|
Post by m on Jul 28, 2003 6:11:26 GMT -5
It sure is, and Iraq plans to pay us back the four billion a month we're spending.
|
|
|
Post by YourCapnSpeaking on Jul 29, 2003 11:50:01 GMT -5
I doubt that Iraq will be paying us back anytime soon as far as monetary amounts go. They'll probably give us some kinda oil discount or some other kind of economic repayment.
|
|
|
Post by strangelilboi on Aug 28, 2003 17:01:19 GMT -5
You mean a rather forced discount. I doubt most Iraqis actually think the US is doing them a favour.
|
|
|
Post by pettyluv on Aug 28, 2003 17:08:26 GMT -5
^Im sure that they would much rather live under the rule of Sadaam and watch their families fill his mass graves?
|
|
|
Post by YourCapnSpeaking on Aug 28, 2003 17:51:09 GMT -5
Looking at the latest news, more soldiers are dying during the occupation than when there was actual fighting. They asked whether the occupation and peace in Iraq was working.
Well, my solution to this ... ask the soldiers. See what they think and then go from there.
|
|
|
Post by strangelilboi on Aug 29, 2003 5:52:55 GMT -5
I agree ^^^. I mean its a messier job, keeping a country stable, than the actually war bit. No offence to the american army, but the British army has had a lot more experience in this sort of mission, especilaly in Northern Ireland. But then, its not like we're doing anything special there either, atm. Erm...one of the reasons people were agaisnt the war was more that it was a dream, in ways, to think that Iraq's problems could be solved jsut by removing Saddam. It jsut seems to have caused more bloodshed than was worth. I know that Saddam was a tyrant. And no one was pro-Saddam, to be honest. Not even the Iraqis. (pettyluv) How hard is it to understand that they do not see our forces as liberators? But rather as invaders...
|
|
|
Post by m on Aug 29, 2003 6:35:23 GMT -5
I'd say send our troops home and be done with it. I mean, everytime a water main is repaired or installed or the oil starts flowing, some idiot blows it up and the Iraqis are dancing in the street. I guess they don't want modern conveniences.
|
|
|
Post by paradoxPanda on Aug 29, 2003 13:16:56 GMT -5
I mean, everytime a water main is repaired or installed or the oil starts flowing, some idiot blows it up and the Iraqis are dancing in the street. I guess they don't want modern conveniences.
I get what you're saying, but the truth is it's just too hard to make generalizations about what it is that the Iraqis want.
|
|
|
Post by pettyluv on Aug 29, 2003 14:48:54 GMT -5
<<No offence to the american army, but the British army has had a lot more experience in this sort of mission, >>
The Brits are not having as hard of a time mainly because of the area of Iraq that they are occupying. All of the problems that the Americans are having in Iraq are almost exclusive to the so called "Sunni Triangle" where support for Sadaam was and does remain strong. I believe that there is still so much insurgence because there was really limited fighting in the major combat stage of the war. There really was no Battle of Baghdad or Tikrit, and because of this many of those most loyal to Sadaam still remain in the country and are ready to disrupt the rebuilding of the country by the Coalition. Most times in war, higher casulties from major combat usually eliminates much of the forces loyal to the old regime.
The idea that handing over power to the UN will calm the Iraqi population also seems erroneous, as proved by the vicious bombing and death of 17 at the UN HQ in Iraq.
I also think that if the vast majority of Iraqis saw us as invaders there would be mass uprising throughout the country. Yes, it is very horrible that American GIs continue to die nearly every day, but I see no general uprising, only pockets of resistance and guerilla fighters mostly concentrated in a small area of the country.
Also most of the Americans that have died in Iraq since the end of major combat have not been due to hostile fire or attack, rather by vehicle accidents and other reasons. You actually have a better chance of being the victim of homicide in California, than does a GI serving in Iraq.
|
|
|
Post by YourCapnSpeaking on Aug 29, 2003 16:20:16 GMT -5
Well, nowadays with how well trained our military is and how deadly it is ... it's not surprising that most deaths will result from friendly fire of some kind.
And the entire Middle East as a whole is nothing more than a God forsaken wasteland it seems. Yeah, there are some valuable things in there. But it's just a giant desert ... that entire region is a breeding ground for rebels, guerillas, and other anarchists.
You can easily disapear in the Middle East if you know how. And if you're a native to the region, it's all the more easier.
|
|
|
Post by paradoxPanda on Aug 29, 2003 19:15:10 GMT -5
The idea that handing over power to the UN will calm the Iraqi population also seems erroneous, as proved by the vicious bombing and death of 17 at the UN HQ in Iraq.
A bombing only takes one person. They don't represent the majority opinion.
Also most of the Americans that have died in Iraq since the end of major combat have not been due to hostile fire or attack, rather by vehicle accidents and other reasons. You actually have a better chance of being the victim of homicide in California, than does a GI serving in Iraq.
But you're probably more likely to die as a soldier in Iraq, than the average US citizen is of a terrorist attck. (Even if it's not true, you get what I'm saying.) More people die of killer dog attacks than killer shark attacks. The point is, we're still losing too many soldiers.
And the entire Middle East as a whole is nothing more than a God forsaken wasteland it seems.
That really is a great quote. I can't say why, but it really, really, is.
|
|
|
Post by pettyluv on Aug 29, 2003 20:11:36 GMT -5
<<A bombing only takes one person. They don't represent the majority opinion.>>
Neither does isolated incidents of sniping.
<<The point is, we're still losing too many soldiers.>>
That is absolutely true, and we need to explore our options as to the most effective way to reduce armed opposition and soldier deaths. Simply pulling out of the country will not solve the problem, and internationalizing the force is not necesarily a good decision either. I think a good solution is to train Iraqis to do security work and enhance the role of the Iraqi Governing Council at a faster rate. These terrorists in Iraq are getting desperate, they are no longer just targeting Americans, they have targeted the UN, and today they killed about 90 of their own.
|
|
|
Post by YourCapnSpeaking on Aug 29, 2003 22:05:17 GMT -5
Like I said before ... I don't think there is any solution to the Middle East issue. I say give it a few more months and see what happens. If it doesn't work, let somebody else do it.
|
|
|
Post by paradoxPanda on Aug 30, 2003 9:17:07 GMT -5
I kind of agree --- we're there, and we can't just leave, but we're certainly losing too many soldiers. I don't think taking our soldiers out will help, but I DO think we should get the UN involved.
|
|
|
Post by busybodies on Aug 30, 2003 10:25:58 GMT -5
<<And the entire Middle East as a whole is nothing more than a God forsaken wasteland it seems. Yeah, there are some valuable things in there. But it's just a giant desert ... that entire region is a breeding ground for rebels, guerillas, and other anarchists.>>
God, what a rascist remark. Do you know anything outside your country? So it's a desert. That doesn't make it a God-forsaken wasteland. If anything, it's one of the most blessed regions in the world. This isn't the only place that has terrorists, and if it wasn't for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict there wouldn't be any terrorists at all.
<<Like I said before ... I don't think there is any solution to the Middle East issue. I say give it a few more months and see what happens. If it doesn't work, let somebody else do it.>> It wasn't your problem in the first place but now you've got into it, I think you should finish it. I'm just afraid this is going to turn into another Vietnam war. I don't see any end in sight to this conflict, but it'll help if the UN is involved in the reorganization of the country.
|
|