Iraq

Discussion in 'Et Cetera, Et Cetera' started by KinkGuy, Aug 20, 2005.

  1. KinkGuy

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2004
    Messages:
    2,976
    Likes Received:
    6
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    southwest US
    Journalist, Robert Fisk reports that 1,100 civilian bodies were brought into the Baghdad morgue in July. The medical journal The Lancet concluded in October 2004 that at least 100,000 Iraqi civilians had died in the first 18 months after Bush invaded Iraq. The picture in Iraq is not a pretty one. Bush has no intention of ever pulling out of Iraq. The US is building the largest CIA station in the world in Baghdad. And Halliburton is busily constructing 14 permanent US military bases in Iraq. Why are we really there? What is “a noble cause?”
     
  2. InsertHere

    InsertHere New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2004
    Messages:
    142
    Likes Received:
    0
    Because it's obviously a better way of improving the economy and securing our future ability to burn ungodly amounts of oil, otherwise known as defending the American way of life, than supporting alternative sources of energy.

    If I have any willpower at all, I will not check this thread again...
     
  3. Dr. Dilznick

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2005
    Messages:
    1,662
    Likes Received:
    1
    At least the American dollar is at an all-time high.
     
  4. Dr Rock

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2005
    Messages:
    3,696
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    who lives in the east 'neath the willow tree? Sex
    I think we knew that as soon as we figured out he was gonna invade in the first place.

    I also think you just answered your own question.
     
  5. KinkGuy

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2004
    Messages:
    2,976
    Likes Received:
    6
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    southwest US
    And that, along with Dr's response, was the discussion I was trying to illicit. A temperature check if you will. Maybe all us "left wing nut jobs" are tired of discussing it?
     
  6. B_DoubleMeatWhopper

    B_DoubleMeatWhopper New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2002
    Messages:
    5,402
    Likes Received:
    7
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Louisiana
    Isn't that the way it always goes? You go in intending to pull out, but once you get a feel for it you want to keep going, and you lose sight of what you were trying to avoid. Tell me sex and warfare have nothing in common.
     
  7. steve319

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2005
    Messages:
    1,205
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Kink, I think we're all just feeling a bit defeated in light of this mess.

    (sigh)

    How many votes will it take next time?
     
  8. headbang8

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2004
    Messages:
    1,272
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    8
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Munich (BY, DE)
    The same number. Just count them next time.
     
  9. KinkGuy

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2004
    Messages:
    2,976
    Likes Received:
    6
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    southwest US
    Or count "ours" twice and don't let "them" vote......hey, it's worked before.....twice.
     
  10. Dr. Dilznick

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2005
    Messages:
    1,662
    Likes Received:
    1
    Army Planning for Four More Years in Iraq

    By ROBERT BURNS
    The Associated Press
    Sunday, August 21, 2005; 8:55 AM


    WASHINGTON - The Army is planning for the possibility of keeping the current number of soldiers in Iraq — well over 100,000 — for four more years, the Army's top general said Saturday.

    In an Associated Press interview, Gen. Peter Schoomaker said the Army is prepared for the "worst case" in terms of the required level of troops in Iraq. He said the number could be adjusted lower if called for by slowing the force rotation or by shortening tours for soldiers.

    Schoomaker said commanders in Iraq and others who are in the chain of command will decide how many troops will be needed next year and beyond. His responsibility is to provide them, trained and equipped.

    About 138,000 U.S. troops, including about 25,000 Marines, are now in Iraq.

    "We are now into '07-'09 in our planning," Schoomaker said, having completed work on the set of combat and support units that will be rotated into Iraq over the coming year for 12-month tours of duty.

    Schoomaker's comments come amid indications from Bush administration officials and commanders in Iraq that the size of the U.S. force may be scaled back next year if certain conditions are achieved.

    Among those conditions: an Iraqi constitution must be drafted in coming days; it must be approved in a national referendum; and elections must be held for a new government under that charter.

    Schoomaker, who spoke aboard an Army jet on the trip back to Washington from Kansas City, Mo., made no predictions about the pace of political progress in Iraq. But he said he was confident the Army could provide the current number of forces to fight the insurgency for many more years. The 2007-09 rotation he is planning would go beyond President Bush's term in office, which ends in January 2009.

    Schoomaker was in Kansas City for a dinner Friday hosted by the Military Order of the World Wars, a veterans' organization.

    "We're staying 18 months to two years ahead of ourselves" in planning which active-duty and National Guard and Reserve units will be provided to meet the commanders' needs, Schoomaker said in the interview.

    The main active-duty combat units that are scheduled to go to Iraq in the coming year are the 101st Airborne Division, based at Fort Campbell, Ky., and the 4th Infantry Division from Fort Hood, Texas. Both did one-year tours earlier in the war.

    The Army has changed the way it arranges troop rotations.

    Instead of sending a full complement of replacement forces each 12-month cycle, it is stretching out the rotation over two years.

    The current rotation, for 2005-07, will overlap with the 2006-08 replacements. Beyond that, the Army is piecing together the plan for the 2007-09 switch, Schoomaker said.

    With the recent deployments of National Guard brigades from Georgia and Pennsylvania, the National Guard has seven combat brigades in Iraq — the most of the entire war — plus thousands of support troops.

    Along with the Army Reserve and Marine Reserve, they account for about 40 percent of the total U.S. forces in Iraq. Schoomaker said that will be scaled back next year to about 25 percent as newly expanded active-duty divisions such as the 101st Airborne enter the rotation.

    August has been the deadliest month of the war for the National Guard and Reserve, with at least 42 fatalities thus far. Schoomaker disputed the suggestion by some that the Guard and Reserve units are not fully prepared for the hostile environment of Iraq.

    "I'm very confident that there is no difference in the preparation" of active-duty soldiers and the reservists, who normally train one weekend a month and two weeks each summer, unless they are mobilized. Once called to active duty, they go through the same training as active-duty units.

    In internal surveys, some in the reserve forces have indicated to Army leaders that they think they are spending too much time in pre-deployment training, not too little, Schoomaker said.

    "Consistently, what we've been (hearing) is, `We're better than you think we are, and we could do this faster,'" he said. "I can promise you that we're not taking any risk in terms of what we're doing to prepare people."

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...5082100187.html
     
  11. Dr. Dilznick

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2005
    Messages:
    1,662
    Likes Received:
    1
    As an aside, Kerry voted for the use of force and would have done so even knowing WMDs weren't in Iraq. He said he would have given inspectors more time, however assuming Saddam reacted to them similarly by being uncooperative (maybe it would have taken an extra year or two under Kerry than it did under Bush) then Kerry would have prosecuted the war.
     
  12. Dr Rock

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2005
    Messages:
    3,696
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    who lives in the east 'neath the willow tree? Sex
    oh, the "possibility." this sounds pretty cut-and-dried for a mere contingency plan, but then we knew that already.

    ... thus defeating the entire point and surreptitiously admitting that the "war" is a colossal failure, exactly as rumsfeld and co. planned it. if you're planning to fight the "insurgency" for MANY MORE YEARS, then, by definition, you've FAILED to achieve your purported PRIMARY OBJECTIVE - peace and stability in iraq. you've already LOST, general schoomaker. christ, I never made it past corporal and even I can figure that one out on my own. :eyes:
     
  13. Dr. Dilznick

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2005
    Messages:
    1,662
    Likes Received:
    1
    GOP Senator Says Iraq Looking Like Vietnam

    By DOUGLASS K. DANIEL, Associated Press Writer

    WASHINGTON - A leading Republican senator and prospective presidential candidate said Sunday that the war in Iraq has destabilized the Middle East and is looking more like the Vietnam conflict from a generation ago.

    Nebraska Sen. Chuck Hagel (news, bio, voting record), who received two Purple Hearts and other military honors for his service in Vietnam, reiterated his position that the United States needs to develop a strategy to leave Iraq.

    Hagel scoffed at the idea that U.S. troops could be in Iraq four years from now at levels above 100,000, a contingency for which the Pentagon is preparing.

    "We should start figuring out how we get out of there," Hagel said on "This Week" on ABC. "But with this understanding, we cannot leave a vacuum that further destabilizes the Middle East. I think our involvement there has destabilized the Middle East. And the longer we stay there, I think the further destabilization will occur."

    Hagel said "stay the course" is not a policy. "By any standard, when you analyze 2 1/2 years in Iraq ... we're not winning," he said.

    President Bush was preparing for separate speeches this week to reaffirm his plan to help Iraq train its security forces while its leaders build a democratic government. In his weekly Saturday radio address, Bush said the fighting there protected Americans at home.

    Polls show the public growing more skeptical about Bush's handling of the war.

    In Iraq, officials continued to craft a new constitution in the face of a Monday night deadline for parliamentary approval. They missed the initial deadline last week.

    Other Republican senators appearing on Sunday news shows advocated remaining in Iraq until the mission set by Bush is completed, but they also noted that the public is becoming more and more concerned and needs to be reassured.

    Sen. George Allen (news, bio, voting record), R-Va., another possible candidate for president in 2008, disagreed that the U.S. is losing in Iraq. He said a constitution guaranteeing basic freedoms would provide a rallying point for Iraqis.

    "I think this is a very crucial time for the future of Iraq," said Allen, also on ABC. "The terrorists don't have anything to win the hearts and minds of the people of Iraq. All they care to do is disrupt."

    Hagel, who was among those who advocated sending two to three times as many troops to Iraq when the war began in March 2003, said a stronger military presence by the U.S. is not the solution today.

    "We're past that stage now because now we are locked into a bogged-down problem not unsimilar, dissimilar to where we were in Vietnam," Hagel said. "The longer we stay, the more problems we're going to have."

    Allen said that unlike the communist-guided North Vietnamese who fought the U.S., the insurgents in Iraq have no guiding political philosophy or organization. Still, Hagel argued, the similarities are growing.

    "What I think the White House does not yet understand — and some of my colleagues — the dam has broke on this policy," Hagel said. "The longer we stay there, the more similarities (to Vietnam) are going to come together."

    The Army's top general, Gen. Peter Schoomaker, said Saturday in an interview with The Associated Press that the Army is planning for the possibility of keeping the current number of soldiers in Iraq — well over 100,000 — for four more years as part of preparations for a worst-case scenario.

    Sen. Lindsey Graham (news, bio, voting record), a South Carolina Republican, said U.S. security is tied to success in Iraq, and he counseled people to be patient.

    "The worst-case scenario is not staying four years. The worst-case scenario is leaving a dysfunctional, repressive government behind that becomes part of the problem in the war on terror and not the solution," Graham said on "Fox News Sunday.

    Allen said the military would be strained at such levels in four years yet could handle that difficult assignment. Hagel described the Army contingency plan as "complete folly."

    "I don't know where he's going to get these troops," Hagel said. "There won't be any National Guard left ... no Army Reserve left ... there is no way America is going to have 100,000 troops in Iraq, nor should it, in four years."

    Hagel added: "It would bog us down, it would further destabilize the Middle East, it would give
    Iran more influence, it would hurt
    Israel, it would put our allies over there in Saudi Arabia and Jordan in a terrible position. It won't be four years. We need to be out."

    Sen. Trent Lott (news, bio, voting record), R-Miss., said the U.S. is winning in Iraq but has "a way to go" before it meets its goals there. Meanwhile, more needs to be done to lay out the strategy, Lott said on NBC's "Meet the Press."

    "I do think we, the president, all of us need to do a better job, do more," Lott said, by telling people "why we have made this commitment, what is being done now, what we do expect in the process and, yes, why it's going to take more time."
     
  14. D_Humper E Bogart

    D_Humper E Bogart New Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    2,226
    Likes Received:
    2
    *Yawn* I don't remember anyone dropping several thousand gallons of Napalm or Agent Orange on Iraq.

    Anyway, calling the NVA "terrorists" or saying that the "terrorists" (I refuse the word insurgance, otherwise call them freedom fighters or rebel scum) are skilled soldiers is insulting to the poor suckers who were 0wned by them.
     
  15. KinkGuy

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2004
    Messages:
    2,976
    Likes Received:
    6
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    southwest US
    1) We've moved way beyond that. Just wait, it WILL get worse.
    2) Who owns who, now?
    3) Who was it that said to the shrub regarding the invasion of Iraq (shortly before he "retired"); "You break it, you bought it."
     
  16. D_Humper E Bogart

    D_Humper E Bogart New Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    2,226
    Likes Received:
    2
    1) Yep, MOABS and friendly fire are cool bedmates.
    2) Well, I'm not sure whether suicide bombers have so far failed to kill anybody.
    3) I dunno..
     
Draft saved Draft deleted