Author |
Share Topic Topic Search Topic Options
|
red clay
Administrator
Tomato Master Emeritus
Joined: 14-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 10226
|
Quote Reply
Topic: War on Iraq Posted: 23-Mar-2006 at 21:36 |
Originally posted by Thegeneral
[QUOTE=
Oh, and I would just like to add one thing. If you are saying the WMD was "hocus pocus" you may want to rethink this. The Iraqi airforces second in command, General (forgot his name, I'm not good with Arab names) said that Saddam did and does have WMD. He says that because of his position, he was able to see the WMD. And then when the UN was looking around, he saw Saddam scramble to hide them. He also claims days before America invaded, he was ordered to have his men fly the WMD to Syria, or atleast the major parts of them. If you don't believe me, he was on the news for writting his book on it. (also forgot the name)
|
Our son was an army combat eng. attached to 2nd brigade, 3rd acr
and was in one of the point units. He said the first Iraqi installation they came to was stocked with thousands of MOP suits and gas masks, and tens of thousands of atropine injectors. " The pucker factor went up by a factor of ten". It was obvious to them that the I.A. thought they had wmds and that they would be used.
Don't misunderstand, I am not a proponent of this badly planned ill conceived mess the shrub has gotten us into. however it is not as clear cut as some people would have you believe.
Edited by red clay
|
"Arguing with someone who hates you or your ideas, is like playing chess with a pigeon. No matter what move you make, your opponent will walk all over the board and scramble the pieces".
Unknown.
|
|
Thegeneral
Chieftain
Joined: 05-Mar-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1117
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 23-Mar-2006 at 21:49 |
I'm sure it's not, but do people want to listen to the government? Of course not, because people want action and results, as if Saddam's capture wasn't enough.
|
|
|
Dark Age
Shogun
Joined: 01-Mar-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 209
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 23-Mar-2006 at 22:25 |
Short of finding WMD in Syria, no one will trust a story opposite their
beliefs. George Sada either saw the WMD or he didn't, but he's
claimed both. First, he was told by two pilots that WMD was
transported to Syria by plane, then he claims he actually saw the
barrels, which were transported by truck. For the record, I have
not read his book, but I suppose it will get a boost from his
promotional appearances, like Richard Clarke.
Also, I'm sure Muslims don't appreciate his statement that Iraq was and is a Christian nation.
http://amboytimes.blogspot.com/2006/01/saddams-general-cla ims-wmds-in-syria.html
|
|
saiwan
Pretorian
Joined: 05-Mar-2006
Location: Sweden
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 198
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 23-Mar-2006 at 23:33 |
In iraq only baathis and terrorist fear american soldiers. After all the USA liberated the iraqi ppl from Saddam, the son of the devil.
They didnt find WMD? Actually they did! The worse kind of WMD!!! Saddam!!!!
Sad that so many ppl dies down there, but they are being killed by their own country men, not by americans.
Hopefully the situation gets better there soon, but most likely there will be a civil war.
|
|
Seko
Emperor
Spammer
Joined: 01-Sep-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8595
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 23-Mar-2006 at 23:45 |
Looks like the whole policy for that country is left to hope. Unfortunately, that is a shame and a shambles. I still want to know what the US policy over there is today and tommorrow.
|
|
Genghis
Caliph
Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2656
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 24-Mar-2006 at 00:13 |
Originally posted by Seko
Looks like the whole policy for that country is left to hope. Unfortunately, that is a shame and a shambles. I still want to know what the US policy over there is today and tommorrow. |
It's been said many times, handing over more and more of the pacification duties to the Iraqis, in order to allow for the establishment of a stable regime friendly to the United States in the heart of the Middle East. In a sense we have an exit strategy for our forces, but an endurance strategy for our influence from which we can exert a great deal of influence on that important region.
|
Member of IAEA
|
|
Seko
Emperor
Spammer
Joined: 01-Sep-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8595
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 24-Mar-2006 at 00:50 |
I would like to believe that we are going to foster a stable regime with our sturdy dollars. Our imperialism has gone from bases in foreign countries to nation taking. We like takeovers. It's in our mindset. We are numb to it. Had the Iraqis asked us to come and change the country's government and demographics then I would be for the invasion. Since that wasn't the case we are not stabilizing that country yet. We have the choice to remain obstinate and continue to push our own agenda (for strategic purposes) however. Remaining patient and sticking it out may bring dividends. How long though? What may eventually happen is that a civil war will brew. One side will show dominance. If that winning side doesn't want us then we will have a problem. And we will be asked to leave. If they do want us it will be a long time for the dust to settle in order to see that. In the mean time lives and dollars will be wasted.
|
|
Thegeneral
Chieftain
Joined: 05-Mar-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1117
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 24-Mar-2006 at 06:59 |
I don't think those soldiers over there would want to be thought of as "wasted" if they died. That is rather demeaning to the troops.
|
|
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 24-Mar-2006 at 07:46 |
Originally posted by Thegeneral
I don't think those soldiers over there would want to
be thought of as "wasted" if they died. That is rather demeaning
to the troops. |
But does that make it any less true?
|
|
erci
Chieftain
Joined: 22-Jun-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1426
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 24-Mar-2006 at 08:22 |
the most recent poll reveals that war in Iraq significantly increased negative view of Americans among Turkish people
Poll results:
Do you support Iran's nuclear program? %46 Yes %45 No
Would you support a US attack on Iran? %94 No
Would you support a US attack on Syria? %96 No
Should US troops withdraw from Iraq? %52 Yes, immediately %22 Yes, by next year %2 No
%92 of participants think, nothing positive has happened since Americans invaded Iraq. %59 of Participants think, there is no difference between Saddam's regime and American control %30 of participants think, Iraq was better off with Saddam
What is USA trying to do in Iraq?
%80 think, USA wants Iraq's oil %12 think, USA is trying to form an independent Kurdish State %8 think, USA is protecting Israel
Who is responsible for civil war in Iraq?
%71 USA %7 Israel %5 Al Kaide and Shias http://sondakika.milliyet.com.tr/2006/03/24/son/sontur05.asp
Edited by erci
|
|
The Canadian Guy
General
The Native Canuck
Joined: 24-Feb-2005
Location: IDK Im lost!
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 891
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 24-Mar-2006 at 08:56 |
Originally posted by The Canadian Guy
Originally posted by Thegeneral
Originally posted by The Canadian Guy
Does anybody have current anything on this stupid unessary war? I'm curious. My friend is an Iraqi and his family is in the frontline trying to evade the American forces. His bro was killed by an American marine. Trying to flee the battle. "He was murderd by soldiers" my friend says, as his brother was trying to escape |
Um, was he by chance part of the Ba'ath party? Maybe there was a good reason for him trying to flee from Americans? Only criminals run.
Oh, and I would just like to add one thing. If you are saying the WMD was "hocus pocus" you may want to rethink this. The Iraqi airforces second in command, General (forgot his name, I'm not good with Arab names) said that Saddam did and does have WMD. He says that because of his position, he was able to see the WMD. And then when the UN was looking around, he saw Saddam scramble to hide them. He also claims days before America invaded, he was ordered to have his men fly the WMD to Syria, or atleast the major parts of them. If you don't believe me, he was on the news for writting his book on it. (also forgot the name) | No he isn't. He has nothing to do with the army, or in fact anything that involves killing. He is a regular person trying to live an impossible life. I'll bet you would try to flee too, if your country was occupied by armed forces. While doing that you will/might get shot. |
Oh btw there was a firefight going on and he fled from the fight, in so doing that, I'll bet the Marines thought he was a combatnant. So they shot him. I guess the marines were trying to protect themselves.
Edited by The Canadian Guy
|
Hate and anger is the fuel of war, while religion and politics is the foundation of it.
|
|
Zagros
Emperor
Suspended
Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8792
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 24-Mar-2006 at 10:45 |
Originally posted by erci
the most recent poll reveals that war in Iraq significantly increased negative view of Americans among Turkish people
Poll results:
Do you support Iran's nuclear program? %46 Yes %45 No
Would you support a US attack on Iran? %94 No
Would you support a US attack on Syria? %96 No
Should US troops withdraw from Iraq? %52 Yes, immediately %22 Yes, by next year %2 No
%92 of participants think, nothing positive has happened since Americans invaded Iraq. %59 of Participants think, there is no difference between Saddam's regime and American control %30 of participants think, Iraq was better off with Saddam
What is USA trying to do in Iraq?
%80 think, USA wants Iraq's oil %12 think, USA is trying to form an independent Kurdish State %8 think, USA is protecting Israel
Who is responsible for civil war in Iraq?
%71 USA %7 Israel %5 Al Kaide and Shias
http://sondakika.milliyet.com.tr/2006/03/24/son/sontur05.asp
|
I think you will get roughly the same results in all Western and Western aligned countries, except Israel and the US.
|
|
Thegeneral
Chieftain
Joined: 05-Mar-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1117
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 24-Mar-2006 at 17:17 |
I think you would get the same results for attacking Iran and Syria in America mostly because they aren't a real threat at the moment and very few people know what those two countries are doing at the present.
However, I still find it shear stupidity and/or pure ignorance to believe 1. We should pull out of Iraq immediatly 2. We are in Iraq for oil.
If we pulled out of Iraq now, it would be worse than if we were in there. And if the Iraqis thought it would be better without us, they should ask us to leave. If we don't, we would be in violation and then be an occupying country.
And if we were in Iraq for oil, someone explain to me two things: Why Iraq, and why are oil prices still high? Iraq isn't even our top supplier of oil. So why would we invade Iraq? And if we really needed oil, we could always go to Alaska if we needed oil badly enough to invade Iraq. And if we are in Iraq, why are prices still so high? If we were really in it for oil, America's main objective would have been to secure the oil areas and not bother ridding the cities of the insugents. The logic just doesn't fit.
And who is responsible for the so called "civil war"? Lol, America? And Israel is even on the poll? HAHAHA! Thats great. Shows how well people actually listen to the news. Its all Americas fault terrorists decide to blow themselves up and kill their fellow country. I LOVE Turkish logic!
|
|
|
DukeC
Arch Duke
Joined: 07-Nov-2005
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1564
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 24-Mar-2006 at 17:22 |
Originally posted by Genghis
Originally posted by Seko
Looks like the whole policy for that country is left to hope. Unfortunately, that is a shame and a shambles. I still want to know what the US policy over there is today and tommorrow. |
It's been said many times, handing over more and more of the pacification duties to the Iraqis, in order to allow for the establishment of a stable regime friendly to the United States in the heart of the Middle East. In a sense we have an exit strategy for our forces, but an endurance strategy for our influence from which we can exert a great deal of influence on that important region.
|
The problem with depending on the Iraqis is, how do you know who your friends are. The insurgents are infiltrating the Iraqi security forces and causing chaos from within. The U.S. needs a dependable power base inside of Iraq that really isn't available. The Kurds in the North provide some support, but they also have their own agenda. The Shia in the south also cause some reservations as they could easily turn Iraq into another fundamentalist state on the model of Iran. Forget the Sunnis, they were Saddams greatest supporters. The U.S. effort in Iraq is a little like trying to build a house on quicksand, any progress you make is soon swallowed up.
|
|
Iranian41ife
Arch Duke
Joined: 24-Dec-2005
Location: Tajikista
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1832
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 24-Mar-2006 at 17:23 |
i find that one really funny.
its the sunni's that are doing all of this crap, but i guess in a sunni country they dont want to admit it.
|
"If they attack Iran, of course I will fight. But I will be fighting to defend Iran... my land. I will not be fighting for the government and the nuclear cause." ~ Hamid, veteran of the Iran Iraq War
|
|
erci
Chieftain
Joined: 22-Jun-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1426
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 24-Mar-2006 at 19:20 |
not that funny I think, besides only %5 think it's Al kaida and shias, not a big deal, it's just a poll.
|
|
erci
Chieftain
Joined: 22-Jun-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1426
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 24-Mar-2006 at 19:40 |
Originally posted by Thegeneral
I think you would get the same results for
attacking Iran and Syria in America mostly because they aren't a real
threat at the moment and very few people know what those two countries
are doing at the present. |
Iraq was a threat? Ah.. WMD's you're rite and you are also there to change the regime and bring peace.Thank god you are there, those people definetely needed a civil war and a chaos for a change.
Originally posted by Thegeneral
And if we were in Iraq for oil, someone explain
to me two things: Why Iraq, and why are oil prices still high? Iraq
isn't even our top supplier of oil. So why would we invade Iraq? And
if we really needed oil, we could always go to Alaska if we needed oil
badly enough to invade Iraq. And if we are in Iraq, why are prices
still so high? If we were really in it for oil, America's main
objective would have been to secure the oil areas and not bother
ridding the cities of the insugents. The logic just doesn't fit.
|
Breaking news for you! Oil is already been shared between US and Brits.Oil is sitting right next to me in Iraq but I'm paying double what you pay in States.Why? because I'm buying oil from the united states, not from Iraq.You sure have Alaska but you are the one who is selling the Iraqi oil to me and Europe, not Iraqis.
Originally posted by Thegeneral
And who is responsible for the so called "civil
war"? Lol, America? And Israel is even on the poll? HAHAHA! Thats
great. Shows how well people actually listen to the news. Its all
Americas fault terrorists decide to blow themselves up and kill their
fellow country. I LOVE Turkish logic! |
Which news source would you recommend? CNN? Fox? BBC? No thanks
|
|
Thegeneral
Chieftain
Joined: 05-Mar-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1117
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 24-Mar-2006 at 19:50 |
Originally posted by erci
Iraq was a threat? Ah.. WMD's you're rite and you are also there to change the regime and bring peace.Thank god you are there, those people definetely needed a civil war and a chaos for a change. |
Shame we didn't cause the civil war, huh?
Originally posted by erci
Breaking news for you! Oil is already been shared between US and Brits.Oil is sitting right next to me in Iraq but I'm paying double what you pay in States.Why? because I'm buying oil from the united states, not from Iraq.You sure have Alaska but you are the one who is selling the Iraqi oil to me and Europe, not Iraqis. |
Riiight, thats why gas is $2.40 and even higher in Britain? You must be a Turk, because you sure think like those in the poll!
Originally posted by erci
Which news source would you recommend? CNN? Fox? BBC? No thanks
|
Fox is quite good. "Fair and Balanced" is always a good motto. You know, instead of the BBCs motto of "Let's attack Bush and America"!
|
|
|
erci
Chieftain
Joined: 22-Jun-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1426
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 24-Mar-2006 at 20:12 |
Turks pay $2.40- $2.50 a litter for oil, How much you par for a gallon in the US? more than this?
|
|
Thegeneral
Chieftain
Joined: 05-Mar-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1117
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 24-Mar-2006 at 20:31 |
It is around $2.50 a gallon after a small spike. It is higher in certain areas, like where I live for some reason than it is in the city next to us.
|
|
|