The Iraq War is As good As lost

Recent Attacks in Fallujah

from JoeUser Forums
The War in Iraq is as good as lost. With every passing day tne support within Iraq for the American war effort is coming down. The real reason for this is the dispropotionate use of force in civillian areas by the "coalition forces". Whole blocks of residential areas have been destroyed in the spate of attaks in Fallujah. The American do not venture anywhere near the city after 2 in the afternoon when the Resistance Forces take over the streets. Theis is affecting the morale of the troops, and under a pall of frustration the ground command aks for areal attacks. In one such attack 22 members of a single family were killed including children..
With such vicious attacks going on it is no wonder that the Game plan of the US has started unravelling. The Allawi government may be well intetioned but it does not have any credibility.
politics
8,022 views 18 replies
Reply #1 from JoeUser Forums Top
That is what we call a load of pooh! At the very best it's just your opinion.
Reply #2 from JoeUser Forums Top
The book "Imperial Hubris" predicted exactly what is going on in Iraq today. Increased insurgency, decentralization of the government, and US forces too scared of Vietnam level casualties to engage in the type of urban warfare that will be necessary to retake parts of the country. George Bush has done what his father knew would be a mistake, and that is try and build a democratic government in a country that is bitterly hostile to western intervention.
Star Control: Origins
Reply #3 from PolMach Forums Top
George Bush has done what his father knew would be a mistake, and that is try and build a democratic government in a country that is bitterly hostile to western intervention.


So Iranian youth and some adults don't want democracy? I don't think you can get a better example than Iran's open hate for the U.S. as an example of people who hate the U.S. but want democracy, don't you think?

Link

As for the topic, the only war that is unwinnable is the war in which people do not support their country's soldiers through 'thick and thin'.

- GX
Reply #4 from JoeUser Forums Top
support their country's soldiers through 'thick and thin'.


I can hope America's soldiers come home safe without supporting a war through "thick and thin." Speaking out against the war or the President is not the horrible thing that many would have us believe it is.

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morraly treasonable to the American public." -- Theodore Roosevelt

"If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion or force citizens to confess by word or act there faith therein." --Justice Robert H. Jackson

"There can be no doubt that criticism in time of war is essential to maintenance of any kind of democratic government." -- Robert Taft

As for the Iranian people, I guarantee you that they don't want democracy at American gunpoint. And neither does Iraq. As a matter of fact, you'd be hard pressed to find any nation on this planet who would want any form of government shoved down their throats by the biggest kid on the block. If democracy is to rise in the world, it can only be through American examples, and I'm afraid we haven't set a very good example in the Middle East for a very long time. Don't be so arrogant to think your country can do no wrong.
Reply #5 from PolMach Forums Top
I can hope America's soldiers come home safe without supporting a war through "thick and thin."


Did I say supporting the war, I think not, I clearly said supporting the soldiers through 'thick and thin' after all they are soldiers of the United States.

- GX
Reply #6 from PolMach Forums Top
What I like to see is that no one has really said that the Iraq war is actually positive in any fashion. Positive meaning that we Americans are gaining valuable from this venture. All I see are body bags and money shredding. The only people I hear from that say Iraq is just fine is Bush and Allawi. Yet, many people at these forums seemingly defend the war on Iraq and almost seem to brandish it as a shining piece of Bush policy. Hey, where's the beef?
Reply #7 from JoeUser Forums Top

Reply #6 By: Deference - 10/4/2004 2:48:33 PM
Hey, where's the beef?


Between the buns! Right or wrong (US being in IRAQ) this is the kind of thing are troops need to hear? NOT!
Reply #8 from PolMach Forums Top
It has been asserted that somehow, questioning our civilian government decisions with what to do with the military somehow render our servicemen less successfull. I really believe that to be quite questionable, but many people have bought in to it. The things is, and you vets know this, when you're told to jump, you ask how high, when you are a soldier, the civilian concessions have no bearing on you, you have a new burden, the rucksack on your back and Uncle Sam's boot in your butt.
Reply #9 from JoeUser Forums Top
Reply #8 By: Deference - 10/4/2004 2:58:45 PM
It has been asserted that somehow, questioning our civilian government decisions with what to do with the military somehow render our servicemen less successfull. I really believe that to be quite questionable, but many people have bought in to it. The things is, and you vets know this, when you're told to jump, you ask how high, when you are a soldier, the civilian concessions have no bearing on you, you have a new burden, the rucksack on your back and Uncle Sam's boot in your butt.


Yes but *when* they get home and see this then what? They'll think that their friends and comrades died for a *lost* cause?
Reply #10 from PolMach Forums Top
That may be true in regards to the "lost cause", time usually gives us that answer, no matter what we wish. We can support our troops and veterans, but we do not always have to support the reasons they are being forced to sacrifice their lives.
Reply #11 from JoeUser Forums Top
They don't have to go home to see this. Kerry and the rest of these defeatist jerks are using this kind of demoralizing tripe to earn military votes. I really, really don't see how some of you get up in the morning, get yourselved dressed, groom and feed yourselves with no more common sense than you have. You are, quite literally, disgusting, Bahu.
Reply #12 from JoeUser Forums Top
They'll think that their friends and comrades died for a *lost* cause?


I respect the armed forces of this country enough to question the legitmacy of the Iraq war. I refer to the quotes I posted in my earlier response.
Reply #13 from JoeUser Forums Top
"questioning our civilian government decisions with what to do with the military somehow render our servicemen less successfull. "


Odd, if it is so "questionable", that every major military in the world has corps specifically designed to do that to the enemy during a time of war, and that people have been imprisoned and executed historically for doing it. Of course millions are spent equipping and training people to do it, but I'm sure the effects are "questionable".

God, the Liberal tunnel vision...
Reply #14 from JoeUser Forums Top
Interesting that this article is being taken seriously at all. There's no evidence to back up all the claims being made here. Not even a single link to a poll.
Reply #15 from JoeUser Forums Top
Almost all international obververs including repected News Magazines like the Economist, Newsweek and Figaro are complaing about the unacceptable levels of civillian casualities in this conflict and the increasing toll on the US and coalitiion forces. The threshold of sustainable casualities has been crossed and it is time to walk away leaving tne UN to set the stage for a legitimate governemnt. The victory of John Kerry is assured and this statesman will steer a course out of Iraq. The American Media is not reporting civillian casulities and hence information trickles out from other ARAB SOURCES. Further what happened when the British tried to pacify Mesopotamia in the 1922-23 campaign. They well and truly failed and there is no reason that this invasion is better planned.
Reply #16 from PolMach Forums Top
The threshold of sustainable casualities has been crossed and it is time to walk away leaving tne UN to set the stage for a legitimate governemnt.


Do you really think the UN will do this? They left the country after one bomb late last year. Look how they have created suability in Rwanda and Sudan. The only time they have successfully got a Government up and running is when we had sent troops.

That's My Two Cents
Reply #17 from JoeUser Forums Top
I can't imagine a full scale war with less civilian casualties than this. Can you possibly imagine how many civilians lost their lives during the bombing of berlin, for instance? We've gone from carpet bombing and napalm to precision strikes and total refusal to attack when civilians are in the way, all in a single generation.

Soldiers are dying so that civilians won't be killed. These "no go" zones could be turned into parking lots if we weren't concerned about innocents. "Arab sources" inflate casualties, "Arab sources" consider most of the terrorists "civilian". Over and over we are told that people who harbor, support, and actively engage in terrorist attacks are "civilians". No offense, but if you are working in a metal shop in Gaza that makes bombs and rockets, you are not a civilian...

I dread the idea of Kerry winning, but if it happens it will be utterly hilarious to watch all these expectations melt and see the "anyone but Bush" crowd turn on their own...
Reply #18 from JoeUser Forums Top
You'll never convince people like BakerStreet that Arab sources can be accurate. He obviously thinks that Arab journalists are all liars -- it might be a racist thing, but I'd hate to think that.