lawrocket 3 #1 December 23, 2004 I haven't heard it articulated, and I know it's different now than it was a year ago. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #2 December 23, 2004 A very good question but one (I'm sure) for which no one here is qualified to answer ....... but that's never stopped us in the past, so here goes my opionions.... (1) destabalisation and subsequent disolution of the UN for which American Leaders appear to set very little store by (hence they dont pay their full dues ..... waits for rant to start..... but before yous start do some research on USA & UN & I.O.U etc...) (2) The US will not leave the region, but will build a strategic enclave in the middle east, which will be garrisoned to provide a show of strength (kind of like a naval Fleet but somewhat less manoverable!) (3) Oh Yes and Oil .... but not just the stuff it's self which is clearly important to the USA, seeing as they currently use more than anyone else put together ... but the sale of oil has been historically made in $US this has changed in recent years with some transactions made in Euros (Iraq was doing this) - so if The US controls the sale of Iraqi oil then I suspect that all future sales would be made in $US (4) Oh yes and natural resources ,,,, maybe oil, who can tell .... With the recent increase in the Indian econnomy and some time soon China will follow suit (in a very...very big way) and the soon to be MASSIVE increase in these 2 nations requirements and demand for oil ... it would suit the US rather well to be sat on top of a rather large bucket of the stuff right about now! (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AndyMan 7 #3 December 23, 2004 That's funny. You think there is one! _Am__ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,175 #4 December 23, 2004 QuoteThat's funny. You think there is one! _Am In March 2003 the end game was to have it all completed in six months (quotes on request). It is therefore a reasonable inference that the folks at the top don't have a f**king clue.... 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
SpeedRacer 1 #5 December 23, 2004 Where the hell is Ivan when you need him? http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=1377553;sb=post_latest_reply;so=ASC;forum_view=forum_view_collapsed;;page=unread#unread Speed Racer -------------------------------------------------- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChasingBlueSky 0 #6 December 24, 2004 QuoteI haven't heard it articulated, and I know it's different now than it was a year ago. Bush will close his eyes and cross his fingers._________________________________________ you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me.... I WILL fly again..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dorbie 0 #7 December 24, 2004 QuoteI haven't heard it articulated, and I know it's different now than it was a year ago. It has been articulated many times and I don't think it has changed recently. A representative government, prefferably a stable democracy with domestic credibility and a gradual reduction of forces in the region with defense and civil order duties handed over to Iraqi units. How soon is completely undetermined, nothing short of years. The deadline for the elections hasn't changed (it wouldn't surprise me if it did), that's just the first step. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
slug 1 #8 December 24, 2004 QuoteQuoteThat's funny. You think there is one! _Am In March 2003 the end game was to have it all completed in six months (quotes on request). It is therefore a reasonable inference that the folks at the top don't have a f**king clue. Negative End game is still the same 6 months we be gone May 2005. R.i.P. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,175 #9 December 24, 2004 QuoteQuoteQuoteThat's funny. You think there is one! _Am In March 2003 the end game was to have it all completed in six months (quotes on request). It is therefore a reasonable inference that the folks at the top don't have a f**king clue. Negative End game is still the same 6 months we be gone May 2005. R.i.P. Your saying the endgame is "gone in 6 months", always has been , always will be?... 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
slug 1 #10 December 24, 2004 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteThat's funny. You think there is one! _Am In March 2003 the end game was to have it all completed in six months (quotes on request). It is therefore a reasonable inference that the folks at the top don't have a f**king clue. Negative End game is still the same 6 months we be gone May 2005. R.i.P. Your saying the endgame is "gone in 6 months", always has been , always will be? Affirmative If you don't want to cry you got to laugh. SC is bullshit just argueing in circles. As you were Resume marching in a CC circle. R.I.P. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tantalum 0 #11 December 24, 2004 Putting Saddam Hussein back into power? After all, 9 out of 10 Iraqis prefer the Hussein government to the liberation by US Forces. (Among those killed by the US, it's 10 out of 10). Hussein was the right lid for the (Iraqi) kettle. And no, democracy is not the only or right answer for every culture on this planet. After all, who are we teach a 1000+-year old society how to run their country. And while Hussein was no choir boy, he, arguably, killed less people than Bush and his invasion. QuoteI haven't heard it articulated, and I know it's different now than it was a year ago. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tantalum 0 #12 December 24, 2004 On another note: I predicted some two years ago that the US will never ever win this war. Why? Simple: the Iraqis have nowhere to go and their only option is to fight. If it gets too hot for the American boys they will ship back home (cf. Viet Nam). Similarly, while I like and respect the US, if they were to invade my country, I'd be fighting them teeth and nails. And so would you if the Iraqis invaded Iowa or Indiana... End game? Retreat only, just as in 'Nam. Only this time, the world willl be a lot less safe leaving behind a self-created terrorists' paradise. QuoteI haven't heard it articulated, and I know it's different now than it was a year ago. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ahegeman 0 #13 December 24, 2004 Quotethe Iraqis have nowhere to go and their only option is to fight That's a good argument, but I think it only holds water if the Iraqi's don't believe we want out ASAP. I'm sure many HAVE bought into the propaganda that we are there for the oil and want to stay forever, but I think it is pretty well established that we wanted out as quickly as possible from the very beginning. Perhaps we need to articulate that message better to ensure our success.--------------------------------------------------------------- There is a fine line between 'hobby' and 'mental illness'. --Dave Barry Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SpeedRacer 1 #14 December 24, 2004 QuoteAnd while Hussein was no choir boy, he, arguably, killed less people than Bush and his invasion. even I don't believe that. Saddam's numbers are way higher. QuoteAfter all, 9 out of 10 Iraqis prefer the Hussein government to the liberation by US Forces. ( source? Speed Racer -------------------------------------------------- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freeryde13 0 #15 December 25, 2004 i agree with you.... my thing is why doesn't bush just be honest about it. but even that seems short term . i don't know if the math works out. will the money spent on the war be recouped by the oil sales . or will the tax payers be footing the bill for the oil companies to make all the profits. i think the second will be true which makes this a true crime, probrobly the biggest theft of all time since bush is in the oil bussiness and stands to profit directly or indirectly from it. it seems that the billion a week spent on the war though, would be better spent for research and development on new energy technology sources. instead, the other countrys who are cut out of the oil will spend money on these technologies and be farther ahead when the oil does run out. i think bush is really doing a diservice to our long term positioning._________________________________________ people see me as a challenge to their balance Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Botellines 0 #16 December 25, 2004 You may want out ASAP as long as you leave a puppet government that can be controled remotely from wasinghton DC. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tantalum 0 #17 December 25, 2004 QuoteQuoteAnd while Hussein was no choir boy, he, arguably, killed less people than Bush and his invasion. even I don't believe that. Saddam's numbers are way higher. Excellent reply. But to the dead it doesn't matter who killed them. Their only wish is to have lived another day... QuoteAfter all, 9 out of 10 Iraqis prefer the Hussein government to the liberation by US Forces. ( source? Source? Iraqis just like you and me!... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SpeedRacer 1 #18 December 26, 2004 QuoteSource? Iraqis just like you and me!... um I'm not an Iraqi. And, I assume you are Iraqi, where do you get your source for the 90%.? because your ideas do not correspond with most blogs I have read. But if you believe that blogsare BS., fine, but post evidence. By the way, ARE you an Iraqi? I really want to know what's going on there. Not just propaganda from either the left or the right of the war. But that's probably wishful thinking. Speed Racer -------------------------------------------------- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tantalum 0 #19 December 28, 2004 SpeedR: I truely appreciate and recognize your rational response in this overcharged forum. And no: I am not Iraqi either, but I can, through personal background and experience, relate a lot more. W/o going into further details or arguing: democracy is not the only option, christianity isn't. As long as we try to impose our society/culture on others (who have been in existence for, at least, 1,800 more yrs than the US), we will, sadly, always loose. Maybe there is something we can learn from Iraq instead....? QuoteQuoteSource? Iraqis just like you and me!... um I'm not an Iraqi. And, I assume you are Iraqi, where do you get your source for the 90%.? because your ideas do not correspond with most blogs I have read. But if you believe that blogsare BS., fine, but post evidence. By the way, ARE you an Iraqi? I really want to know what's going on there. Not just propaganda from either the left or the right of the war. But that's probably wishful thinking. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pajarito 0 #20 December 28, 2004 QuoteIn March 2003 the end game was to have it all completed in six months (quotes on request). It is therefore a reasonable inference that the folks at the top don't have a f**king clue. And your choice for "folks at the top" would have it all figured out by now, right? Or would they follow their past reputations and just cut and run like fu$%ing cowards? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dorbie 0 #21 December 28, 2004 QuoteQuotethe Iraqis have nowhere to go and their only option is to fight That's a good argument, but I think it only holds water if the Iraqi's don't believe we want out ASAP. I'm sure many HAVE bought into the propaganda that we are there for the oil and want to stay forever, but I think it is pretty well established that we wanted out as quickly as possible from the very beginning. Perhaps we need to articulate that message better to ensure our success. This is a double edged sword for us. While we want to convey that the Iraqis will control their own destiny they need to have confidence that their democratic system will be viable and have support. If you overplay the exit strategy you merely bolster the enemy, letting them know they need only wait for you to leave before intimidating and strangling whatever regime remains. It's really about the Iraqi mindset, and the impression they have of their own system and its viability. It's a very difficult equation but the answer is not to leave early if you want the long term outcome to be a positive one. That's not guaranteed by staying of course, therein lies the dilema. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,175 #22 December 28, 2004 QuoteQuoteIn March 2003 the end game was to have it all completed in six months (quotes on request). It is therefore a reasonable inference that the folks at the top don't have a f**king clue. And your choice for "folks at the top" would have it all figured out by now, right? Or would they follow their past reputations and just cut and run like fu$%ing cowards? Just because your choice FUBARd majorly, why does that require my choice to figure out how to fix your choice's FU?... 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
