So, if this plan was formulated 3 years before Bush, does that mean that Clinton sponsored the effort?
I think that any rational- thinking human being that has at least a modicum of political saavy knew that we'd have to deal with Saddam again after the first Gulf War because we failed to permanently cripple his regime then. (Thanks to the UN who didn't want a neutered Iraq at the time) It was that poor decision then that led to the inevitable need for us to return to Iraq.

As for imposing our form of government on a tribal culture, only time will tell. There are still a lot of fresh, open wounds caused by the Sunis. I don't expect the Kurds and Shi'ia to embrace them at the moment. But, who knows, even dogs and cats can co-exist if they develop trust.

 

The Iraqi people have the perception that we are brutalizing them. I heard an interview broadcast over the radio where Iraqi citizens believed that becasue no US soldiers were injured in the car bombing that killed 50 Iraqi civilians, the US planned it. Some go so far as to believe it was a missle strike by the US.

No matter what the objective facts are, perception will become the truth that motivates Iraqi citizens to armed revolt.

The only difference here is we had support of both the legitimate government and the general populace of both countries. We have neither in Iraq.

Whistler

 

I find it hard to believe that if George Bush would have come on television a year ago and told the American people the real monetary, personal, and long term logistical costs of this war if even the most hardcore Republicans would have been on board. We are learning a very real and costly lesson on why you get the UN and world community onboard before invading another country that is not an immediate threat to you. Considering the obstacles that lie ahead, I don't know if they'll ever be a great time to pull out of Iraq. What good is a democracy that only works when there are 100,000 US troops to enforce it??

 

Dont believe everything you here on arab radio!

 

Unfortunately it was not Arab radio, cartwright. Wish it was. Whether it's true or not is another thing.

 

I heard this on Minnesota Public Radio through a correspondant with the BBC, IIRC.

After the bomb exploded killing the Iraqi applicants a mob of other Iraqi's stormed the policestation chanting something along the lines of "Down with the US". This group stormed the building because they believed the US was responsible. The interview was with several of these people (angry Iraqi citizens).

This sort of perception is difficult to fight. American credibility is non-existant for many Iraqi citizens.

Whistler

 

I guess what I'm failing to understand is our administration's apparant lack of recognition for the civil aspect of a Western style democracy separating church and state ever working in a nation driven by a devotion to Islamic Law, additionally complicated by sect and ethnic differences. Under those circumstances in that part of the world only a monarchy or other single seat of power with control of the military has successfully held power for any period of time. To me, it looks like we're going to have to keep guns pointed at the citizens of Iraq to retain a democratic presence of government, not unlike any other colony long accustomed to self-rule.

Without holding absolute military power over the entire country, those bases would be Fort Apache style outposts. SA was a benevolent host who, for a period of time, wanted us there.

From your viewpoint, I'm seeing a desire for long-term occupation of Iraq regardless of the expense or loss of US troops. Since the pencil has been put to the numbers and there's no US financial gain involved with long-term opposed occupation, may I ask if your views are prompted by support of current administration policy or?

 

I'd suggest that you listen to more credible news sources in the future.
I have had contact with a friend's son who is in Iraq today and he says otherwise. I tend to believe him.

 

The word Ive been getting is that the large majority of the Iraqis dont want the U.S. to leave any time soon. Of course there are some that will always hate us, they would even if we had never gone in. Iraq is more secular than other Arab states and most of the extremists are being sponsored from Iran (go figure).

 

.................Every overt action in Iraq will be to mask the failure(s) of the Bush White house in both the lack of proper planning for a civilian police force and to deny any foundation for a Rationale for the obvious need for an increase of American troops to fulfill all the Needs that the ongoing WAR effort needs. To admit that we have an obvious lack of troop strength is equivalent to admitting that we should have fashioned a WAR effort with France, Germany , etc.
.................The nation building effort in both Afghanistan and Iraq will Ultimately fail because the war lords don't want or need a Democracy to validate how they Rule their piece of the geographic pie. The russians tried for 10 years to teach the Camel Racers how to Drink Vodka and eat borst. They would have none of it. Most thieves missing one or more fingers or toes know Exactly who "Big Daddy" really is and Will Be when the Last AmeriKan soldier leaves to come home.
.................Any governmental structure that we try to Implement that disinfranchises the War Lords and gives the People Power is going to be as stable as a 5 pound Ball of Cotton candy on a Hot day at Coney Island. We are going to learn some very valuable lessons by the time this exercise in Nation building is finished.,......s.kuteman

 

The ONLY reason the Russians lost Afghanistan was because of the U.S. and British advisors on the ground there, and the endless supply of weapons from China. Dont believe all the propoganda about the" great Islamic warriors" defeating the Russian superpower because it didnt happen that way. Before we got involved Ivan was kicking the tar out of the Affies, and they would still be there had the C.I.A., SF, and S.A.S not gotten involved. We can stay there as long as we choose to, and the same is true for Iraq!

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by skuteman
.................Every overt action in Iraq will be to mask the failure(s) of the Bush White house in both the lack of proper planning for a civilian police force and to deny any foundation for a Rationale for the obvious need for an increase of American troops to fulfill all the Needs that the ongoing WAR effort needs. To admit that we have an obvious lack of troop strength is equivalent to admitting that we should have fashioned a WAR effort with France, Germany , etc.

The problem isn't that we don't have enough troops in Iraq. We had more than what was needed to win the war. What we need in Iraq now is an army of policemen, not soldiers. The soldiers did their job with haste. They won the war too fast to allow planners to plan for peace.

.................The nation building effort in both Afghanistan and Iraq will Ultimately fail because the war lords don't want or need a Democracy to validate how they Rule their piece of the geographic pie. The russians tried for 10 years to teach the Camel Racers how to Drink Vodka and eat borst. They would have none of it. Most thieves missing one or more fingers or toes know Exactly who "Big Daddy" really is and Will Be when the Last AmeriKan soldier leaves to come home.
The Russian intent was never to allow Afghanistan to be a sovereign nation. Russia wanted to control and exploit the country, unlike the US, which wants them to control themselves. There's a BIG difference there.

.................Any governmental structure that we try to Implement that disinfranchises the War Lords and gives the People Power is going to be as stable as a 5 pound Ball of Cotton candy on a Hot day at Coney Island. We are going to learn some very valuable lessons by the time this exercise in Nation building is finished.,......s.kuteman

I disagree. The speed in which a determined Allied military took out the Taliban and Saddam will cause would-be warlords to take pause. The giant has been awakened; I don't think he'll be going back into hybernation for quite a while.

 

With the US pumping arms (especially shoulder-launched Stingers that had a pension for Russian gunships) into Afghanistan and the training/support mentioned above, it simply became uneconomical for the USSR to continue pouring money into Afghanistan. Their economy couldn't handle the cost.
By contrast, the US spends $100Billions in Iraq and US citizens complain because they won't be able to Supersize their fries at McDonald's as a result.

 

I guess you're saying that our economy CAN handle the cost. Where did the $100 billion figure come from?? We probably used that up before the first week of the invasion ended. Obviously, we have the money to fund the war, it's more about making a choice. Just like Russia, every dollar that is diverted to military conflicts like Iraq is a dollar that could be spent somewhere else in your domestic economy. In addition, the human resources at the highest level of this administration are continually being diverted/distracted away from the issues within our own country.

 

Ahhh, yes. The BBC, a pack of liars and conspiracists, all of them. I'm sure they really didn't interview the protesters. In fact, I bet those were hired actors speaking in Arabic sitting in a London recording studio being told by the 'correspondant' what to say.




Whistler