Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The biggest mistake in the current war -other than

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • The biggest mistake in the current war -other than

    The biggest mistake comes not from being bullish on War - are the smoke screen of WMD - or even the pursuit of an evil dictator.

    The biggest mistake - bar none - was in thinking the war had an ending point.

    When the powers that be - redivided up the world for their own purposes - the maps that were drawn never took into account long term religious beliefs and long term customs. It is the equivalent of putting square pegs in round holes.

    So the result is that you have country's in constant open civil war. You see this in Africa as well as the middle east. If people have been fighting for a number of year than just because you go in and kill some on either one or both sides - you don't end the war you just allow that war to have another enemy - you the third party.

    Now as third party you appoint yourself ruler to leave - because you know you don't want to expend the energy trying to keep two groups apart that are determiined to absolutely kill the other side to the last child.

    So as ruler to leave you hand pick people for a ruling party with members from both sides. You tell them they have to work it out - those that were in power tell you they had a solution before you came in - those that were not say no solution is possible until you kill those that have been killing them for years.

    In the meantime - you stick the thumbs of your soldiers up their asses and tell them not to make either side angry and to try not to take sides. Yeah right - doing this makes them an even bigger target for both sides. You can't fight a war- without taking a side.

    So as the politicians on both sides try to kill each other - while the new combined military and police department work to get their sides guns- your occupying force becomes increasingly hostile toward their superiors for giving them death orders and the people they are supposed to be helping for putting them in harms way.

    Since this war is officially over there are now fewer and fewer hard targets. To attack you have to wait to be attacked and find out who threw the rock. Or hope that someone turns in the rock thrower before the rock leaves their hands (and then go back and live next to the rock throwers family).

    Your options are:
    1. Leave immediately and let the inevitable civil war take place - best option for America.
    2. Fight both sides until there are no more bad guys - We don't have the necessary time (probably take another 10 years or more).
    3. Continue down the road we are on of hoping like hell they can work out a solution we approve of without further major loss of life.

    In hindsight:
    Saddam in power was better than any of the current options for a solution. Just a brutal fact.

    The future will probably be:
    We stay until Bush is out and then pull out plunging the area into civil War. Unless open civil war happens first.

    Just my thoughts.
    Turning the other cheek is better than burying the other body.

    Official Sport Lounge Sponsor of Rhode Island - Quincy Jones - Yadier Molina who knows no fear.
    God is stronger and the problem knows it.

    2017 BOTB bracket

  • #2
    I mostly agree with you but they knew 'wining the peace' would be much more difficult than winning the war and that was discussed....jut not to the extent it shoud have been.

    They underestimated how much the Sunni's would fight after having lost control of the country with Saddam's ouster over the Shiite majority.

    I totally agree with your likely outcome...we stay as long as Bush is in office and then his successor pulls us out...then the country slips into a huge civil war anyway...with the civil war threatening and/or destroynig the oil feilds. The even bigger risk is that war expands and envelops Saudi Arabia and the whole ME. Then things will be much worse...and not just for them. The uncerainty of oil supplies and a diminished capacity will hurt all the world's economies.
    Go Cards ...12 in 13.


    Comment


    • #3
      As big of a prick as Saddam was, the country was more stable with him in charge.

      He was feared enough that no one tried to pull any crap while he was in charge.


      Here's my question on this whole debacle: Considering the reports and claims that Iraq's current instability has transformed it into an even hotter spot for terrorist recruitment and training...what happens if a few years down the road, there is another terrorist attack on US soil, and it's linked back to Iraqi training grounds?

      Do we turn around and invade the new regime over there for harboring terrorists?
      " Look, forget the myths the media's created about the White House--the truth is, these are not very bright guys, and things got out of hand."

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by _STLfan_in_DFW@Aug 27 2005, 11:25 AM
        As big of a prick as Saddam was, the country was more stable with him in charge.

        He was feared enough that no one tried to pull any crap while he was in charge.


        Here's my question on this whole debacle: Considering the reports and claims that Iraq's current instability has transformed it into an even hotter spot for terrorist recruitment and training...what happens if a few years down the road, there is another terrorist attack on US soil, and it's linked back to Iraqi training grounds?

        Do we turn around and invade the new regime over there for harboring terrorists?
        Nope...just bomb the fuck out of them from the air.
        Go Cards ...12 in 13.


        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by TTB+Aug 27 2005, 11:28 AM-->
          QUOTE(TTB @ Aug 27 2005, 11:28 AM)

        • #6
          Originally posted by Schwahalala@Aug 27 2005, 10:07 AM

          In hindsight:
          Saddam in power was better than any of the current options for a solution. Just a brutal fact.

          A point I have made repeatedly for some time now.

          Absent WMD's there was no good reason to go into Iraq. The unfortunate thing is that America's withdrawal at this time could create a power void that creates another Afghanistan pre-U.S. invasion, a veritable incubator for terrorists.

          I fear that our arrogance has led us into another Vietnam.
          Sponsor of Alex Pieterangelo.

          ..."I spent a lot of money on booze, birds and fast cars. The rest I just squandered." George Best

          Comment


          • #7
            Originally posted by hkyfan+Aug 27 2005, 11:36 AM-->
            QUOTE(hkyfan @ Aug 27 2005, 11:36 AM)

          • #8
            Originally posted by Schwahalala@Aug 27 2005, 10:07 AM
            let the inevitable civil war take place - best option for America.

            This is really the best option as far as destroying Iraqi nationalism and weakening any future possibility of a strong Iraqi state with control of its own resources and enterprises.

            The US choosing Islamic Fundamentalism over a secular state with a centralized government means the US chooses civil war against Sunnis instead of bringing them into negotiations.
            Damn these electric sex pants!

            26+31+34+42+44+46+64+67+82+06 = 10

            Bring back the death penalty for corporations!

            Comment


            • #9
              Originally posted by hkyfan+Aug 27 2005, 11:36 AM-->
              QUOTE(hkyfan @ Aug 27 2005, 11:36 AM)

            • #10
              Originally posted by dredbyrd+Aug 27 2005, 11:44 AM-->
              QUOTE(dredbyrd @ Aug 27 2005, 11:44 AM)

            • #11
              Originally posted by TTB+Aug 27 2005, 10:46 AM-->
              QUOTE(TTB @ Aug 27 2005, 10:46 AM)
              Originally posted by [email protected] 27 2005, 11:44 AM

            • #12
              Originally posted by dredbyrd+Aug 27 2005, 11:44 AM-->
              QUOTE(dredbyrd @ Aug 27 2005, 11:44 AM)

            • #13
              Originally posted by dredbyrd+Aug 27 2005, 11:49 AM-->
              QUOTE(dredbyrd @ Aug 27 2005, 11:49 AM)
              Originally posted by [email protected] 27 2005, 10:46 AM
              Originally posted by [email protected] 27 2005, 11:44 AM

            • #14
              It's time to admit we have made some mistakes and for Dubya to marshal the forces at his disposal to attack the problem utilizing our nations best military minds. Forget the bullshit from Rove and Cheney and Rummy and allow the joint chiefs in concert with a few national leaders such as McCain, Hagel, Lieberman etc to try and determine the best U.S. policy as we move forward.

              We're engaged now and a complete and quick withdrawal at this time probably leaves us in a bigger mess than we faced four years ago with a Taliban and AQ infested Afghanistan and a Saddam led Iraq.
              Sponsor of Alex Pieterangelo.

              ..."I spent a lot of money on booze, birds and fast cars. The rest I just squandered." George Best

              Comment


              • #15
                This is just a real clusterfuck.

                I'd like to just yank everyone out of there and bring them home...

                On the other hand, we invaded...we turned the place into the disorganized goat rope it is now...

                We can't really just drop everything, apologize for fucking everything up, tell them it's become "hard work" trying to fix everything, and bid them good luck on our way out the door...
                " Look, forget the myths the media's created about the White House--the truth is, these are not very bright guys, and things got out of hand."

                Comment

                Working...
                X