Stop That Giant Sucking Sound, Maggots!

This is not to gloat. On the contrary, rather than uttering any further told-ya-so-s, or recounting the misgivings many of us so-called "peaceniks" shared before the invasion, I am patiently waiting to hear from those who were so effusively supportive of invading and occupying Iraq. I am waiting for you to explain how everything is going to work out for the best.

Explain: How it is or will be, that the "good" Iraqis are going to maintain faith in the judgement and goodwill of Washington planners, when this intervention is failing to secure the minimal measure of authority that any government, benign or repressive, must secure to provide basic order?

Explain: How are Americans, sending their sons and daughters toward anguish, toward disfigurement, dismemberment, and death, expected to maintain faith in a mission and Mideast political environment that has never been explained to them?

Just how long are American combat soldiers expected to carry out their increasingly horrific missions, in the face of steadily compounding evidence before their own eyes, that they are not defending the security of the United States, but are instead inciting the most intense hatred that human beings are capable of?

Exactly how will any additional blood and guts redeem this macabre World Exhibition of American coalition-building, nation-building, stabilization, and counter-terrorism?

Exactly when do we achieve a sufficient level of killing, or find perfect blend of "hearts & minds" and killing, so that the "insurgents" are attrited faster than resentment is sparked among more Iraqis? And our combat soldiers- thrust intellectually, linguistically, and culturally unprepared into a radically disorienting culture and situation: When and how do they bloom into effective ambassadors, into a revolutionary Peace Corps? When and how do these nice American kids stop morphing in the eyes of Iraqis from fascinating, to awkward, to ignorant, to nervous, to reckless, to murderous, to satanic foreign monsters, who are dealing out brutal shock and awe in the same streets their mothers, fathers, lovers, siblings, and children walk in? How are Iraqis to interpret a level of fear and brutality they have never before witnessed before, as the sound of fighting crashed up the street, as the door bursts in, or the walls are shredded and their lives sliced up in a roar?

You who have derided those of us who were "too chicken" or who "didn't support our troops", and who until recently have asserted that this war was righteous - like taking out Hitler - You who still believe in this crusade that President Bush and company compel us to see through to it's promised but unmapped democratic, stable, and secure end... You must explain, because the leaders you so vocally supported until recently are themselves refusing to explain.

Don't cower in this awkward silence- have the courage to explain the genius of the crusade you have been praising.

Wardogs: Speak!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

One of the mistakes the US made here is that you can't invade a country under the guise of selectively fighting only the leadership and expect to secure a nation without having the support of the majority of the people. The Iraqi people didn't rise up in support of our war against the Baathists, as this administration supposedly expected, and we're not really sure how to approach the current situation. The majority may have applauded the fall of Saddam, but that majority doesn't seem to necessarily have the same goals for their future as we have for them. It is imperative to get a handle on the uprisings, yet to do this effectively the military is going to have to get medieval, and since this is not just former Baathists and foreign fighters we're talking about, to do so means getting medieval on average Iraqi citizens who are passed frustration and finally pissed off, and breaking them down means further alienating a population that has long grown tired of us. This administration relied too much on the urgings of Chalabi and other exiled Iraqis telling them that the Iraqis would welcome us. Something hasn't smelled right about this for quite a while now. As we keep being told that this is just a small minority who want to prevent the democratic process from happening, I keep wondering why the majority that supposedly do want it to happen aren't yet turning on that small minority and fighting alongside us to secure their country. I think history shows us that outside forces cannot win and secure a people's future for them, they have to want it, and ultimately earn it. And I have not seen that from the Iraqis as of yet.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I supported the overthrow of Saddam, however I suspected that George Bush would fumble the aftermath. It could have been a great accomplishment, but he alienated the UN, lied about or misrepresented WMD evidence, neglected the need for security and police after Saddam, and most importantly, overestimated the Iraqi's ability to govern themselves. They need a strong monarchy. If you believe the Koran, this is how the universe is governed.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

So are we talking about "Do the ends justify the means??"
Yes.

On a side note, and this probably should be in the Science part but I thought I'd pick your brains....
I was thinking a remote controlled robot (say a sized up battle bot) with a M134 and a grenade launcher would be very effective in this type of urban senerio. Has anyone seen any website with plans for something like this?? If not, id like to build one and sell it

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

No. I don't think we are.
You can't justify the ends because we haven't got one yet.
I suspect Hype is interested in knowing what crumb of comfort is keeping the wardogs optimistic.
Personally I'll be suprised if he can find an optimistic wardog but good luck to him anyway.

Dee Cee

 

I remember having an exchange with a war mongering fundementalist once prior to the invasion. I remember asking him how many dead Americans would he find acceptable to accomplish the so called removal of WMD. He said a couple of thousand dead would be acceptable. This from one of those southern Christian fundementalists.

I asked him whether he would be fighting or any of his family or relatives. He said some might because some were of draft age.

Fortunately, the few thousand dead doesn't involve any contribution from him or his kin except for his bellicose support and incitement for this war. He is very enthusiastic for war and death as long as someone else is doing the fighting and dying.

I think he will get his few thousand dead plus along with blood on his soul.

He claimed to be a Christian but he certainly doesn't understand Christ's teachings.

 

As a 'Military Warmonger' I support the war. Im in the Military and my unit is already over there getting shot at. There is a good chance i'll go and YES I still support it.

 

As a 'Military Warmonger' I support the war. Im in the Military and my unit is already over there getting shot at. There is a good chance i'll go and YES I still support it.

Ok you do that, but remember this. Don't come crawling to us to prevent this:

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

From happening to you.

 

But how do you feel about they way things are going?
Optimistic?
Well that pots about to boil over methinks.
Good luck and take care crazy.
I mean it.

Dee Cee

 

Unde,

Did the Rwandians crawl to you?? What about the Cambodians?
The nice thing about Living in America is that you dont have to Join the Military. Its VOLUNTEER. As in EVERYONE there VOLUNTEERED. You are not required to make the Sacrafice.

DeeCee,
This is war. War is Hell. I think the American public tends to forget how nasty Wars are because they havnt seen a Real war since Vietnam. Even then, Vietnam was nothing compared to WWII. Talk to a WWII veteran and see what they have to say. Ask them what They saw. We have benefited from our advancments in Tech that allow us to have an enourmous advantage in certain battlefield senerios. Urban senerios are a different story, partially because we were not concered about them. We were going to fight the Commies so we designed system that dealt with massive ground combat situations. As the past couple of years have shown in those situations we kick the living hell out of the Enemy. If we were immoral we would just carpet bomb the entire cites and be done with it. We tend to play by the rules. Granted Civilians get killed but they really try to avoid it. Many here would say otherwise but theyve never been there and had to deal with it. Soon urban Tech will catch up

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

They are spending Millions on it.

And as far as that pic of the burned tank- no biggie. I doubt they died. The last I heard only 4 tankers had been killed and that was because they were shot when they leaving their tank. It might be more than 4 but I promise you far more infantry guys are dying. Tanks can take hits

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

(then again im biased, im a Tanker

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

The Bradleys are ok, but you couldnt pay me to be in a Stryker.

The Military is doing its job. Thats what we get paid to do! We were given a task, let us do it. If you dont like that we are doing it fine, complain to your local politician. However, let us finish before we leave.

 

Unde,

Did the Rwandians crawl to you??

Thank you for brining up Rwanda, since I am a Canadian. I am proud that it was one of my generals who was pleading with the P5 and the UN SC to increase the size of the UN. who instead of increasing UN forces decreased them. So yes they did and we responded. I am glad that it was Canada who came up with the notion of Peacekeeping operations. Canada has responded to her duty to help others.

What about the Cambodians?

Vietnam got rid of Pol Pot.

The nice thing about Living in America is that you dont have to Join the Military. Its VOLUNTEER. As in EVERYONE there VOLUNTEERED. You are not required to make the Sacrafice.

Did I even insinuate otherwise? What relevance does this have when you are going to see more of this?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Volunteer or not, it’s largely irrelevant.

 

Unde,

By all means Pat yourselves on the back for Rwanda. Did Canada go in and stop the Slaughter? NOPE. Good job!

Vietnam got rid of Pol Pot?? Before or after 1,000,000 people died?

What is your point of the pic? A blown up tank? So what? You want me to post some pics of a car wreck and tell you not to drive??

 

"I suspect Hype is interested in knowing what crumb of comfort is keeping the wardogs optimistic."

That's true- Further, I am asking those who have been, up until now, vocal in their arguments that this war was both necessary and promising in enhancing the security interests of the United States, to come out of their rhetorical spider holes.

During the invasion and first year of occupation, the Warheads were effusive in defending their cause, and participated admirably in sincere debate. Now, the dialogue is becoming increasingly one-sided, because supporters of the Iraq intervention are now only sporadically sniping or smearing. Proponents of the occupation of Iraq are now very difficult to engage in substantive conversation.

I don't suspect many of these individuals have come over to "the other side", although I would be interested in conversing with any who have. Instead, I suspect that the course of events has left fans of the Iraq intervention with very little substantiation of their expectations, and as a result they may be feeling insecure, which is a crappy excuse for a warmonger to hide. I am challenging these shirkers to return to this important debate.

Crazy151: At least you're obliquely engaging, so you get some credit. Actually respond by explaining how this intervention is going to succeed, and you'll have my gratitude.

 

Hype: Please define "succeed"

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

If success is handing over control of Iraq to the council (hopefully) planting a seed of democracy then yes we will succeed. It will take some time but it will happen.

If success is preventing a bunch of nuts from blowing themselves up on buses and attempting to nuke us then no, we will not succeed. Unless we kill them all but that would not be very politically correct

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

By your definition of "planting a seed" defining success, is it not time to go now? Or, if the full flowering of US-Iraqi relations is still ahead, please describe the progression, and at what point conditions will be better than they are now for the departure of US forces. Thanks.

 

Hype: The seed has been planted but it needs some watering. Sadly, its being watered with blood. If thats what it takes, thats what it takes. Withdrawing now would be a total waste of time, money, and lives which would leave an incredible power vacume. Who would fill it! It would be ugly.

Progression:
1) Invade
2) Get rid of Saddam
3) Start rebuilding countries
4) KILL ALL THE WEEDS so the flower can grow

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

5) Once the flower is self sufficient, we leave.

 

Haha, you're not making a very strong case in support of this war, are you? War is hell you say? All the more reason to stay the hell away from it when it's unnecessary!

 

At least he's trying. To reiterate 151's plan without euphemisms, kill all who resist our plans, and a friendly democracy will eventually emerge. Stay the course, and we won't be left with a power vacuum when we leave, because the survivors are going to respect us.

It's not a bad start, 151. Would you answer the questions in my first post?

 

As someone who served in the former, I'd be curious as to know what you meant.

 

What kind of question is that?

Vietnam cost far fewer American lives, did it not?

58,168 soldiers died in Vietnam, whereas 407,316 soldiers died in WWII.

The death rate in Vietnam was 0.7%, whereas it was 2.5% in WWII.

In 1990's dollars, Vietnam cost roughly 346.7 billion, whereas WWII cost roughly 2,091.3 billion.

Statistical Summary
America's Major Wars


I don't think they can even be compared.