Mickey Posted November 21, 2005 Share Posted November 21, 2005 Do you mean to say that "leaving 'now' is wrong" or that leaving in its ownright is wrong? I think we need a sensible plan to get the F out of there. If there is a sensible plan out there in operation I want to know what it is. 509161[/snapback] Such a plan would start with answering the basic questions: 1. What precisely must be achieved before we can leave? 2. How will we measure each one of those conditions to determine when they have been achieved? The only answers I get are either silence or some version of an immeasurable, amorphous goal like "when the Iraqi's can defend themsleves" or "when the Iraqi's are strong enough..." etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted November 21, 2005 Share Posted November 21, 2005 "Better question for anyone in favor of immediate or announced removal of US forces: Why wouldn't the terrorists view that as a victory? Wouldn't this embolden them in the future by making the US a "paper tiger" like we were after Somalia? It's basically the only victory they can possibly achieve." ? Who cares whether or not the terrorists view something as a "victory"? Do you think they're going to attack the US any less if they are not "emboldened"? The criteria for whether to follow a course of action or not should be the likely consequences of that action and not what goes on in the head of a fanatic. People like Zarqawi's group will continue to attack the west until they are captured or killed regardless of whether they are emboldened or not. 508220[/snapback] Add that to the list of amorphous goals in Iraq: "do not embolden terrorists". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted November 21, 2005 Share Posted November 21, 2005 That may be the result of living in a dictatorship. North Koreans generally don't act up either. I imagine people in countries next to Iraq are wondering why the Iraqis are voting and they are not. And I doubt those suicide bombers attacking mosques are actually making suicide bombing more popular. 508880[/snapback] I think their neighbors might also be thanking Muhammed that Iraqi's are dying in droves and they are not. I think the Shiites are happy to see Sunni Mosques attacked and Sunnis are happy to see Shiite mosques attacked. I don't know, is it our strategy to hope that the insurgents kill enough of the wrong muslims so that they become a pariah among their own people? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted November 21, 2005 Share Posted November 21, 2005 "Or maybe not" indeed. I'm not over there but if I was, I'd be wondering why the Muslim world is falling further from the top of the heap in the world when it comes to economics, medicine, culture, etc. while the US remains at the top and China and India are taking off. Perhaps some introspection is in order..... 508908[/snapback] I hope they don't wonder too much lest they conclude that the reason is that they are selling their oil waaaaaay to cheaply. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted November 21, 2005 Share Posted November 21, 2005 Why? If there is, should we tell everyone? Because if you know, then everybody should know, right? 509205[/snapback] I am not very long on trust. Are you implying that our plan for victory should be a state secret? I am fine with secret tactics, but strategy is Macro, and if our strategy is a secret then there is no transparency, no transparency = no democracy. Of course, I think Nixon once had a secret plan, and that was frickin brilliant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted November 21, 2005 Share Posted November 21, 2005 They were angry at us before the war. They were angry with us when we removed the dictator who killed his own people by the hundreds of thousands. They are angry with us now for helping rebuild. Maybe, just maybe, the "Arab Street" needs to take a long hard look in the mirror. An entire culture based on US/Jewish conspiracy theories isn't doing them any favors. 508930[/snapback] The presence of over 100,000 American troops in Iraq to depose Saddam long after he was deposed is not a theory. It is a fact. Public opinion in the Arab world is not likely to be more informed than it is here, probably much less so. I don't think it is realistic to expect them to understand the intricate argument that despite the presence of all those soldiers, we are not an occupier. Even your best friend visiting from Toledo is going to outstay his welcome sooner or later. Karen Hughes doesn't seem to be able to counteract that perception. Maybe we should give Michael Brown a shot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted November 21, 2005 Share Posted November 21, 2005 I am not very long on trust. Are you implying that our plan for victoryshould be a state secret? I am fine with secret tactics, but strategy is Macro, and if our strategy is a secret then there is no transparency, no transparency = no democracy. Of course, I think Nixon once had a secret plan, and that was frickin brilliant. 509220[/snapback] If it was a 20 year plan, it would be to long, if it was a 5 year plan, to long or to little. Someone will always be saying its not enough or its to little. What I meant is, that by letting to much information out, can and would be used against our troops in some kind of capacity. Pretty simple logic, really. And it is up to the Iraqi people, regardless of what Mickey says. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverNRed Posted November 21, 2005 Share Posted November 21, 2005 The presence of over 100,000 American troops in Iraq to depose Saddam long after he was deposed is not a theory. 509231[/snapback] The 100,000 troops there are helping rebuild. This isn't some friend from Toledo mooching off you and crashing on your couch. If they're somehow insulted by people there helping them rebuild, they just plain have issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverNRed Posted November 21, 2005 Share Posted November 21, 2005 I hope they don't wonder too much lest they conclude that the reason is that they are selling their oil waaaaaay to cheaply. 509218[/snapback] Raising the price of oil won't change the technology or education gaps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted November 21, 2005 Share Posted November 21, 2005 The 100,000 troops there are helping rebuild. This isn't some friend from Toledo mooching off you and crashing on your couch. If they're somehow insulted by people there helping them rebuild, they just plain have issues. 509375[/snapback] I think this is true, but oversimplified. If you are a friendly middle-level Baathist bureaucrat, those 100,000 troops are rebuilding your country so that you no longer have an upper-middle class lifestyle and a bunch of Kurds to bitchslap all day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted November 21, 2005 Share Posted November 21, 2005 Such a plan would start with answering the basic questions: 1. What precisely must be achieved before we can leave? 2. How will we measure each one of those conditions to determine when they have been achieved? The only answers I get are either silence or some version of an immeasurable, amorphous goal like "when the Iraqi's can defend themsleves" or "when the Iraqi's are strong enough..." etc. 509207[/snapback] Actually, neither of those goals is amorphorous or immeasurable. I don't think, however, the measurables for those have been published, and most people don't have the knowledge to estimate them for themselves. But just because you can't measure them and haven't heard anyone else do so, doesn't mean it hasn't been done. I'd bet large sums of money it has been done, if only because it's integral to the planning of the training schedules for the Iraqi forces, and that planning has been done. The real problem is that, once again, the administration's marketing sucks. Sure, there's an overall strategic goal with intermediate milestones, at least some of which are being met...but the administration can't, for a variety of reasons (including but hardly limited to: "they're idiots"), explain them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverNRed Posted November 21, 2005 Share Posted November 21, 2005 The real problem is that, once again, the administration's marketing sucks. Sure, there's an overall strategic goal with intermediate milestones, at least some of which are being met...but the administration can't, for a variety of reasons (including but hardly limited to: "they're idiots"), explain them. 509426[/snapback] Amen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted November 21, 2005 Share Posted November 21, 2005 The real problem is that, once again, the administration's marketing sucks. Sure, there's an overall strategic goal with intermediate milestones, at least some of which are being met...but the administration can't, for a variety of reasons (including but hardly limited to: "they're idiots"), explain them. 509426[/snapback] When they stand up, we'll stand down. When we stand down, they'll stand up. If I were in kintergarten it would sound like fun. I know F-all about marketing. But they should come up with better game instructions for the rest of us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chicot Posted November 22, 2005 Share Posted November 22, 2005 The 100,000 troops there are helping rebuild. This isn't some friend from Toledo mooching off you and crashing on your couch. If they're somehow insulted by people there helping them rebuild, they just plain have issues. 509375[/snapback] Say your friend from Toledo dropped by to help fix your bathroom without you asking and then stayed for 3 years and your bathroom still wasn't fixed. If you then told him that you'd prefer to do it yourself and you'd like them to leave soon or at least say when they were going, it would be slightly odd if he then beat you up, told you that he'd fix it whether you liked it or not, and refused to say when he'd leave. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted November 22, 2005 Share Posted November 22, 2005 Say your friend from Toledo dropped by to help fix your bathroom without you asking and then stayed for 3 years and your bathroom still wasn't fixed. 509560[/snapback] If you put it that way, I think all my issues would be with my neighbor. Time, Newsweek, Reader's Digest, etc. I just can't go without a good magazine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverNRed Posted November 22, 2005 Share Posted November 22, 2005 Say your friend from Toledo dropped by to help fix your bathroom without you asking 509560[/snapback] That depends. Was my bathroom killing me before my friend showed up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted November 22, 2005 Share Posted November 22, 2005 The 100,000 troops there are helping rebuild. This isn't some friend from Toledo mooching off you and crashing on your couch. If they're somehow insulted by people there helping them rebuild, they just plain have issues. 509375[/snapback] You don't have to convince me, you have to convince them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chicot Posted November 22, 2005 Share Posted November 22, 2005 That depends. Was my bathroom killing me before my friend showed up? 509739[/snapback] Even then, I'm not sure I'd be happy with him completely restructuring my household and then insisting on staying indefinitely. To dispense with the analogy though, I'm sure you know, just as I do, that they're not there just to rebuild. They're also there to further the strategic interests of the US. As the shade of BiB implied, to ensure Iraq becomes an ally against Iran and Syria. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PastaJoe Posted November 22, 2005 Author Share Posted November 22, 2005 Even then, I'm not sure I'd be happy with him completely restructuring my household and then insisting on staying indefinitely. To dispense with the analogy though, I'm sure you know, just as I do, that they're not there just to rebuild. They're also there to further the strategic interests of the US. As the shade of BiB implied, to ensure Iraq becomes an ally against Iran and Syria. 509917[/snapback] Funny how things come full circle. In the '80s when it was convienent for the U.S. we backed Saddam against Iran. The enemy of my enemy is my friend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of BiB Posted November 22, 2005 Share Posted November 22, 2005 Funny how things come full circle. In the '80s when it was convienent for the U.S. we backed Saddam against Iran. The enemy of my enemy is my friend. 510256[/snapback] Welcome to the Big Game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts