Elections in Iraq

Kerry’s Amnesia

from JoeUser Forums

Putting aside the violence midst the coming Iraqi elections, heavily entrenched and financially supported exile groups are dwarfing the influence of native Iraqi political groups, only furthering the bleak promise of free and fair elections. … It seems incredible that someone did not say to the president, “Excuse me, sir, but don’t you think we should finish the war in Afghanistan first?” The closest to this was Powell’s warning Bush that “if you break it you own it.” It is unfortunate that so many Americans think it is our war, not Bush’s. … Moreover, it is mystifying that we just don’t learn by the history of empires that in the end it is a losing struggle. Kerry, too, is guilty of forgetting his own youthful criticism of the Vietnam War by voting to authorize Bush’s war without bravely questioning the wisdom of it until now. … It is scary to think that just before 9/11 there were five incidents in which police had stopped the terrorists responsible for the tragedy and let them drive off after being ticketed for traffic violations, owing to inadequate integration of databases, which still are not in play to this day — that’s not just scary, it is outrageous. … How can there still be 46% of the public who believe that Saddam was responsible for 9/11? I’m hoping they don’t vote because ill-informed voters are as dangerous as our blindly informed politicians.

Copyright © 2004 Richard R. Kennedy All rights reserved. Revised: September 28, 2004.

http://stevendedalus.joeuser.com

politics
7,926 views 26 replies
Reply #1 from JoeUser Forums Top
At what point would Afghanistan be considered "finished"? Is our occupation of Germany finished?
Reply #2 from JoeUser Forums Top
At what point would Afghanistan be considered "finished"? Is our occupation of Germany finished?


Ummm . . . I think that when our soldiers are still dying in firefights and Afghanis are being killed because they attempt to register to vote and warlords are taking back portions of the country and assassination attempts are being made on the people we put into power, then Afghanistan is not "finished."

If it's finished, then send my husband home please.
Fences - Organize your desktop icons today!
Reply #3 from JoeUser Forums Top
I wasn't trying to imply that Afghanistan was finished.

My point was, we are probably going to have troops in Afghanistan for a long time, and to suggest that it should preclude US action elsewhere means that we won't be doing anything else for a long time.
Reply #4 from JoeUser Forums Top

it should preclude US action elsewhere means that we won't be doing anything else for a long time.
That would be great!

Thanks, Texaii, for the telling support.

Reply #5 from JoeUser Forums Top
That would be great!


Yup. My feelings exactly.
Reply #6 from JoeUser Forums Top
The War I Iraq was is totally against the accepted norms of International Law. It constitutes a valid case for bringing both Bush and his poodle Blair to an International Tribunal to try them for "crimes against peace". Further the prison abuses in Iraq constitutes grave violation of the Geneva Convention, and hence accountabilityy must be fixed. One can begin by voting out the present occupant of the White House in November.
Reply #7 from JoeUser Forums Top
ill-informed voters are as dangerous as our blindly informed politicians.


funny, now that sounds like another country i know ... a little closer to home, though

mig XX
Reply #8 from JoeUser Forums Top
Further the prison abuses in Iraq constitutes grave violation of the Geneva Convention, and hence accountabilityy must be fixed. One can begin by voting out the present occupant of the White House in November.


What a CROCK!!! And this is Bush's fault, how? They have already *dealt* with the people responsible.
Reply #9 from PolMach Forums Top
It is so strange that 60 minutes will repeatedly report and scream about the prison abuses in Iraq. Saying it is against the Geneva Convention.

Then not once do a story about all the beheading of innocent people in Iraq.

It shows how far down the sewer hole people can get when the grizzly murder by non-Americans is portrayed with less horror then a few Iraqis being made to spend the night getting pictures taken in a human pyramid. I also guess the suicide bombings of public market places killing over 48 innocent women and children, also don't get the attention as against the Geneva Convention. Lets just add Saddam's Mass graves, use of Chemical weapons during the Iran war and the laundry list of other Geneva Violations that he did.

It is a sad fact that people paint the US as Evil for a hand full of idiots that are being put in jail themselves.

That's My Two Cents
Reply #10 from JoeUser Forums Top
If it's finished, then send my husband home please.


Yeah, send everybody's family back home.
Reply #11 from JoeUser Forums Top
Right, Mig, in spite of Australia overwhemingly against the war your "informed" still keep sending young Aussies to hell. 
Reply #12 from JoeUser Forums Top

At what point would Afghanistan be considered "finished"? Is our occupation of Germany finished?


One really has to wonder why non of the anti-Iraq people ever complain about our occupation in Germany.

Reply #13 from JoeUser Forums Top
The difference is, Afghanistan is still a combat zone.
Reply #14 from JoeUser Forums Top
It shows how far down the sewer hole people can get when the grizzly murder by non-Americans is portrayed with less horror then a few Iraqis being made to spend the night getting pictures taken in a human pyramid.


I'm not sure that's a fair comparison. The people who committed those crimes are undeniably scum on all sides, but in the former case (the beheadings), they're taped and shown to elicit a reaction; in effect, the perpetrators are using the media to try to win. Disgust and scare the Americans and maybe then they'll pull out--it's pure manipulation using a powerful medium: Americans' televisions. I'm still not clear on why, exactly, the naked prisoner abuse pictures were taken, but they were broadcast throughout the U.S. and met with not horror, but outrage that WE were doing that to our prisoners.

Both are awful, awful crimes but showing the beheadings in their entirety would be exactly what they (call them insurgents, terrorists, murderers, whatever) want. I'm not saying let's all bury our heads in the sand and ignore that it's happening--I'm saying let's not give them the satisfaction of using their grisly executions to manipulate us.

-A.
Reply #15 from JoeUser Forums Top
The difference is, Afghanistan is still a combat zone.


Yes, so it makes sense that soldiers are there. What's in Germany that requires the forces of the U.S. military?
Reply #16 from JoeUser Forums Top
The Army's actually reconfiguring things now, and within the span of several years the troops stationed in Germany (they are there at a duty station, not on deployment orders) will be brought home. The point is, we were still at war with another nation when we got started up in Iraq . . . a war that is still being fought. We are not at war with Germany.
Reply #17 from JoeUser Forums Top
Exactly. We're not at war with Germany, and they haven't WMDs or been of any threat for decades. It's unwise to start one war when there's another war happening, but it makes absolutely no sense to have troops occupying Germany, whether on deployment orders or at a duty station.
Reply #19 from PolMach Forums Top
Exactly. We're not at war with Germany, and they haven't WMDs or been of any threat for decades. It's unwise to start one war when there's another war happening, but it makes absolutely no sense to have troops occupying Germany, whether on deployment orders or at a duty station.


Though it could serve as a forward deployment point for that part of the world, after all would you like to travel straight from the US to Iraq, or US to Germany to Iraq? Germany is kept more of as a staging point for forward deployment. Korea would be the better example or Bosnia, or Kosovo? Though Japan is the same situation as Germany, Japan serves as a forward deployment point for the Pacific.

Though I may have the terminology wrong, maybe called something else, like a logistical point or something.

- GX
"I have no answers to your questions, but I can question your demands." - Motto Inspired by Laibach's WAT
Reply #20 from JoeUser Forums Top
Good point, GX, but how large a presence do you think is neccessary?
Reply #21 from PolMach Forums Top
The Military was in Germany as a balence to the old USSR. But the big plan is to move the staging area to the Baulkens. This helps in four ways.

1. Moves the deployment/staging areas closer to the hot spots of the world.

2. Provides the local economies in the area a needed boost.

3. Provides a stablizing Force to prevent them from killing each other again.

4. Keeps a sizable force near NATO, filling our requirments for assistance there if needed (I'm not sure what from, Oh wait the French, they are the only ones whos forces are not helping us in some way elsewhere in the world. hmmm, I'll have to take note of that.)

The Airbase will be the only thing left soon, but I think that will be closed here within the next ten years also.

I think it's a win win situation for us to move. The only thing I don't like is the fact that Germany is one of the best Duty Stationings there is.
Reply #22 from PolMach Forums Top
Good point, GX, but how large a presence do you think is neccessary?


Corrected after I actually looked at the Army site: It is usually a 'Corps' sized force, i.e. I Corps is in Fort Lewis and will be moving to Japan once they have been outfitted in the new modular formation. The remants of VII Corps (?), 1 Inf Div and parts of 1st Armor Div are in Germany.
What do you think is an adequate force size for an emergency deployment, personally I would rather have a core or multiple Brigade Combat Teams or Division (?) in a Forward Point that could be deployed or hold the point until the bulk of the forces from US arrive there, refuel and move out.

Though I think a person more enlightened to logistics would know better.

As for the move to the Balkan powder keg, initially it will suck for them, but eventually as the region economy improves so shall the region, and eventually it won't be that bad of place, also you can still drive from the Balkans to Germany if you really want to go to Germany.

For the corps names, I haven't paid attention nor remember who was who and where they were. Just checked on it and Lee reminded me.

- GX
"I have no answers to your questions, but I can question your demands." - Motto Inspired by Laibach's WAT
Reply #23 from PolMach Forums Top
Most likely a Corp built only with the 1st Inf. Div. that is already in Germany. They will add a few small elements to realy be called a Corp though. As for the Corp name, I think they are playing with the 7th Corp.
Reply #24 from JoeUser Forums Top
Germany is kept more of as a staging point for forward deployment.
Yes, that's exactly what it was for to swiftly deploy troops as it did in Bosnia and Kosovo, not to mention Desert Storm. The visible presence of US troops in South Korea has substantilly prevented incursions by north. Though for deployment Okinawa would be better for Pacific and far eastern troubles.  
Reply #25 from PolMach Forums Top
The visible presence of US troops in South Korea has substantilly prevented incursions by north.


I think troops in South Korea is more of deterrent than actual forward point, after all as long as the US is there in South Korea, Ole Kimmy Boy will not try anything funny, we hope, though it would be nice to SEE China take a harsher stance with Kimmy boy.

- GX