Seems to matter to you guys. This thing has gone on for five pages now. All started from one Kiwi saying she’s fed up with Bush’s yammering on the newscasts.
And BTW World Eater, what did you mean by:
Because, everybody knows Kiwis are rarely found alone in the wild
~grins~
Kiwi seems like calling people krauts and frogs.
We call ourselves Kiwis - with pride. So I figure you are allowed to as well.
N.B. the fruit is a kiwifruit, not a kiwi.
Actually World Eater, while I was in Europe each and every New Zealander I met referred to themselves as a Kiwi.
Ok, you just never know with people like Brutus and Milroyj.
I do note a very light use of the word “people”
Trust me, World Eater, calling us Enzedders “Kiwis” ain’t an insult. And we get to laugh at the woefully ignorant people who think the name came after the chinese gooseberry, and not decades before (from during World War 1, actually). But thanks for the thought, mate. You’re a good’un in my book. 
Thanks bro!
I have been offline for a day or so and I’m ever so surprised/embarrassed/bewildered to find this thread still going on.
To milroyj and Brutus, I never meant to suggest for one moment that I (or any other non American) had any right to decide who the president of the US is. I am allowed to be irritated by him though. Sometimes he really pisses me off. Sometimes he just annoys me. It was the latter mood that inspired my OP, hence the lack of substance. I was just sick to death of seeing his smirking face, it was late at night and NZ TV doesn’t offer many options this time of night.
I don’t represent Kiwi’s as a group nor did I pretend to. milroyj, YES I was raving and NO I don’t expect George to either notice or care but I like living in a democracy and being able to rave at will (please remind George we are a democracy and don’t need to be liberated) 
To World Eater, thank you for your position in this thread.
To Ice Wolf and Banquet Bear, I am sorry for making you have to defend NZ. I shall try hard not to put you in that position again (note to self: Don’t post when George is annoying).
Oh and World Eater Kiwi is NEVER silly or insulting unless you use it to refer to a fruit. NZ is a country of 4 mill proud Kiwis.
Maybe I really should change my user name. I often seem to be less then calm and I don’t like embarrassing other Kiwis.
Don’t be sorry. On my part, there’s no problem.
I can’t think of any Kiwis you’ve embarrassed, Calm Kiwi. I like the name, and I LOVE how you’ve put “Kiwi” up there in bright lights. The “calm” bit is cool alliteration. You rock, lady. Proud t’ share the region with ya. tips cap
May I suggest
[ul]
[li]Non-Kiwi Avatar of Destruction[/li][li]Certainly not a Kiwi, and I’ll kick your ass[/li][li]I don’t even know what a Kiwi is, but boy am I trouble![/li][li]Who you calling a Kiwi? You wanna make something of it?[/li][li]I am not, nor have I ever been a Commu, er, Calm Kiwi. [/li][li]I am from the antipodes and wield death and chaos at my pleasure, fear me![/li][/ul]
Whenever I hear about someone calling Israel or even regarding it as a criminal state, I sit back and laugh at the abdication of argument. Thanks Redfury
There is no evidence of this, and I hardly think the Shia would induce genocide just to get back at the Sunnis, its completely laughable.
Obviously not the same shit you are, because usually, a civil war equals destruction on both sides of the divide
Why wouldn’t it happen? This new government is all about compromise, with the Kurds as stolwart allies of the US, seem to be able to field better armed forces than their Shia counter parts, and have their people on the largest oil fields of Iraq in Kirkuk, I’d say the cards were in their favour, the only thing which blinds this to people is their comparative size.
The most advanced military in the world has invested a shorter amount of troops than expected, its like saying how come one man can’t control his town even though he has the best weapondry and expertise anyone can field, its simple numbers and we don’t have enough, but it doesn’t translate into the fact that it will never get better, or that they can manipulate the local population into doing work.
Ask Osama, he seemed to make it a pretty big deal when he helped those terrorist slam those planes into the WTC and Pentagon. :rolleyes:
it is because we’re wealthy dumbass, but its not the only reason, what do you need more than anything to back up political and military capital?
MONEY
and lots of it, jesus, I’d thought anyone would know that shit, obviously you don’t know Geo Politics 101. And how does that money get generated into more amounts of money?
FREEDOM
Freedom to spend it on products you want, to buy property, lessened restrictions. Freedom to do this in varying degrees of course (bcs of China)
Quite welcomed, cumstain. Here’s some more slapstick for you:
You may now go back to picking lint from your belly-buttom.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4303629.stm
Yeah, I’m sure they won’t want any retribution after this and other attacks. :rolleyes:
By the way I never mentioned “genocide”, where in your ass did you pull that from?
It also ends with one side achieving power over the other, an important detail you neglect to mention.
You’re looking at the situation through the wrong lense. You see allies of the US, everyone over there sees “puppets” of the US. The Kurds will be marginalized, just watch.
That and Turkey.
I love this one because it illustrates just how far from reality you dwell.
We don’t have enough numbers? Whose fault is that? Whose fault is it for letting this problem continue? Not sending enough troops, and more importantly, continuing to maintain insufficient troop levels is a MAJOR MILITARY FUCKUP!
Anyway we’re going off the point here, which isn’t about US troops, it’s about Iraqi troops. 135,000 Iraqi troops with the most advanced gear money we can buy for them cannot currently keep the country stable. I find this nigh on impossible to achieve, and yet even if it was, still more then that would be needed. I’ll give you a map…
- Turn Iraqi army into imitation US army by matching the two army troop levels, and giving them the same weaponry.
Do you realize that step 1 is almost impossible to achieve?
- Once we made the Iraqi army the equivalent in all respects to the US one, we need add even more manpower, because the US army (of which the Iraqi army has now mimiced) can’t currently maintain safety in the country.
This simply ain’t going to fucking happen.
btw, you mention “but it doesn’t translate into the fact that it will never get better”, as I was saying before is some vague bullshit. Provide with a REASON why things will get better, don’t just expect me to believe they will.
Do you know why OBL hit us on 9/11? He’s given his reasoning straight up.
Hint: it wasn’t because we’re a rich nation.
This is so goddamned stupid I don’t know why I’m even responding to it. It has nothing to do with our wealth and everything to do with meddling with other countries and generally being a global bully. Take Japan, rich as hell, and just as free as the US, yet do you see anyone chanting death to Japan?
Plenty of countries generate plenty of money without resorting to nation building. Get over it, people don’t hate us because we’re rich, they hate us becuse we meddle in all their countries.
Plenty of countries are just as free as the US, so repeat with me.
They hate us because we meddle in their countries. By the way, OBL said he attacked us because we…wait for it…meddle in other countries!
That’s straight from the horse’s mouth.
Like his idol, George W. Bush, Ryan_Liam has an uncanny ability to believe in statements that are totally unsupported by reality.
Yes Einstein, the Sunnis were responsible for that bombing, not Shia, and Shia aren’t exactly going out right now as we speak massacring Sunnis as we speak as in revenge.
That nature of attack is for maximum carnage publicity and sectarian split all rolled in to one, they managed to get the least important too to succeed.
Like the last Ashura festival in Karbala where 150 people were killed? Where was the retaliation then dumbass?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3527221.stm
The same place where you pulled that shit from. If revenge attacks were gonna happen and fully supported by the Shia community, they would of happened by now, the fact they haven’t is even better.
I didn’t mention it because its obvious, yes you’re right, but it doesn’t = oppression or slaughter.
Just like the proposed Shia slaughter of the Sunnis because of the nature and ferocity of the extremist attacks against them? Isn’t there any place within your mind to at least regard there is an equal possibility that the Kurds won’t be marginalised?
Why do people always whine on at me at having a favourable opinion of the Coalition and the Iraqi forces? Isn’t more than one viewpoint allowed on this board without it being piledrived into oblivion because its not the status quo of thought on the board? Aren’t we all entitled to our own opinion?
Yes, but how long would it take for you to change your tune and then whine on about how even with the sufficient forces in place, we cannot maintain law order security issues etc?
135,000 Iraqi troops haven’t got the most advanced weapondry unfortunately, we don’t give them that sort of tech until the army is completely rehauled and organised as an effective force, unless you want to show me an Iraqi Abrhams tank?
its been two years with a large scale insurgency, for the US/Coalition to get to grips with building an Iraqi security force and dealing with that issue too, its going to take time.
If we take Iraq and it turns out to be an Israeli type terrorism scenario, would you regard it as stable?
You don’t need to make it as good as the US army for it to achieve the same kind of success, since the Iraqi Army has a distinct advantage, such as not being foreign, takes some of the heat out of the insurgency, and will minimise some of the violence.
that doesn’t make sense, since Iraqi security forces outnumber American forces, since as you said, these would be fully trained and American-like, why would they need the Americans to supplement them?
Remember the US army giving command to local Iraqis over specific areas, slowly but surely helping Iraqis take care of themselves, thats the strategy that will be implemented, and thats how we’ll succeed, as the US becomes more of a supporting role than the bearer of it, thats how we’ll succeed in Iraq and how the majority of Coalition forces will be able to leave. It doesn’t seem impossible to do this, and looks entirely feasable.
Ok, heres a few reasons, if the the Army is so ineffective, how come the troops haven’t defected to the terrorists or resistance?
Sunni militants begin to attempt talks with US forces
Traning of Iraqi forces continues to improve
No shit the Sunnis were responsible for what happened. And the Shia ain’t going to do shit until the US is gone. It’s like a sibling not returning a punch until the parent leaves the room.
I’m sure it must make the Iraqis feel nice anc safe that after the US army has been there, for two years, and still 120 of them applying for govt. jobs can get blown to shit in an instant.
Again, it makes no sense for them to retaliate until “daddy” has left the room.
Hmmm, decisions decisions?
Should the Shia…
a) Start, as you put it, “massacring” the Sunnis which is political and PR suicide
or
b) Consolidate power, and wait for the US to go away before exacting revenge?
Look at the history, they’re in a tight spot. I don’t think they’ll come out ahead.
You’re welcome to your opinion of course, but I’m welcome to criticize it and pick it apart, and you can return the favor.
If our sufficient number of forces cannot maintain law and order, perhaps they’re not sufficient enough?
I’m not bitching about our troop numbers, I’m bitching about not being able to maintain law and order. If, as you’ve suggested we increase troop numbers, yet the country is still out of control, then of course I’ll keep “whining”, the problem hasn’t been fixed.
No, and that’s my point. The Iraqi army wll be expected to do what the US army currently does, yet with inferior equipment. This a problem.
I’m not going to worry about you sitting here saying “it’s going to take time”. Instead I’ll point out that the Pentagon didn’t think it was going to last this long, which makes me worry.
Are you fucking serious?
People living in fear, randomly getting blown up, and hating the US because we are unable to protect them?
No. I was just saying that you’ll need more Iraqi troops too.
As of two years from invasion, nothing has indicated this will happen. Get back to me when our troops start leaving the country.
What? If the army is so bad, why haven’t they joined the enemy?
Wtf does that even mean?
Now time to play did you even read your own link?
“Talking with the US” meaning a bunch of terrorists making their demands known.
This next one is from Stars and Stripes, are you fucking kidding me? That’s the fucking newspaper of the Army! It literally doesn’t get anymore bias then this.
Check out the beginning…
First time, oooops, second time, ooooops, third time is the charm? It would be damn hysterical if it wasn’t so depressing. These are our tactics now? We should invade Iraq a 3rd time, because the third times the charm!
The rest of your links are equally stupid so I think I’ll stop here.
No please continue, why did you leave out the comparison of the Ashura bombings?
Won’t happen. Next!
thats the risk you take when insurgents want to destabilise and derail the government, its going to happen.
Doesn’t make sense after either, they needs these people to come into the fold to ensure a stable a civil society forms and remains, revenge serves nothing in the long term.
So now its gone to ‘waiting after the US has gone’ has it? Just keep moving the reason the cause, I’m sure somewhere in the end, you’ll get to your answer. :rolleyes:
Yes, ‘you’ don’t, but I do, and I don’t want to have my opinions on this board treated as rubbish just because I see a positive outcome.
It seems to be the case of that all being fine in theory, but anyone who goes against some grain of considered ‘ordinary’ viewpoint, is immediately met with derision. You’re right though I am, and I’ll keep expressing it.
Law and order seems to be improving, look at the comparison of 2003-2004, guerilla wars aren’t won with just large scale bombings, they’re won with the wearing down of the enemy with constant attack with smaller arms and low intensity warfare. Large scale attacks are a sign of how they need the maximum publicity and devastation in order to demoralise and frighten the enemy, but this is all short term gain, if they can’t project their power through other than these types of tactics, it won’t work as it loses them support.
How many insurgents control Iraqi cities now?
And I keep saying, the Iraqis have one extra advantage, they’re not foreign.
And now it does, and has changed its viewpoint considerably, considering the US hadn’t been in a largescale invasion and occupation for over 30 years, its understandable there would be some naivety there.
Yes, I see it as a situation like that to Northern Ireland, or Colombia somewhat for a number of years after we’ve left.
Don’t worry I will, you can count on that.
Yes, if the army is as you say ‘ineffective and uncapable’ surely there would be some who would be convinced that the US would want Iraq to be incapable of being independent on its own, without the US, this surely would amount to defections amongst them to the ranks of the insurgents to get us out.
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1029805,00.html
I’m not one to think that insurgents are to be tolerated, or even approached like this, but thats the reality of the situation, and we all know that an insurgency cannot be defeated by arms alone, if they’re brought under the political process, then its better. I don’t see how thats humiliating for the US, or terrible for the new Iraqi government, because we all know sooner or later, a situation with the Sunnis has to be realised.
It is dreadfully sad that you were born in the wrong country Ryan
(Thank you Ice)
Lots of love
I am not, nor have I ever been a Commu, er, Calm Kiwi. (thanks FinnAgain)