Back to Topic Index

5 Years on

By Mickey on 19/03/2008
"5 years after the Iraq war started and still no end in sight."

Discuss.

By JC on 19/03/2008
The first question is; Is it a war that in its current form can ever be won? Personally I think the war in Iraq is impossible to 'win' or even finish in its current form.

Why is this?

1) The insurgents are effectively unbeatable. In a way the war in Iraq mirror's an ideal comando situation, you have a big 'occupier' (the US forces) which small 'commando units' (the Insurgents) wish to attack. Ineherently because of the size of the American forces they cannot even dream of defending themselves from enemies which can appear anywhere and attack without warning.

2) The big issue is the basis of the modern armed forces. All the branches of the American armed forces are designed to defeat a large army of a similar design, which is why it has the best tanks/planes/ships etc. yet these are of little use when the opposition could be anyone, anywhere. In essence the US armed forces are optimised to take out large, obvious targets such as 'soviet/cold war Russia' which is when most of the weapons in current use were designed, and now moving on to targets such as N Korea. Hence once the Us has occupied an area its advantage is neutralised....

Lastly of all, why I dont think it will ever be won is that from what I see of the american forces in Iraq they are not even trying to work with the popultaion.... I have footage on my PC of an American Humvee ramming vehicles to force them out of it's way while on patrol which clearly shows the lack of concern over working with the Iraqi's rather than against them to sort their country out. Untill the US is fully out of Iraq I cant exactly see it getting any better.....

But then the US leaving will naturally cause more problems...... oh such fun

rolleyes.gif

By His Lordship on 19/03/2008
Next time learn your lesson and don't invade unless you have undeniable proof there's a good reason to.

By Karel Dude on 19/03/2008
Shh they are still finding the terrorists!

By JC on 19/03/2008
Justifying the war on iraq is a can of worms I didnt even want to touch.....

By Pseudomage0 on 19/03/2008
To be totally honest i am not a supporter of the war i have friends and a cousin that have gone to the war at a very young age. What has happened, is that this war had just gotten plain out of hand. Its like Bush doesnt even know who we are fighting anymore which makes it an almost impossible battle to win and victory almost unachieveable. I also dont like the fact that instead of providing healthcare to millions of people. Bush has use trillions of dollars on the war putting us even farther and farther into debt. Thus making us poor to say the least

By JC on 19/03/2008
Just one thing.... The iraq war cost is currently sitting t just over $500 Billion. It hasnt cleared $1 Trillion yet, though it is predicted to surpass that figure eventually.

By Pazenon on 19/03/2008
I am against this war. Some people make it sound like the war was started for the US to claim 'victory' and win. The war wasn't started for that reason, it was started for false reasons spread by the American media.

The only good thing that came up with this war is getting rid of Saddam, whose era wasn't less than quarter as bad as today's, in Iraq.

By Karlfischer on 19/03/2008
Going into Iraq not only was a mistake, but even if they had WMDs the war would still not have been justified. Even if Saddam had WMDs he would not have used them because he did not want to give Bush a ligitimate reason to invade.

The important question today is do we stay in Iraq or pull the troops out. My opinion is that pulling out is a short-sighted solution. We have a history of creating problems for ourselves in the Middle-east. We supported the efforts of both Saddam in fighting Iran and Osama in fighting the Soviets. In the aftermath we let Saddam reign virtually unchecked, and we let Afgahnistan become a failed state. Hence our current problems in the Middle East.

We created a huge problem in Iraq and it is costing us dearly, but letting Iraq collapse into civil war is not the right solution from both a humanitarian perspective and for long term stability in the Middle-East.

By Kwaichi on 19/03/2008
Yes, i wrote a very long essay one year ago about it, but i dont care to translate it whole to english tongue.gif

I agree with everyone who is against the war... I personally think that Iranians have now harder life as at the time of Sadam Hussain.

By David on 19/03/2008
Going into Iraq was dump, plain and simple. Like some have already said, our military is good against something it can actually fight. If we get into a battle with an actual, identifiable enemy we have a huge chance of winning. When the enemy is but a small group of people who are basically normal citizens, our military has some trouble. They're trained to not kill civilians, but when their targets are basically civilians, it's a tough call.

Our weapons are made to destroy stockpiles, and airports, railroads and bases. They're not that great at blowing up underground tunnels (unless they are using bunker-busters).

I find it funny sometimes when I watch the news, it's referred to as "The War in Iraq" a lot these days, when it started as "The War on Terror." When the towers were hit, practically the whole world was with America, and wanted the terrorists behind bars. Bush, being the complete retard that he is decided to invade a country, that had zero part in the destruction of the towers. Sure people can say "Would you rather have Sadam back in power?" to which at this point I'd say yes. If we could undo everything that happened but Sadam would still be in power, I'd do it in a heartbeat. We can't say that though, because that would mean that the lives that were lost meant absolutely nothing. At least this way they took out an evil person, who wasn't even a part of why this was started.

Had America gone after Bin Laden instead of invading Iraq, I'm sure things would be much different.

By Robertw56 on 19/03/2008
I'll send a couple nobles towards iraq and help out a bit.

By His Lordship on 19/03/2008
QUOTE (Kwaichi @ March 19, 2008 03:03 pm)
Yes, i wrote a very long essay one year ago about it, but i dont care to translate it whole to english tongue.gif

I agree with everyone who is against the war... I personally think that Iranians have now harder life as at the time of Sadam Hussain.

You wrote an entire essay and at the end of it all you call them Iranians?

By Bambaleo on 19/03/2008
i'm actually so tired of all this Iraq **** lol...i actually don't give a f anymore.

**** happens

By Firelion08 on 19/03/2008
QUOTE (His Lordship @ March 19, 2008 03:14 pm)
QUOTE (Kwaichi @ March 19, 2008 03:03 pm)
Yes, i wrote a very long essay one year ago about it, but i dont care to translate it whole  to english tongue.gif

I agree with everyone who is against the war... I personally think that Iranians have now harder life as at the time of Sadam Hussain.

You wrote an entire essay and at the end of it all you call them Iranians?

Hmm... blink.gif

Maybe he meant to say "Iraqis" but it got lost somewhere in translation. lol


QUOTE
i'm actually so tired of all this Iraq **** lol...i actually don't give a f anymore.

**** happens


I agree.
~ And also, that everyone thinks they are politicians.

Oh, and except for that "**** happens" (lol, sounds like something I'd here, down in my area. It's refreshing) part... (1) Because, even though it's just a way to express your lack of concern, it undermines the details that compose the reality (2) It gives protestors another reason to go ranting on... And the world needs that just as much as it needs more irrational extremists in the Mid-East.







By Sir Wolfoo on 19/03/2008
You know if the US pulled all their troops out that would cost them a lot of money.

Really Us attacked iraq because where iraq is..its a vital strategic point. China, Iran, North Korea being to the east.

By Firelion08 on 19/03/2008
QUOTE (Iron this @ March 19, 2008 06:49 pm)
You know if the US pulled all their troops out that would cost them a lot of money.

It also costs a lot to get into Iraq.


QUOTE
Really Us attacked iraq because where iraq is..its a vital strategic point. China, Iran, North Korea being to the east.


I don't mean to sound like a bitch, so don't misunderstand me, Iron... But how can you back that up?
I mean, you bring up an interesting point - which is probably true - but it is, you have to admit, a bit of a stretch.

I'm not exactly disagreeing with you, because I believe that has some level relevance. But don't imply that that is a bad thing.

By Spicy63 on 19/03/2008
One of the reasons the US went to war was to set up a Democracy in Iraq.

If that was a good idea or not is beyond me, but I will say it was succesfull. Iraq is now a Democratic Country.

The US has been trying to do this ever since WWI with many countries and have suceeded in most of them.

George Bush said he doesn't regret going into Iraq 5 Years ago, and doesn't regret it today. The total casualties of US Soldiers is currently around 4,000.

That really isn't that much, dont say something to me like 'Every life is important'. I know every life is, and those who were there gave up their lives for others knowingly, Along with the soldiers of Iraq.

My point mainly is, in a way the US did what it set out to do. Not everything was resolved, but some of it was.

By Pazenon on 19/03/2008
QUOTE (Spicy63 @ March 19, 2008 07:44 pm)
Iraq is now a Democratic Country.

You can say that, but everyone knows that one cannot live in a place deemed to be unsafe. Before the Americans came in, one could walk out at night without having any fear. Now, all Iraqis just want to escape the country itself. One is afraid to be at his own home. That, beats democracy. Big time.

QUOTE (Spicy63)
The total casualties of US Soldiers is currently around 4,000.


The casuality number of the innocent Iraqi civilians is much, much more than that. I'm pretty sure. You should also care about the deaths on Iraq's side, can't just black them out since they're the "enemy". You talked about Iraqi soldiers, which is something different.

By Spicy63 on 19/03/2008
QUOTE
The casuality number of the innocent Iraqi civilians is much, much more than that. I'm pretty sure. You should also care about the deaths on Iraq's side, can't just black them out since they're the "enemy". You talked about Iraqi soldiers, which is something different.


If Iraqi Soldiers were on American soil we would have losses of innocents as well.
Death, wether it be a Soldier or Civilian is a part of war.

QUOTE
You can say that, but everyone knows that one cannot live in a place deemed to be unsafe. Before the Americans came in, one could walk out at night without having any fear. Now, all Iraqis just want to escape the country itself. One is afraid to be at his own home. That, beats democracy. Big time.


No Country will ever be safe, that has nothing to do with a Democracy, along with what I said before. The Security (Safety) of the people is an effect of war.

By Sir Wolfoo on 19/03/2008
more civilians die in wars today..

By Squelchyfish on 19/03/2008
swear i saw that on msn-today

By Pazenon on 19/03/2008
QUOTE (Spicy63 @ March 19, 2008 08:19 pm)
QUOTE
The casuality number of the innocent Iraqi civilians is much, much more than that. I'm pretty sure. You should also care about the deaths on Iraq's side, can't just black them out since they're the "enemy". You talked about Iraqi soldiers, which is something different.


If Iraqi Soldiers were on American soil we would have losses of innocents as well.
Death, wether it be a Soldier or Civilian is a part of war.

QUOTE
You can say that, but everyone knows that one cannot live in a place deemed to be unsafe. Before the Americans came in, one could walk out at night without having any fear. Now, all Iraqis just want to escape the country itself. One is afraid to be at his own home. That, beats democracy. Big time.


No Country will ever be safe, that has nothing to do with a Democracy, along with what I said before. The Security (Safety) of the people is an effect of war.

But hey, the thing is Iraqi soldiers weren't on your soil, thus the US didn't lose any civilians.

QUOTE
The Security (Safety) of the people is an effect of war.

You just said it, the war caused that unstable current situation of security in Iraq.

By Spicy63 on 19/03/2008
QUOTE (Pazenon @ March 19, 2008 09:07 pm)
QUOTE (Spicy63 @ March 19, 2008 08:19 pm)
QUOTE
The casuality number of the innocent Iraqi civilians is much, much more than that. I'm pretty sure. You should also care about the deaths on Iraq's side, can't just black them out since they're the "enemy". You talked about Iraqi soldiers, which is something different.


If Iraqi Soldiers were on American soil we would have losses of innocents as well.
Death, wether it be a Soldier or Civilian is a part of war.

QUOTE
You can say that, but everyone knows that one cannot live in a place deemed to be unsafe. Before the Americans came in, one could walk out at night without having any fear. Now, all Iraqis just want to escape the country itself. One is afraid to be at his own home. That, beats democracy. Big time.


No Country will ever be safe, that has nothing to do with a Democracy, along with what I said before. The Security (Safety) of the people is an effect of war.

But hey, the thing is Iraqi soldiers weren't on your soil, thus the US didn't lose any civilians.

QUOTE
The Security (Safety) of the people is an effect of war.

You just said it, the war caused that unstable current situation of security in Iraq.

What I'm trying to say is that they suffered Civilian Casualties because it was on Iraqi Soil. Of course there will be no American Civilians there, so it's not fair to say 'Well they suffered many Sivilian Casualties and we only lost some Soldiers'.

And yes I did say that the situation will effect safety in Iraq. A War will effect safety any where, we could have went to war in...Iceland and it will still be dangerous.

By Kiwi011 on 19/03/2008
yea....we shouldn't have done anything. We had no proof, we had no reason other than because "it was highly probable Saddam had WOMD", bullshit waste of good soldiers lives. Support the troops, hate the government.

How is Iraq democratic? It is no such thing. We put a guy WE wanted in so we could control him. If we leave, the pres of Iraq will be dead within a week or a large scale civil war will occur.

Saddam at least had control of his country. Not to mention he knew how fight, if we leave and Iran has nukes and or wants to start WWIII, they will invade iraq 3 months or so after we leave probably, or until the civil wars end with a large bloodbath like Cambodia's 20 yrs ago.


Lets look at some things---
Electricity for most Iraqi homes does not turn on, and if it does its only for 2-3 hrs. Saddam was able to keep electricity on all the time for the people living there.

How is Iraq a democracy? The people don't speak out, they are to scared their neighbor is a terrorist. My friend joined the army 3 yrs ago(hes 22), and is in Iraq right now. The last time he emailed me, he said iraq is more of a **** hole than it was, and that its extremely sad because you don't know who you can trust. He said the last 3 civilians who had given them info on weapon cashes were shot in the head a few days later. He has also had to shoot 6 iraqi children becuase they have walked to close and he has nightmares about it because small 5-10 yr olds are strapping bombs on and walking up to them. Thats not freedom, its no government. Its lies given to us by our government. Its anarchy over there.....

A war with the only outcome of you dieing or going home unable to sleep at night. he cant go to his brothers house anymore wither because seeing his nephews brings back the memories.....I cant even tell you how bad he has it, its indescribable. Our troops are fighting a war without purpose. America needs to learn when to gtfo of other peoples buisness and stop trying to "help".


By Tnuac on 19/03/2008
Going into the iraq achieved nothing globally beneficial. Unless you manage to suppress or kill every non-civilian, more fighting just raises more hatred. The angle that america is attacking at currently achieves nothing but costs lives.

Probably the only feasible thing to solve dispute and war in those nations is to have an extremely powerful dictator. But what are the chances of someone fitting the bill? Basically impossible.



By Firelion08 on 20/03/2008
QUOTE (Tnuac @ March 19, 2008 11:06 pm)
Going into the iraq achieved nothing globally beneficial. Unless you manage to suppress or kill every non-civilian, more fighting just raises more hatred. The angle that america is attacking at currently achieves nothing but costs lives.


How many attacks from islamic extremists has the world taken without any major retaliation? Openly confronting this problem was bound to happen - and it did.
Maybe it's debatable whether or not that is beneficial to the world in the end, but it does make the message clear... We're not gonna take it anymore.

QUOTE
Probably the only feasible thing to solve dispute and war in those nations is to have an extremely powerful dictator. But what are the chances of someone fitting the bill? Basically impossible.


I think, possibly, Saddam Hussein could've thought something similar to that at some point during his reign over Iraq.

---

Wars are never easy. Simply writing that down undermines it's significance... Think about it seriously for a few minutes. Refamiliarize yourself with the definitions of combat, war, and death.

I know people (in general) who can't understand that talking, although, can be very powerful, can't solve everything. And when your enemies won't listen to your words, they'll have to duck at the sound of gunfire.

Barbaric, isn't it?





@Kiwi
QUOTE
yea....we shouldn't have done anything. We had no proof, we had no reason other than because "it was highly probable Saddam had WOMD", bullshit waste of good soldiers lives. Support the troops, hate the government.

How is Iraq democratic? It is no such thing. We put a guy WE wanted in so we could control him. If we leave, the pres of Iraq will be dead within a week or a large scale civil war will occur.

Saddam at least had control of his country. Not to mention he knew how fight, if we leave and Iran has nukes and or wants to start WWIII, they will invade iraq 3 months or so after we leave probably, or until the civil wars end with a large bloodbath like Cambodia's 20 yrs ago.


Lets look at some things---
Electricity for most Iraqi homes does not turn on, and if it does its only for 2-3 hrs. Saddam was able to keep electricity on all the time for the people living there.

How is Iraq a democracy? The people don't speak out, they are to scared their neighbor is a terrorist. My friend joined the army 3 yrs ago(hes 22), and is in Iraq right now. The last time he emailed me, he said iraq is more of a **** hole than it was, and that its extremely sad because you don't know who you can trust. He said the last 3 civilians who had given them info on weapon cashes were shot in the head a few days later. He has also had to shoot 6 iraqi children becuase they have walked to close and he has nightmares about it because small 5-10 yr olds are strapping bombs on and walking up to them. Thats not freedom, its no government. Its lies given to us by our government. Its anarchy over there.....

A war with the only outcome of you dieing or going home unable to sleep at night. he cant go to his brothers house anymore wither because seeing his nephews brings back the memories.....I cant even tell you how bad he has it, its indescribable. Our troops are fighting a war without purpose. America needs to learn when to gtfo of other peoples buisness and stop trying to "help".


You're absolutely right. Iraqis are scared. There's a war going on in their backyards... I would be too if there were groups of guys shooting automotic weapons down my street. But it doesn't stop there... There are grenades to worry about; rockets, booby-traps, IED's, artilliery fire, airborne bombs... The list goes on.

However. With all these dangers put into consideration, instead of staying in their homes, Iraqis went out to vote.

That's a hell of a lot of courage.

And your buddy's right - I respect him for being over there - It makes sense that Iraq would be more a shithole than it used to be. What else would it be with our troops over there with armed religious fanatics to shoot at?

I'm sorry if this is beginning to sound obnoxious... But,
"A war with the only outcome of you dieing or going home unable to sleep at night."

...?

It seems to me, that you're only spitting out the losses of the war -- First of all, let me get this out of the way before I continue: What do you expect for a soldier to undergo after going to a "shithole" like Iraq?

-- Now, back to what I was getting to~

It's easier to express the downside of the things you are against than to accept and admit the upside.

Don't tell me crap that I already understand. I have family members and friends who are in the military too. It's painful to think that one of them could be lost at anytime while they're over there. But don't talk like everything over there has just been death and chaos, because it's not true.

By Kiwi011 on 20/03/2008
QUOTE (Firelion08 @ March 20, 2008 03:50 pm)
-- Now, back to what I was getting to~

It's easier to express the downside of the things you are against than to accept and admit the upside.

Don't tell me crap that I already understand. I have family members and friends who are in the military too. It's painful to think that one of them could be lost at anytime while they're over there. But don't talk like everything over there has just been death and chaos, because it's not true.

The only hope for Iraq now, is that the civilians keep hope and try to do something as a large group.

All Iraq is now is segmented people doing things. If they can band together to help and put their country back together, there is a positive....but currently, theres not much to look forward to over there...

By Spicy63 on 20/03/2008
QUOTE (Kiwi011 @ March 20, 2008 06:40 pm)
QUOTE (Firelion08 @ March 20, 2008 03:50 pm)
-- Now, back to what I was getting to~

It's easier to express the downside of the things you are against than to accept and admit the upside.

Don't tell me crap that I already understand. I have family members and friends who are in the military too. It's painful to think that one of them could be lost at anytime while they're over there. But don't talk like everything over there has just been death and chaos, because it's not true.

The only hope for Iraq now, is that the civilians keep hope and try to do something as a large group.

All Iraq is now is segmented people doing things. If they can band together to help and put their country back together, there is a positive....but currently, theres not much to look forward to over there...

The US is attempting to do that for them.

By Firelion08 on 20/03/2008
QUOTE (Kiwi011 @ March 20, 2008 06:40 pm)
QUOTE (Firelion08 @ March 20, 2008 03:50 pm)
-- Now, back to what I was getting to~

It's easier to express the downside of the things you are against than to accept and admit the upside.

Don't tell me crap that I already understand. I have family members and friends who are in the military too. It's painful to think that one of them could be lost at anytime while they're over there. But don't talk like everything over there has just been death and chaos, because it's not true.

The only hope for Iraq now, is that the civilians keep hope and try to do something as a large group.

All Iraq is now is segmented people doing things. If they can band together to help and put their country back together, there is a positive....but currently, theres not much to look forward to over there...

You're right, it seems there's a lot of work to be done.
Thought, that kind of attitude will only makes things harder.

I can understand thinking realistically, but if one can't have hope for something better for the future, what will possess one to make it a reality?

By Samurai-JM on 20/03/2008
You know that in my local paper, the Pittsburgh Post Gazette, it documented a Bush/Cheney speech where they had the NERVE to say they were just about to "win" the war. BS. Then when faced with the polls that 2/3 of Americans were completely against the war by now, Cheney responded, "So?"

By Firelion08 on 20/03/2008
QUOTE (Samurai-JM @ March 20, 2008 07:51 pm)
You know that in my local paper, the Pittsburgh Post Gazette, it documented a Bush/Cheney speech where they had the NERVE to say they were just about to "win" the war. BS. Then when faced with the polls that 2/3 of Americans were completely against the war by now, Cheney responded, "So?"


Point please.

By Kiwi011 on 20/03/2008
QUOTE (Firelion08 @ March 20, 2008 08:27 pm)
QUOTE (Samurai-JM @ March 20, 2008 07:51 pm)
You know that in my local paper, the Pittsburgh Post Gazette, it documented a Bush/Cheney speech where they had the NERVE to say they were just about to "win" the war. BS. Then when faced with the polls that 2/3 of Americans were completely against the war by now, Cheney responded, "So?"


Point please.

i think hes saying our government is full of hypocrites....but yea idk....something like that.

By Karlfischer on 21/03/2008
Ignore this post. We need a delete post option.

By Kwaichi on 21/03/2008
QUOTE (His Lordship @ March 19, 2008 04:14 pm)
QUOTE (Kwaichi @ March 19, 2008 03:03 pm)
Yes, i wrote a very long essay one year ago about it, but i dont care to translate it whole  to english tongue.gif

I agree with everyone who is against the war... I personally think that Iranians have now harder life as at the time of Sadam Hussain.

You wrote an entire essay and at the end of it all you call them Iranians?

It was not in english language... paranoid.gif

By Gunsnblades on 30/03/2008
The reason for the iraq war was in my opinion for the greed of britian and america tbh they obv knew Sadam Hussain didnt have WOMD (wepons of mass destuction)
but what they did know was iraq is rich in oil and wanted that for their own greed to gain more income from forign soil which is sad...

This is my opinion sory if it hurts anyone.

By ArSeNaLfAn32 on 31/03/2008
I hate the reason behind the war. You can't win a war when there is no realistic or possible solution. Most of Iraqis don't want us there. Why are we in there in the first place? There was firm proof there was NO WEAPONS there to start. We had intelligence stating so.
I hate Bush and Cheney. Cheney has multiple defermints for ditching out on fighting terms. He is the largest supporter of this war. He has no idea what the **** we are doing emotionally to these kids fresh out of high school. He has no experience in this. Also, why are they so firm on fighting there? They will grow as we kill them. We are not wanted. Get the hell out.
The largest thing I am looking for in the presidential candidates is what they are going to actually do about the war in Iraq. It is putting the United States hugely in debt. We are currently making bases for a permanent defense stationed in Iraq. I want the new president to end this and get the hell out over a year period.
Our country simply cannot handle this war. Less than a third of the US supports this.
I think we cannot let McCain win. He is a supporter of the war. Right there I immediately eliminate him.
/end rant



Back to Topic Index

Developed by Mojo.