House passes HR 2956 (223-201) Redeployment from Iraq Act

Well, I'm not condoning Gator's COA here, but I do think he's right about one thing...What we're doing right now doesn't seem to be very effective. And no, I haven't read the August report, but I don't think it'll show very much progress.
 
As I keep saying,

The problem isn't the U.S military, its the Iraqi Government. It exists only in name. As long as there is no stable government in Iraq we can never win. Because without the backing of a true government, a strong government , the US military will always be thought of as an occupation force by the locals whose country this is.
 
it already is!

The government that is in place is essentially been set there to do what we want them to do. If they start to disobey, it's bye-bye to them. Free thinking is limited to the free thinking we give them.
 
Boy oh Boy. We have the "use arc-light to turn Iraq into a parking lot faction" AKA the "Kill em all let God sort em out crew" We have the Cut and run crew and the we need to be more diplomatic crew.

This isn't a question thats easily settled here or in the esteemed (cough cough Morons) halls of congress.

IMHO When the troops are redeployed from Iraq there will be civil war. But on the other hand we can't stay there forever....so the questions is this. How long do we provide support to the current goverment?
 
03USMC said:
Boy oh Boy. We have the "use arc-light to turn Iraq into a parking lot faction" AKA the "Kill em all let God sort em out crew" We have the Cut and run crew and the we need to be more diplomatic crew.

This isn't a question thats easily settled here or in the esteemed (cough cough Morons) halls of congress.

IMHO When the troops are redeployed from Iraq there will be civil war. But on the other hand we can't stay there forever....so the questions is this. How long do we provide support to the current goverment?
Click to expand...

Iraqi insurgency will remain a problem as long as Syria and Iran are not dealt with
 
03USMC said:
Boy oh Boy. We have the "use arc-light to turn Iraq into a parking lot faction" AKA the "Kill em all let God sort em out crew" We have the Cut and run crew and the we need to be more diplomatic crew.

This isn't a question thats easily settled here or in the esteemed (cough cough Morons) halls of congress.

IMHO When the troops are redeployed from Iraq there will be civil war. But on the other hand we can't stay there forever....so the questions is this. How long do we provide support to the current government?
Click to expand...
I say a gradual withdrawal and if it looks like the various factions are going to tumble the democracy, then we send more back in...Keep doing that until we can withdraw completely without chaos breaking out immediately. That would give more troops more time at home, and would also give the concept of the "surge" more possibility/availability.
 
phoenix80 said:
Iraqi insurgency will remain a problem as long as Syria and Iran are not dealt with
Click to expand...


Yes but the US can't go willie nillie invading every country that sponsers terrorists without regional and world fallout. We are over extended as it is.
 
Just a side comment from reading some of this...

People watch to much TV and believe to heavily in media polls...I have yet to be asked about any of these questions in the past 9 years I have been able to vote!

Sure sure you have the probability of statistics in that a sampling from areas will generate what the masses think, but you must also take into account the demographics of these areas. The poll areas may only capture certain areas heavy in one set of opinions and only reflect that masses ideals.

I was reading a recent article on MSNBC and it just looks like all parties are up to politics as usual...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19811593/

The best line that goes against what they stated in the beginning and how they got themselves elected:
“I’m not going to get into numbers — because it changes the subject from what the issue is,” Levin said. "The issue is whether we’re going to change course, whether we’re going to begin to reduce our troops….”
Click to expand...
Levin is a D-Mich, they are just making noise and not coming up with anything substantial.

Finally in having a defeatists attitude you have been defeated before you start, more should think positively; you generally live longer.

One more side comment, the first gulf war had about 4 times as many troops on the ground than we have ever had in Iraq and Afghanistan to date, perhaps it is repeating what works; Infern0?

First Gulf War had 575,000 US troops on the ground http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_War#Troop_deployment

With a total coalition deployment of about 900,000 Troops
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_War

Another article stating similar numbers
http://www.answers.com/topic/gulf-war

Final thought....What did that Darwin guy say?
 
Last edited:
03USMC said:
How long do we provide support to the current goverment?
Click to expand...

If the current government in Iraq were changed, and someone in the same mold of Saddam were picked to lead Iraq out of its current state of dysfunction, the ensuing civil war that Iraq would no doubt face would have less of an impact outside the region, at take less time to be wraped up, in my own opinion.

Say what you want about Saddam, sure he was a bad man, he outlived his usefulness, and overstepped his bounds with regards to Kuwait, but, he did know how to keep his people in line, and he did not like Terrorists on his soil, nor did he like Iranians.

The Iraqi people had thier shot at a better life, complements of the United States Military, and as far as I'm concerned they threw away their best hope for a better life.
 
Gator said:
.

Say what you want about Saddam, sure he was a bad man, he outlived his usefulness, and overstepped his bounds with regards to Kuwait, but, he did know how to keep his people in line, and he did not like Terrorists on his soil, nor did he like Iranians.

The Iraqi people had thier shot at a better life, complements of the United States Military, and as far as I'm concerned they threw away their best hope for a better life.
Click to expand...

There is so much fundamentally wrong with that I don't know where to begin:?.

He didn't much like Iraqis or Kurds ETHIER.

And I suppose if launching NBC weapons, toturing, raping and wholesale execution of your own people is keeping them in line he had that down to a freakin science.
 
03USMC said:
Yes but the US can't go willie nillie invading every country that sponsers terrorists without regional and world fallout. We are over extended as it is.
Click to expand...

I didnt say they should invade iran or syria. I said the US must deal with these countries and dealing doesnt necessarily mean AN INVASION

Regime change is an effective tool to deal with baby Assad and mullahs

03USMC said:
There is so much fundamentally wrong with that I don't know where to begin:?.

He didn't much like Iraqis or Kurds ETHIER.

And I suppose if launching NBC weapons, toturing, raping and wholesale execution of your own people is keeping them in line he had that down to a freakin science.
Click to expand...

Second that
 
Last edited by a moderator:
03USMC said:
Boy oh Boy. We have the "use arc-light to turn Iraq into a parking lot faction" AKA the "Kill em all let God sort em out crew" We have the Cut and run crew and the we need to be more diplomatic crew.

This isn't a question thats easily settled here or in the esteemed (cough cough Morons) halls of congress.

IMHO When the troops are redeployed from Iraq there will be civil war. But on the other hand we can't stay there forever....so the questions is this. How long do we provide support to the current goverment?
Click to expand...

You think there will be a Civil War when we leave? I think we already are in one. It's hard to imagine the war in Iraq getting any worse than it is now. I am all for diplomacy, but I think that avenue has already crossed repeatively. I mean the Bush administration is so desperate they are even talking to members of the "Axis of Evil" in order to resolve this mess.

-Thats scraping the bottom of the diplomatic barrel.
 
03USMC said:
And I suppose if launching NBC weapons, toturing, raping and wholesale execution of your own people is keeping them in line he had that down to a freakin science.
Click to expand...

As for the Chemical Weapons Release, well, Saddam was our boy in the Area when he did that, our common Ally against Iran.

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/

And the United States of America did after all restore Formal Relations with Iraq in 1984.

As for the killing and such, well Saddam did some of his best work when he was our boy in the Area.
 
phoenix80 said:
Iraqi insurgency will remain a problem as long as Syria and Iran are not dealt with
Click to expand...


How do you suggest we deal with Iran and Syria? Military force is impossible. What should we do?

O3USMC said:
Yes but the US can't go willie nillie invading every country that sponsers terrorists without regional and world fallout. We are over extended as it is.
Click to expand...

I agree.

phoenix80 said:
Regime change is an effective tool to deal with baby Assad and mullahs
Click to expand...
how do you suggest we change the regime. walk up to them and say they've been evicted? how do we do that without miltary support?

---
Saddam was the good guy until he invaded Kuwait. he was our little pet, much the same as the Banana Republics in South America were and how Saudi Arabia is now. They are oppressive, and terrible, but that's okay because they're on our side. Iran was right to overthrow the Shah. He was unjust and was a terrible dictator. Iran is angry at the US because we supported the Shah and helped keep him in power for all of those years. We forced this problem upon ourselves, and now we are paying the price.
 
mmarsh said:
You think there will be a Civil War when we leave? I think we already are in one. It's hard to imagine the war in Iraq getting any worse than it is now. I am all for diplomacy, but I think that avenue has already crossed repeatively. I mean the Bush administration is so desperate they are even talking to members of the "Axis of Evil" in order to resolve this mess.

-Thats scraping the bottom of the diplomatic barrel.
Click to expand...

I don't think I am almost certain in my own mind. Iraq can get much worse and if you spend some time there you'd see that.

Right now the only way I can describe the US/Allied Forces there is as the little spinning top on Moms pressure cooker. Once you remove it the pressure is gonna build up and then Bang tamales all over the wall.

Is there factional fighting yes. But is that a reason to leave the majority of Iraqis to the tender mercies of the islamonazis? not in my mind.The majority of the Iraqis are like the people in other place they'd like to live and raise their families without the drama of constant warfare.

Remember this regardless of what comes out of some Senators yap.They care not one iota about the troops as they would have believe it's partisian politics pure and simple. The troops are caught in the middle, Iraq is caught in the middle and the welfare of the both maybe sacrificed for the good of the 2008 election.



Gator regardless of who's "boy" he was you got my meaning.
 
I agree. Everything is going in the toilet. The troops are the worthless pawns being thrown in the way to help save the image of the king.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top