I think we’ll actually win by leaving. The Iraqis don’t want us there, so we should leave. We should have left after bagging Saddam. Iraq will then fracture along religious and ethnic lines, a la Yugoslavia - not nice in the short term but a surer longer term solution. Iraq is an artificial state anyway. Israel will destroy Iran’s nuclear facilities, solving that problem for us, and the region will generally quieten down. This will probably (WAG) take 5-10 years.
Well, maybe, but would you risk a ten to one chance of being boiled in oil if the prize were a toaster oven?
The neutron bomb is no sekrit.
I think you are grossly overestimating Israel’s air power, and underestimating the precautions the Iranians have taken against air attack on those facilities (most of which, I understand, are not only bomb-hardened but partly underground).
Not to mention statues of him in every town in Iraq, in Bush Square on Bush Street, to be decorated with flowers every year on Bush Day. He’s still, by some reports, determined to at least get an Iraqi government in place that will hold a grand, formal Celebration of Gratitude to the Great Liberator.
It’s not resistance, it’s terrorism. As for Oil not going anywhere, sure output is down, but it’s still going out and is the primary resource the Iraqi Government is relying on at the moment. And since this is the first Oil contract the Iraqi Government has negotiated with a foreign firm, it being China, doesn’t that poke a few holes in the argument that ‘Bush controls all the Oil, no one is gonna get any’
No, it’s the clear duty of the Iraqis, and everyone else, to kill and sabotage us in Iraq. Every time someone manages to hurt or kill us there, it’s a victory for both Iraq and humanity in general.
It wouldn’t be the first time he failed.
How’s that? Infrastructure is usually fair game in wartime, without anyone being smeared as a terrorist. Would you call Operation Tidal Wave an act of terrorism? Why or why not?
I think you’re letting your emotions run away with your definitions here.
That was Richard Perle, wasn’t it? Predicting that there would be a statue of George in downtown Baghdad within a year?
What makes you think the two are mutually exclusive?
That wasn’t exactly the point of the war. (There was, from the start, deep conflict within the Admin about what the point was.)
Yes infrastructure is fair game, you’re quite right, blowing up masses of civilians isn’t, neither is sectarian deathsquads either, both of which constitute acts of terrorism, so I don’t know how this clearly translates as ‘national liberation’ or even comes close to ‘resistance’ as it clearly contributes to most of the killings in the country anyway.
If I take the NI example, we had the UDA and the IRA at either end killing each other, whilst the UDA was in tact supported by the British Government through the troubles, it still ended up as a terrorist organisation, as was the IRA, none of which are ‘resistance organisations’ and who through constant battles with the British Army and intelligence forces, instead went to the ballot box.
Yawn :rolleyes: endless sloganeering with a nihilistic touch isn’t going to convince me otherwise.
Oh, but I thought Iraq was the Vichy puppet government of the Middle East whos legitimacy was invalid as it was the American overlords who wrote the democratic process in which Iraqis were allowed to vote for who they wanted for the first time, be it sectarian or otherwise, and now, this said Puppet Government is awarding contracts to Chinese bidders, low and behold! It thinks for it’s own!
<Catches breath>
Now,
You want to know the way to some sort of victory in Iraq? Well I’ve been saying it for God knows how long, but training the Iraqi Security forces until they are competent and capable is the only way we’re going to be able to leave.
No one in the US government is going to associate themselves with wanting a withdrawal only later to find a massive civil war in the heart of the Middle East, complete radicalisation of the Sunnis within that area which in turn helps Al Queda establish a base of operations to strike at other US back allies and secular states within the region. Withdrawal simply won’t happen in the Bush Presidency. As for the Vietnam parallel, that is simply not viable in this situation, the only one close is the Soviets in Afghanistan.
So this is what will happen;
Constant political compromise within sectarian groups in government whether they like it or not, which is happening already, even if the violence is getting worse.
The US role being from immediate protector of the Iraqi Government, to becoming it’s defacto peacekeepers between the warring parties.
Constant vetting and beefing up of Iraqi security forces. Rooting out corruption and inflitration, sorting out desertion, supplying it with some Goddamn heavy weapons, organising it’s logistical supply chain, same applies to the Police forces, and again, vetting vetting vetting.
It’s going to be tough, heartwrenching, chaotic, unbearable, saddening and sometimes worthless, but that’s the only option left open, if you take out the wanting to destroy the country and seperate it.
Ah, BrainGlutton.
They don’t have to be mutally exclusive, but you can exercise a defeat on a military rather than the civilian population you’re supposedly trying to liberate. As for the ‘oh US wanted Oil, didn’t get it, erm ok’ I couldn’t really give two damns, however it shows the Iraqi government having the capability of acting independently of what the US government wants, which I think we can all agree is a good thing?
You’re the one who apparently doesn’t care about the tens of thousands we’ve killed, and I’m nihilistic ?
I already know it; the withdrawal and humiliation of America. Not much of a victory, but the best one that I consider possible.
They’ll just shoot at us or each other. “Competent and capable” is not the same as “supports America”, or “supports a unified Iraq”, or “supports democracy”.
And what makes you think not withdrawing will stop that ? Iraq is already well along that path, and not slowing down.
Of course not; Bush is insane.
A rather contradictory statement; “except for the murders, there is no crime problem”.
Never happen. Without us, the government falls fast.
Impossible. If you “vet” them and eliminate the corrupt, infilterators and those who are there just for the money, you’d have barely anyone left, and barely anyone to recruit. Anyone who’s hard working, dedicated and patriotic is shooting at us, not working for us.
How noble sounding, if all the “tough, heartwrenching, chaotic, unbearable, saddening and sometimes worthless” stuff wasn’t happening to them. This sounds like “rape her until she likes it”, and I expect it to work as well.
As for seperating the country, why not ? A nation is just an administrative district; it’s not an inherent tragedy for one to break up.
That gives me an idea of a way out. Some aides make up a fake DVD showing these celebrations. We bugger out, show the tapes to George, and, since he never reads the papers, will never know the difference. Then, at the next cabinet meeting, he can say “tell me about the rabbits, Dick.” 
In fact the phrase is a quaint sentiment, as if from another age. In Quartz’s scenario, the US will not destroy Iran’s nuclear facilities, leaving Israel’s problem unsolved.
Oil companies do not care where it goes. They are internatiomal and make profit where ever it goes. The Alaskan Oil which is supposed to help out Us is slated for Japan. Money money money. They are not American. We are just a market.
The idea thayt we stand down when they stand up is a joke. In the 2004 election Condi said they had fully trained over 100 000 troops. She lied .There were none. The crack troops she touted later turned and ran. There are no jobs. People join to eat ,not for conviction. This is Bushes war,not Americas’ and not Iraqs’.
It us a mess and has no way to get better.
Another faint echo of another debacle, a joke then current amongst American troops in Viet Nam: “For sale, ARVN rifle. Never fired, only dropped once.”
I think if you define Victory correctly, it’s almost in the bag.
You see, the real conditions of Victory are a Republican President in 2008.
And keep the people fearful, then we can restage the Triumphal March our of Saigon, Version 2.1, and declare ourselves the winners.
And the American People get the government they deserve.
Tris
I fail to see the comparison of the ARVN and the Iraqi Army at all, the notable difference being that the ARVN was already failing when US troops were stationed in Vietnam, and the other has been only operational as an army for the last 3 years.
I didn’t say that the Iraqi Army was in it’s best position as of right now, I was simply stating the fact that if the US wants to win against the insurgents, then viable security forces have to be in place in order for it to do so. As for the Oil bit, Chinas Oil company is a state owned asset, and I think the Iraqis have shown some ability to take independent action for their own state since this would be their first major foreign Oil contract.
Yes, because you’d rather see Iraq in flames to spite the current administration than have it any chance of becoming a proper democratic state.
Again nihilistic tendencies and self defeatism.
That’s why I was talking in the context of competent Iraqi security forces loyal to the state.
Withdrawal allows them to grow with impunity, no withdrawal or security vaccuum once we’ve left makes it alot harder for them to do so.
Emotion running through the course of logic, it’s simply Bush made the pledge to never allow the terrorists an opportunity to strike the US again, and if it withdraws under his administration, then he’s damaging his partys stance as the one who isn’t soft on terrorism.
Maybe, however half of the Sunni tribal chiefs in Anbar have now sided with the Iraqi government to kick out Al Queda, so you see, even amongst the murder there is political compromise on going everyday.
I don’t think so, the Iraqi Government is predominantly Shia led, so if the US were to leave, there’d be numerous agreements and powersharing, however we’d see a heavily Shia dominated government more than there is now, and security forces all pretty pointed towards Sunni areas.
You can be there ‘just for the money’ and not be a corrupt officer, I don’t see how you cannot seperate this from people actively supporting militias and insurgents. Also, as for ‘barely having anyone left’ Are you actually saying there are absolutely no Iraqis in the Army or Police who give a damn about their country?
You’ve already come to numerous conclusions about things, so what is the point of trying to talk to you about otherwise?
Again, tactful use of colourful metaphors to get a rise out of people who disagree with you, anyway, I don’t care what you think, I’m simply stating what the US has to do in order to win in Iraq.
So is the UK, the US, Russian Federation, and a whole other host of states which are diverse in nature but which are artificial creations. They survived, so can Iraq.