April 8th, 2004, 09:52 PM
On the subject of Iraq...
Hell's broken lose in Iraq since last weekend and our troops are not coming home anytime soon. Although the government still says it's standing by the June 30th deadline. Yeah, right. The whole thing is a failure and I wouldn't be surprised if it becomes another Vietnam.
Thing is, when are we going to accept losing the war? Or are we just gonna keep pretending there, while ppl are getting killed?
I dug this out of yahoo today and it made me sick to my stomach
April 8th, 2004, 11:10 PM
Losing the war? Because a fanatical cleric with a militia who wants to take power for himself staged and uprising? What is a cleric doing with a militia? Thanks for the link; I printed it out to remind me of their sacrifice. Your intention may have been meant to humble me, and it did but not in the sense I want them to come home, it reminds me that to lose now makes their deaths meaningless. A part of me wants to get out and let them burn one another to death then clean up after, but I know there are people there who want the same government the west has, and I would hate to see them fall to a cleric bent on reaping his own version of oppression and violence.
West of House
You are standing in an open field west of a white house, with a boarded front door.
There is a small mailbox here.
April 8th, 2004, 11:43 PM
I don't think this is vietnam at all, though it still sucks. I don't know if I agree with the war, but a lot has been accomplished. Whatever happens, I hope Iraq will be rebuilt better off than it was with Saddam, and I have confidence that it will.
According to this site, over 98% of Marine deaths in Vietnam came in the six years 1965 through 1970. If the other services followed the same pattern, that means an average of 26.03 deaths per day over those six years.
April 9th, 2004, 09:01 AM
While I never agreed with the reasons that Bush used to send the US army into Iraq. I feel that the worst possable thing now would be for the Bush adminisitration to pull out of Iraq before there is a working goverment in place.
The result of such an action would be to leave a power vacum that would be perfectly suited to the setting up of an fundamentalist State. It would give a huge propoganda boost to the islamic terrorist factions and the iraqi people would be in a much worst situtation than if America never went in.
\"America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between.\"
\"The reason we are so pleased to find other people\'s secrets is that it distracts public attention from our own.\"
April 9th, 2004, 01:39 PM
RoadClosed: given i twould be hard for the verious groups of militants to "win", but how dose the US win the war? We are fighting agenst a general upriseing, that will not give up untill they are dead to the last man or we are out.....with the death rate on both sides, and the numbers on both sides we will run out of troops long before they do. Humm this is starting to look real familiar.
Who is more trustworthy then all of the gurus or Buddha’s?
April 9th, 2004, 02:14 PM
The way out of iraq remains one of degrees.
1. Withdrawal after a "friendly" (now that is certainly a misnomer) government is installed.
2. In bodybags (no disrespect meant to many troops and ngo personnel) or on a stretcher.
3. International agreement to recognize new government and acceptable level of stability.
Hmm. There must be more choices.
April 9th, 2004, 07:53 PM
Well Soda, you disagreed on my comments about this being a new Vietnam, and you threw a 26 death rate per day as an example, but let me remind you , we're up to 40 casualties in a week. That's not counting the casualties among civilians in Iraq and the other troops from coalition forces. Plus the number of soldiers going line of duty, the injuries and the diseases they're coming back home with. Does it have to come to 26 deaths per day? In one week we lost total control of two major cities plus surronding villages, we have hostages, Bush's re election is now at stake, and to RoadClose, it sounds all beautiful what you said about being reminded of our troops sacrifice, but I ask you, what are we sacrificing them for?
Can you imagine how those marines felt , when after a year of eating sand and sacrifice, they went to get a plane back home, only to be told they had to go back to the war for God knows how long? I would've gone crazy.
We're wasting millions of dollars everyday to fight against a regime that's gone, we're pouring billions to reconstruct an economy when in the meantime the American people are out of jobs here at home and living in debt in this horrible economy. WMD don't even exist and we were lied too, there are no links between AlQaida and Iraq, and the situation is getting worse by the day.
It's wrong and we shouldn't have gone there in the first place, but now what??
April 10th, 2004, 12:53 AM
Just a reminder, I can't really say that doing what we did was the right decision, I wasn't the one in the oval office receiving intelligence about it from 9 to 5, but I have to say I would like to think I wouldn't have attacked. But the truth is, we have a much better handle on this war than the war in vietnam. Just my thoughts, not my opinions. I would make opinions if I was working in the white house or held a position in the military.
April 12th, 2004, 04:16 PM
Yesterday, CNN reported that 30% of Iraqi's now have a satellite dish thanks to the Americans. How dare anyone say that this war was a failure! Ditch the cable, get the dish!
April 12th, 2004, 06:41 PM
Send in the SAS to take out the leaders of the opposition - that'll stop them. Same for anyone who tries to take coalition hostages. With the Royal Marines as backup they could easily deal with the hard core of the rebels and without people to lead them the resistance would crumble fairly quickly.
As for the troops who gave their lives in Iraq - they knew that death was a possibility when they joined the army. It's not like with the two world wars where you didn't have a choice - men over 18 of fighting ability were automatically conscripted over here in the UK - these men are paid to fight and knew right from the start that their job could involve being put in the front line. Yes it's a tragedy that so many lives have been lost, but a lot of people seem to be saying it as if they expected coalition forces to just walk into Iraq and quietly restore order.
I also wish people would shut up about the whole issue of WMD. You think Bush made a big deal of it - come and see what Tony Blair said about it. He went on about nothing else for about three months leading up to the conflict. Besides, it's a moot point now - whatever reason we went to war for our troops are in Iraq now and dealing with the situation. You might not like the fact that they're fighting (and dying) or the reason why they were sent, but the fact is they're there now and there's nothing you can do to remedy that. To pull out now would be an absolute disaster - we'd have lost hundreds of lives just to replace one evil dictator with another.
Negative: I thought CNN was part of the evil right-wing, Bush-supporting media group (along with Fox and the rest of the companies Rupert Murdoch owns) and therefore their statistics shouldn't be trusted? Judging by the quality of some of the programming that comes through our satellite dishes, I sometimes think the Iraqis might be better off without it anyway.