Now that there's a Democratic majority in both Houses of Congress perhaps its time to vote an end to the war.

Sorry Mr. President, not one more dime for Iraq and you've got 30 days to get every single American military home (no advisors).

What do you think?

I think it would be a bad idea. It's basically telling the world not only should you be worried about the next mess we'll make, but on top of it you should worried about who cleans it up.

We owe it to the world to see this through. Of course, that doesn't mean we necessarily need to be doing more of the same. An entirely different strategy could be appropriate at this time. But I doubt any successful strategy would call for an immediate withdrawl of troops.

I think it would be a bad idea. It's basically telling the world not only should you be worried about the next mess we'll make, but on top of it you should worried about who cleans it up.

We owe it to the world to see this through. Of course, that doesn't mean we necessarily need to be doing more of the same. An entirely different strategy could be appropriate at this time. But I doubt any successful strategy would call for an immediate withdrawl of troops.


The old idiom, of the river and the horse would seem to apply here.

The old idiom, of the river and the horse would seem to apply here.
never heard of it?:confused:

Something along the lines of "you don't change horses in midstream".

I'm not sure that's the case, since the American people voted to 'change horses'. I just think that we owe the people of Iraq to leave their country as safe and stable as it was before we got there - if not more. If pulling out would accomplish that then I'd be all for it, but it doesn't seem like it will.

I agree, but right now it looks like there's no way to at least make it as safe as it was before. If lives are being lost just to bring the country back to what it was before, at what point do you just cut your losses* and say that you can't sacrifice any more lives to bring something back to the start?

*I know "cut your losses" is a bad term when dealing with human lives...

Kraj wrote
<<
I just think that we owe the people of Iraq to leave their country as safe and stable as it was before we got there - if not more.
>>

That makes sense and seems morally right, but...
we don't seem to be making anything safer or more stable.

The destabilizers always have an edge on the stabilizers, IMO. So I think the fact that everything in Iraq was not an instant success is just the way it goes. But the trend over the last year has clearly been toward disorder and away from order.

The status quo is not acceptable. Either go in with a substantial commitment or withdraw in an orderly manner.

RichM

Iraq was destined to dissolve from the very beginning and only a massive international police action is going to save it.

Since that is not likely, what to do next.

The biggest problem, forgetting for a moment the cost in shattered lives, is regional destabilization. There is much evidence to a wide spread revolution in the Middle East.

The time is ripe for factions within the Muslim nations to reassert previous alignments. There is actually as much, or more, hatred towards other Muslim sects as there is traditionally towards the West. As soon as our presence is no longer felt; the old hatreds will reassert themselves.

Iran is going through tremendous internal strife now as educated citizens are pushing for a more western style nation and Muslim clerics are touting killing Westerners and Jews.

Saudi Arabia is in the midst of a quiet boiling; as members of more devout factions ply for more conservative Muslims traditions. Meanwhile the royal family has pilfered billions from the economy in order to secure their place in the West after the pending revolutions begins.

Syria is still led by an ambitious military dictator looking for signs of weakness in the region to assert Syrian power.

Of the region mostly only the Arabic Emirate and Kuwait have tried to bolster Trade with west in areas other than oil production, leaving their economies vulnerable.

The pressure cooker is in full churn now, as the powers in the Middle East are determined to see the failure of Iraq to create the world newest democracy.

the failure of Iraq to create the world newest democracy.
Pity no one thought to ask Iraqis if that was what they wanted in the first place:rolleyes:

Pity no one thought to ask Iraqis if that was what they wanted in the first place:rolleyes:


You mean when you guys artificially created the Iraqi state?


Didn't you just post somewhere that Americans use the same old arguments.

The funny thing about being a one trick pony is that when people have seen your act, brother, they really have seen it.

I have a challenge for you Richie Try tomorrow (today by the time you read this) to only say encouraging and insightful statements. And while you’re at it answer some of the questions your own countrymen pose to you.

I bet you can’t do it, I’ll bet your old habits are just too far ingrained.

I've got a great idea, call up the axis of evil and ask them to sort it out

I think it would be a bad idea. It's basically telling the world not only should you be worried about the next mess we'll make, but on top of it you should worried about who cleans it up.

We owe it to the world to see this through. Of course, that doesn't mean we necessarily need to be doing more of the same. An entirely different strategy could be appropriate at this time. But I doubt any successful strategy would call for an immediate withdrawl of troops.


I seem to recall very similar comments during Vietnam...only then it was the domino theory.

Iraq was destined to dissolve from the very beginning and only a massive international police action is going to save it.

Since that is not likely, what to do next.

The biggest problem, forgetting for a moment the cost in shattered lives, is regional destabilization. There is much evidence to a wide spread revolution in the Middle East.

The time is ripe for factions within the Muslim nations to reassert previous alignments. There is actually as much, or more, hatred towards other Muslim sects as there is traditionally towards the West. As soon as our presence is no longer felt; the old hatreds will reassert themselves.

Iran is going through tremendous internal strife now as educated citizens are pushing for a more western style nation and Muslim clerics are touting killing Westerners and Jews.

Saudi Arabia is in the midst of a quiet boiling; as members of more devout factions ply for more conservative Muslims traditions. Meanwhile the royal family has pilfered billions from the economy in order to secure their place in the West after the pending revolutions begins.

Syria is still led by an ambitious military dictator looking for signs of weakness in the region to assert Syrian power.

Of the region mostly only the Arabic Emirate and Kuwait have tried to bolster Trade with west in areas other than oil production, leaving their economies vulnerable.

The pressure cooker is in full churn now, as the powers in the Middle East are determined to see the failure of Iraq to create the world newest democracy.

Iran, Syria and Saudi Arabia all have a vested interest in the Americans failing in Iraq. They do not want a second democratic country in the Middle East.

And that dear friends is the REAL reason why they oppose Israel. If all these oil rich countries put aside 1 days revenue a year and gave it to the Palestinians, they would be living like kings in Gaza and the West Bank. Instead, they give money to terrorists in the hope they may overthrow the democratically elected government. Their citizens have no idea what a vote is and they don't want them finding out.

Use of the term 'Democratically elected" open to interpretation.

My rant for the day.

I seem to recall very similar comments during Vietnam...only then it was the domino theory.
Well I wasn't there so I can't recall one way or another what comments were being made, but I don't think the situation in Iraq is any way comparable to the Vietnam war.

just think that we owe the people of Iraq to leave their country as safe and stable as it was before we got there - if not more.
Todays MAX (just for Rich's sake) is 54K deaths for the Iraq police action
what about this ONE incident:
The exact number of people killed is as yet unknown, but al-Majid was said to have protested at the accusation by the Kurds that 182,000 persons were unaccounted for and feared dead. He responded that the Kurds were great exaggerators and that he actually killed no more than 100,000.

I like that, he didn't really kill more than 100K, yea, that makes it better.

So they are already better off if you pick and choose numbers..... :rolleyes:

Todays MAX (just for Rich's sake) is 54K deaths for the Iraq police action
what about this ONE incident:


I like that, he didn't really kill more than 100K, yea, that makes it better.

So they are already better off if you pick and choose numbers..... :rolleyes:
Unlike the 600,000 estimated deaths since America took over the country, what's your point again?

I like the "Ripley" solution.

Well I wasn't there so I can't recall one way or another what comments were being made, but I don't think the situation in Iraq is any way comparable to the Vietnam war.

One of the problems with getting older is you remember the previous occasions that things were tried and didn't work.

Iraq and Vietnam are remarkably similar:
The US goes in with no clear goal as to what they're trying to accomplish. The battle cry is we are the mighty United States and we can do whatever we want.
A small minority holds the mighty US military machine at bay for an extended period of time.
The majority don't really care, they just want to be left alone go get on with their lives.
Most especially, at what point can we declare victory and go home.

Starting to sound familiar now?

Starting to sound familiar now?
*Eats crow for not being specific*

Sure there are definite comparissons, but my comments were mostly in regard to who is responsible for the situation in Iraq and therefore who is responsible for fixing it. The United States did not create the situation in Vietnam, we just got involved. Leaving would have returned Vietnam to the status quo. We did cause the situation in Iraq and leaving would not restore the status quo, it would pretty much guarantee civil war.

Vietnam WAS a civil war between the north and south.
If the US were to pull out tomorrow, what would happen?

The Iraqi militants would form the government and things would go back pretty much the way they were under Sadim, except there still wouldn't be any weapons of mass destruction.

I don't see how the US can stop this except by putting in their entire Army and placing the country under occupation for the next 10 years.

The Iraqi militants would form the government and things would go back pretty much the way they were under Sadim, except there still wouldn't be any weapons of mass destruction.


I hate to tell you this, but Iraq was a secular state before Bush/Blair took the plunge. There is no way that Iraq would faintly resemble the pre-allied version if they were to just withdraw.

I hate to tell you this, but Iraq was a secular state before Bush/Blair took the plunge. There is no way that Iraq would faintly resemble the pre-allied version if they were to just withdraw.

Mea culpa
My message should have read more along the lines of Iraq returning to some form of one party rule with a strongman at the top. Of course Iraq is secular.

But after how much civil war? There's more than one strong, armed faction in Iraq.

On the other hand, how many times does one political power get in promising one thing, then actually doing it?

Also, what if any reason every given is not the real reason we are in Iraq?
Take a look at the following map.
http://www.uark.edu/depts/globmark/middeastmap.jpg
Now just for thought, what if you wanted a significant military presence in the middle east (hypothetically)? You would want not that much gov. intervention (hence a country take over). You would want access to all or most of the countries by air without the refueling hassles. So would you not want something say right in the middle or as close as you could get?
Just thinking.

Guys,

I don't think it helps when the rest of the big powers in the world are divided as to what should be done in Iraq.

The Russians have their own problems, most of Europe does not give a hoot being lead on this by the French.

China has no vested interest as far as I can see.

I feel that the allied forces owe it to the Iraqi people to sort out the mess that they have created.

Also, what if any reason every given is not the real reason we are in Iraq?...
Now just for thought, what if you wanted a significant military presence in the middle east (hypothetically)? You would want not that much gov. intervention (hence a country take over). You would want access to all or most of the countries by air without the refueling hassles. So would you not want something say right in the middle or as close as you could get?
Just thinking.
I'd be surprised if this is the case. Between Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Afghanistan, we have quite the military presence already. If I'm not mistaken, there have been aircraft carriers stationed in the area since the Gulf War, so easy aircraft access isn't much of an issue.

I'm no expert; you may be right. It just seems to me there are lots better (ie., more cost-effective, less politically risky, less draining on the country) ways to increase our established military presence in the Middle East than an ongoing military action in Iraq.

I think this (http://archives.cnn.com/2000/WORLD/meast/10/30/iraq.un.euro.reut/) had alot to do with it.

Guys,




China has no vested interest as far as I can see.

.

Becasue they have long term contracts with Canada and Nicaragua

China's best trading partners are currently
1/ Japan
2/ The USA

Also, what if any reason every given is not the real reason we are in Iraq?
Take a look at the following map.
Now just for thought, what if you wanted a significant military presence in the middle east (hypothetically)? You would want not that much gov. intervention (hence a country take over). You would want access to all or most of the countries by air without the refueling hassles. So would you not want something say right in the middle or as close as you could get?
Just thinking.

It was my understanding the the US currently has large bases in
Saudi Arabia
and don't they pretty much own an entire island off the coast of Qatar?
These pretty much cover every contingancy.

China's best trading partners are currently
1/ Japan
2/ The USA

I was refering to oil.

I was refering to oil.
And the Chinese didn't send an army in to try and get control of oil either, did they?:mad:

And the Chinese didn't send an army in to try and get control of oil either, did they?:mad:

The day is young.

The day is young.
Maybe but then the Yanks will have used up all the worlds oil before they get the chance

Maybe but then the Yanks will have used up all the worlds oil before they get the chance


Good, our strategy is working; long live the empire and to hell with the rest of the world.

Good, our strategy is working; long live the empire and to hell with the rest of the world.
Blessed are the Americans dear lord,
for they doth think they shall inherit thine earth:rolleyes:

Blessed are the Americans dear lord,
for they doth think they shall inherit thine earth:rolleyes:

That happened after your failure to contain the Nazis.

That happened after your failure to contain the Nazis.
Or yours to contain the Japs:rolleyes:

This is the song that never ends.
Yes it goes on and on, my friends.
Some people started singing it
not knowing what it was.
And now they keep on singing it
forever just because
this is the song that never ends.
Yes it goes on and on, my friends.
Some people started singing it
not knowing what it was.
And now they keep on singing it
forever just because
this is the song that never ends.
Yes it goes on and on, my friends.
Some people started singing it
not knowing what it was.
And now they keep on singing it
forever just because
this is the song that never ends.
Yes it goes on and on, my friends.
Some people started singing it
not knowing what it was.
And now they keep on singing it
forever just because
this is the song that never ends.
Yes it goes on and on, my friends.
Some people started singing it
not knowing what it was.
And now they keep on singing it
forever just because...

This is the song that never ends.
Yes it goes on and on, my friends.
Some people started singing it
not knowing what it was.
And now they keep on singing it
forever just because
this is the song that never ends.
Yes it goes on and on, my friends.
Some people started singing it
not knowing what it was.
And now they keep on singing it
forever just because
this is the song that never ends.
Yes it goes on and on, my friends.
Some people started singing it
not knowing what it was.
And now they keep on singing it
forever just because
this is the song that never ends.
Yes it goes on and on, my friends.
Some people started singing it
not knowing what it was.
And now they keep on singing it
forever just because
this is the song that never ends.
Yes it goes on and on, my friends.
Some people started singing it
not knowing what it was.
And now they keep on singing it
forever just because...
this is a repeat of a repeat of a repeat , I think your needle's stuck, try giving col. saunders a nudge

this is a repeat of a repeat of a repeat , I think your needle's stuck, try giving col. saunders a nudge
Isn't it past your bedtime?

Isn't it past your bedtime?
Reading some of your posts certainly makes me feel sleepy

This is the song that never ends.
Yes it goes on and on, my friends.
Some people started singing it
not knowing what it was.
And now they keep on singing it
forever just because
this is the song that never ends.
Yes it goes on and on, my friends.
Some people started singing it
not knowing what it was.
And now they keep on singing it
forever just because
this is the song that never ends.
Yes it goes on and on, my friends.
Some people started singing it
not knowing what it was.
And now they keep on singing it
forever just because
this is the song that never ends.
Yes it goes on and on, my friends.
Some people started singing it
not knowing what it was.
And now they keep on singing it
forever just because
this is the song that never ends.
Yes it goes on and on, my friends.
Some people started singing it
not knowing what it was.
And now they keep on singing it
forever just because...

Cont'd :

I know a song that will drive everybody nuts
Drive everybody nuts
Drive everybody nuts
I know a song that will drive everybody nuts
And this is how it goes:

I know a song that will get on your nerves
Get on your nerves
Get on your nerves
I know a song that will get on your nerves
And this is how it goes:

I know a song that gets on everybodys nerves
Everybodys nerves
Everybodys nerves
I know a song that gets on everybodys nerves
And this is how it goes


:p

Cont'd :

I know a song that will drive everybody nuts
Drive everybody nuts
Drive everybody nuts
I know a song that will drive everybody nuts
And this is how it goes:

I know a song that will get on your nerves
Get on your nerves
Get on your nerves
I know a song that will get on your nerves
And this is how it goes:

I know a song that gets on everybodys nerves
Everybodys nerves
Everybodys nerves
I know a song that gets on everybodys nerves
And this is how it goes


:p

Yes, I know we’re boring you all to death.

But I’m somewhat less ambitious than Rich; he contends to reform the entire United States, where as I, on the other hand, would be content with him, just one time, admitting that he’s wrong.

I wonder who has the best chance of wining.

would be content with him, just one time, admitting that he’s wrong.


With regard to what exactly?

With regard to what exactly?


Just make a sincere effort at acting the human and we’ll go from there.

The kiddies are obviously getting restless. I think they have had enough of our silliness.

Just make a sincere effort at acting the human and we’ll go from there.

The kiddies are obviously getting restless. I think they have had enough of our silliness.
You mean the American method of going in all guns blazing and shooting at anything that moves is flawed?:confused:
Hell I learnt it here

You mean the American method of going in all guns blazing and shooting at anything that moves is flawed?:confused:
Hell I learnt it here


Good Grief Man! Are you completely unaware of your words.

But I’m somewhat less ambitious than Rich; he contends to reform the entire United States, where as I, on the other hand, would be content with him, just one time, admitting that he’s wrong.

I wonder who has the best chance of wining.
Rich. Duh.

I wonder who has the best chance of wining.
Whoever of the two of you owns the most vineyards, surely? :confused:

Whoever of the two of you owns the most vineyards, surely? :confused:
ROFL! ...I totally missed that.

Rich. Duh.
Americans. Duh.

Americans. Duh.

Starting in 1776 and then again in 1812. You boys just never learn do you?

Starting in 1776 and then again in 1812. You boys just never learn do you?
Remind me again what war of any significance you've won without us holding your hand, since then

Remind me again what war of any significance you've won without us holding your hand, since thenummm...haven't I seen some of your posts accusing the US of "dragging" the British into every war since then and now you're holding our hands? :confused: :confused:

I'd actually take the time to read throught them, but I'm too mellow for that right now.;)

ummm...haven't I seen some of your posts accusing the US of "dragging" the British into every war since then and now you're holding our hands?

No you must be dreaming

No you must be dreamingwell, as long as you say so

Remind me again what war of any significance you've won without us holding your hand, since then


The one where we kept the Japanese from coming around the Horn.

well, as long as you say so
Thanks for the chuckle.:p

The one where we kept the Japanese from coming around the Horn.
This is the song that never ends.
Yes it goes on and on, my friends.
Some people started singing it
not knowing what it was.
And now they keep on singing it
forever just because
this is the song that never ends.
Yes it goes on and on, my friends.
Some people started singing it
not knowing what it was.
And now they keep on singing it
forever just because
this is the song that never ends.
Yes it goes on and on, my friends.
Some people started singing it
not knowing what it was.
And now they keep on singing it
forever just because
this is the song that never ends.
Yes it goes on and on, my friends.
Some people started singing it
not knowing what it was.
And now they keep on singing it
forever just because
this is the song that never ends.
Yes it goes on and on, my friends.
Some people started singing it
not knowing what it was.
And now they keep on singing it
forever just because...
:rolleyes:

This is the song that never ends...
:rolleyes:

Wow Rich, you must have worked really hard to come up with that one.

Wow Rich, you must have worked really hard to come up with that one.
I borrowed it from an American, are you saying it's not meritorious:confused:

I borrowed it from an American, are you saying it's not meritorious:confused:

I'm saying it's not original.

I'm saying it's not original.
Doesn't matter, I am

Doesn't matter, I am

You are what?

You are what?
original, isn't it obvious:rolleyes:

original, isn't it obvious:rolleyes:

Actualy; more like a broken record.

Actualy; more like a broken record.
sayeth the needle:rolleyes:

Remind me again what war of any significance you've won without us holding your hand, since then

Now if they would just tag each thread with an AmericanVictory boolean value. We could run a simple query for you. :D

Actually, the "Song That Never Ends" was used on a TV ad for a headache pill. The kids sing the song for hour after hour while the mother takes the pill to relieve the headache its causing.

I really liked the one where they're singing it at a birthday party. The mother is outside the house, the door opens and the clown makes a run for it.