taterhill Posted April 4, 2006 Share Posted April 4, 2006 This is a serious question, as I am not as politcally saavy as all of you..all you hear about is how the Iraqi's hate us and dying soliders....my question is..are we doing anything worth losing all of these soldiers and spending all of this $$ on what seems like an impossible situation..Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VABills Posted April 4, 2006 Share Posted April 4, 2006 Tater there are some folks around who have spent some time in Iraq. Ask them what some of the locals think. In my opinion, while the media does potray things as bad, I do not think they are going as bad as some think. I think if we stay resolved to finish this, get a Iraqi elected government in power and grow their military to have some good field grade officers and non-coms they'll be okay, and it will stablize the region. As a bit of perspective I went to the Fredericksburg battlefield a few weeks back. In that one seige alone, over 100,000 people were killed. I am not undervaluing what the current guys who die in Iraq, but in perspective, war sucks. People get wounded and die. History will decide if it was worth it. 140 years later most in this country will agree that this country became greater after the civil war. Let history decide if Iraq was the right thing. It is hard to judge realtime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of BiB Posted April 4, 2006 Share Posted April 4, 2006 This is a serious question, as I am not as politcally saavy as all of you..all you hear about is how the Iraqi's hate us and dying soliders....my question is..are we doing anything worth losing all of these soldiers and spending all of this $$ on what seems like an impossible situation..Thanks 651340[/snapback] At this point in time, if we are I don't see it. At the risk of being called "revisionist", I would have held a different opinion 18 months ago. But unlike some people I try to reevaluate things based on their own merit as things develop. I still personally agree with the idea of removing Sadaam. It fits into a greater pattern and scheme of adjustments we need (or would like) to have happen in the Middle East. Whether the timing was right is open for debate, but he needed to go. That's about the point where anything that could possibly be called intelligent ended. Things have pretty well gone down hill since then. There's a small handful of people that should be held seriously accountable for whatever post invasion fiascos have taken place. My former boss, Jay Garner was originally the guy sent in to help reorganize the place. He didn't last long before he said "Fugg this", and came home. I personally gave up on anything good happening in an organized manner when the "gang" dictated that the entire Baath operation be abandoned and dismantled wholesale. IMO, whoever is responsible for that call is/was an idiot. The entire situation and it's aftermath was completely misread by those who pushed it, and who I would have hoped had known better. So now, what probably could have been actually accomplished with some real homework, a plan based on conditions there and not wishful thinking here, and effective execution has turned into a dog chasing it's car bomb laden tail. Problem is, we are now committed and walking away from it will result in a further hostile and fragmented middle east than there was when we started. I won't go into the list of mistakes, there are enough- but many have been realized and steps are being taken to mitigate them. A somewhat stable Iraq is still possible, we just really made it a lot harder on ourselves. To top it off, we did Iran's heavy lifting for them. Now, instead of having a viable American surrogate (rather than a nut case Hitler wanna be) positioned on their border, they face no credible military threat from their western border and are, as I write both actively undermining our efforts in Iraq and ratcheting up their "I'm the big dog now" rhetoric. All that said, as mentioned we can't just up and walk away either. We shouldn't be in the shape we are in, didn't have to be, but now that the stakes are so high, we have to be. So in a reverse logic kind of way, yeah...it's worth what is getting spent. Could have been done a lot less expensively, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BB27 Posted April 4, 2006 Share Posted April 4, 2006 Yes, I think we are. At least Sadam isn't torturing and killing people anymore. Granted someone else has probably stepped into this role (I AM NOT INSINUATING THAT IT IS THE US OF A) but the majority of people in Iraq are benefitting from our being there. The god awful liberal media loves to portray the war as one we are losing. They will do anything to make people think this is Vietnam all over again. The other day I was watching a PBS program about the war, and it had a PBS reporter travelling with the Marines in Iraq. Whenever the Marines were oout patrolling, they would be surrounded by iraqi children. The Marines would be yelling back and forth about suicide bombers and snipers, in one scene they were actually in a firefight, then, as soon as it was over, the kids came running to see them. Nothing but smiles on their faces. Overall, I thought the program was typical liberal bullsh--. In one part, the Marines were taking fire from 5 insurgent fighters. They quickly killed two of them, but the other three ran into a marsh canal (tall reeds and grass) so the marines opened up on the ditch, mowing down the grass, and killing the insurgents, and the reporter had to get his two cents in about the Marines killing people who could have surrendered. The fact that they died holding guns and RPG's didn't seem to matter. I say we are doing good, and we are making some progress in some areas of Iraq. Also, isn't it interesting that we don't hear about how things are going in other areas of Iraq, except for where there is fighting? Also why don't we hear about what is going on in Basra where the Brits are in control? I would say it is the liberal slanted media that just reports on the bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRC Posted April 4, 2006 Share Posted April 4, 2006 This is a serious question, as I am not as politcally saavy as all of you..all you hear about is how the Iraqi's hate us and dying soliders....my question is..are we doing anything worth losing all of these soldiers and spending all of this $$ on what seems like an impossible situation..Thanks 651340[/snapback] The long-term part of me says that we are doing good. It will take more than one administration to see these changes, however. It is way too early to label things as a disaster or success. You are talking about a complete overhaul of a country. This is not something that you do in the matter of a decade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of BiB Posted April 4, 2006 Share Posted April 4, 2006 Are we discussing policy related or operations? Without trying to sound cliche-ish, the military has done all they can be expected to do, and much more. When it comes to that part of the equation, no one on this planet can hold a candle to us. Yes, the media is completely biased and thrives on showing failure. No, not all nor do the majority of Iraqis "hate us". I just think this is a more complicated issue from the big picture perspective than laughing children and water treatment plants. And, it's more important now than ever that this transition be based on a solid foundation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VABills Posted April 4, 2006 Share Posted April 4, 2006 With congress critters like this. You wonder why you get bad info: http://prestoagitato.typepad.com/presto_ag...down_in_vi.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of BiB Posted April 4, 2006 Share Posted April 4, 2006 With congress critters like this. You wonder why you get bad info: http://prestoagitato.typepad.com/presto_ag...down_in_vi.html 651438[/snapback] Yeah, Bill. That's what it's all about. Please at least try to think a little deeper? I hate the press probably more than you do. They are a huge part of the problem HERE but not as much as there. I'll also contradict myself by happily stating that their press is a major problem, mostly because we taught them how. They didn't even get the Viet Nam thingy press wise, until American media reinforced it. It's still a big problem. Information is no longer just TV to fill time between Southpark, American Idol and Family Guy, it is a weapon. I recall the outrage here when it came up that we would actually "stoop so low" as to try to interject our own ideas into the middle east media. Al Jazeera has a lot more balanced view than a lot of folks here do. Both sides. No they don't, but they know how to play it. How you play it is what is important. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VABills Posted April 4, 2006 Share Posted April 4, 2006 Yeah, Bill. That's what it's all about. Please at least try to think a little deeper? I hate the press probably more than you do. They are a huge part of the problem HERE but not as much as there. I'll also contradict myself by happily stating that their press is a major problem, mostly because we taught them how. They didn't even get the Viet Nam thingy press wise, until American media reinforced it. It's still a big problem. Information is no longer just TV to fill time between Southpark, American Idol and Family Guy, it is a weapon. I recall the outrage here when it came up that we would actually "stoop so low" as to try to interject our own ideas into the middle east media. Al Jazeera has a lot more balanced view than a lot of folks here do. Both sides. No they don't, but they know how to play it. How you play it is what is important. 651519[/snapback] I don't quite understand your reply, but this never made the news. When Murtha was bashed, it made headlines at how bad the WH and others were that this "hero" was being raked over the coals. Yet here we have a newly returned Command Sergeant from Afghanistan who called Moran and Murtha out saying they are lying to the people about moral, and how things are going. Did this make the news? Hell no. Why not? because it doesn't fit the agenda and the lies that the media continues to feed the people. Because they want bad news. Bad news sells. if the world was all roses and there were no problems, noone would watch the news. They don't play the good, because people want the bad, the "fantastic" stories. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of BiB Posted April 4, 2006 Share Posted April 4, 2006 I don't quite understand your reply, but this never made the news. When Murtha was bashed, it made headlines at how bad the WH and others were that this "hero" was being raked over the coals. Yet here we have a newly returned Command Sergeant from Afghanistan who called Moran and Murtha out saying they are lying to the people about moral, and how things are going. Did this make the news? Hell no. Why not? because it doesn't fit the agenda and the lies that the media continues to feed the people. Because they want bad news. Bad news sells. if the world was all roses and there were no problems, noone would watch the news. They don't play the good, because people want the bad, the "fantastic" stories. 651545[/snapback] A lot of things don't make the news. Most things don't make the news. Basically, anything that would help anyone figure stuff out never makes the news. I can't believe you work in the heart of DC and haven't figured this stuff out. Is IT that insulated from reality? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VABills Posted April 4, 2006 Share Posted April 4, 2006 A lot of things don't make the news. Most things don't make the news. Basically, anything that would help anyone figure stuff out never makes the news. I can't believe you work in the heart of DC and haven't figured this stuff out. Is IT that insulated from reality? 651586[/snapback] Trust me, I know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of BiB Posted April 4, 2006 Share Posted April 4, 2006 Trust me, I know. 651595[/snapback] Cool, tell me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of BiB Posted April 4, 2006 Share Posted April 4, 2006 Cool, tell me. 651680[/snapback] Well, everyone kept their mouth shut. Anyone want to really discuss foreign relations policy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRC Posted April 4, 2006 Share Posted April 4, 2006 Well, everyone kept their mouth shut. Anyone want to really discuss foreign relations policy? 651723[/snapback] Sure. Pick a location and start a thread. Hot topics are Iraq, Iran and North Korea, but you can bring up Africa if you like. Iraq is already in this thread, but you can start a new one if there is something different you want to discuss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted April 4, 2006 Share Posted April 4, 2006 Sure. Pick a location and start a thread. Hot topics are Iraq, Iran and North Korea, but you can bring up Africa if you like. Iraq is already in this thread, but you can start a new one if there is something different you want to discuss. 651784[/snapback] How about Cuba? Top American officials who study Cuba and dictator Fidel Castro, 79, now believe that his Parkinson's disease is so bad that he will be dead in four years. "The Parkinson's has gone beyond the stage that it can be controlled," says a top U.S. official. "He's not going to live forever." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of BiB Posted April 4, 2006 Share Posted April 4, 2006 Sure. Pick a location and start a thread. Hot topics are Iraq, Iran and North Korea, but you can bring up Africa if you like. Iraq is already in this thread, but you can start a new one if there is something different you want to discuss. 651784[/snapback] Can do, but it doesn't matter. No one here gets the fact that you have studied, written on and researched a hell of a lot more on North Korea than most people would ever care about. BTW, Ken is very anal retentive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted April 4, 2006 Share Posted April 4, 2006 Can do, but it doesn't matter. No one here gets the fact that you have studied, written on and researched a hell of a lot more on North Korea than most people would ever care about. BTW, Ken is very anal retentive. 651843[/snapback] Who the !@#$ cares what Ken's done. It's not true unless Bernsten writes about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRC Posted April 4, 2006 Share Posted April 4, 2006 It's not true unless Bernsten writes about it. 651879[/snapback] That's not fair. Zinni also counts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRC Posted April 4, 2006 Share Posted April 4, 2006 BTW, Ken is very anal retentive. 651843[/snapback] I am not anal retentive. I am "detail oriented." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted April 4, 2006 Share Posted April 4, 2006 That's not fair. Zinni also counts. 651890[/snapback] Before I start to explore what Zinni says, or has said, does anyone have a take on the guy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts