Thumper
Member
Appeasement and the destruction of the Jewish State.
Some of us rankle at being dictated to, though.
Analysis: A mini-Tet offensive in Iraq?
- Thread starter canucksvt
- Start date
- Status
Appeasement and the destruction of the Jewish State.
Some of us rankle at being dictated to, though.
Bountyhunter,
Tet broke the back of the Viet Cong. They were pretty much finished as a military force after that. It is still possible to root out the remaining insurgents. It's not a short process though. In the mean time the more we kill in these set piece battles the better. They are giving up what advantage they had by coming out in the open.
You are forgetting some other history. The Islamic culture hasn't produced an army that could fight since Saladin. Israel's continued existance is proof as is the performance of both the Iranian and Iraqi armed forces during their ieght year war and the dismal performance of the Iraqi army against western forces twice in the last 15 years.
Iraq will become more secure and subsequently become a more secular society and it's people will be permitted to participate in the economy and exploit it's wealth. More and more people will accept western ideas. That's what freedom brings.
You are ignoring the fact that the new Iraqi security forces are bearing their share of the fight. The press isn't reporting that very well.
The situation is well in hand and if we don't win the military battle and lose the political one here at home, we've turned the corner.
Jeff
Tet broke the back of the Viet Cong. They were pretty much finished as a military force after that. It is still possible to root out the remaining insurgents. It's not a short process though. In the mean time the more we kill in these set piece battles the better. They are giving up what advantage they had by coming out in the open.
You are forgetting some other history. The Islamic culture hasn't produced an army that could fight since Saladin. Israel's continued existance is proof as is the performance of both the Iranian and Iraqi armed forces during their ieght year war and the dismal performance of the Iraqi army against western forces twice in the last 15 years.
Iraq will become more secure and subsequently become a more secular society and it's people will be permitted to participate in the economy and exploit it's wealth. More and more people will accept western ideas. That's what freedom brings.
You are ignoring the fact that the new Iraqi security forces are bearing their share of the fight. The press isn't reporting that very well.
The situation is well in hand and if we don't win the military battle and lose the political one here at home, we've turned the corner.
Jeff
Evidently, this has been a limited problem. Iraqi security forces that were moved into Falluja were not a cohesive force, with many refusing to fight other Iraqis. It seems that their trainers just went home and new U.S. personnel were in charge of the units. Anyway, I don't know how much these folks are contributing.
Again, for those that are critical of this war. What would you do to stop terror? As a group, you are long on criticism and short on a workable plan.
bountyhunter
member
NO, actually, I have many posts pre dating the war that are long on recommendations.
1) Attack Al qaeda, not Iraq because they are not connected.
2) Lay down the law to Saudi Arabia whose government has turned ablind eye to the financing and training of AQ within it's borders for a decade. They are cowards, and Bush is likewise because he won't stand up to their government.
3) Use diplomacy to assemble a coalition of Arab states who actually believe it's in their best interests to help us fight against AQ. Bush did exactly the opposite with his heavy handed charge to attack a country who was no player at all in the WOT. His father was successful at building such a coalition, it's too bad brains and class are not inherited in that family.
4) Bush should stop lying. To this day, he lies by linking the war in Iraq with the WOT in his commercial ads. It's a lie, he and Cheney have both been forced to admit there was no link between Iraq and Al Qaeda, but he won't stop using the Big Lie to justify his war.
5) Admit the major mistakes that were made, salvage relationships with the allies we must have to win the WOT, and stop acting like a giant arrogant thug who thinks we can do anything we want and everybody else has to like it.
Thumper
Member
Bounty, I think I finally see our disconnect and a major source of disagreement.
Do you think that AQ is the only terrorist group worth going after?
Do you think that AQ is the only terrorist group worth going after?
bountyhunter
member
Apples and oranges. You are buying into the propoganda lie that all of the forces we face in Iraq are "insurgents" which are remnants of the saddam forces or Shiite militia. In fact, we face an unkonwn number of Al Qaeda forces because they entered after Saddam was driven out of power. It was Saddam (who had an open and mutual loathing for Osama Bin laden) that kept them out. Now, we face aligned forces between Saddam remnants, local militia, and imported terrorists.
As for breaking the back of Al qaeda: that has proven impossible so far. We had them "cornered" in Afghanistan and we saw how that turned out. They are NOT cornered in Iraq, they flow in and out at will. AQ cells are developing independently across the Middle East. With all due respect, "rooting them out and killing them" is a job far larger than the US could possible do alone and would encompass an area about 1/4 the size of the world... not just a bunch of fighters in a single country.
bountyhunter:
Thanks..
1. Iraq does not equal Osama and crew. Agreed. We attacked Iraq for a different reason. Also, Saddam allowed other terrorist to live within Iraq's borders. What stops him from transferring technology to these people? I think that you could make a good argument that Iran is a bigger potential threat with regards to passing technology to terrorists.
2. Good sound bite, but how do you do this?
3. Coalition of Arab states? If we only could. We have had limited cooperation. Historically, Arabs fight each other and only unite to fight outsiders.
4. Our allies that were doing behind the scene deals with Iraq? Food for oil U.N. scams??
Ya, Bush is not the ideal leader with regards to putting forth a clear understandable plan of attack. He leaves much to be desired. I wonder how it would go over if he just came out and stated that he wanted to democratize the Middle East and have the local people overthrow most of the governments? That is the strategy. That is a long term solution.
The problem is not Osama. The problem is that poverty and religious fundamentalist zeal is generating future terrorist as I type. How do we stop the youth from becoming future Osamas?
Thanks..
1. Iraq does not equal Osama and crew. Agreed. We attacked Iraq for a different reason. Also, Saddam allowed other terrorist to live within Iraq's borders. What stops him from transferring technology to these people? I think that you could make a good argument that Iran is a bigger potential threat with regards to passing technology to terrorists.
2. Good sound bite, but how do you do this?
3. Coalition of Arab states? If we only could. We have had limited cooperation. Historically, Arabs fight each other and only unite to fight outsiders.
4. Our allies that were doing behind the scene deals with Iraq? Food for oil U.N. scams??
Ya, Bush is not the ideal leader with regards to putting forth a clear understandable plan of attack. He leaves much to be desired. I wonder how it would go over if he just came out and stated that he wanted to democratize the Middle East and have the local people overthrow most of the governments? That is the strategy. That is a long term solution.
The problem is not Osama. The problem is that poverty and religious fundamentalist zeal is generating future terrorist as I type. How do we stop the youth from becoming future Osamas?
bountyhunter
member
An even handed approach that treated all parties fairly. We first have to make the Arabs understand we won't grab our ankles for them anymore. Saudi's rely on use for security, defense hardware, training for their pilots. I would institute an arms-for-oil policy. We stand up and force them to a level playing field. As it is now, we sent 500,000 US forces to SA to shield their northern border from Saddam in 1990 and our payback was to they didn't pay their share of the cost, they threw us off their soil, and now they are reaming us by cutting oil production. I would embargo all military sales until they get an attitude adjustment.
We simply have to stop the past policies that the saudis can do no wrong, the Israelis can blow up anything they want and all we do is "express concern"... we have to make these countries understand the standards of behavior we expect. If they choose to ignore this, we just cut off trade until they bleed. Bottom line, the terror problem goes away when the countries feeding them decide it is more pain to protect them than drop a dime on them. We should be applying the pain diplomatically and economically, not charging around with the Marines which makes us end up looking like idiots.
Thumper
Member
Why is "both" not a sound solution? You seem to exclude force as an option almost out of hand.
bountyhunter:
We need Saudi oil. That is our fault. That negates your suggestions.
Second, the Saudis have been working on self-sufficiency regarding defense. That is one reason they feel comfortable snubbing the U.S.
Our efforts to press the Saudis can work against us with regards to Muslims and Mecca.
Third, I believe that the Israelis respond to folks killing civilians. We do come down on the Israelis from time to time. I think that we would come down hard should they start sending out forces to kill civilians unrelated to attacks on Israel. I believe that their military moves are direct actions against Hammas and friends.
We need Saudi oil. That is our fault. That negates your suggestions.
Second, the Saudis have been working on self-sufficiency regarding defense. That is one reason they feel comfortable snubbing the U.S.
Our efforts to press the Saudis can work against us with regards to Muslims and Mecca.
Third, I believe that the Israelis respond to folks killing civilians. We do come down on the Israelis from time to time. I think that we would come down hard should they start sending out forces to kill civilians unrelated to attacks on Israel. I believe that their military moves are direct actions against Hammas and friends.
bountyhunter said;
So you're saying that everyone would be in better shape if Saddam was still in power? The way I see it, we're drawing al-Qaeda forces out into the open in Iraq. Where we are killing them.
We have the native insurgents cornered in Iraq and those are the ones we must defeat to make Iraq into a democratic state. As for al-Qaeda flowing in and out of Iraq at will, we don't have the Johnson administration in charge any longer. Nations that allow al-Qaeda to operate within their borders risk our wrath. The Iranians will most likely soon find out the price of supporting operations against the US military.
I have to differ. we are the only nation in the world capable of rooting them out and killing them. The rest of the world has dismantled their military into forces that are barely adequate to secure their own borders (if that, take a look at Canadian readiness). The rest of the world has taken the money they haven't spent on defense and poured it into failed social programs. Now they have economies that can't compete globally and the can't project power very far across their borders. No my friend, the rest of the world needs us, not the other way around. The socialist Euro economies will no longer support military forces sufficient for expeditionary warfare. As for needing their aproval, who cares. What are they going to do, denounce us in the UN? Boycott our products? Whine to the American left that we're bullies? Face it, they haven't got the means to back up anything they say.
We will win. It's not going to be fast. It's not going to be clean. But when we're finished the entire world will be a better place. We can't lose on the battlefield. Diplomacy is irrelevant in a world where all those that oppose us couldn't fight their way out of the proverbial wet paper bag. The only way we can lose is if the blissninnys and whiners in our own country break our national will to win.
Jeff
So you're saying that everyone would be in better shape if Saddam was still in power? The way I see it, we're drawing al-Qaeda forces out into the open in Iraq. Where we are killing them.
We have the native insurgents cornered in Iraq and those are the ones we must defeat to make Iraq into a democratic state. As for al-Qaeda flowing in and out of Iraq at will, we don't have the Johnson administration in charge any longer. Nations that allow al-Qaeda to operate within their borders risk our wrath. The Iranians will most likely soon find out the price of supporting operations against the US military.
I have to differ. we are the only nation in the world capable of rooting them out and killing them. The rest of the world has dismantled their military into forces that are barely adequate to secure their own borders (if that, take a look at Canadian readiness). The rest of the world has taken the money they haven't spent on defense and poured it into failed social programs. Now they have economies that can't compete globally and the can't project power very far across their borders. No my friend, the rest of the world needs us, not the other way around. The socialist Euro economies will no longer support military forces sufficient for expeditionary warfare. As for needing their aproval, who cares. What are they going to do, denounce us in the UN? Boycott our products? Whine to the American left that we're bullies? Face it, they haven't got the means to back up anything they say.
We will win. It's not going to be fast. It's not going to be clean. But when we're finished the entire world will be a better place. We can't lose on the battlefield. Diplomacy is irrelevant in a world where all those that oppose us couldn't fight their way out of the proverbial wet paper bag. The only way we can lose is if the blissninnys and whiners in our own country break our national will to win.
Jeff
- Status