Today in Iraq.

[mrbscott19]

Re: Today in Iraq.

I never said that MY. They have the second largest stash of oil on the planet. If it would ever start flowing again the way it was with Saddam in power, Iraq wouldn't have to worry about financial prosperity. They could redistribute that wealth to the country and the people, unlike Saddam. We removed the the one thing that stood in their way of being free. We've set up their government for them. Tell me MY, what else do we owe them?

 

[SCO]

Re: Today in Iraq.

We are getting out of there, but what we've gained will be lost if another warlord or Cleric simply replaces Saddam. Iran for example is proceding with Nuke development. THey see us as infidels worthy of extermination too. We need to contain that, not turn tail and let that way of thinking engulph the middle east. That's the forest many don't see for the trees, the big picture. This isn't just an exercise in US aggression or colonialism as many of the screamers in this country seem to think, it is to defeat an enemy that has been growing to critical mass for some time. Osama wants to overthrow Pakistan, Saudi, etc., and he was almost there pre Bush. What kind of problem will we have when that happens Mr Scott, and what kind of fanny kissing will we need to do to appease them according to the Democrat platform. Should we rattle our sabers then. What good would that do if they know we wouldn't use them.<br /><br />What if we just let the middle east be the middle east. I can go with that too. We'd have to let them exterminate Israel. Would that be satisfactory for them? Would they leave us alone or would they collectively call us the great satan and want to rid the world of our cultural influence? Even if we became energy self sufficient and sealed the borders, how powerfull would they become selling oil to a thirsty europe and china? Your guess is as good as mine. What's your long term view of what we should do and what the result will be Mr. Scott. Whats the big picture in your estimation?

 

[oddjob]

Re: Today in Iraq.

SCO,...you will probably have to wait for the next commercial break to get an answer from scott...

 

[BrianFD]

Re: Today in Iraq.

Please, guys, let's keep in the spirit of this forum, OK? How about you take your little war-of-words/politicizing down to Dockside Chat where it can be better appreciated?<br />Thanks!<br />Brian<br /><br />

 

[SCO]

Re: Today in Iraq.

Hey, I didn't start this GNN hijack and am a little surprised that JB hasn't moved it. You gotta consider it's troll like nature. We couldn't help but get into a little spat since it doesn't seem to be good news to all. How about it JB?

 

[mellowyellow]

Re: Today in Iraq.

understand his motive, but hard to keep this in<br />the vein intentioned IMO. agree with SCO and BFD<br />as usual...

 

[JB]

Re: Today in Iraq.

Moving to DC

 

[BrianFD]

Re: Today in Iraq.

JB, thanks for moving this. Hope I didn't tick you off!

 

[Elmer Fudge]

Re: Today in Iraq.

I never thought that i'd see the day when JB had to move his own topic

 

[phatmanmike]

Re: Today in Iraq.

Originally posted by Elmer Fudge:<br /> I never thought that i'd see the day when JB had to move his own topic

l o l l o l

 

[12Footer]

Re: Today in Iraq.

Originally posted by Karl Marx???:<br /> I never said that MY. They have the second largest stash of oil on the planet. If it would ever start flowing again the way it was with Saddam in power, Iraq wouldn't have to worry about financial prosperity. They could redistribute that wealth to the country and the people, unlike Saddam. We removed the the one thing that stood in their way of being free. We've set up their government for them. Tell me MY, what else do we owe them?

You guys really need to leave certain words out of your posts, if you ever intend to sucessfully mislead us from your true intent. You fully know how the "wealth was redistributed" under Sadamn's regime. We removed that, allong with the "oil-for-food" program. Now that his regime has been removed from power, the pipes and plants are blowing up somehow. The good news is, we have removed the sandman, and given soverienty BACK to the Iraqi people, who now must be allowed to form a new governing body,and at the same time, not be assasinated in the process. They are doing that. They are also rebuilding the plants and pipes as quickly as the mutant terrorists take them offline. We are there to see to it, that they get that chance.Then, we are outta there.<br />As for wealth,oil, Haliburton, and the Iraqi citezenry, Iraq can own all three under a self-governing capitalist society. Look at what happened to Japan's and Germany's resources durring and after WWII to get an idea of how a free government can reap the benifits of what was and still is THIERS.<br /><br />Of course, if Haliburton doesn't move over there and become an Iraqi-based company, they're missing the gravy-train, IMHO. <br />But it aint over yet, is it?<br />Rock on, Diemler/Chrysler!!

 

[CoachHolland]

Re: Today in Iraq.

Originally posted by mrbscott19:<br /> But thats the problem. Not many of those things are happening. Women are being brutalized and murdered more than ever because they have been given rights that Iraqi men feel they shouldn't have. Al Sadr hasn't stood down his militias, and most people in iraq still don't have power.<br /><br />We may be moving toward our objective, but it's more like a very slow crawl. The bottom line is that for every school thats built, 10 people die. Mass death will always be headline news, no matter where it happens. The people of Iraq want us gone, so we must not be doing something right.

So because women are being raped and murdered, we should allow them to be enslaved once again? We should stop building schools because a few people don't want to change the status quo in Iraq and their only answer is to kill their own countrymen? Less and less coalition forces are bing killed now. It is now the Iraqi's killing their own who actually want the changes to come about.<br /><br />Guess what? Under Saddam, Iraqi women were not only raped and killed, but they were raped, killed and tortured and it was sanctioned by the Saddam goverment. Remember his sons? Remember the torture rooms they set up specifically for those purposes?<br /><br />There are those that are going to resist change due to growing up in a hardline society and they believed in what Saddam was doing. The majority of Iraq did not.<br /><br />A long time ago, our government abolished slavery and some people weren't happy about that, so they raped and killed black women. They tortured and killed black men. It takes time to educate and change, however if we were to give up on them, then things would be no different after we leave than if we never went there in the first place.

 

[mikeandronda]

Re: Today in Iraq.

Hey we are America....No matter how you put it since we are the greatest country ever I feel with all my heart it is our job to to stand aganst evil period. Saddam was evil so be it. If you cant see he was evil well chances are you need to look into your own heart.Take the freakin politics out of it and an evil man was destroyed ........so there. As for what we are doing there now coach hit it on the head. It amazes me people can expect things to happen over night. I guess if it was a dem prez they would be defending his record there tooth and nail.

 

[mrbscott19]

Re: Today in Iraq.

Originally posted by SCO:<br /> We are getting out of there, but what we've gained will be lost if another warlord or Cleric simply replaces Saddam. Iran for example is proceding with Nuke development. THey see us as infidels worthy of extermination too. We need to contain that, not turn tail and let that way of thinking engulph the middle east. That's the forest many don't see for the trees, the big picture. This isn't just an exercise in US aggression or colonialism as many of the screamers in this country seem to think, it is to defeat an enemy that has been growing to critical mass for some time. Osama wants to overthrow Pakistan, Saudi, etc., and he was almost there pre Bush. What kind of problem will we have when that happens Mr Scott, and what kind of fanny kissing will we need to do to appease them according to the Democrat platform. Should we rattle our sabers then. What good would that do if they know we wouldn't use them.<br /><br />What if we just let the middle east be the middle east. I can go with that too. We'd have to let them exterminate Israel. Would that be satisfactory for them? Would they leave us alone or would they collectively call us the great satan and want to rid the world of our cultural influence? Even if we became energy self sufficient and sealed the borders, how powerfull would they become selling oil to a thirsty europe and china? Your guess is as good as mine. What's your long term view of what we should do and what the result will be Mr. Scott. Whats the big picture in your estimation?

For starters, read my sig. Violence only breeds violence. Regardless of whether it has good intentions behind it or not. We've no doubt made the Middle East less stable by going into Iraq, thus fueling the fire. I can't remember ever hearing about car bombs and such in such amounts in Iraq before the war. Would you disagree? <br /><br />Saudia Arabia is still on the verge of collapse, but it has little if nothing to do with OBL. But even IF OBL was able to overthrow the Sauds and Pakistan, what makes that any different than what we've done in Iraq? We've overthrown a government that we have deemed evil, or an enemy of the US, whatever you want to call it. The only difference between us and OBL in that regard is that we have succeeded. Saudi Arabia has a much worse civil rights record that Iraq. Beheadings occur daily. So why haven't we invaded them? North Korea has WMD, why don't we invade them? Iran is getting closer to nuclear capabilities, why don't we invade them? I mean, if the main reason for going into Iraq was for the WMD's, then there is no reason why we shouldn't have stopped North Korea before Iraq. Why didn't we? Simple. North Korea really does have WMD's, unlike Saddam. And the US knows they'll use them if we try what we did in Iraq.<br /><br />We cannot bring peace to the middle east by war. And now we've royally pissed off almost the entire muslim world because of what we've done. <br /><br />Does anyone even remember Afghanistan? The country is about ready to implode because we can't seem to clean up the mess we left behind. Now we have 2 countries that are falling apart that we are stuck managing and paying for. There is no doubt in my mind that in order to win this war on terror, we're going to have to hunt down each and every one of them and kill or capture them. But invading an entire country in an attempt to root out the terrorists is only going to recruit more terrorists. The war on terror will end up like the war on drugs. Unwinnable. While I know we need to stop any and all terrorists, the US needs to focus more at home than abroad. Since we started this war in Iraq, terrorist bombings have almost tripled. Now tell me thats a coincidence. You don't have to invade a country to fight terrorism. Fight the terrorists, not the people. If the people were all on our side in Iraq, then we would have no problem stopping the insurgents. People fight because they have a reason to. The way to stop terrorism is to not give people a reason to terrorize. Invading a helpless country and torturing their citizens isn't the way to win over the people.<br /><br />Long Term plan: keep hitting at terrorism without invading a sovereign(sp?) country. Do more to protect the borders of our own country.

 

[mrbscott19]

Re: Today in Iraq.

Originally posted by CoachHolland:<br />

Originally posted by mrbscott19:<br /> But thats the problem. Not many of those things are happening. Women are being brutalized and murdered more than ever because they have been given rights that Iraqi men feel they shouldn't have. Al Sadr hasn't stood down his militias, and most people in iraq still don't have power.<br /><br />We may be moving toward our objective, but it's more like a very slow crawl. The bottom line is that for every school thats built, 10 people die. Mass death will always be headline news, no matter where it happens. The people of Iraq want us gone, so we must not be doing something right.

So because women are being raped and murdered, we should allow them to be enslaved once again? We should stop building schools because a few people don't want to change the status quo in Iraq and their only answer is to kill their own countrymen? Less and less coalition forces are bing killed now. It is now the Iraqi's killing their own who actually want the changes to come about.<br /><br />Guess what? Under Saddam, Iraqi women were not only raped and killed, but they were raped, killed and tortured and it was sanctioned by the Saddam goverment. Remember his sons? Remember the torture rooms they set up specifically for those purposes?<br /><br />There are those that are going to resist change due to growing up in a hardline society and they believed in what Saddam was doing. The majority of Iraq did not.<br /><br />A long time ago, our government abolished slavery and some people weren't happy about that, so they raped and killed black women. They tortured and killed black men. It takes time to educate and change, however if we were to give up on them, then things would be no different after we leave than if we never went there in the first place.

There is 1 distinct problem with what you've said. These honor killings of women aren't being done by any government or group of people. They are being done by their own family, to restore honor to the family. That is the way they live. That is what their traditions dictate. You disgrace our family, we will kill you. Now we have given rights to these women that the family doesn't think they should have. Their muslim traditions say they shouldn't have these rights. But we're saying they can have them. Well, Iraqis obviously hold their traditional beliefs above what an outsider thinks. It's not the way it should be, but the fact that these killings have gone up since Saddam was overthrown is a good indication that we're not gonna change their minds on the issue anytime soon.

 

[SCO]

Re: Today in Iraq.

Believe it or mot Mr Scott, I respect your viewpoint, and am glad you have one with a basis. I disagree in many ways, because the the problems we now have are expected. I certainly expected hostilities and terrorism to increase when we joined the fight. You can let the the pot of oil heat till it bursts in a kitchen fire, or take some steps to avoid that and get some relatively minor burns in the process. I'll suggest another reason terrorism is increasing, because near 1/2 of us has made it known that we have caved. I guess the current revelations about alqeda casing our financial centers brings home my point that we don't have a choice...we have to fight them, its going to get hot, its no time to *****foot around. We need to attack far and wide and gather info, gain as much ground as fast as we can. Does violence breed violence??? Yes. But, appeasing them also is not the ticket, Clintons method was certainly not effective. People know we are serious now unlike before, the covert war is working because people like Mousharif(sp) know we are serious. They didn't know that before. YOu think this is hot, step back to 1944 and tell me that violence breeds violence. It is the only way to prevail and that has been true since the dawn of civilization. Thought question...why are men statistically larger than women??? ans. Natural selection. The peace mentality of the 60's is destined to become extinct, either by defeat or by its proponents waking up to a more realistic point of view. I'm all for peace, but we cant be dumb about it. The wrong attitude/philosophy can encourage aggression. I've got it, and you can quote me: Walk softly and carry a big stick.

 

[JoeW]

Re: Today in Iraq.

I agree with Boomyal's post earlier. At least since the 1960's the concept of the U.S. being the immoral imperialist has been an overarching principle in the left's campaign to regain power in this country. That concept was reenforced by the left's self proclaimed victory when the government conceeded and withdrew from Vietnam. This has somehow evolved into a doctrine that believes that anything that is in the national interest of the United States is somehow immoral. <br />Unfortunately, because this doctrine is perpetuated within our school system and our media, it becomes a self-sustaining doctrine.<br /><br />Today, many look back at the civil disobience of the 1960's as somehow their heyday. This anti-Iraq war movement that we see today is, for many, a way for them to capture or re-capture some of that "glory". <br /><br />I grew up in San Francisco during the 1960's and can tell you that, from my perspective, there was nothing glorious about it. It was a confusing mess. That's not to say that there wasn't a good cause or two mixed into the mess, but they were vitually indistinguishable from the hordes of protesters for all sorts of causes. <br /><br />That said, i considered myself liberal until I saw the Soviet threat first hand during my tour in the Army in West Germany (1970's). That, plus the negative effects of the extremely liberal policies of the West German government changed my mind. <br /><br />I guess my point here is that it's very easy to become a liberal in this country. Simply be raised with a sense of morals as we all are, go to college, read the newspaper, and watch the news on TV. <br /><br />In my view, becoming a conservative requires quite a bit more thought on the subject, and perhaps some personal experience. I undestand that many liberals will reject this idea because it's not flattering to think that such decisions or judgements have been made without much thought. That's not really what I'm suggresting. One simply needs to gains a bit more experience and use some common sense before making such a judgement.

 

[mellowyellow]

Re: Today in Iraq.

if big Al had only won his home state, he woulda won... maybe the homeboys knew?

 

[CoachHolland]

Re: Today in Iraq.

Originally posted by mrbscott19:<br />

Originally posted by CoachHolland:<br />

Originally posted by mrbscott19:<br /> But thats the problem. Not many of those things are happening. Women are being brutalized and murdered more than ever because they have been given rights that Iraqi men feel they shouldn't have. Al Sadr hasn't stood down his militias, and most people in iraq still don't have power.<br /><br />We may be moving toward our objective, but it's more like a very slow crawl. The bottom line is that for every school thats built, 10 people die. Mass death will always be headline news, no matter where it happens. The people of Iraq want us gone, so we must not be doing something right.

So because women are being raped and murdered, we should allow them to be enslaved once again? We should stop building schools because a few people don't want to change the status quo in Iraq and their only answer is to kill their own countrymen? Less and less coalition forces are bing killed now. It is now the Iraqi's killing their own who actually want the changes to come about.<br /><br />Guess what? Under Saddam, Iraqi women were not only raped and killed, but they were raped, killed and tortured and it was sanctioned by the Saddam goverment. Remember his sons? Remember the torture rooms they set up specifically for those purposes?<br /><br />There are those that are going to resist change due to growing up in a hardline society and they believed in what Saddam was doing. The majority of Iraq did not.<br /><br />A long time ago, our government abolished slavery and some people weren't happy about that, so they raped and killed black women. They tortured and killed black men. It takes time to educate and change, however if we were to give up on them, then things would be no different after we leave than if we never went there in the first place.

There is 1 distinct problem with what you've said. These honor killings of women aren't being done by any government or group of people. They are being done by their own family, to restore honor to the family. That is the way they live. That is what their traditions dictate. You disgrace our family, we will kill you. Now we have given rights to these women that the family doesn't think they should have. Their muslim traditions say they shouldn't have these rights. But we're saying they can have them. Well, Iraqis obviously hold their traditional beliefs above what an outsider thinks. It's not the way it should be, but the fact that these killings have gone up since Saddam was overthrown is a good indication that we're not gonna change their minds on the issue anytime soon.

Last counterpoint on this issue. The US is predominately a nation that believes in God. That said, look to the Old Testament and see how it is written that women are viewed as people who are not equal. The New Testament changed this some, however not completely. There are still segments of Christianity that do not allow women to do certain things.<br /><br />Same with those that follow Muslim teachings. However, there are plenty of Muslims in this country, the UK and many other "free" countries around the world. For some reason though, you don't hear about honor killings with them very often.<br /><br />You bring up a good point... to a point. You didn't hear about all these killings and bombings before the invasion of Iraq. It seems like things have only gotten worse, however that isn't the case.<br /><br />The former Iraqi goverment ran a state controlled media. The things that came out of Iraq were only things that Saddam wanted to come out. That is changed now with a media that is more free to report what is going on there today.<br /><br />Nine out of ten Afghans are registered to vote in their upcoming elections. That doesn't sound like a country ready to implode. It sounds like a place where democracy is working.<br /><br />Like I said. Education is the key to change. How anyone can expect beliefs that people have had for generations to be changed overnight is beyond me. What has to be done is for a groundwork to be laid down and then and only then should the US pull out.

 

[mrbscott19]

Re: Today in Iraq.

We didn't hear about the bombings in Iraq because they didn't happen like they do now. There weren't alot of bombings in Iraq, if any, before we removed Saddam because would-be bombers knew what would happen if they were caught. Remember what happened when the Shiites formed an uprising? Saddam destroyed anyone who opposed him. Saddam was the fear of Iraq. Nobody dared opposed him. There was no resistance against Saddam inside Iraq. <br /><br />In reference to the honor killings, I misspoke earlier when I said muslim tradition. it's not a muslim tradition, but an Iraqi tradition. The muslim religious group doesn't practice honor killings, Iraqi's do.<br /><br />Just because people want to vote in Afghanistan doesn't mean things are going well. Go do a search for Afghanistan news. Afghanistan is more unstable than Iraq right now. Opium trade is at an all-time high and the warlords are returing to power. Yes, the same ones that helped us oust the Taliban. The US thought the warlords were our allies. Wrong! They just had a common goal with the US. Get rid of the Taliban. Now they are no longer our friends and are attempting to take the country back over. They're not attacking US troops, but fighting among themselves, in the streets, with total disregard to the new government. Thats why Karzai has asked the UN for more troops, and soon.