PhillyKev 0 #1 February 18, 2004 http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=578&e=4&u=/nm/20040218/ts_nm/iraq_sanchez_dc Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #2 February 18, 2004 QuoteTroops Staying in Iraq for Years No surprise to me. We're still in Japan. We're still in Korea. We're still in Germany. And all of those places have remained peaceful since their wars. If a continual troop presence in Iraq will bring peace to the middle east, it will be well worth it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
benny 0 #3 February 18, 2004 QuoteQuoteTroops Staying in Iraq for Years No surprise to me. We're still in Japan. We're still in Korea. We're still in Germany. And all of those places have remained peaceful since their wars. If a continual troop presence in Iraq will bring peace to the middle east, it will be well worth it. I think the atmosphere is significantly different in Iraq than any of the places you mentioned John. Never go to a DZ strip show. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,120 #4 February 18, 2004 >If a continual troop presence in Iraq will bring peace to the middle >east, it will be well worth it. Having them there for a year in Iraq didn't do it. Having them there for two years in Afghanistan didn't do it. Not sure what will change in the next ten years. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
crapflinger2000 1 #5 February 18, 2004 Yes, Japan and Germany would surely have cooked off another WW if it weren't for us!!! Damn those Krauts! I bet they are massing in the Argonne right NOW!!! Hell yeah, policemen of the world!! Fuckin A Baby! __________________________________________________ What would Vic Mackey do? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #6 February 18, 2004 U.S. Marines Preparing for 'Small War' in Falluja I guess "small war" doesn't mean major hostilities since they've been over for a year. . Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gawain 0 #7 February 18, 2004 QuoteQuoteQuoteTroops Staying in Iraq for Years No surprise to me. We're still in Japan. We're still in Korea. We're still in Germany. And all of those places have remained peaceful since their wars. If a continual troop presence in Iraq will bring peace to the middle east, it will be well worth it. I think the atmosphere is significantly different in Iraq than any of the places you mentioned John. Indeed, but not at the onset of their occupation in the 40s. Either way, it was plainly noted that the campaign in Iraq would take years. I love how folks are starting to feign surprise at that prospect.So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,120 #8 February 18, 2004 >I guess "small war" doesn't mean major hostilities since they've >been over for a year. It will also be interesting to see what side the US will take if Kurdistan opposes joining an incipient theocracy in Baghdad. Will we force an independent, pseudo-democratic province to put itself under Islamic rule? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
benny 0 #9 February 18, 2004 Quote Indeed, but not at the onset of their occupation in the 40s. Either way, it was plainly noted that the campaign in Iraq would take years. I love how folks are starting to feign surprise at that prospect. The atmosphere in Iraq is nothing like any of the areas John mentioned, not even when the occupations of those places started. For one those places were all basically ethnically and religiously homogenous. Iraq is not. It's going to be a lot more difficult to try and get the Kurds and Sunnis and Shiites, etc etc ad infinitum to play nice. Never go to a DZ strip show. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Casurf1978 0 #10 February 18, 2004 Quote The atmosphere in Iraq is nothing like any of the areas John mentioned, not even when the occupations of those places started. For one those places were all basically ethnically and religiously homogenous. Iraq is not. It's going to be a lot more difficult to try and get the Kurds and Sunnis and Shiites, etc etc ad infinitum to play nice. Good point Benny. Last thing those groups want is to play nice with each other. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,120 #11 February 18, 2004 >Either way, it was plainly noted that the campaign in Iraq would take years. 'It could last six days, six weeks. I doubt six months.' Donald Rumsfeld, US Defence Secretary, 8 February 2003 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gawain 0 #12 February 18, 2004 QuoteQuote Indeed, but not at the onset of their occupation in the 40s. Either way, it was plainly noted that the campaign in Iraq would take years. I love how folks are starting to feign surprise at that prospect. The atmosphere in Iraq is nothing like any of the areas John mentioned, not even when the occupations of those places started. For one those places were all basically ethnically and religiously homogenous. Iraq is not. It's going to be a lot more difficult to try and get the Kurds and Sunnis and Shiites, etc etc ad infinitum to play nice. We are not in disagreement on that point of ethnicity. Culturally though, there was plenty of tension in the European and Asian theaters. If there wasn't the risk of another theocratic-anti-western-terror-breeding ground, part of me wishes we reexamined the pre-Iraq maps and cutlures from the early 20th century.So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gawain 0 #13 February 18, 2004 Quote>Either way, it was plainly noted that the campaign in Iraq would take years. 'It could last six days, six weeks. I doubt six months.' Donald Rumsfeld, US Defence Secretary, 8 February 2003 If I am recalling correctly, that was in response to the query about how long the major military invasion would take, not in reference to occupation.So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #14 February 18, 2004 Quoteit was plainly noted that the campaign in Iraq would take years. I love how folks are starting to feign surprise at that prospect. Yes; anyone who actually believes that nation-building on this scale can occur in just one short year, is deluding themselves. It takes a long time to drag people kicking and screaming out of the last century, into the present, and get them to accept it. And those people should also note that those Iraqis who don't like our presence there, are killing people of their own religion, in an attempt to start a civil war amongst the various factions. They even went so far as to bomb schoolchildren last week, killing several of them. Are these the people you want to assume charge of the country if we pull out? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #15 February 18, 2004 QuoteIt's going to be a lot more difficult to try and get the Kurds and Sunnis and Shiites, etc etc ad infinitum to play nice. If you were King, what action would you take in Iraq to solve the problems? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
benny 0 #16 February 18, 2004 It's not like the conflict between these people just started or is a response to our presence, our presence may exacerbate it but it's been going on for ages. Thinking that we can "drag them kicking and screaming into this century" and make them accept it is ludicrous. It took nearly 1600 years for modern western "christian" society to stop killing people in the name of god, what makes you think we can speed up the timeline in another society? Never go to a DZ strip show. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,120 #17 February 18, 2004 >Yes; anyone who actually believes that nation-building on this scale > can occur in just one short year, is deluding themselves. It takes a > long time to drag people kicking and screaming out of the last > century, into the present, and get them to accept it. It only took Bush two years to do a 180 and accept it. Nov 6th, 2000: "Let me tell you what else I'm worried about: I'm worried about an opponent who uses nation building and the military in the same sentence. See, our view of the military is for our military to be properly prepared to fight and win war and, therefore, prevent war from happening in the first place." Oct 11th, 2000: "I don't think our troops ought to be used for what's called nation-building. I think our troops ought to be used to fight and win war." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,120 #18 February 18, 2004 >If I am recalling correctly, that was in response to the query about > how long the major military invasion would take, not in reference to > occupation. Nope, it was in a speech, and he said that the conflict would take that long, not "major military invasions" or even "major combat." The full quote: "And it is not knowable if force will be used, but if it is to be used, it is not knowable how long that conflict would last. It could last, you know, six days, six weeks. I doubt six months." About a soldier a day is dying in Iraq, and today another "small war" was announced. Surely you're not going to claim there's no conflict? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,150 #19 February 18, 2004 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteTroops Staying in Iraq for Years No surprise to me. We're still in Japan. We're still in Korea. We're still in Germany. And all of those places have remained peaceful since their wars. If a continual troop presence in Iraq will bring peace to the middle east, it will be well worth it. I think the atmosphere is significantly different in Iraq than any of the places you mentioned John. Indeed, but not at the onset of their occupation in the 40s. Either way, it was plainly noted that the campaign in Iraq would take years. I love how folks are starting to feign surprise at that prospect. I have a VERY distinct recollection of a campaign statement by GWB on the topic of nation building and how we weren't going to do it. I guess this goes along with his other statements that he shortly contradicted by his own actions: the deficit, unemployment, federal spending... And then there are the WMDs he lied about too. Good job it wasn't a blow job or he'd really be in trouble.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mikkey 0 #20 February 18, 2004 QuoteQuote Indeed, but not at the onset of their occupation in the 40s. Either way, it was plainly noted that the campaign in Iraq would take years. I love how folks are starting to feign surprise at that prospect. The atmosphere in Iraq is nothing like any of the areas John mentioned, not even when the occupations of those places started. For one those places were all basically ethnically and religiously homogenous. Iraq is not. It's going to be a lot more difficult to try and get the Kurds and Sunnis and Shiites, etc etc ad infinitum to play nice. Interesting that one of the French' strongest argument against rushing to war was exactly above point and they were ridiculed by the US administration...--------------------------------------------------------- When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
b1jercat 0 #21 February 18, 2004 Kallend, I think the whole goal in Iraq is to privatize the oil supply for the good of the Iraqs. What a surprise. blues Jerry Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
benny 0 #22 February 18, 2004 QuoteQuoteQuote Indeed, but not at the onset of their occupation in the 40s. Either way, it was plainly noted that the campaign in Iraq would take years. I love how folks are starting to feign surprise at that prospect. The atmosphere in Iraq is nothing like any of the areas John mentioned, not even when the occupations of those places started. For one those places were all basically ethnically and religiously homogenous. Iraq is not. It's going to be a lot more difficult to try and get the Kurds and Sunnis and Shiites, etc etc ad infinitum to play nice. Interesting that one of the French' strongest argument against rushing to war was exactly above point and they were ridiculed by the US administration... Freedom fries my ass. I'll tell you one of the funniest things leading up to war was when they asked Jacques Chirac about the whole White House "french fry" snub. And he's like "what do I care? they came from Belgium. Yep, we used our taxpayers' hard-earned money to change those menus folks. Yours and mine. The thing is, I just think the way this administration operates is very immature. They really do act like the fourth grader who would beat the crap out of the 1st grader just because he didn't like the way he looked at him. Never go to a DZ strip show. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jimbo 0 #23 February 18, 2004 QuoteI have a VERY distinct recollection of a campaign statement by GWB on the topic of nation building and how we weren't going to do it. Would you prefer that since we've deposed Saddam Hussein that we simply pick up our toys and leave? - Jim"Like" - The modern day comma Good bye, my friends. You are missed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #24 February 18, 2004 Quote QuoteI have a VERY distinct recollection of a campaign statement by GWB on the topic of nation building and how we weren't going to do it. Would you prefer that since we've deposed Saddam Hussein that we simply pick up our toys and leave? - Jim I doubt it, but it's another good illustration of him saying something completely false. Whether for deception or through stupidity, it's an all too common occurence. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
newsstand 0 #25 February 18, 2004 I would have prefered that we not go in in the first place. Lacking that I would have prefered a plan for what to do after we toppled Saddam. Something a little more detailed than "foster democracy." Maybe this country isn't ready for democracy. I don't really think you can impose democracy. Maybe it needs a king, or maybe it needs to be a bunch of smaller countries, or maybe it needs some other solution. Our government should have thought all of that out ahead of time. Fixed a typo "Truth is tough. It will not break, like a bubble, at a touch; nay, you may kick it about all day like a football, and it will be round and full at evening." -- Oliver Wendell Holmes Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
