Iraq War Headed toward a point of no return

Why the U S will not prevail in Iraq

from JoeUser Forums
The U S marines have only one rule in Iraq:shoot first clear the mess later. Any vehicle approaching within 100 meters of a US military humvee is peppered with bullets before questions are asked. Similarly any ordinary Iraqi with a cell phone risks having his guts ripped out by a splatter of M-16 gunfire. Deadly force has become the norm as for as the Anglo American forces are concerned. All this makes for a horrendous loss of civillian life. A 20 something U S soldier says proudly that "we waste people "if they come too close. Just imagine if men used to this level of violence return home. Since September 1 2004 when theAmerican soldiers came to Ramadi more than2000 civillians have been killed inthat city alone.Now the US army with logistical support from the British forces have a new tactic: they hide in wait near the bodies of dead Iraqis and when someone comes to bury the body, they open fire. I wish the commanders of such forces would read one of the outstanding plays of Greek literature, Antigone. They would know that for every one Iraqi they "waste" 10 more will take their place. It is for this reasonr the deadly force is unlikely to yield the desired results.

So far the steady flow ofcasualities has only proved that the American civil society has overcome its distaste for body bags. There is as yet no hope of a settlement that would bring peace with honor.

The run up to the elections as we have always known is proving extremely costly. In the last two days more than 36 Iraqis have dies in bombings, 21 US soldiers have died along with the Allawi regime governor of Bagdad. The projected Sunni Shia divide is not materialising and Iraqis are showing everyone thatthey matter .
politics
26,696 views 77 replies
Reply #1 from JoeUser Forums Top

I hate to tell you this but the US has already prevailed in Iraq. 

Moving the goal posts until one can re-define victory into an impossible context may make some people feel better, but the reality is, the US went in to overthrow the Saddam regime.

This whole "let's set up a democratic government" thing is definitely something the US wants, but it is akin to arguing that Victory in World War II depended on whether Germany developed a stable democracy after the Nazi's were conquered. 

Hopefully the Iraqi's will be able to have a peaceful, democratic government. But if they fail that, it's not our loss, it's theirs.

Reply #2 from JoeUser Forums Top
In W.W. II, Americans heard the ominous predictions of Tokyo Rose & Axis Sally; Vietnam gave us Hanoi Hanna & for that matter Hanoi Jane. Here at Joe User, we get a cheap knock off called Baghdad Bahu. What's wrong Bahu? I sense nervousness on your part; it is in fact palpable. What you fear most will occur shortly; yes the many fine people of Iraq will reject Islamic totalitarianism and instead embrace Western democracy. Yes greater Arabia will embrace the American way: bullets & the ballot box. Vote or I will shoot you is surely not as bad a proposition as vote & I will shoot you. No? Yes soon we will see Western democracy spreading like wildfire across greater Arabia. Moslem children will choose to pledge allegiance to the American flag; they will reject the symbols of Islam; the flags of Allah will burn. The people of Arabia will turn to drugs, sex & rock & roll ... let me repeat that it sounds so good: drugs, sex & rock -n-roll over the word of the prophet; who could blame them? After all, who in the hell could resist booze & sluttish women right here on earth... Elvis & Jim Morrison would laugh at the idea of a mere 72 virgins for all of eternity: that's all; that's no bargain; a mere weeks undertaking for Jim or Elvis; so come on Baghdad Bahu and admit that it's over for Allah... because rock -n- roll will never die, but the word of the prophet will; it is written in the book called rock -n-roll.
CursorFX - Customize your Windows cursor
Reply #3 from JoeUser Forums Top
hey babu maybe you should take some flowers over to iraq shout peace and love,,, that will stop the muslim terroist from killing ok??
Reply #4 from JoeUser Forums Top
..and are the troops' wives at home fooling around with Bart Simpson too?? ;~D
Reply #5 from JoeUser Forums Top
True -- and that "point" would be an election.

The left never tires of trying to push the lemonade back into the lemon.

Cheers,
Daiwa
Reply #6 from PolMach Forums Top
They would know that for every one Iraqi they "waste" 10 more will take their place


How long have I been saying this? But the mission is accomplished. An inept President (note my discretion, I was going to say chimp) in a flight suit posing as a tough guy on an aircraft carrier, remember?

I don't know what is sadder: The bullshit of the Bush administration (just don't get me started), or the fact that people actually believe it. Bush is either stupid or a liar. And either way, I don't trust him.
Reply #7 from JoeUser Forums Top
Reply By: ParaTed2kPosted: Friday, January 07, 2005..and are the troops' wives at home fooling around with Bart Simpson too?? ;~D


n there not really american troops there alien experamentel subjects fighting for the planet zorgopp...
Reply #8 from JoeUser Forums Top
I don't think that one can even remotely compare Germany to Iraq. To do so would be anti-semitic. Hussein did not kill over four million people through purges. Hitler did and so did Stalin. This kind of statement could easily be construed as anti-semitic.

The idea that you invade a country and then abondon them because of faults within their infrastructure is unwarranted. If one is to create a power vacuum, than one has the responsiblity to fix it. What the United States needs is a long term commitment to the region. I would assume that a twenty year outlook is in order. The goal in Iraq should be a secular government that is of limited democratic principles, i.e. the United States. A line must be drawn between Allah/God and the will of the people. Religion has no place in government, but is rather a deeply private matter.

As for the election, it is to soon.
Reply #9 from JoeUser Forums Top
" the US went in to overthrow the Saddam regime."-Draignol

Bush wen in with the objectives of : sparing the people of Iraq from further suffering resulting from an oppressive, brutal dictatorship,to rid the region of weapons of mass destruction under development by Saddam Hussein as called for by various UN resolutions,to install free democracy within Iraq and ultimately the surrounding region for the benefit of the people, and to sever connections between Saddam Hussein (and his weaponry) and international terrorist groups of threat.'

While it should have never been complete US responsibility to establish this democracy, Bush promised it and made it one of the objectives. Therefore if we do not succeed in that we have failed to meet mission objectives. This is Unlike Germany in which we never promised we would reestablish democracy in post-war Germany, we just said we would take down Hitler.

Your right that the failure to establish democracy should be Iraq's fault but we will have to take some of the blame since we promised to bring one there.

But then again Bahu seems extremely pessimistic about our endeavors to establish democracy. I beleive it is probably alot more succesful then he paints it to be.
Reply #10 from JoeUser Forums Top
There are two things that the terrorists fear the most right now. The election in Palestine and the election in Iraq.
Reply #11 from JoeUser Forums Top
Reply By: latour999Posted: Friday, January 07, 2005They would know that for every one Iraqi they "waste" 10 more will take their placeHow long have I been saying this? But the mission is accomplished. An inept President (note my discretion, I was going to say chimp) in a flight suit posing as a tough guy on an aircraft carrier, remember?I don't know what is sadder: The bullshit of the Bush administration (just don't get me started), or the fact that people actually believe it. Bush is either stupid or a liar. And either way, I don't trust him.


ok I am going to endevor to be succient and nice at the same time'

THE WHOLE FUCKING WORLD THOUGHT SADDAM had weapons of mass destruction......... Bush did not lie ..... I respect your right to not like bush , to disagree with bush but FOR GODS SAKE MAN GET OVER IT........
Reply #12 from PolMach Forums Top
THE WHOLE FUCKING WORLD THOUGHT SADDAM had weapons of mass destruction......... Bush did not lie ..... I respect your right to not like bush , to disagree with bush but FOR GODS SAKE MAN GET OVER IT........


Not the whole fucking world. Hans Blix thought Iraq had no WMDs, and wanted more time to conduct more thorough investigations, but were deemed naive and incompetent. Look whose the naive incompetent one now.

I guess Bush did have proof that Saddam had them at one point. His daddy and Rummy kept the receipts.
Reply #13 from JoeUser Forums Top
The U.S. should have done things the old fashion way. Lay waste to the country, then sort it out. Fewer people to deal with!
Reply #14 from JoeUser Forums Top
The problem is old boy, that the 'dream' of an Iraqi democracy is a false one, like a peasant dreaming of owning a Bentley whilst working a poorly paid job. Democracy is absolutely alien to the Arab mind, in short, they do not want it. Each faction in Iraq wants to dominate the other, not launch election campaigns. Democracy in Iraq will only survive asling as the US and UK are there to prop it up with force, is this real democracy? The Arabs must create their own democracy in order for it to survive long term, not have a Western franchise.

The job is done chaps, now lets stop wasting money and get the bloody hell out. It's been slashed, and it's been burned.
Reply #15 from JoeUser Forums Top
Draginol

By the lodgic of your 1st post we should have removed our troops from Iraq starting the day after Saddam fell. At the very latest the day after Saddam was captured. The issue for the US is our safety. Are we safer today than before we went into Iraq? Not to end the rule of Saddam. Not to establish a democratic system. Not to please Israel. If we measure the success in Iraq by that objective (are we safer for the Iraq War) we HAVE FAILED BIG TIME!
Reply #16 from JoeUser Forums Top
The left never tires of trying to push the lemonade back into the lemon.


At least you finally admit this is one big fat lemon of an idea.
Reply #17 from JoeUser Forums Top
"At least you finally admit this is one big fat lemon of an idea"

There is nothing wrong with making lemonade, all of the 'free Iraq' rhetoric is an attempt to keep the peasants happy. We all know that Iraq is a political and economic exercise, and the 'freedom' of the Iraqi peasants comes at the bottom of the list of 'things to do'.
Reply #18 from JoeUser Forums Top


The U.S. should have done things the old fashion way. Lay waste to the country, then sort it out. Fewer people to deal with!


but then canada would have been pissed at us....oh wait.....
Reply #19 from JoeUser Forums Top
Reply #19 By: MythicalMino - 1/8/2005 11:11:36 AM


The U.S. should have done things the old fashion way. Lay waste to the country, then sort it out. Fewer people to deal with!


but then canada would have been pissed at us....oh wait.....


Does that mean too late or who cares?
Reply #20 from PolMach Forums Top
ok I am going to endevor to be succient and nice at the same time'


now we know you're lying

THE WHOLE FUCKING WORLD THOUGHT SADDAM had weapons of mass destruction......... Bush did not lie ..... I respect your right to not like bush , to disagree with bush but FOR GODS SAKE MAN GET OVER IT........


and you just proved the lie in your next statement. you are the one who needs to get over it. where are the weapons? you bought into a bluff. and now you're buying into a lie. don't give me some crap about how they went to syria. we mapped every inch of iraq with satellites and there has been no evidence. Every reason for going to war has been debunked, only the lies and the dead remain.
Reply #21 from JoeUser Forums Top
You know Bahu I would like to thank you. I have been labeled a butthead by more than a few on this list. And to be frank I probably deserve the label. But you are working out to be a bigger one than me and as such it pulls the heat off me. So type your foolish head off.
Reply #22 from JoeUser Forums Top
The Capitol is now rife with miles and miles of telephone wire that has many many pairs of burning pants hanging on them.
Reply #23 from JoeUser Forums Top
Democracy is absolutely alien to the Arab mind, in short, they do not want it.


This is a false belief/assumption. The huge election turnout in Afghanistan has been sloughed off as a non-event because it doesn't fit nicely into the pessimistic view of the left which purports to know what Muslims/Arabs want. I give the left credit for doing a pretty good job of hiding their disappointment when that election went well, but their silence tells the story.

That's the thing about the left - they claim to know what everyone else wants and needs. They pride themselves on being the "voice of the unheard little guy" and are completely oblivious when "the little guy" disagrees with them & says, "No, wait, that's actually not what I want."

And to return to Bahu's initial point - the US never intended to "prevail" in Iraq. This is not the return of the Raj in another location. The intent has always been to eliminate Saddam's regime & turn the country back over to its citizens, most of whom are grateful for the opportunity, whether they "like" the current US presence or not.

Cheers,
Daiwa
Reply #24 from JoeUser Forums Top
"That's the thing about the left"


Those that think I am a left-winger, should read my website. www.sirpetermaxwell.com

Democracy is being propped up by military power in Afghanistan, the President has no control outside of Kabul, you are naive if you think a fully fledged democracy can work in the Middle East because they are all uncouth Arabs and would rather act like monkeys than English gentleman. England after all is the birth place of the modern form of democracy.
Reply #25 from JoeUser Forums Top
Your idea of democracy and those in prominent positions in the Arab world, are completely different. They are centuries behind, democracy is completely alien to the human mindset (even in our own countries we have to fight hard to preserve it) and in reality democracy can never truly exist.

Too much money is being wasted paying for Arabs to vote, when in reality, democracy must happened naturally. And besides, it should not be our concern to lose money for the sake of their "freedom" when in reality we should be looking to set up dictators that will do business with us. If it doesn't turn a profit, then it is not worth the billions.