us. Bet you don't know that France was the first nation to offer help in Afghanistan.

Sadam murdered, gassed, tourtured, and gunned down many more people than due to us. He killed more than the people that you listed, he killed anyone that he didn't like .The reason the crime rate was zero was that its a dictatorship, no one commited crime because they were afraid of him. And I have to agree with you on the nessesities.

Very true on the justification part

I didn't know about France, that Im interested in.

NATO was formed in 1949. Russia invaded Hungary in 1956 to put down a move to change to a democratic government and NATO did nothing. Eastern Block invaded Czechoslovakia in 1968 to put down a move to change to a democratic government, and NATO did nothing. The Berlin Wall was constructed in 1961 to stop the flow of emigration from the east, NATO did nothing. The Wall fell in 1989. There was no action by the West that brought this about. The Soviet Union made the decision based on their own desire to change.

It would help if you would study history.

And also their economy was in ruins, and they realized:

"Hey instead of controling the markets, let the people do it! Heck, we've screwed up badly enough!" :p

Sadam murdered, gassed, tourtured, and gunned down many more people than due to us. He killed more than the people that you listed, he killed anyone that he didn't like .The reason the crime rate was zero was that its a dictatorship, no one commited crime because they were afraid of him.


Look up the numbers. On a Per Year basis more people have been killed under the US watch. The US is responsible for anyone killed who wouldn't have been killed under Saddam. Every BOOM belongs to the US, at least as far as those living there are concerned.

Saddam did not kill at random. If he didn't like someone there was a reason. The person was a threat to his power or a criminal or the family or supporters of a threat to his power or the criminal. If people obeyed the law and didn't support taking his power they were safe. The only thing they could convict him of was killing people that attempted to kill him and their supporters. He didn't get convicted of killing at random. He killed treasoners and their supporters, the same as the US would do after a long trial. He was hung for being efficient in dealing with treason.

Criminals were of course afraid of him. It would be nice if criminals in the US were afraid of the government.

The people of Iraq had the FREEDOM to walk the streets of any big city at any time, day or night. The children could play in the streets without fear. They had universal health care. They had universal education through college (one of the best educated peoples in the region, now the children have no schools or are afraid to go to them) They had the right to automatic weapons (If they didn't like Saddam they had the fire power.) Do YOU have those same freedoms?

If there is a problem with Islam in general, if Mohammed's followers are a threat. then rather than surrender your freedoms call for an end..temporarily or indefinidte to muslim immigration. halt any building of new mosques and deport muslims who break laws..

dont punish everyone because Muslims wage jihad on non-Muslims...go for the problem not the rest of us...Islam is the problem not iran..and certainly not some idiot with an rpg in bahgdad..

You're a bit dense, aren't ya'?

That would just make more extremists, and make the ones already out there even angrier.

I find it hard to conceive a way how Iraq could be won. I think the central element would be the Iraqi government, which for all intents and purposes doesn't exist anymore.

The military could, if it employed more troops and went for a 'clear, hold, build' strategy, pacify parts of the country. But that would ultimately only work as long as those areas are then protected against outside threats - that would be the job of the Iraqi government and security forces, which show no capability or intent of doing so.

I think Afghanistan is easier because it's not as much a civil war right now. You've got a bunch of peasants and tribal chiefs with no real desire to do any fighting, who just want a good deal from the government. And then you've got the Taliban who want to bring down the government and put themselves back in a position where they can make deals with the local tribesmen and peasants, just with more Sharia and less human rights.

Creating a stable status quo of relationships between local tribes and the government in Kabul shouldn't be too hard. The problem are the Taliban, but the solution to that problem is not in Afghanistan, it's in Pakistan.

Criminals were of course afraid of him. It would be nice if criminals in the US were afraid of the government.

The people of Iraq had the FREEDOM to walk the streets of any big city at any time, day or night. The children could play in the streets without fear. They had universal health care. They had universal education through college (one of the best educated peoples in the region, now the children have no schools or are afraid to go to them) They had the right to automatic weapons (If they didn't like Saddam they had the fire power.) Do YOU have those same freedoms?


Isn't everyone already afraid of what the government will screw up next?

Lets see, the last time I checked, no. And I thought the more western parts of the Middle East had a higher EQ, or was it GDP:confused:?

what war and what is being ment here by winning?

i keep hearing all this "stay the course and win" happy horse shit, but win what?

oil concessions? that seems to be the only thing the corporate mafia is likely to be willing to stop the genocide for.

sure the factions will cheerfully go on killing each other whether we stay or leave, more so because of being kept stirred up against each other, but the one thing they all aggree on, is that whoever is the last one standing, they still aren't going to GIVE away their oil. which is only logical as it is just about the only thing they have to buy groceries with, and all the flock they ever wanted was to get a fair price for it and for the western/northern world to stop killing them which it was already doing, albeit on a perhaps smaller scale, more sneakyly, less conspicuously.

when are people going to wake up to the reality that the only thing you can do with a gun, is kill or injure something?

sure we can do a lot more of that, probably for a very long time as long as there isn't anyone our own size to hit back, but what, oh what oh what, in the hell, is that supposed to WIN?

=^^=
.../\...

in a war all parties are losers, there can be no winner. the winner is he who avoids a war. ME

And crush the civilian population in the process? Great idea. Hundreds of thousands of civilians are dead already.

The total number of dead in Iraq, including everyone who has been killed by the insurgents, is probably around a ballpark figure of 70-80 thousand. These days, the vast majority of deaths are Iraqi-on-Iraqi. If the US were to leave at this point, deaths would probably skyrocket.


And why did you not respond to my point on Iran? Why shouldn't Iran want to arm themselves with the USA on both sides of its border. Again, if a nation invaded Mexico and Canada, would you not be afraid? Would you not arm yourself against it?

The Iranians are walking down an extremely dangerous path- they are antagonizing a superpower, as well as other nuclear powers (such as Israel). Something eventually will need to be done about them. Whether they feel justified in trying to obtain nukes is wholly irrelevant at this point.

hear! hear!

:D

Whether they feel justified in trying to obtain nukes is wholly irrelevant at this point.

When you negotiate with someone (or go to war) the number one thing you need to know is how they feel. What are their values? What are their fears? Knowing this is more important than knowing what arms they have. Their motivation will tell you how they will negotiate or fight. It will tell you what they are willing to lose and what they will never give up.

This is (was) the problem the US face(d) in the last four wars. They don't (didn't) have a clue what the thoughts of the enemy are (were).

What the fuck is "winning" anyway? In Iraq, it took about 3 weeks to destory their entire army, implement the occupation force's authority, and send Saddam hiding like an ugly rat in a hole. We "won", we took over their country, we imposed a government on them, and we flooded their streets with soldiers.

And like any logical person would do, they resisted. If "winning" means stopping every last insurgent, you must be out of your mind if you think we can win.

And as for Iran, why can't you see it from their view? If you were an American, and a military force took over and occupied Canada and Mexico, wouldn't you be arming yourself? Why shouldn't Iran arm themselves with one of the largest and most well trained armies on both sides of their border?

I guess Iran isn't into DP..who woulda guessed...

There are so many things wrong in this thread that I can't be bothered to address them all.

Actually, the USA does have more freedoms than any of the countries on your list, sorry, try again.

If there is a constitutional amendment proposed do you get to vote on it?

If you are voting for your president, is it your vote or the electoral college that counts?

There you go, not nearly as free and democratic as you thought you were, huh?

Seathornia you're being impractical...and your argument makes no sense...if every single person got to vote for an amendment...or if it went every individual vote then the entire political process would fail...due to the fact it would take too long to tally everything...the US by far has more freedoms than most countries around the world....

Please at least come up with a better argument that can actually hold water...I'm getting very disappointed on NSG lately...

There are so many things wrong in this thread that I can't be bothered to address them all.



If there is a constitutional amendment proposed do you get to vote on it?

If you are voting for your president, is it your vote or the electoral college that counts?

There you go, not nearly as free and democratic as you thought you were, huh?

direct democracy =/= freedom

direct democracy =/= freedom

Very true. But the electoral college is even less freedom.

Yeah, but 10 yrs from now, iraq will be lost and President Bush will have a best selling book out: If i did it: The story of what if I really did allow the deaths of 3,000 American Soldiers, 100,000 Iraqis, and America's reputation

The Iranians are walking down an extremely dangerous path- they are antagonizing a superpower, as well as other nuclear powers (such as Israel). Something eventually will need to be done about them. Whether they feel justified in trying to obtain nukes is wholly irrelevant at this point.


Anyone developing or in possesion of nuclear weapons has evil intentions, as there is nothing good that comes out of them. We need to set an example for the world and disarm first, and we should negotiate with Iran by first assuring that we aren't going to invade their nation too.

There is no direct democracy on the planet, to my knowledge.

The war cannot be won. The war should not have been started. As has been said before, we already 'won'. We pwned the iraqi military's ass. Occupations, and I salute whoever said this first, cannot be won. Ever. Period.

Oh, by the way, I would appreciate it if people would stop throwing out terms such as 'bushevik', 'neo-fascist', and 'corporate mafia'. Most people would be unwise to post on the forums here if they were indeed a bushevik/neo-fascist, and I am unaware of this 'corporate mafia' which has never existed. I may not be Republican, or hell, even conservative, but I would like it if people would actually attempt to find out a person's political affiliation using means other than 'oh they disagree and attempt to defend the US current administration, that means they are a bushevik' before actually calling them a Bushevik.

There is no direct democracy on the planet, to my knowledge.

The war cannot be won. The war should not have been started. As has been said before, we already 'won'. We pwned the iraqi military's ass. Occupations, and I salute whoever said this first, cannot be won. Ever. Period.

Oh, by the way, I would appreciate it if people would stop throwing out terms such as 'bushevik', 'neo-fascist', and 'corporate mafia'. Most people would be unwise to post on the forums here if they were indeed a bushevik/neo-fascist, and I am unaware of this 'corporate mafia' which has never existed. I may not be Republican, or hell, even conservative, but I would like it if people would actually attempt to find out a person's political affiliation using means other than 'oh they disagree and attempt to defend the US current administration, that means they are a bushevik' before actually calling them a Bushevik.

That's a dumb word. And the Bush regime isn't really neo-fascist, but they are neocons, which is bad.

Anyone developing or in possesion of nuclear weapons has evil intentions, as there is nothing good that comes out of them. We need to set an example for the world and disarm first, and we should negotiate with Iran by first assuring that we aren't going to invade their nation too.

QFT


But then They will have nuclear weapons and we won't.
They will take advantage of us and burn us to the ground.

"What if" the United States was still a respected country? "What if" Bush had never invaded Iraq in the first place? "What if" Bush had not been "elected" in 2000 in the first place?

As long as we are using "what ifs".

There is no direct democracy on the planet, to my knowledge.

bushevik/neo-fascist, and I am unaware of this 'corporate mafia'

Can I use Bushnam?

And no there hasn't been a direct democracy since the glory days of Athens. The US founders were aware of democracy and rejected it. For the most part, only landholders could vote because they tended to be better educated and had an economic stake in the country. There is nothing in the foundational documents that say anything about democracy. The country was called a Republic until FDR thought it would help his party to call it a Democracy. He was in office long enough to spread the word world-wide.

That's a dumb word. And the Bush regime isn't really neo-fascist, but they are neocons, which is bad.

A skunk by any other name.........

(Apologies to Shakespeare)

The country was called a Republic until FDR thought it would help his party to call it a Democracy. He was in office long enough to spread the word world-wide.

And he added "in God we Trust" to the US crest.

QFT


But then They will have nuclear weapons and we won't.
They will take advantage of us and burn us to the ground.

I think Hitler thought of that as well ........

The US didn't "win" the Cold War. The other side decided to change without the US doing anything. There is not one respected researcher that can find one thing the US did that caused this change.

According to the history books in the US schools : The United States never lost a war. They didn't win them all, but they never lost one. Now you can understand the adamant righteousness of their thinking.

Are you referring to 9/11? 19 out of 20 hijackers were Saudis. Which nation is one of Bush's allies.

Osama is a Saudi, yet they never invaded them, too much risk for losing the oil I guess !

There are so many things wrong in this thread that I can't be bothered to address them all.



If there is a constitutional amendment proposed do you get to vote on it?

If you are voting for your president, is it your vote or the electoral college that counts?

There you go, not nearly as free and democratic as you thought you were, huh?

Yes, but same goes in Europe and Asia, some things that we take for granted that others cant get include....

Some people don't have freedom of religion

or free press, others do, but its very limited (inclueds free speech)

votes in some European countries don't count based on race

Immigrations laws are way more stricter in other countries than here

Alot more business are owned by the government than privately owned in countries other than the US

so Touche! :D

Osama is a Saudi, yet they never invaded them, too much risk for losing the oil I guess !

No, it's more because a US invasion of Saudi Arabia would be immediately seen as an attack on Mecca and Islam itself. Iraq's pretty unimportant compared to Saudi Arabia in terms of its importance to the faith (although, truth be told, Baghdad was a major Islamic center back in the day and the paragon of that civilization), so attacking there was a much safer bet.

Mind you, the US does have plans for attacking Saudi Arabia (and has since 1973, IIRC), but I doubt they'd ever use them. Better to use the Saudis for their oil and reap the benefits for comparatively low geopolitical cost.

wow that is so completely wrong i dont know where to start.

you dont "win" an occupation.

I dunno about that.

I quite enjoyed my Hawaiian vacation of a few years ago. The occupation seems to have outlasted the insurgency there, as an example. :p Same probably goes for some other territories/former territories, say, Guam, the Philippines, etc.

Anyone developing or in possesion of nuclear weapons has evil intentions, as there is nothing good that comes out of them. We need to set an example for the world and disarm first, and we should negotiate with Iran by first assuring that we aren't going to invade their nation too.

Bah, those who beat their swords into plowshares are doomed to farm for those who don't.

Afghanistan can be won.
Iraq has already been lost.