Iraqi Gun Turn-In Program not a Success?

[Baba Louie]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,117858,00.html

Thursday, April 22, 2004

FALLUJAH, Iraq — Guerrillas and residents of Fallujah had handed over only a paltry assortment of old and rusty weapons as of Thursday, prompting U.S. military officials to warn that a shaky cease-fire in the city may soon collapse.

"We weren't pleased at all with the turn-in [of weapons] we saw yesterday. In terms of volume, it amounted to about a pick-up [truck] full," Lt. Gen. Jim Conway (search) said, characterizing the turned-in weapons as "junk."

"It's our estimate the people of Fallujah have not responded well to the agreements ... that the weapons turn-in would be a reflection of their desire to end the situation peacefully," Conway added. "I think what happens next is in the hands of the negotiators."

U.S. officials said the weapons deal's success hinged on whether the Fallujah negotiators —a group of local civic leaders — could convince the guerrillas to comply.


There's more in the article... but imagine that. These newly free democratic social types do NOT want to turn in something that might let them defend themselves against those who would do them harm...

I am shocked. Looks like it's gonna be the old kick in the front door time... we know how well that works. I'd really like to think that the US armed forces can look back to April 19, 1775 and say... you know, I remember reading about a similar situation once... somewhere...

 

[TallPine]

I have believed for quite a while now that the operation in Iraq is simply a training exercise .....

 

[Baba Louie]

You mean... for Iran? Right? Maybe N Korea? UN related activites elsewhere perchance?

 

[hops]

Say that I can't blame them for not turning their tools. I'm certain there are quite a few members on this board who'd ignore such a request from their own or any other governement as well. Lots of uncertains remain in Iraq, and even if I were not participating in attacks against coalition forces, if I were an Iraqi, I'd hang on to the AK's I'd have.

 

[TallPine]

For similar operations in the USA ....

 

[jnojr]

I really love the dichotomy on this board over Iraq. When the subject is the UN and NWO invading the US, we say "Those blue helmets will make great targets!" and "They'll pry my gun from my cold, dead fingers". But when we invade Iraq, we're surprised and outraged that they shoot at us and refuse to turn their weapons over to us.

We are a foreign invader in Iraq. Yes, we (at least ostensibly) want to "make things better" for them, and have done so for a lot of Iraqis in a lot of ways. But a certain, significant number of Iraqis do not want us there. We're never going to "win" in Iraq. There will always be people who hate us and want to shoot at our soldiers over there. And once we leave, the government we helped to create and propped up will come under attack from a number of directions, until it breaks and we have more religious warfare. Heck, we might even wind up with another Taliban-esque government over there, what with all the non-Iraqi Arabs who have flooded into the country.

IMO, we need to pick a reasonable date to have authority fully transferred over to the Provisional government, and then stick to it. Period. That will go badly, but we'll have at least given them a chance. As it is, I'm afraid we're going to be a semi-permanent occupation force propping up an unpopular governemnt with no end in sight. Sound familiar?

 

[Baba Louie]

As it is, I'm afraid we're going to be a semi-permanent occupation force propping up an unpopular governemnt with no end in sight. Sound familiar?

Japan and Germany come to mind, tho in Germany the duties were shared by what would become UN members... true? Or were you referring to SEA? Or S. Korea? Or maybe you referring to the UK in N Ireland? So many areas fit the bill.

But I do agree with your take as, it would appear, does our President. I keep hearing June 30 for some kind of turnover date in Iraq w/ some form of coalition forces stationed there for a time as yet unspecified to "Keep the Peace". Then onward, to the NEXT nest of vipers in the WOT "Axis of Evil". Think anyone in or near DC is dusting off Jimmy Carter's Tehran raid plans?

Is anyone getting tired of our War on Terror yet? Do the masses recall the WTC and Pentagon or are they all outraged by whatever happened on American Idol last night (what DID happen? I don't partake of that particular sitcom)?

 

[USAFNoDAk]

Is anyone getting tired of our War on Terror yet? Do the masses recall the WTC and Pentagon or are they all outraged by whatever happened on American Idol last night (what DID happen? I don't partake of that particular sitcom)?

Not entirely on topic, but I believe the reason the Liberals were so upset that we started on Iraq before we captured Been Hidin' is that if we had Been Hidin' in custody, they think we would be less likely to be attacked again before the 2004 elections. Because if we are attacked again, I think it will be very hard for voters to hand the keys to Kerry and his Democrats.

With Been Hidin' on ice, that variable would be out of the mix and the lefties could drone on about the environment, the deficit, starving children in schools, etc. etc. etc. Their weakness on national security/defense would not be so risky to them.

Just a theory. No facts to support it. Gut feeling maybe.

 

[Hkmp5sd]

They need to use the approved US turn-in method....

and offer them $25 or a gift certificate for Toys-R-Us for any gun surrendered. In fact, it is one thing Democrats have no problem budgeting money for.

 

[TallPine]

But when we invade Iraq, we're surprised and outraged that they shoot at us and refuse to turn their weapons over to us.

Not me. I understand completely.

OTOH, I don't want a single one of our soldiers to get so much as a scratch over there either. Thats why I think we ought to bring them all home and let the Iraqis determine their own destiny.