Thoughts on the reaction of the Iraqi people, government, insurgents, and "military".

As well as the reaction of the middle east in general.

10/18/2006 1:23:27 PM

if we stay there, more innocents will die

if we leave, the entire war will be a waste

10/18/2006 1:25:25 PM

if we stay there, more innocents will die, the entire war will be a waste, and it'll cost more taxpayer dollars.

if we leave, more innocents will die, the entire war will be a waste, but at least our tax dollars won't be wasted in Iraq.

Yeah, i know, this horse is dead.

but I care about my tax dollars more than dead Iraqis.

10/18/2006 1:29:42 PM

^^ the entire war will be a waste?
but we conclusively determined there are no WMDs.... so.... at least now we know they aren't a threat to us.
And we removed Sadaam.
and freedom is on the march, right?

10/18/2006 1:33:39 PM

ok fine

lets leave the middle east altogether


and when the shit hits the fan, I hope they don't look to us for ANYTHING

thats what I'm down for

and when an islamic extremist commits a terrorist act against us, unleash hell

10/18/2006 1:33:57 PM

We fucked ourselves properly. We have congressmen and women to this day that still don't know the differences between shiite and sunni

http://mediamatters.org/items/200610170008

I see all possible scenarios from this point as a loss in some form or the other.

We nearly have to stay as a service to the people of Iraq, and so that we don't lose international credibility.

If we leave, we're rightly fucked for having international support needed if we really do have to do something in Iran or NK.


We're just fucked, period. Would should have stayed over here on our side of the pond, and stopped making so much noise drawing attention to ourselves. We should have shored up our defenses at home, and realized that despite how evil 9/11, invading countries was not the way to solve the problem.

[Turkish from Snatch]We're proper fucked[/Turkish]

10/18/2006 1:41:15 PM

bttt

10/26/2006 11:25:36 AM

Quote :

"we conclusively determined there are no WMDs"

http://www.thewolfweb.com/message_topic.aspx?topic=440880

10/26/2006 11:27:23 AM

either way, the entire war is a waste

you can either look good and the war be a waste
or look bad and the war be a waste

so you might as well put up a screen and pretend you know're in control and everything is fine and look good.

10/26/2006 9:52:19 PM

if we stay, we're turning the corner

if we leave, we're turning the corner

10/26/2006 10:03:25 PM

If we stay we need a much larger commitment and thats not gonna happen. We need more troops and more money spent on sustainable redevelopment

10/26/2006 10:15:05 PM

Send an additional 250,000 troops.

10/26/2006 10:41:15 PM

Quote :

"WASHINGTON (AP) -- Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said Thursday that anyone demanding deadlines for progress in Iraq should "just back off," because it is too difficult to predict when Iraqis will resume control of their country. During an often-combative Pentagon news conference, Rumsfeld said that while benchmarks for security, political and economic progress are valuable, "it's difficult. We're looking out into the future. No one can predict the future with absolute certainty.""

But didn't they do just that? Claiming a short campaign, not cost too much money, and the Iraqis would stand up soon and take over things?

ISN'T THIS WHAT THEY TOLD THE AMERICAN PEOPLE

WITH GREAT CONFIDENCE AND BRAVADO?

WHEN WILL A HEAD ROLL FOR BEING INCAPABLE OF DOING THE JOB CORRECTLY?

10/27/2006 10:23:58 AM

Quote :

"We're just fucked, period. "

Pretty much. Bottom line is if we leave we leave Iraq in a state of turmoil and don't get any benefit politically or economically (oil) from being there. If we stay we're continuing to spend enormous amounts of money and losing more American lives. Somewhere in the middle is the fact that we didn't find any of the things we came for...

10/27/2006 12:07:44 PM

Quote :

"OUR NATIONAL STRATEGY FOR VICTORY IN IRAQ: Helping the Iraqi People Defeat the Terrorists and Build an Inclusive Democratic State PART I -- STRATEGIC OVERVIEW "Our mission in Iraq is clear. We're hunting down the terrorists. We're helping Iraqis build a free nation that is an ally in the war on terror. We're advancing freedom in the broader Middle East. We are removing a source of violence and instability, and laying the foundation of peace for our children and grandchildren." -- President George W. Bush June 28, 2003 VICTORY IN IRAQ DEFINED As the central front in the global war on terror, success in Iraq is an essential element in the long war against the ideology that breeds international terrorism. Unlike past wars, however, victory in Iraq will not come in the form of an enemy's surrender, or be signaled by a single particular event -- there will be no Battleship Missouri, no Appomattox. The ultimate victory will be achieved in stages, and we expect: * In the short term: o An Iraq that is making steady progress in fighting terrorists and neutralizing the insurgency, meeting political milestones; building democratic institutions; standing up robust security forces to gather intelligence, destroy terrorist networks, and maintain security; and tackling key economic reforms to lay the foundation for a sound economy. * In the medium term: o An Iraq that is in the lead defeating terrorists and insurgents and providing its own security, with a constitutional, elected government in place, providing an inspiring example to reformers in the region, and well on its way to achieving its economic potential. * In the longer term: o An Iraq that has defeated the terrorists and neutralized the insurgency. o An Iraq that is peaceful, united, stable, democratic, and secure, where Iraqis have the institutions and resources they need to govern themselves justly and provide security for their country. o An Iraq that is a partner in the global war on terror and the fight against the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, integrated into the international community, an engine for regional economic growth, and proving the fruits of democratic governance to the region. "

You can read the entire "Plan for Victory" here:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/iraq/iraq_national_strategy_20051130.pdf

10/27/2006 1:00:36 PM

How many more American sacrifices need to be made for this illegal war? We have been lied to time and time again! It's time to get hell out of there and bring our troops home. This war is about money, oil, and military bases. Our government doesn't give a damn about us. What makes you think they care about the Iraqis?

10/28/2006 5:00:13 AM

Consequences of staying:

-Cost.

-More of our military forces will die.

-Loss of morale in troops and reserves, there's a serious manpower problem right now.

-Leverage with troops, right now we're overextended, so if a problem props up in, say, North Korea, we will have to either do nothing to the PRK or we're gonna have to move troops out of Iraq, which would put forces still there at increased risk.

Consequences of leaving:

-Loss of respect from Middle East states that were our government's (if not public's) friends: Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain. Some of those more than others.

-Loss of respect for a world context. For all extensive purposes, when we overthrew Saddam we pretty much made Iraq an American colony. We don't call such things colonies for political reasons, but that was what it was. If we do leave without things in a "right" state, we're not much better than European powers in the 1950s that clung to their status as overlord power over African colonies, only to leave when there was a conflict going on so as to wash their hands of the matter once they lost interest. See Belgium and the Congo as an example of what I am thinking. Pretty much, we would never be able to do what we did in Iraq, as an occupying power trying to create a new government from ashes, again for the foreseeable future.

-Gives Muslim fanatics the idea they won, which will increase their recruiting and money resources.

-Loss of influence in Middle Eastern affairs. This has already happened pretty much though, so this may not be a real consequence.

-Open the door for Iran to have great influence over the Shia part of Iraq.

-Potential problem of a breakaway state into three segments. If this happened, the Shia part would be dominated by Iran. The Sunni part would be powerless due to no oil money in their part of the country. The Kurd part would be a potential problem cause Turkey has stated they will never accept an independent Kurdish state cause that would cause Kurdish populations in their country to want to secede to help form a future Kurdistan.

-Lack of order in this part of the world is not good for anybody.

[Edited on October 28, 2006 at 3:37 PM. Reason : /]

10/28/2006 3:34:49 PM

Quote :

"if we stay there, more innocents will die if we leave, the entire war will be a waste"

Quote :

"In economics and in business decision-making, sunk costs are costs that have already been incurred and which cannot be recovered to any significant degree. Sunk costs are sometimes contrasted with variable costs, which are the costs that will change due to the proposed course of action. In microeconomic theory, only variable costs are relevant to a decision. Economics proposes that one should not let sunk costs influence one's decisions, because doing so would not be assessing a decision exclusively on its own. Sunk costs may cause cost overrun."

10/28/2006 4:34:08 PM

I guess the real question is when we leave, how many refugees are we gonna take back to the United States?

You know there are alot of Iraqis that are known among their friends/families to be collaborators with U.S. troops. These people are going to want out when the US leaves.

10/28/2006 8:58:18 PM

^who fucking cares either way?

10/29/2006 12:33:06 AM

^^ I once read an axiom describing our country's policies after wars ended: there's nothing more useless than a former ally.

10/29/2006 10:51:48 AM

Quote :

"^who fucking cares either way?"

It goes back to the point of foreign policy. When the U.S. leaves, these people can/will be exploited by those who take over power in the region.

This will make our already bad image look even worse as we are seen abandoning all those who we were supposed to be protecting/helping in the first place.

Our actions will be seen (if not already) for what they are worth....for our own interests. Either way, the situation in Iraq is going to ge worse before it ever gets better.

10/29/2006 6:51:32 PM

^that is retarded. That's the kind of opinion you might have if you were talking about fake, ivory tower constructions of foreign policy. In this situation given the context and the history, the things muslims want the most is for the west to get the fuck out of the middle east. They couldn't care less about getting handouts and being "helped" by the US.

The cases where the US has meaningfully helped other countries are few and exceptional, especially when the people being helped are culturally very different. The only people who believe this kind of policy works are naive liberals.

What will actually happen is that

1. The sunni-shia conflict will once again come to the foreground, with shia dominated iraq aligning itself with Iran
2. All muslims will focus on Israel
3. All muslims focus on their own internal reforms (aka, a revival of fundamentalists versus reformists, which was developing before GWB's axis of evil proclamation and invasions)

[Edited on October 29, 2006 at 10:00 PM. Reason : 79874]

10/29/2006 9:57:37 PM

^Whats retarded is you acting like you actually "know" what is going to happen.

And as for your "Ivory Tower" comment, I have served in the U.S. Army as an Infantryman, I know exactly what I am talking about but I don't go around telling people what "is" going to happen because NOBODY knows.


You don't know what is going to happen, nobody does, all you can do it try and predict with what we know right now. You only make yourself look incompetent by saying shit like this:

Quote :

"What will actually happen is that"

10/29/2006 10:05:00 PM

It's exactly that kind of ignorant hand-wringing that is paralyzing our foreign policy. "Woe is me, I'm wholly ignorant about the middle east, so instead of confronting my own ignorance, I'll assert that we can't really know what will happen -- making it possible for me to suggest any old stupid idea"

We have a bunch of idiots who don't want to admit that what is happening now in the middle east is just a replay of what has been happening there for hundreds of years. Instead, we've taken three years to run through the gamut of stupid ideas before realizing that the US will not, cannot, and should not succeed in nation building in the muslim middle east.

[Edited on October 29, 2006 at 10:18 PM. Reason : sdf]

10/29/2006 10:16:06 PM

I actually agree with you. I'd like to see us out of the ME as soon as possible.

The only thing is that our exit planning/strategy is going to have to involve some type of deal with those who have been working with the U.S. from day one. (whether its extradite them to U.S. or to safer region) Those who will be the targets of attacks when the U.S. leaves.

Quote :

""Woe is me, I'm wholly ignorant about the middle east, so instead of confronting my own ignorance, I'll assert that we can't really know what will happen -- making it possible for me to suggest any old stupid idea""

I don't know what this is in reference to in this thread. It can't be to any of my posts so.....w/e

[Edited on October 29, 2006 at 10:25 PM. Reason : .]

10/29/2006 10:21:39 PM

do you want another government controlled war? see vietnam for the success of a govt. controlled limited war.... it doesn't work (btw didn't dems control most of the govt. then?)

let the military do what it thinks it needs to do and then strongly suggest leaving at the earliest realistic time.

11/13/2006 8:11:42 AM