Pentagon F.U.P. #372797836

I was about to write a juicy bit on how Nancy Pelosi is now famous and adored in Syria; that Assad is now seen as right in refusing to negotiate with the west, at all, now that the Congress is on Syria's side. And noting that Syria rounded up a bunch of domestic blogger-critics the day after she left.

And maybe a snarky piece wondering if Diane Feinstein would be run out of Washington on a rail foressentially doing the same thing Randy Cunningham did. (answer: of course not, you big sillies!.. Cunningham was a Republican, Feinstein's a Dem..and a Dem cannot be a Crook, by definition!)

Unfortunately, the military has topped Pelosi's unbelievable stupidity and Feinstein's little faux-pas.

They have essentially put the final nail in Mil-blogging. Thus they lose the best advocates and critics of what the US is actually doing in Iraq.

Of course... just like the war on drugs, and anti-gun laws, it's not going tostop the minority who dont give a shit about the military or what we're doing in Iraq...(you can tell which side they are on because the subject is always about how anything happening affects THEM!, and how THEY feel about it.)

But for the guys who tell why they want to be in Iraq, and how they feel we are making a difference, there.... of course it will probably shut most of them down.

 

In a nutshell can someone please explain to me why we are still in Iraq?

 

Tom if you're REALLY interested, I can explain it... but that would mean I have to put up with Don's Bullshit Memes.

see how we always counter facts and ideas with feelings?

 

Let me explain it this way... I sat down with one of my kids who has exactly the same views as Don, but for him it was part rebellion and part protection of his 'circle of friends' views.

Over the course of 2 hours and several beers i explained the whole 'Saddam/WMD' thing and how it probably played out... fromSaddam's view.

At the end of the evening I had him, if not convinced, recognizing the real possibilities.... in the end, though, it didnt take.

Neither woulld it take with Don, who I suspect SEES the truth but desperately denies it.

 

I just do not understand what good we are doing any part of this country by being there. Our soldiers are getting killed and hurt. Our military is being run thin, we are spending tons of billions of dollars on an effort that seems to be getting nowhere and whether we leave tomorrow or in ten years, the problems we are facing there now will likely still be there. That being said, what we are accomplishing by being there?

 

Short as I can get it... we are trying to establish that middle-easterners can indeed have a country that THEY can have a say in... ie; a democracy of sorts. We previously could point to Lebanon and Jordan as prototypes of a modern state. Then Syria ruined Lebanon and Jordan is in thrall to the foreign elements in their midst, requiring they keep a low profile.

If Iraq DID succeed... that would stem, somewhat, the flow of middle eastern muslim to the west; who are followed, of course, by their imams who are determined to make western countries into a duplicate image of the oppressive hell-holes they escaped from.

The thing that amazes me is that the radicals have put what they are doing on the record, they have pointed out exactly what I say above, as a danger to their views... and liberals refuse to believe it... or more accurately, shut their eyes to it, preferring to believe that WE are at fault for whatever these nut-cases say or do.

At the same time, some short-sighted libs point out Saudi Arabia as a case where the people should overthrow their oppression but only the shortsighted, as the Sauds are very nervous about Iraq succeeding... might give their own moderate 'democrats' ideas... and they would have been paying off the wahabists for all these years, for nothing.

Note that anti-semitism is markedly on the rise in the west... it's all Israels fault, and by extension all those Joos and evangelicals that support Israel. It's okay for ISLAMISTS to use terror, extortion and subversion for their ends.. if 'Western Religionists' even use propaganda, it's a shame on us!

Of course that smacks of implied bigotry and elitism (they are only poor victimised third worlders, after all) if you look close at it... but the left isnt looking at it.

 

Okay, but what it seems you are saying is that the ongoing problems in Iraq require people to change the way they think. Thus, this is a political problem rather than a military problem.

What is the definition of "success" in Iraq?

While I do think we are somewhat at fault for the problems we are experiencing with radical Muslims, I do not think we are totally at fault.

 

What gave you the idea that we're talking about a 'military venture' anymore?

What we are now engaged in is truly a 'Police Action' which of course wont sit well with most.. but that's what it is... rooting out terror cells which prevent full participation of various political factions in Iraq... pointing out an instance: The Sunni's (including baathists) in no way want the US out of Iraq.. indeed they are joining the IDF in increasing numbers, and pointing out terrorists and the cells they work in.

The Dems first castigated Dubya for the lack of 'security' and once they got Rummy out and dictated Dubya 'change course' now that we have markedly improved security, they are saying the 'War is lost anyway'.

The deinition of success is that when we do leave we dont have a repeat of Virt Nam's aftermath, and another 'Killing Fields'.

 

I guess I assume it is a military venture because thousands of American troops and billions of American dollars are being used to "root" out the terrorists rather than say.......the Iraqi people.

While it is hard to believe any media outlet is telling the whole, truthful story, I have read and heard very little to the affect that this new surge is working and that things are getting better.

Additionally, in November of 2006, the American people voted to elect a Democratically controlled Congress. It was not so much that the Dems were all great, but the American people voted for change...specifically in Iraq. Thus, the Dems come up with a bill that will finally hold the President and his administration accountable for their actions and he vetoes it.

We do live in a democracy here in America, but when countless polls suggest by an overwhelming majority that most Americans want us out of Iraq quickly, why does Bush go with the Minority and continue proceedings in Iraq? It seems more like a dictatorship than a democracy.

It also sounds like stubborness on Bush's part which is what we have seen from him for the better part of six years. It is time for a change and it is time to get our heads out of the sand and come home. We are not gaining anything being there. Regardless of what the Bush optimists think, a good chunk of the Middle East is going to hate us for many, many years because of this whole fiasco the last five years. Kids being born now will be raised to hate us. It will take generations to heal the wombs Bush has created for the American people. Not to even mention the debt we are incurring by the day. Fiscal responsibility? Bush has never heard of it.

 

How WHO thinks?

How the Kurds and Shia think? The Kurds are happy that we more or less protected them after the Gulf War... the Shia STILL resent us because we didnt protect them, after we made vague promises to do exactly that. How the Sunni think? EVEN the Sunni want a Republican state of Iraq... only a minority of ANY of those want civil war.. those that do want it to establish hegemony over the other two.
And only Westerners REALLY think Iraqis want the country split up the way it was before the Brits created it.

How are we at fault AT ALL? Dont we give asylum to any or all of them who claim 'oppression'? Dont we allow them to practice their religion freely in our midst... and we cannot in THEIR midst!

If you point at oil... it was oil that made them rich. It's the west that discovered it, and who buys that oil and THEY are the ones who continue to set the price... how is THAT 'oppression'?

If you want to point at how we 'really f***d up, in the past... what nation hasnt? An Arabic nation? A Persian Nation? All excuses! Convenient ones at the moment to explain how WE are at fault.

I remind those with that view that the west supported Haile Selassie. And what was the result there.. once he was gone? Closer to the West... how we all gushed over Tito's influence on suppressing the ethinc violence we saw erupt after he died... were we at fault for that?

I've pointed out how the French actually were MUCH at fault for the rise of Hitler... does that excuse Hitler and the Nazis?

I will say and have said that the long ago Church and the Vatican gave rise to the miseries of Latin America including Mexico... does that excuse them for REMAINING to be virtual fiefdoms?

No... you have to start at the present when considering any global politic.. it is only the present that counts, and whether Dubya had the right idea or not, the end result starts with what's happening NOW.

 

I am not even going to get into this kind of debate with you Pettyfog. The present is not the only thing that counts. History is very important in determining how and why a country and its people is the way they are.

It is easy to say we as Americans are NOT at fault at all. But in turn, we have played a role in some of this. Here are a few:

1. Why did we create a place like Israel and simply uproot thousands if not millions of Palestinians? This has played a factor.

2. After Iran elected a person in 1952, America did not like him, so they overthrew that regime and brought in a person they liked better. That sounds democratic. This has played a factor.

There are surely others, but to tell me history does not factor in to this equation seems a bit naive.

 

They are convenient EXCUSES to justify your views...I JUST explained that no nation is so farsighted and altruistic as to never screw up.

Thus, it's obvious there CAN be no worth-while debate on the past.. only what's the right thing to do from here on.

THAT is what VALUE history teaches us. We can best learn from our mistakes but the value is ONLY from a set-point, not in monday quarterbacking.

THAT is why the US intervened after WWII, resulting in the economic rebuilding of both Germany and Japan. I cannot put it in any better perspective than that example.

So let's use the Viet Nam example and start with the set point that Cronkite declared we had lost. Even though we definitely hadnt, and the Nv didnt think we'd lost.

Iraqis dont think we've lost, nor does al quaeda or al Sadr...UNLESS WE LEAVE.


NOW what would you do?

 

What is the fascination with you Republicans about winning and losing? I do not get it at all.

 

Just having fun with ya, Tom... it's allowed here. keep a sense of humor on ya, lad!

'So here i go:"

Yes, like the history of how Arabs have negotiated and upheld treaties in the past.

But it's even EASIER to say we are at fault, because:

Indeed it does... especially if you ignoree the T & C's of that and prefer to look on the Palestinians as victims. Never mind we had just gone through the holocaust in Germany and the pogroms in Russia.. we played to the JOOS!!

So lets just go back and get a re-do and it will all be better!

Indeed there are... going back to how Cuba would be different if we'd never done the Spanish American war... NOT!

BUT..the philippines... imagine! We, thus, would have had no interest in the Pac Rim and what Japan did would be of no consequence to us.

And if we hadnt beaten Japan back, then they would have Viet Nam, and the French couldnt have drug us in there. And if there had been no Viet Nam.. then we wouldnt have had the rise of the socialist element in the US... and Jimmy Carter would have never gotten in. Thus we'd have had no Ronald Reagan... instead Walter Mondale would have set the tone and we'd have had a workers paradise for sure

To think that we should temper our ability to think about what we should do once we 'get into a pickle' based on what led to it, seems a bit naive to me.

I know anytime my car has skidded out on ice, and I'm heading for a ditch or a tree, I just think back about how I shouldnt have left home in such sucky weather ... thus i close my eyes and click my heels together three times and 'voila!'

 

Petty, you are a funny man!! That last paragraph was funny. I am not saying the past dictates what is done in the future, I am merely saying the past does help us understand the thoughts and mindsets of people and countries.

 

Not when you IGNORE the main points, tom... go back to the Barbary War and work forward!

To think that you can start , from here, with 'negotiation and diplomacy' without threat of military action.. is so ludicrous it's almost INSANE!

Remember the popular definition of insanity?

 

Honestly I have mixed emotions on wether we should pull out NOW or not. We went in there and F*%4ed their whole country up. Turned it on its head, destroyed the social fabric, unleashed a civil war. We ruined lives and communites. It was a terribly planed, poorly executed war launched on a whim, a dreamy notion that we could simply create a democracy and all the unfriendly regimes of the region would simply collapse and go against thousands of years of history and take up American style democracy. We've done tremendous damage to the nation of Iraq, destroyed every element of their lives.

So isn't it our responsibility to hang around, and try and restore the country to some sort of working form? Our actions have led to the deaths of hundreds of thousands and ruined the lives of millions beyond repair.
Have we even the right to complain about losing a few thousand soldiers? Isn't it the least we should be expected to do, to give some sort of future to the people of Iraq?

On the other hand, its never going to work. Nothing improves, dubya, Tony Snow, fog all say its stabilized, how do they know? Why the hell should I believe them?? Every day I open the paper the death count is on the rise, another key bloc of the parliment has left in protest. Nothings being worked out, more Iraqis die, more Brits die, more Americans die. Its endless, these groups are incapable of compromise. Shouldn't we just cut are losses, call it a day?

I can't get beyond these two thoughts. Which is the lesser of two evils, I can't decide. Either way were F*&%ed, the Iraqis are F*&%ed, we've screwed up. To see people continue to be apologists for this war is beyond incredible.