I hear your point, 03USMC. Yup, we absolutely had Arab allies with us in the First Gulf War, and I certainly should not have denigrated their actions in concert with the Allied Coalition.However, do you think they would have taken it upon themselves to liberate Kuwait had we not taken the lead? Just curious, but if Saudi Arabia and Qatar and UAE et al would have taken up arms independently to do so, I would have been glad to see it.

Also, the LAST thing I should do is lump all "Muslims" in the same category. There are good and decent Muslims fighting with us, the Coalition, in Iraq, in Afghanistan, also in Pakistan, even in the Phillippines, Indonesia, Djibouti, and several other countries. It gets really easy to lump everyone in the same category, and I was wrong to do so.

***Ted: Glad to be speaking to someone from Nederlands. I honestly think that the invasion of Iraq was based on good intentions, and good intel. Sadam Husayn was head of a terrorist state, with terrorist training camps and an intelligence and logistics network working in support of terrorist groups, as well as connections to Hezbollah and Hamas, also paying families of Palestinian suicide bombers in support of the attacks on our ally, Israel.

Additionally, there was definite intel, not only from US intelligence but from SEVERAL other nations' intelligence agencies, that he was working on a nuke program (which we DID locate 500 tons of yellowcake uranium stockpiled) and he had already demonstrated not only a chemical production capability but had also used chemical weapons against his OWN people. In addition, Sadam was in violation of the 1991 Gulf War ceasefire.

Also, I think that Iraq was seen as a bridgehead into the MidEast in support of the Afghan ops, and a jumping-off point for a planned attack on Iran and overthrow of the Iranian terrorist government. Unfortunately, the attack on Iran never came off because of undercutting of the war effort on the home front, and opposition from allies. Iran IS the nexus of international terror, make no bones about it. Additionally, the seizure of Iraq physically separated Iran and her little buddy, Assad, in Syria.I think the liberation of the Iraqi people was a GOOD thing, NOT because it was based on supporting my political party, because freeing oppressed people from evil, brutal dicators is the right thing to do. I thought it a terrible misstep stopping the First Gulf War without the capitulation of the Iraqi government, leaving the people of Iraq to suffer under Sadam's Ba'athist regime (modeled on Nazi Germany, by the way, same for the Syrian arm), and standing by while Sadam massacred the Kurds and the Marsh Arabs was a horrible thing to do.


Finally, on Obama, and his gutless yellow streak. Someone claimed they could find just as many vets to support Obama as oppose him: I would take that bet in a heartbeat. Most vets know a backstabbing political opportunist, and an avowed enemy of the US military, when they see one.
Obama is an America-hating Leftist who was raised by an America-hating hippie, taught in an America-hating madrassa in Indonesia, traveled to Pakistan at a time that ACTUAL American citizens could not. He pals around with scum like William Ayers (who ATTACKED US military assets in the United States along with his skank wife Bernardine Dohrn), sat in pews of an America-hating preacher named Jeremiah Wright, and studied at the knee of an avowed America-hating communist ("Uncle Frank" in his memoirs). Those are his anti-America/anti-West credentials.

So why the yellow streak? 1. Appoints Hillary Clinton as Sec of State in the midst of a war. 2. Appoints Leon Panetta, a man with NO intel background, as head of CIA. 3. IGNORES the advice of General David Petraeus (a stellar man accused by Hillary Clinton of LYING about the success of the Iraqi surge). 4. Stabs Israel in the back by stating publicly that he would not support our ally attacking Iran to remove an existential threat. 5. IMMEDIATELY begins dismantling the Anti-Ballistic Missile program, and abandons the Poles AND the Czech Republic, who WANT interceptors in their countries, in favor of KGB Putin's Russia (and Hillary hands the KGB-trained Russian foreign minister a toy button glommed from a Staples office products store marked "reset" in her mind but actually says something else). 6. Abandons the decades-long policy of isolation of the Communist dictatorship of Cuba, HUGS Hugo Chavez, and stabs our ally Colombia in the back by refusing to pass free trade to bolster that ally's economy). 7. Declares that he will launch attacks on our ALLY, Pakistan. 8. The ONLY government he slashes is what? THE DEFENSE BUDGET!!! He KILLS the F-22 Raptor, the new Destroyer class, seeks to slash additional carrier GROUPS from the fleet, the list goes on...and as you can see, so can I. Sorry to take up so much space.

Originally Posted by senojekips

-snip- the first rule of successful warfare, "NEVER underestimate your opponent"-

Indeed.

AFAIK the whole Vietnam debacle came from that (and the partisan "approved" success stories).

Frankly, I find it hard to discuss on that level.

Any opponent, if you are in a war alrite, *deserves* to be taken seriously. They do not have high tech? But they have the most intelligent bombs: Humans.

They do not have F-Wahtevers, and not sats? Well, the have truckloads of 155mms, local terrain on their side, talk the talk and are not afraid to use any of them virtues.

We are facing an enemy who knows about his strength and weaknesses as any military commander, and so far they are making quite well from a warfighter POV (and are about to be even winning the PR war). Those are military commanders, like it or not, studying carefully the rules, strats and tactics of 4th gen warfare, not dumbasses.

I challenge you (bropous) to test your ability as (just a Rgt) commander in a simulation (PM me for BLUE site and PW if you are interested), overview here: http://www.opcon.org/SadrCity/

While I cannot go on as BLUE cdr there due to time restraints, it will give you a slightly bit more realistic idea about the problems Coalition Forces are facing out there (and one of them being an attitude like the one you are displaying).

Warfare is warfare, and arrogance twrads enemy strats or tactics has not won one IIRC.

Rattler

Bropous, what are you smoking? Seriously.
You understand nothing about the guys the West is fighting against - what their motivations and fears are...
You have no idea why these actions are a huge problem. We can no longer claim the higher moral ground regardless of whether or not what the enemy does is worse or not. There's an old Chinese story of two soldiers who fled upon contact with the enemy. The guy who ran back a mile made fun of the guy who ran back a mile and a half. Both cases are unacceptable.
Personally I think we should have dropped the whole higher moral ground crap to begin with. Not saying we should go around torturing people as a SOP on prisoner treatment but if certain events occur, the damage is certainly far less. It tires, bores and quite frankly pisses me off whenever the spokes people always show up talking about the "despicable" "cowardly" etc etc whatevers of what it is our enemies do.

Saddam was in violation of a lot of things but an imminent threat, he was not. A serious backer of international terrorism, not really. Active WMD program and posession of WMDs, apparently not. I think the enforcement of the no fly zones and the occasional bombing of targets in Iraq were doing its job.

Actually, Al Qaeda offered the Kuwaitis and Saudis their willingness to take on Saddam Hussein's army in the 1991 Gulf War. They were rejected in favor of the US led coalition. Had there been no US led coalition, an organized Arab response of some kind may have resulted. We can't really know what the outcome would have been but something may have just happened.

The attitudes and sympathies of the other Muslim peoples that you mentioned are complicated and mixed. They may not be a big fan of the Taliban or Al Qaeda but they're probably not going to shake your hand in a hurry either.

Originally Posted by bropous

-snip-
Obama is an America-hating Leftist who was raised by an America-hating hippie, taught in an America-hating madrassa in Indonesia, traveled to Pakistan at a time that ACTUAL American citizens could not. He pals around with scum like William Ayers (who ATTACKED US military assets in the United States along with his skank wife Bernardine Dohrn), sat in pews of an America-hating preacher named Jeremiah Wright, and studied at the knee of an avowed America-hating communist ("Uncle Frank" in his memoirs).-snip-

Wow.

Sometimes you just gotta clap yourself on the shoulder for having bravely stood defending the right of anybody to utter a - whatever educated or not - opinion... and still being proud for that... (and I so far I have only felt necessary to use that line on our Neo-Nazis...) I am truly beginning to wonder if you would do me the same favour...?

Rattler

rattler: Thanks for the link. I'll certainly check it out, but my wargaming skills are a little better at the operational level instead of tactical. I'll give it a good go, though.

However, I'm not so clear on your "Sometimes you just gotta clap yourself on the back..." statement. Are you equating my views with Neo-Nazis or am I misunderstanding your point? I sincerely think I am missing your point, though, not being intentionally dense, and would like to understand what you mean.

I've certainly not taken ANY position that someone doesn't have a right to their opinion, nor to express it; doesn't mean I have to agree with it, nor keep my trap shut about being in opposition, but I don't think THAT is what you meant, either. I am absolutely anti-Leftist (and, friend, Neo-Nazis, or even PAELO-Nazis, are LEFTISTS), and find everything about Obama's background completely opposed to every value I hold dear.

13th: Well, maybe they're not gonna shake our hand, fine. But Sadam WAS a threat, he was removed, and Iraq, the MidEast, and the world, are better off for it. Are we perfect and pure, motivated by the highest principles? Of course not, we're just as flawed as anyone else, but in the West, there are some huge differences: We support the concept of the individual BEFORE the collective, we (for the most part) tend to think you shouldn't get your head blown off your shoulders for disagreeing with the leadership or the majority, we tend to treat women on an equal footing as men, we try and provide a decent living infrastructure for our citizens, we try and avoid hopping off into the neighboring country to snag their assets, we try to bring up the standards of living of the poor, we tend to respect humanity and not just allow murderers to walk the streets snuffing anyone we want, etc.

As for understanding the motivations of the guys we are fighting, let's see if I have it right: They want to kill anyone who disagrees with them, they want to wage a religious war against the "infidel" (just like their religion tells them to do), they have no problem living in ratbag poverty and seeing their kids with no future whatsoever, they take advantage of the weak and only respect being faced down with strength, they hate pigs, they hate women, should I go on?

Heck, I know we're getting WAY off topic. As for "dropping the high moral ground crap", I agree with you, and I disagree with you. But the enemy we face DOES commit acts of cowardice that ARE despicable (Sadam's sons feeding eight year old kids into chipper shredders feet first, strapping suicide bomb vests on retarded kids and sending them into crowded marketplaces, parents cheering on their sons when they butcher innocent women and children, etc).

No, you do make good points. No enemy is monolithic, monochromatic, nor monomotivated. But there ARE some basic differences between "us" and "them", and even in their societies, there are a good number of decent folks who would just like to be able to speak their minds without being killed, not have some freak talking their kid into suicide bombing a pizza parlor, own a house or a business, and actually see their societies live in a pretty peaceful environment. I am hoping that a free Iraq will be a light to some other Arab nations, and honestly want Iraq to succeed, not because it would help Republicans, not because it would help America, not because it would help the West. I would like it to succed because I want to see Iraqis have a future.

I want a free Iraq to be the postwar Germany or Japan of the Middle East, and I think it has a good shot at becoming so.

Originally Posted by bropous

13th: Well, maybe they're not gonna shake our hand, fine. But Sadam WAS a threat, he was removed, and Iraq, the MidEast, and the world, are better off for it. Are we perfect and pure, motivated by the highest principles? Of course not, we're just as flawed as anyone else, but in the West, there are some huge differences: We support the concept of the individual BEFORE the collective

Lie. We are a democracy. We support the majority's decision. It's one of the reasons I think there are a lot of problems with this country. We don't pay enough attention to the minority, because the majority is what counts.

Originally Posted by bropous

we tend to treat women on an equal footing as men

Kinda sorta.....

Originally Posted by bropous

As for understanding the motivations of the guys we are fighting, let's see if I have it right: They want to kill anyone who disagrees with them, they want to wage a religious war against the "infidel" (just like their religion tells them to do), they have no problem living in ratbag poverty and seeing their kids with no future whatsoever, they take advantage of the weak and only respect being faced down with strength, they hate pigs, they hate women, should I go on?

The saddest part is, that's not just the folks we're fighting... It's a lot of every day people over there too. They don't realize what life can be, so they choose to be resentful and bitter towards the West, who epitomizes modern extravagance. They don't want to better their lives (for the most part) they just want to watch the world burn.

Originally Posted by bropous

Heck, I know we're getting WAY off topic. As for "dropping the high moral ground crap", I agree with you, and I disagree with you. But the enemy we face DOES commit acts of cowardice that ARE despicable (Sadam's sons feeding eight year old kids into chipper shredders feet first, strapping suicide bomb vests on retarded kids and sending them into crowded marketplaces, parents cheering on their sons when they butcher innocent women and children, etc).

We've got the Israel logic going on here.... I'm going to spell this out for you as plain as I can... America is NOT innocent. We were FORMED as a nation by underhanded, guerilla tactics. We torture people, we commit crimes and then cover them up, etc. Yes, there are some severe problems with the way they live in the Middle East, but there are some pretty effed up people here too! I can give you all kinds of news articles about mothers drowning their children, grandmothers being shot by grandchildren, young men being killed simply for being in a different part of town... All of ours are not aggression towards other nations, but you get what I'm saying.

Originally Posted by bropous

No, you do make good points. No enemy is monolithic, monochromatic, nor monomotivated. But there ARE some basic differences between "us" and "them", and even in their societies, there are a good number of decent folks who would just like to be able to speak their minds without being killed, not have some freak talking their kid into suicide bombing a pizza parlor, own a house or a business, and actually see their societies live in a pretty peaceful environment. I am hoping that a free Iraq will be a light to some other Arab nations, and honestly want Iraq to succeed, not because it would help Republicans, not because it would help America, not because it would help the West. I would like it to succed because I want to see Iraqis have a future.

I want a free Iraq to be the postwar Germany or Japan of the Middle East, and I think it has a good shot at becoming so.

You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink. You cannot help free a nation that doesn't want to be freed. There were plenty of people in Iraq who were just fine with the past regime, who didn't care what Sadaam did, because they didn't have to do anything for themselves. They didn't want to rock the boat, and it wasn't the United States' place to rock it for them.

Rob:

"Originally Posted by bropous
we tend to treat women on an equal footing as men
Kinda sorta....."

Exactly, Rob, why I said we TEND to. We ain't all the way there, yet, but we should be.

****

"We support the concept of the individual BEFORE the collective..."

"Lie. We are a democracy. We support the majority's decision. It's one of the reasons I think there are a lot of problems with this country. We don't pay enough attention to the minority, because the majority is what counts."

Incorrect. We are a REPRESENTATIVE REPUBLIC, big difference, man. I would also strongly disagree that we don't pay enough attention to the minority, seems certain minorities are paid more attention to than they should be...

"The saddest part is, that's not just the folks we're fighting... It's a lot of every day people over there too. They don't realize what life can be, so they choose to be resentful and bitter towards the West, who epitomizes modern extravagance. They don't want to better their lives (for the most part) they just want to watch the world burn."

AGREED.

You and I will NEVER agree on Israel though, nor on the value of freeing the Iraqi people, man, we'll let that lie undisturbed.

You and I will agree on some things, Rob, and disagree vehemently on others, same as most folks here. But at least I won't be accusing someone of being a Nazi for their opinions, like some folks do.

Originally Posted by bropous

Finally, on Obama, and his gutless yellow streak. Someone claimed they could find just as many vets to support Obama as oppose him: I would take that bet in a heartbeat. Most vets know a backstabbing political opportunist, and an avowed enemy of the US military, when they see one.
Obama is an America-hating Leftist who was raised by an America-hating hippie, taught in an America-hating madrassa in Indonesia, traveled to Pakistan at a time that ACTUAL American citizens could not. He pals around with scum like William Ayers (who ATTACKED US military assets in the United States along with his skank wife Bernardine Dohrn), sat in pews of an America-hating preacher named Jeremiah Wright, and studied at the knee of an avowed America-hating communist ("Uncle Frank" in his memoirs). Those are his anti-America/anti-West credentials.

I find it unbelievable that if even half of what you claim is correct that he won enough votes to score the highest post in the land. Obviously you must feel that the majority of Americans are complete and utter idiots??

Yeah, your reasoning reminds me of Johnny's Mum at his Passing out parade. "Oh look out of 2000 men our Johnny is the only one in step"

I believe that it has been said in the world wide media that Obama has dealt with more problems in his first 100 days than any President since Roosevelt.... Not a bad start for a rabid, Muslim inspired, anti-American hippie.

C'mon you're talking to adults here.

Originally Posted by bropous

Incorrect. We are a REPRESENTATIVE REPUBLIC, big difference, man. I would also strongly disagree that we don't pay enough attention to the minority, seems certain minorities are paid more attention to than they should be...

Yes, there is a difference, but the fact still remains that we hold the majority to be the "winner" in all fields. In a class vote to move a final a day earlier, the majority won, even though I would have appreciated the extra time to study, those who wanted to get it over with won out. My point being that from the Oval Office down to Montevallo, Alabama, the majority is what we base our government on. NOT the individual.

You say we pay too much attention to some minorities... Like who?

Originally Posted by bropous

"The saddest part is, that's not just the folks we're fighting... It's a lot of every day people over there too. They don't realize what life can be, so they choose to be resentful and bitter towards the West, who epitomizes modern extravagance. They don't want to better their lives (for the most part) they just want to watch the world burn."

AGREED.

So if you agree with that, then why do you so vehemently defend the rash decision to invade Iraq? The sole reason we were given to justify the United States' invasion was because Sadaam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction and was intent on using those weapons. That turned out to be a lie, and all we did was open up the biggest can of worms since letting Hitler get away with the things he did. We should not have invaded Iraq. In Iraq, we aren't fighting terrorists... What I mean is that we aren't fighting those who attacked the United States. In Iraq, we are simply fighting those who hate the West... And will ALWAYS hate the West... It's an impossible war to win.

Originally Posted by bropous

You and I will NEVER agree on Israel though, nor on the value of freeing the Iraqi people, man, we'll let that lie undisturbed.

Clearly... I mean, I agree that the Iraqi people living a free life and understanding what a modern life is like would be great, but they simply don't WANT to live that way... They don't have the motivation to get off their butts and do something about it. They're perfectly content with having it handed to them by the United States, but they won't do it on their own, and the US can't afford a permanent military presence in Iraq.

"Yes, there is a difference, but the fact still remains that we hold the majority to be the "winner" in all fields."

Well, true, but the majority doesn't gain the right to silence the individual, they get to make the decision if they are the majority. Obama will slash the defense budget because he got the majority, doesn't mean I don't get to slam the guy for doing so (until Janet Napolitano's thugs find me on her list, ha!).

"In Iraq, we are simply fighting those who hate the West... And will ALWAYS hate the West... It's an impossible war to win."

Uh, Rob, in case you missed it: WE WON. IRAQ won. They have a stable, constitutional government elected by the people. Their death rates have been lower than some US cities. The War in Iraq was won, by the Iraqis and by the Coalition. Iraq is Free.

Rob, you're oversimplifying on several levels. You know as well as I do that the Iraq War was NOT only about WMDs, but Husayn DID have them, 550 tons of yellowcake uranium was not there for chemotherapy. You are right, there were plenty of folks in Iraq we were fighting who hate(d) the West, but there are plenty of folks in Iraq who are HAPPY they are living in a free country now. Is it perfect? Hell, no. Would I want to live there? Hell, no. Are the Iraqi people better off not under the Ba'athist regime? Hell, YES.

"..I agree that the Iraqi people living a free life and understanding what a modern life is like would be great [of COURSE you do, you're a decent guy], but they simply don't WANT to live that way [I'd say their elections and the development of the Iraqi Army proves otherwise]... They don't have the motivation to get off their butts and do something about it [see above]. They're perfectly content with having it handed to them by the United States [just like a lot of folks here in America who would prefer having Mommy Gummint handing them a living instead of getting off THEIR asses, people are people, man, good and bad in EVERY society], but they won't do it on their own [they have no choice, now], and the US can't afford a permanent military presence in Iraq [of COURSE we can].

Hell, I'd argue we can't afford NOT to have a permanent military presence in Iraq, and the Iraqis would prefer us to have permanent bases there just like we have STILL in Germany and Japan, and for the same reasons. An additional American base in the region is a stabilizing force, Rob.

[I PROMISE no more off-topic statements. I'll try to find an Iraq War thread to revive, sorry for wandering off into the weeds, even though the topics are interrelated.]