Long-Term in Iraq

[Cancel3]

The Obama/Pinhead/Anti-War Plan, has us essentially abandoning 50 million Iraqi people who have put their faith and trust in us to see this through to the end. Abandoning our partners in the UN and the coalition. Abandoning the cause that 5000 American service men and women have given their lives for already, and thousands of others have suffered great personal loss and made great personal sacrifice to accomplish. Your plan, your idea, will make it all for nothing.

Remaining strong and focused on our objectives in Iraq, and keeping a vigilant military presence there and elsewhere in the region, will ultimately result in a fundamental change. Democratizing Iraq can have tremendous positive consequences for the region. It is one of the most 'resource-rich' areas of the middle east, and the people of Iraq have proven to be some of the smartest people on the planet. Most importantly, American success in Iraq means alQaeda failure in Iraq. That alone, should be all the motivation needed to see it through. For whatever reason, you morons think if we abandon Iraq, alQaeda is just going to shrug their shoulders and say 'oh well'. It will be the most monumental victory alQaeda has ever had, if we leave Iraq. The recruitment to their movement, the support for their insanity, will skyrocket in the wake of US departure from Iraq. The few Muslim allies we have in the region will instantly be converted to enemies of the US. And eventually...sooner or later.... US service men and women will be called to duty again, in some other obscure place, to battle these very same radical Islamic terror elements, and give their lives in even greater numbers.

You are thinking that our continued presence will cause a fundamental change in the entire region? I think you have not paid attention to the history of the area or the profound influence that the religious leaders have.

Your mentioning the fact that it is "resource rich" only adds fuel to the fire for those who believe we went to war for oil.

Also, you keep talking about the UN, but the majority of the members of the United Nations were not in favor of our invasion. Our coalition was far from what it would have been if the UN had backed us.

The idea that a victory will weaken Al-Qaeda is simply nonsense. Whether we win or lose, Al-Qaeda will have a strong base for recruiting. If we win they will recruit heavily to "remove the great satan from Iraq". If we lose, the will recruit because "we have the great satan on the run". There is no change in our war with Al-Qaeda based on victory or defeat in Iraq. But our mission was a regime change. We have accomplished that. Once the Iraqi armed forces are capable of defending their nation, we have no more business there.

The lives of 5,000 americans have already been lost for nothing. Their service was noble and honorable. But the leaders that sent them into Iraq did so under false pretenses. They lied to the american public in order to get backing for the invasion. Afganistan was the right direction, but Iraq was just bullshit. Whether we accomplish a great democracy or not does not change the sacrifice our young men and women made. It is not that tenuous or fragile. They volunteered for service and they served. They were ordered into Iraq. The military is not a democracy. So their sacrifice is the same no matter what. And the guilt of our leaders who sent them in there is the same, whether we win or not.

This is not NASCAR or monday night football. Its not about winning or losing. It is about what we accomplish. And so far, we have accomplished a regime change, split the american public, and caused the death of 5k of our soldiers.

 

[Cancel3]

End game? I would say the ultimate 'end-game' is to defeat alQaeda terrorism and the ideology which comes with it, the mentality that brought alQaeda to us. This means a fundamental change in how people think in that region, and it isn't something that is going to happen overnight, or in a few years. It will take generations to develop this cultural change, but if it works, and there is no reason to believe democracy will fail, it will change the entire situation in the Middle East. QUOTE]


So your plan is to use the military to change the way people THINK?

Can you not see how self-defeating that is? Are we going to shoot or imprison anyone who holds a certain ideology?

What makes you think we have the right to make a fundamental change in the way people think in that region?

Hell, we don't even have a democracy here, we are a republic. The majority does not rule. And you want to use the military to force a "fundamental change in how people think"? And you wonder why nations despise us?

And a big part of the instability in that region is our responsibility. We have played in the ruling of nations all over that region. We PUT Saddam in power. We removed a leader and installed the Shah in Iran, and he was far more brutal than Saddam ever dreamed of being.

We KNOW that more support and funding for the 9/11 terrorists came out of Saudi Arabia than anywhere else, but we haven't done one damn thing about it.

 

[Battleborne]

Right....did you also fail history 101!

End game? I would say the ultimate 'end-game' is to defeat alQaeda terrorism and the ideology which comes with it, the mentality that brought alQaeda to us. This means a fundamental change in how people think in that region, and it isn't something that is going to happen overnight, or in a few years. It will take generations to develop this cultural change, but if it works, and there is no reason to believe democracy will fail, it will change the entire situation in the Middle East.

_______________________________________________________________________________
Quote solitary
So your plan is to use the military to change the way people THINK?

Can you not see how self-defeating that is? Are we going to shoot or imprison anyone who holds a certain ideology?

What makes you think we have the right to make a fundamental change in the way people think in that region?

Hell, we don't even have a democracy here, we are a republic. The majority does not rule. And you want to use the military to force a "fundamental change in how people think"? And you wonder why nations despise us?

And a big part of the instability in that region is our responsibility. We have played in the ruling of nations all over that region. We PUT Saddam in power. We removed a leader and installed the Shah in Iran, and he was far more brutal than Saddam ever dreamed of being.

We KNOW that more support and funding for the 9/11 terrorists came out of Saudi Arabia than anywhere else, but we haven't done one damn thing about it.

fyi Jimmy Carter the peanut Farmer helped remove the Shah' in Iran...and see what it got us...lotsa State Department emploees a free vacation held as hostages...he even screwed up the rescue attempt...took Ronald Reagan/GHW Bush to clean up Jimmies mess!

 

[Cancel3]

fyi Jimmy Carter the peanut Farmer helped remove the Shah' in Iran...and see what it got us...lotsa State Department emploees a free vacation held as hostages...he even screwed up the rescue attempt...took Ronald Reagan/GHW Bush to clean up Jimmies mess!

The revolution in Iran was brought about by decades of brutal dictatorship of the Shah, who we supported. Carter was an inept fool, and his rescue attempts were disastrous. But the revolution that saw the overthrow of the Shah's dictatorship was mainly because of the large opposition to the Shah's capitulation laws. This is capitulation was to appease the USA.

And just as an FYI, the Shah overthrew a constitutional monarchy to take absolute power.

And we supported him for decades, because he did what we wanted him to do (for the most part).

 

[Cancel3]

My mistake that we installed the Shah. I should have said we supported him. I apologize for that error. Too many conversations at one time. But the rest of what I said stands.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

So your plan is to use the military to change the way people THINK?

No, I assumed you already understood we can't win with only a military solution. Democracy and the inherent benefits of it, will ultimately change the minds of the people in that region. WE have absolutely no way of changing minds, WE are viewed as the fundamental enemy, but the establishment of Democratic society can and will change people's minds over time.

Your mentioning the fact that it is "resource rich" only adds fuel to the fire for those who believe we went to war for oil.

Well see, that is one of the many things you and the left have been proven totally wrong on in your assumptions about this war. The reason I mentioned it, and coupled it with the fact that Iraqi's are very smart people, is the obvious combination is a formula for economic success. They have Freedom, they have Democracy, they have Resources, and they are Smart. It would be almost impossible for the Iraqi people to not enjoy greater prosperity than they did under Saddam Hussein.

For the record, I completely understand why you liberals are so fundamentally opposed to democratizing Iraq. It's because it makes it harder to Socialize the world! It would be much more conducive to your cause to leave tyrant dictators in place, as this is a more effective means of implementing your socialist views. Giving power to the people is contrary to what you hope to accomplish, so it is understandable you are opposed to the idea.

 

[Cancel3]

We liberals? I guess it makes it easier if you can pigeon-hole people into convenient slots.

Look back thru my posts and find the ones where I am in favor of socialistic measures. I think you won't find any.

Just because I believe the war in Iraq was a mistake, does not make me a liberal. It simply means I do not follow any political party's ideology.

Also, republicans have done as much to put dictators in power and to support them as the democrats. Trying to pawn that off on democrats simply shows either your ignorance of history or your willingness to present false facts to support your politics.

 

[uscitizen]

fyi Jimmy Carter the peanut Farmer helped remove the Shah' in Iran...and see what it got us...lotsa State Department emploees a free vacation held as hostages...he even screwed up the rescue attempt...took Ronald Reagan/GHW Bush to clean up Jimmies mess!

After GHWB made an under the table deal with Iran.

Remember the weapons we sold/gave to Iran an avowed ememy ?

Your mistake to bring up Regean on Iran.

Also which party put the Shaw into power , over the wishes of the people. After all the previous leader had nationalized Irans oil.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

We liberals? I guess it makes it easier if you can pigeon-hole people into convenient slots.

Look back thru my posts and find the ones where I am in favor of socialistic measures. I think you won't find any.

Just because I believe the war in Iraq was a mistake, does not make me a liberal. It simply means I do not follow any political party's ideology.

Also, republicans have done as much to put dictators in power and to support them as the democrats. Trying to pawn that off on democrats simply shows either your ignorance of history or your willingness to present false facts to support your politics.

Yes, I pretty much have determined that all liberals are also anti-war. I've not seen any exceptions to this, maybe you know of some? So, yes, I will conveniently pigeonhole you into the same slot. I don't need to look at your posts, if you are a liberal in favor of Democrat policy and anti-war, you are also a Socialist. Because you don't see yourself as a Socialist, means nothing to me.

As for your final straw man, it is not worthy of discussion. What America has done in the past has no bearing on what we should do in the future. It is precisely this kind of backward thinking we should avoid. Democrats have been very clear that they would have favored leaving Saddam in power. I didn't attribute that position to them, it was their own viewpoint and position taken, so I haven't "pawned" anything off.

 

[uscitizen]

What America has done in the past has no bearing on what we should do in the future.
//


what amazing dixie whizdom.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

What America has done in the past has no bearing on what we should do in the future.
//


what amazing dixie whizdom.

Well it's true, idiot. Thomas Jefferson owned slaves! The man who penned the Constitution, owned human beings as property! Does that mean we shouldn't have abolished slavery? Of course it doesn't! What America did in the past has no bearing on what we should do in the the future. NONE! Yet, that is precisely the idiotic argument you leftists keep wanting to present.

 

[Cancel7]

Yes, I pretty much have determined that all liberals are also anti-war. I've not seen any exceptions to this, maybe you know of some? So, yes, I will conveniently pigeonhole you into the same slot. I don't need to look at your posts, if you are a liberal in favor of Democrat policy and anti-war, you are also a Socialist. Because you don't see yourself as a Socialist, means nothing to me.

As for your final straw man, it is not worthy of discussion. What America has done in the past has no bearing on what we should do in the future. It is precisely this kind of backward thinking we should avoid. Democrats have been very clear that they would have favored leaving Saddam in power. I didn't attribute that position to them, it was their own viewpoint and position taken, so I haven't "pawned" anything off.

You know what Dixie, you put on a lot of airs, as if you are dipping your quill into a pot of ink and writing the fucking federalist papers, but all you are is an idiot, who is on the outskirts of American political opinion.

Liberals are anti-war? There is now a Super-majority of Americans who are anti-war. What are you sniffing, glue? Wake and smell the special elections, three in a row of which you lost. You lost in districts Dems are usually not even competitive in.

Piss all over this board all you want, but come November, you are going to be looking at the beginning of many years in the political wilderness. The Senate is going to be so far gone that Democrats are going to have Joe Lieberman cleaning toilets before summer is out, bowing and scraping not to be thrown out with the rest of the garbage. The majority in the House gets bigger, Obama is in the White House.

Your day is long gone, and you won't see it come back in your lifetime. You'll die with a strong Democratic congress in place, and, you'll have the pleasure of knowing you gave that to us. You and your radical-moonbat bullshit, gave this to us in the coming backlash.

So shut the fuck up and sit the fuck down now Dixie, your day is over, and it ain't never coming back. You'll die with a Democrat in the white house. There will never be another con Supreme Court pick in your lifetime. Not in your lifetime Dixie. Take your posts, and address them "Dear Penthouse, I usually don't write letters like this, but..." and put them in the mail, because that is all they are now, the sad, creepy fantasies of an old man whose day is done.

 

[Cancel3]

Yes, I pretty much have determined that all liberals are also anti-war. I've not seen any exceptions to this, maybe you know of some? So, yes, I will conveniently pigeonhole you into the same slot. I don't need to look at your posts, if you are a liberal in favor of Democrat policy and anti-war, you are also a Socialist. Because you don't see yourself as a Socialist, means nothing to me.

As for your final straw man, it is not worthy of discussion. What America has done in the past has no bearing on what we should do in the future. It is precisely this kind of backward thinking we should avoid. Democrats have been very clear that they would have favored leaving Saddam in power. I didn't attribute that position to them, it was their own viewpoint and position taken, so I haven't "pawned" anything off.

Continued delusions don't make any of them true. I am not anti-war. I am against sending our young men & women to die in a war that has no real meaning for our nation. I am all for what we did and are doing in Afganistan. But the differences between Iraq and Vietnam are mainly climate and the lies told to get us there. Those men and women who die in Iraq were not sent to protect us. They were sent there for purely political reasons. That a politician would send OUR people to die for such reasons is indefensible.

No Dixie, as hard as you may wish it I am not in favor of socialistic policies. I am completely against nationalized healthcare, nationalizing the energy industry, continued social programs that only pour money into bad situations, and even against government schools. I am a card carrying member of the NRA. I have spent my own money and time campaigning for the Fair Tax Act. I served in the military. I believe in being responsible for your own life, not waiting for some government bureaucrat to "fix" your life.

But I will not sit quietly while our honorable and brave soldiers die in a place we had no business invading. I will not sit quietly while idiots toe the party line and simply accept what is done. Right is right and wrong is wrong. I do not decide what is right or wrong based on political ideologies.


Your claim that what we have done in the past has no bearing on what we should do in the future is simply bullshit. "Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it". You claim to want to fix problems in other places around the world. How can you fix problems without addressing the causes? I am not for appeasement of our enemies. But unless you are willing to accept some responsibility for WHY they became our enemies, the list of people who wish to kill you will grow longer and longer.

And I am not talking about what happened 250 years ago. I am talking about things done in our lifetime. I am talking about things that have a profound effect on what is happening now. That you claim it is "not worthy of discussion" proves that you are either ignorant of what has happened or you know what happened and have no answer for the failings of bad policies. Either way, it makes you part of the problem.

So either get with the program or get out of the way.

 

[uscitizen]

Well it's true, idiot. Thomas Jefferson owned slaves! The man who penned the Constitution, owned human beings as property! Does that mean we shouldn't have abolished slavery? Of course it doesn't! What America did in the past has no bearing on what we should do in the the future. NONE! Yet, that is precisely the idiotic argument you leftists keep wanting to present.

The fact that Thomas Jefferson had slaves is not a biggie right now, but the fact that we have a huge national debt has no effect on our future ? or the fact thatr this war has already cost around a trillion with overall costs to be triple that if we withdrew today ?

Your binary thinking method has serious flaws.