Baghdad 5 years later: WTF have we done?

[machinegun_gogo]

Contrary to the official reports about the military surge bringing stability to Iraq, today's Baghdad is the city of 12ft high walls (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TTMp-YNaDdg) where one street is at war with the next.

On the outskirts there are killing fields (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Woxu5dwCSX0), where militia brings their kidnapped victims, kill them and dump their bodies in thousands of unmarked graves.

But the real disaster is saved for later, when the kids who know only fear and sectarianism (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GRA3QdvY9rQ) today, and whose heroes are extremists, will grow up tomorrow and demand their revenge from the Americans who completely destroyed their country.

(via MetaFilter (http://www.metafilter.com/73847/Baghdad-5-years-later))

[CombatBoots]

All these people are trying to get their power up, make sure that when the the U.S. Leaves that they will have enough power to push their agenda through. You can not blame the U.S. for taking off the head of this snake, it was long due and you can not blame the U.S. for the following escalation in violence, I see that if saddams regime fell on it's own and his sons weren't with enough power to kill off their opposition and rivals for power, it would have ended the same way. I just feel sorry for those who want normality, and for their country to be strong and free.
It doesn't have to be this way, I blame their religious blindness and their trust in their religious leaders who follow a very much non religious agenda in their actions.
They would have schools, hotels, improved medical facilities by now, were it not for the continous confilct that they lead.
Imagine how many investors would come into a new, free, controlled Iraqi business enviroment, how many would profit from a stronger Iraqi currency.
Imagine how openly U.S. aid would flow into the area, not through a kind heart of a leader but to show the world that Bush was right and it could be done.

[rssmps]

well, first of all, 5 years is really too short to judge historical events.

secondly, it has given them (the good people of Iraq) an opportunity to stand up and say no to thugs/extreamists/radicals. It's up to those people to decide if they want to live in prosperity/peace or in a craphole...

No one is responsible for sectarian violence except for Iraqis. It's not like 12 ft walls were being air dropped there starting the first day.

[CombatBoots]

That hatered he's talking about that has been placed in the hearts of the children, he himself said their under Mullah's propaganda... He has heard probably a million times from the only adults in his life now, how americans are bad, evil and kill children.

These schools are not a charity organisation! It is profitable for the militia to catch the children, and poison them with their deranged beliefs before they have a mind to make opinions of their own.

[Pennatus]

It doesn't have to be this way, I blame their religious blindness and their trust in their religious leaders who follow a very much non religious agenda in their actions.

I was under the impression it's the same in the US, only with a different religion? ;)

[CombatBoots]

I was under the impression it's the same in the US, only with a different religion? ;)

I wouldn't know, and be straight and clear when you talk... I don't take winking for opinions.

[Buckeye67]

I was under the impression it's the same in the US, only with a different religion? ;)

Your impression would make you an ignorant knob who should lurk more.

[deagle]

i liked how we invested so many millions for buildings and services, only to have them negated with a few cents worth of bullets.

i also liked how gas prices went up 2.5x.

then again, it could be a coincidence.

[Snoshi]

The word "stability" in Iraq has different meaning then in USA, at least now.

[Wuerfler]

The point is:

Why should the Iraq become a democracy like the USA / Europe etc.?
What if they fight for there own form of government and against the occupying forces ?

I think these two points understandable and important! Especially for Citizens of the USA, the land of freedom and peace.

[CombatBoots]

Pointless...

[Adux]

I have great hopes on USA: Lets see South Korea, Japan and Germany. Though I agree the Character of these nationalities were more conducive to American methodologies, and it is not the case with Iraq or Afghanistan. Maybe with a bit more work, they will do better. My country will endure a direct impact if US fails on WoT

[Firefly26]

The point is:

Why should the Iraq become a democracy like the USA / Europe etc.?
What if they fight for there own form of government and against the occupying forces ?

I think these two points understandable and important! Especially for Citizens of the USA, the land of freedom and peace.

Since you posed the question, maybe you could enlighten us on what form of effective gov't they would fight for and accomplish?

I know I am going out on a limb here, but I think that democracies in the form of presidential gov'ts and parliaments have the best track records in modern times; but, you have to have the right kind of people to make them fully effective.

1. Some people actually prefer to be ruled by someone as long as they provide security and the minimum public goods. It frees them from having to make any decisions and makes life simpler.

2. Others recognize that you can only get so far in this kind of nation-state and actually want to assert themselves and have control over the state and enforce it to provide public goods and not be hindered by the state.

The thing is, I think most people go through the first type above first before they become ready for democracy. I think Iraqis are still hardwired to be the first type for now until democracy can wear off the dye of skepticism. These religious fanatics only sustain the first type of people.

[Wuerfler]

If someone comes in my country and kill more than 600.000 (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/10/AR2006101001442.html) of my people, i would fight them with all i have. So does a big part of the iraqi people.
It's the swirl of violence the "Operation Iraqi Freedom" has started and this swirl never end until the occupying forces leaves the country.

Perhaps in this future no more GI's get killed over there because the US has left the Iraq. But in this case, the poor bastards of US-Vasalls like Poland or Canada etc. will get killed in iraq.

[CombatBoots]

If someone comes in my country and kill more than 600.000 (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/10/AR2006101001442.html) of my people, i would fight them with all i have. So does a big part of the iraqi people.
It's the swirl of violence the "Operation Iraqi Freedom" has started and this swirl never end until the occupying forces leaves the country.

Perhaps in this future no more GI's get killed over there because the US has left the Iraq. But in this case, the poor bastards of US-Vasalls like Poland or Canada etc. will get killed in iraq.


Aah! You're blind, idealistic, and wrong!
You tell others not to apply their "western" views to the matter, you do so yourself. Most of them don't fight for their fallen brothers, that's your little mind showing them to you as romantic freedom fighters. You think that the coalition leaves the situation settles down? Is the U.S. to blame for Shiie/Sunii violence? Is it all about religion to them? Think again.

[Calanen]

If someone comes in my country and kill more than 600.000 (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/10/AR2006101001442.html) of my people, i would fight them with all i have. So does a big part of the iraqi people.


That study has been thoroughly discredited. They asked a group of not many Iraqis, how many people do you know that have died..then multiplied the amounts to give that number. Entirely unreliable method of surveys.

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/WO0610/S00436.htm

The majority of people being killed are being killed by other muslims, not by Americans - jihadis, Al-Quada and other terrorist groups.

Are Japan and Germany still firmly under the US jackboot today? What, they are not? But isnt that what evil American imperialists do? Strip all of Japans and Germany's resources and enslave its people? No they rebuilt the place and helped them recover into economic powerhouses. If the Iraqis picking up guns and killing other Iraqis would just take a chill-pill, the same thing would happen in Iraq.


It's the swirl of violence the "Operation Iraqi Freedom" has started and this swirl never end until the occupying forces leaves the country.

You think the violence will *end* when the US leaves? No, then the violence will increase. Shias will kill Sunnis. Sunnis will kill Shias and Kurds. Al Quada will kill everyone. The US wants to leave, it just cannot do so yet without a Taliban style government taking over. And then they will have to go back.


Perhaps in this future no more GI's get killed over there because the US has left the Iraq. But in this case, the poor bastards of US-Vasalls like Poland or Canada etc. will get killed in iraq.

What a stupid thing to say. That Poland and Canada are 'vassals' of the United States. Canada and the US disagree on many things, but they both agree that having the Taliban out of Afghanistan is good for everyone.

Even for people like you.

[Firefly26]

If someone comes in my country and kill more than 600.000 (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/10/AR2006101001442.html) of my people, i would fight them with all i have. So does a big part of the iraqi people.
It's the swirl of violence the "Operation Iraqi Freedom" has started and this swirl never end until the occupying forces leaves the country.

Perhaps in this future no more GI's get killed over there because the US has left the Iraq. But in this case, the poor bastards of US-Vasalls like Poland or Canada etc. will get killed in iraq.

First of all, you want to listen to any report you find on the news so that you can believe your point.


The estimate, produced by interviewing residents during a random sampling of households throughout the country, is far higher than ones produced by other groups, including Iraq's government.

That is an unreliable form of sampling so that source right there is flawed. Even with Johns Hopkins epidemiologists saying that their conclusions were sound, epidemiologists deal in death&disease causes, not numbers. I highly doubt they were out there in the neighborhoods with clip boards seeing all 655,000 reports. I don't dispute that the number of deaths is in the amount of hundreds of thousands (which I/we regret completely), but I can't accept 655,000 as fact.

Second, you implied (giving you the benefit of the doubt here) that US forces directly killed these 655,000. You are wrong and hyperbolic and know it, and at this point I will stop listening to you.

[marktigger]

At th end of the day Iraq will explode into civil war that was what removing a regeime that rulled by fear was going to do. The Ethnic tensions that are causing the current problems have existed for centuries and in a culture where life is cheap it will lead to killing. Iraq has been held together by strong leadership and rule by fear for at least the last 100 years now there is scores being settled from generations ago. All the coalition troops are doing is giving the locals someonelse to shoot at and a playground for mister I hate America to play in.
I would sujest as I did in 2003 whilst in Iraq that it will eventually Fragment.

[jokuhuna]

Wtf people in reality it is so easy, I can´t understand why so many people fail to see it. There are 2 absolut requirements for a chance for democracy:

You CAN NOT have democracy without economic stability!!
There is absolutly no even half assed democratic country without beeing first a relativ economic powerhouse.
(Even Japan and Germany, after ww2 had the know how and work mentality to get the economy back running with the help of the allies. Besides both countrys were economicly strong decades before the war so the social structure were already there even if everything was destroyed)

And equally important you need patriotism or nationalism. Nationalism in the sense that the state is more important then the tribe, clan, religion, monarch, or ethnicity.

I challange everyone to show me one democratic country that did not fullfill both requirements.

I wondered since the start of the Iraq war how the allies were planing to get this done. And I still see no plan that addresses this two basic points. I still think there is and was no masterplan.

[BonesBrigade]

Well to get nationalism Iraq could always take a look at the right wing media commentators for advice

[Firefly26]

Wtf people in reality it is so easy, I can´t understand why so many people fail to see it. There are 2 absolut requirements for a chance for democracy:

You CAN NOT have democracy without economic stability!!
There is absolutly no even half assed democratic country without beeing first a relativ economic powerhouse.
(Even Japan and Germany, after ww2 had the know how and work mentality to get the economy back running with the help of the allies. Besides both countrys were economicly strong decades before the war so the social structure were already there even if everything was destroyed)

And equally important you need patriotism or nationalism. Nationalism in the sense that the state is more important then the tribe, clan, religion, monarch, or ethnicity.

I challange everyone to show me one democratic country that did not fullfill both requirements.

I wondered since the start of the Iraq war how the allies were planing to get this done. And I still see no plan that addresses this two basic points. I still think there is and was no masterplan.

You are partially correct. First comes security, then economic stability. Nationalism applies to countries that are more homogenous in their people.

The US and Japan did not have the ethnic and religious divide that Iraq has, making it completely different than those two models. I think we really expected their oil to make their economy take off, but it keeps going back to maintaining security when the ethnic-religious divide becomes a more important issue.

Growth of nationalism is inhibited right now, going back to the divide, but it is slowly growing.

When they realize how much this divide is killing them, the country can only improve by drops in the bucket.

[Adux]

If someone comes in my country and kill more than 600.000 (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/10/AR2006101001442.html) of my people, i would fight them with all i have. So does a big part of the iraqi people.
It's the swirl of violence the "Operation Iraqi Freedom" has started and this swirl never end until the occupying forces leaves the country.

Perhaps in this future no more GI's get killed over there because the US has left the Iraq. But in this case, the poor bastards of US-Vasalls like Poland or Canada etc. will get killed in iraq.


let me guess Americans put sucide squads and bombed markets, schools, buses, mosque's!!!! Yea right:bash:

[Moriarti]

FACTS:

600,000 (+) Iraqis in the Security Forces, more joining every day. (and THOUSANDS have already paid the ultimate price or recieved wounds fighting terrorism)
Basra, Mosul, Sadr City and now Baquba all cleaned of AQIZ primarily by the ISF
AQIZ leadership retreating to Afghanistan/Pakistan
Govenrment of Iraq (GoI) building infrastructure to suport the masses, improving every day.
Violence at its lowest point since early 2004
Sadr changing his stance on how he will resist the Coalition - Spiritually, not with weapons.
The Anbar Awakening
"Sons of Iraq" citizens groups are protecting their neighborhoods from AQIZ and JAM
GoI now earning $1.6 Billion per week in oil revenues alone. (Which BTW - the US gets not one red cent of) This translates to them being able generate their own armed forces, and rebuild their own country.
Thousands of terrorists detained and prosecuted by the GoI
Tens of Thousands of low level insurgents rehabilitated and returned to their families
Thousands of insurgents turning in their arms to the ISF and receiving clemency form the GoI


Think of the way we COULD have handled it (Historical relavence):
The American Indian Wars
The Phillipine Insurrection
The Japaneese Internment Camps of WWII
Northern Ireland
Medieval Scotland
The Moorish conquest of Iberia
The Iraqi Kurds
The Iraqi Shia
Tienamen Square
Cambodia
Vietnam
The American Revolution
The American Civil War and Reconstruction
The Iranian Revolution
The Taliban
The Balkins
Castro's Cuba
Haiti
Columbia
The Soviet Revolution
The Red Chineese Revolution
Nicaraugua
Sri Lanka
Boer Wars
Zulu Wars
need I go on?

My opinion -
I think we have a LONG way to go - but we have also come a LONG way. Look up the history of Counter Insurgency and one will realize that we are doing rather well.
The key is that Iraq will probably NEVER be like Germany or Japan of today. However, we have spilled enough blood and spent enough treasure that we should at least finish the job, and give a budding nation a *chance* at sucess - and hopefully, we will have a moderate ally in the region.

[Shahanshah]

I do not know even know why USA invaded Afghanistan and Iraq in the first place. War sucks... very sad.

[Parx400]

I do not know even know why USA invaded Afghanistan and Iraq in the first place. War sucks... very sad.


Because some people from the sand box came over and blew **** up.

[PeterRJG]

Because some people from the sand box came over and blew **** up.

The sand box was, for most of the people who did the blowing up, Saudi Arabia.

[Shahanshah]

Because some people from the sand box came over and blew **** up.

Then you need to ask yourself why they do such thing, if it now really was terrorists and not the government it self. Have you ever thought what USA does to others? What part had Iraq or Afghanistan in this? It was not even a whole country supporting them. The terrorists were from all over the place.

This is just a game for USA to be able to control Middle East once again. The 9/11 attacks gave USA and the rich people a lot of goodies. Now USA has puppets in Iraq & Afghanistan, they control large areas, they control oil, drugs, gas etc.

Heck, Iran is now another reason for USA to get more control. During His Imperial Majesty in 1970s- USA did not have one naval warship in the Persian Gulf, not one, outside Persian Gulf, yes. Now see what happened when he left? Lots of them in the Persian Gulf. Shame...

[NYCDweller]

Because some people from the sand box came over and blew **** up.

Enlighten us as to what **** did people from Iraq blow up again when then came over?

As for situation in Iraq, sadly, not much has changed or improved for an average Iraqi Muhammad. Elections were cool and flashy, with lots of blue fingers being photographed, but the gov't still sucks and quality of life has not improved much or at all.

[Basillicus]

I do not know even know why USA invaded Afghanistan and Iraq in the first place. War sucks... very sad.

Well, Afghanistan was pretty clear, those bastards were openly supporting terrorism and therefore were a clear target. But Iraq is another thing. I don't remember anymore what the reason for this war was supposed to be since it has changed so many times. Clearly there was a group of people who wanted to grab Iraq and post-WTC mindset finally made it possible. As a result hundreds of thousands of people are dead and there's no end for this killing in sight. Sad example how a small group of greedy arsehats can **** up the lives of millions of people.

[Adux]

Then you need to ask yourself why they do such thing, if it now really was terrorists and not the government it self. Have you ever thought what USA does to others? What part had Iraq or Afghanistan in this? It was not even a whole country supporting them. The terrorists were from all over the place.

This is just a game for USA to be able to control Middle East once again. The 9/11 attacks gave USA and the rich people a lot of goodies. Now USA has puppets in Iraq & Afghanistan, they control large areas, they control oil, drugs, gas etc.

Heck, Iran is now another reason for USA to get more control. During His Imperial Majesty in 1970s- USA did not have one naval warship in the Persian Gulf, not one, outside Persian Gulf, yes. Now see what happened when he left? Lots of them in the Persian Gulf. Shame...


So 9/11 was done by the United States Government. Really the US was desperate to look for reasons to invade Middle east, they had to kill their own 3000 people, and make billions of dollars in losses. Have you seen the US Economy now? Is this same as Iranian Embassy saga was stage managed?

Geo-politics is a fact of life, like it or not. But even then none of those countries will do to each other such unethical concept as ramming a aircraft a into building. Even the Soviet Union and United States of America followed some rules against each other.

I agree and support your cause in Iran, but this kind of utterly stupid and unintelligent behaviour only good for snotty teenagers looking for tabloid newspaper conspiracy theory and gossip is not helping you or Iran at all.

[Macs.]

Because some people from the sand box came over and blew **** up.

15 of the 19 terrorist of 9/11 were from Saudi Arabia - Go figure.

Osama Bin Laden, the higher ranks and the base of Al-Kaida/Taliban is believe to be doodling around somewhere in Pakistan-Afghanistan border section, using Pakistan as a nice grounding stage for their attack on ISAF/OEF in Afghanistan. Still there is no massive ground invasion into Pakistan.

McCain (I just take him as a example) says that he will do anything to bring Osama and Al-Kaida to it's knees - But he doesn't support a invasion of Pakistan because they are a sovereign nation... :roll:

The fact is that (Saudi) business interests are of higher value than the GWOT.


So 9/11 was done by the United States Government. Really the US was desperate to look for reasons to invade Middle east, they had to kill their own 3000 people, and make billions of dollars in losses. Have you seen the US Economy now? Is this same as Iranian Embassy saga was stage managed?

Did he say 9/11 was a inside job ? No. :roll:

Without all the political jibber jabber and conspiracy theories: Do you think rolling off OIF would have been that easy if it was not for the Support in the US population that still swept over from the aftermath of 9/11 ?

[Moriarti]

Heh -

FACTS:

Attacks against the U.S. on 11 SEP 2001 - perpetrated by Wahabbi/Salafist/Takfiri, mostly from SA - TRUE, however, we notn attacked by the Kingdom of SA, who is our ally and a member State of the U.N. - The Wahabbi "Base" - Al Queda was "headquartered" in Afghaniblamistan, lead by UBL and supported by a Wahabbi/Salafi/Takfiri government called the Taliban. The simple reason we went into Afghan - to eradicate Wahabbi scum who hit us first.

Saddam Hussain's Iraq - failed to adhere to the terms of the 1991 cease fire following their attempted annexation of KU. they thence violate 12 (TWELVE) U.N. Resolutions and made a (bigger) mockery of U.N. inspectors. A further authorization to enforce the previous resolutions by the U.N. as well as an authorization to use force to effect a regime change in IZ by the US Congress allowed the invasion, liberation and subsequest pacification and reconstruction of IZ.

Note: The U.N. charter disallows "unprovoked" declarations of war by beligerent member States (i.e. a State that has not been Directly attacked), hence "authorizations to use force" -

Those are the facts - any bush/hitler/haliburton/zionist/blackhelicopter/truther nonsense is what it is.

[wildcat]

So 9/11 was done by the United States Government. Really the US was desperate to look for reasons to invade Middle east, they had to kill their own 3000 people, and make billions of dollars in losses. Have you seen the US Economy now? Is this same as Iranian Embassy saga was stage managed?

Geo-politics is a fact of life, like it or not. But even then none of those countries will do to each other such unethical concept as ramming a aircraft a into building. Even the Soviet Union and United States of America followed some rules against each other.

I agree and support your cause in Iran, but this kind of utterly stupid and unintelligent behaviour only good for snotty teenagers looking for tabloid newspaper conspiracy theory and gossip is not helping you or Iran at all.

Watch what you say. about 3000 people were murdered in 911, it was not done by the US government, it was done by Islamic extremist in Afghanistan. when Afghanistan was confronted about turning over the leaders of Al Aqeada, they refused too, hence the US was left no choice but to go into the region and deal with the situation itself.


:roll:The propaganda video in this thread to me just tell the story of how peaceful Islam is. How Sunnis are now reduced to live like the Shiites. How they hate each other. Under Saddam, Sunnis live a better life, now they have lost that power, they live more like the Shiites. Just my impression. The reporter is full of crap. just propaganda, What will help Iraq is Iraq, when the people stop blowing each other up, give the government a chance, but I doubt that will happen in a while, if not every ever, Islam is at war with itself.

[Macs.]

Attacks against the U.S. on 11 SEP 2001 - perpetrated by Wahabbi/Salafist/Takfiri, mostly from SA - TRUE, however, we notn attacked by the Kingdom of SA, who is our ally and a member State of the U.N.

The majority of Terrorist still was from Saudi Arabia, because they have and support a very very radical Islam. It's not a coincidence 15 of the 19 9/11 Terrorist were originally from Saudi Arabia, do you think that ?

Saudi Arabia is playing a huge part in international terrorism - It still seems to get the least attention - Why ? We know why.


- The Wahabbi "Base" - Al Queda was "headquartered" in Afghaniblamistan, lead by UBL and supported by a Wahabbi/Salafi/Takfiri government called the Taliban. The simple reason we went into Afghan - to eradicate Wahabbi scum who hit us first.

And there is nothing wrong with it. But it seems the war stopped geographically... Pakistan for example.


Saddam Hussain's Iraq - failed to adhere to the terms of the 1991 cease fire following their attempted annexation of KU. they thence violate 12 (TWELVE) U.N. Resolutions and made a (bigger) mockery of U.N. inspectors. A further authorization to enforce the previous resolutions as well as an authorization to use force to effect a regime change in IZ by the US Congress allowed the invasion, liberation and subsequest pacification and reconstruction of IZ.

Still one of the main points in the phase before the invasion was "The Global War On Terror", even with speculated links to Osama Bin Laden and Al-Kaida itself.

The terror-theme was a part of the justification. And not a small one.

[Firefly26]

15 of the 19 terrorist of 9/11 were from Saudi Arabia - Go figure.

Osama Bin Laden, the higher ranks and the base of Al-Kaida/Taliban is believe to be doodling around somewhere in Pakistan-Afghanistan border section, using Pakistan as a nice grounding stage for their attack on ISAF/OEF in Afghanistan. Still there is no massive ground invasion into Pakistan.

McCain (I just take him as a example) says that he will do anything to bring Osama and Al-Kaida to it's knees - But he doesn't support a invasion of Pakistan because they are a sovereign nation... :roll:

The fact is that (Saudi) business interests are of higher value than the GWOT.

I have to disagree with you macs.

Saudis are also way more capable and cooperative of taking care of their domestic affairs which effect us than Pakistan. The fact that 15 of the 19 came from there does not mean we should invade them or that they were responsible. The Taliban however did harbour AQ and allowed them to use training camps all over the place. We knew this since 1998 under the Clinton administration. OBL escaped to Pakistan in Operation Anaconda so before that, Afghanistan was his haven and we invaded in order to get him.

The "sovereign nation" bit isn't exactly true to me either, but the principle that he won't invade Pakistan speaks alot more sanity and intelligence than the person that says we should go there. Pakistan has nukes mind you. The terrain would also be a nightmare. It'd be like having a ground war on K2, not to mention most helicopters can't operate effectively at all at that altitude.

All of this talk of business interests is conspiracy theory nonsense. If it were true, we would all be alot richer.

OIF imho was the result of poor source vetting. We will never do that again.

[Shahanshah]

So 9/11 was done by the United States Government. Really the US was desperate to look for reasons to invade Middle east, they had to kill their own 3000 people, and make billions of dollars in losses. Have you seen the US Economy now? Is this same as Iranian Embassy saga was stage managed?

Geo-politics is a fact of life, like it or not. But even then none of those countries will do to each other such unethical concept as ramming a aircraft a into building. Even the Soviet Union and United States of America followed some rules against each other.

I agree and support your cause in Iran, but this kind of utterly stupid and unintelligent behaviour only good for snotty teenagers looking for tabloid newspaper conspiracy theory and gossip is not helping you or Iran at all.

When did I say 9/11 was a government job? Please show me that first. You won't and you can't because I never said 9/11 was a government job. 9/11 didn't only give them a reason to attack Middle East but a lot of other things. I am not here to discuss with you if 9/11 was an inside job or not because it seems like you never change your opinion anyway. What's wrong with the economy of US today? Why not look at the people who have enough power to start wars and owning a lot of military companies? Halliburton, **** Cheney etc. It's like, hitting two birds with one stone, but this time it's 50000 birds.

What does Iran have to do with this? I didn't come here just to try and get you to feel sorry for me, no. I didn't even come here to discuss Iran all the time. This has nothing to do with Iran. This is USA attacking and destroying other nations becaues they feel for it, and no one is standing up to them. This is USA where rich people are getting richer owning lots of companies, I wonder what Bush owns - how many companies does he own? Oil companies, military companies etc. Also, just because one things that 9/11 is a inside job, must one be a teenager? or that? or this. You are too pro-USA and I am sorry, I don't want to discuss with people that are way too pro-USA because they will never change their mind. If I am not wrong, you are Israeli so you are more than happy to see everyone but Israel killed and attacked in the middle east. Sorry, but that won't happen.

[LaoSexMachine]

When did I say 9/11 was a government job? Please show me that first. You won't and you can't because I never said 9/11 was a government job. 9/11 didn't only give them a reason to attack Middle East but a lot of other things. I am not here to discuss with you if 9/11 was an inside job or not because it seems like you never change your opinion anyway. What's wrong with the economy of US today? Why not look at the people who have enough power to start wars and owning a lot of military companies? Halliburton, **** Cheney etc. It's like, hitting two birds with one stone, but this time it's 50000 birds.

What does Iran have to do with this? I didn't come here just to try and get you to feel sorry for me, no. I didn't even come here to discuss Iran all the time. This has nothing to do with Iran. This is USA attacking and destroying other nations becaues they feel for it, and no one is standing up to them. This is USA where rich people are getting richer owning lots of companies, I wonder what Bush owns - how many companies does he own? Oil companies, military companies etc. Also, just because one things that 9/11 is a inside job, must one be a teenager? or that? or this. You are too pro-USA and I am sorry, I don't want to discuss with people that are way too pro-USA because they will never change their mind. If I am not wrong, you are Israeli so you are more than happy to see everyone but Israel killed and attacked in the middle east. Sorry, but that won't happen.

I smell a conspiracy.

[Moriarti]

Well...opinions. I'm out:) have a wonderful freedom of speech day!

[chino65]

Two people are fighting. They are not your neighbours, your friends or colleagues etc. Would you go up to them and say: STOP fighting each other! Fight ME instead!"

There has to be another way to deal with other people's conflicts. Somehow I feel simply offering your own (US) troops up for target practice without a clear plan is a crime.

[Firefly26]

When did I say 9/11 was a government job? Please show me that first. You won't and you can't because I never said 9/11 was a government job. 9/11 didn't only give them a reason to attack Middle East but a lot of other things. I am not here to discuss with you if 9/11 was an inside job or not because it seems like you never change your opinion anyway. What's wrong with the economy of US today? Why not look at the people who have enough power to start wars and owning a lot of military companies? Halliburton, **** Cheney etc. It's like, hitting two birds with one stone, but this time it's 50000 birds.

What does Iran have to do with this? I didn't come here just to try and get you to feel sorry for me, no. I didn't even come here to discuss Iran all the time. This has nothing to do with Iran. This is USA attacking and destroying other nations becaues they feel for it, and no one is standing up to them. This is USA where rich people are getting richer owning lots of companies, I wonder what Bush owns - how many companies does he own? Oil companies, military companies etc. Also, just because one things that 9/11 is a inside job, must one be a teenager? or that? or this. You are too pro-USA and I am sorry, I don't want to discuss with people that are way too pro-USA because they will never change their mind. If I am not wrong, you are Israeli so you are more than happy to see everyone but Israel killed and attacked in the middle east. Sorry, but that won't happen.

So you're saying that, Bush and Cheney like to start wars because it makes them richer?

Wow..... that had not occured to me dude.....

[Macs.]

I have to disagree with you macs.

Saudis are also way more capable and cooperative of taking care of their domestic affairs which effect us than Pakistan.

The fact that 15 of the 19 came from there does not mean we should invade them or that they were responsible.

Yeah ?

There have been numeros attacks on westerners in Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia still supports and is the base for Wahabism around the world. Wahabism has proved itself to be the perfect breeding ground for Terrorists. Millions are floating around from there to around the world to support their idiology.

Still Saudi Arabia is feeling no big open pressure. Why ? Maybe because they have a lot of Oil and billions over billions invested in the west ?

And don't tell me that is blackhelicopterconsipracy thinking. I want to see this rational. Business/economy is the major factor.

You can't tell me that most wars these days are done because the west or whoever is a noble knight on a white horse who just loves to see other enjoying freedom and democracy. Business and business interests , a stable Middle-East for example and all that plays a major role - And there isn't even anything that bad about.


The "sovereign nation" bit isn't exactly true to me either, but the principle that he won't invade Pakistan speaks alot more sanity and intelligence than the person that says we should go there. Pakistan has nukes mind you. The terrain would also be a nightmare. It'd be like having a ground war on K2, not to mention most helicopters can't operate effectively at all at that altitude.

So, as I said... Somehow the GWOT does come to stop.

It's just a secret on how the troops in ISAF are going to be succesful when their enemies have a yard where they can pull back and relax and refill without having to fear a bit attack.

Also when talking about Pakistan, we are not talking about whole Pakistan. Waziristan for example has been made out as a staging ground for the Taliban, and from what I know the geography of it isn't that greatly different from part of Afghanistan - Hence they share borders.

All of this talk of business interests is conspiracy theory nonsense. If it were true, we would all be alot richer.

The other thing is, that if these guys on Sandals and with just enough food/water support can escape into Pakistan I believe the military with the biggest spending in the history of this planet should be able to do something about it.

Political "problems" seem to forbid it, largly.

[LaoSexMachine]

Two people are fighting. They are not your neighbours, your friends or colleagues etc. Would you go up to them and say: STOP fighting each other! Fight ME instead!"

There has to be another way to deal with other people's conflicts. Somehow I feel simply offering your own (US) troops up for target practice without a clear plan is a crime.

Please elaborate further.

[Moriarti]

I thought the question was What did we do in Iraq...then why Iraq...then Why Afghan...then why war...then why NOT SA and PAK and and and and and

[Adux]

Watch what you say. about 3000 people were murdered in 911, it was not done by the US government, it was done by Islamic extremist in Afghanistan. when Afghanistan was confronted about turning over the leaders of Al Aqeada, they refused too, hence the US was left no choice but to go into the region and deal with the situation itself.

The propaganda video in this thread to me just tell the story of how peaceful Islam is. How Sunnis are now reduced to live like the Shiites. How they hate each other. Under Saddam, Sunnis live a better life, now they have lost that power, they live more like the Shiites. Just my impression. The reporter is full of crap. just propaganda, What will help Iraq is Iraq, when the people stop blowing each other up, give the government a chance, but I doubt that will happen in a while, if not every ever, Islam is at war with itself.

Wild Cat,

I was being sarcastic!!!!!!!!:roll:, read through the post again...carefully and slowly.

[Adux]

Shahanshah,

I am Indian,

And the rest of your points dont have any value.

[LongShot]

The prevailing and justifiable points for invading Afghanistan have already been covered in this thread, so I will not waste anyone’s time by covering them again. Having said that, the invasion of Afghanistan served (if nothing else) the purpose of securing the first step in removing viable support and training acreage from terrorist organizations.

The invasion of Iraq is a quagmire mainly of media creation, though also of “reasoning creation” as the original basis for invading the nation has been shown mostly false, yet America did not really mind. As with Afghanistan, the invasion served the purpose of beginning to remove a host that would directly or in-directly support terrorist organizations. It is also worth noting that, when looked at in the light of a terrorist support nation, Iraq had much more to offer terrorist organizations in the ways of equipment and resources.

While the road to security in both nations is still a long one, progress in Iraq is remarkable given the amount of time that has passed since the initial fall of the Saddam regime. As both conflicts are still in the infant stage as far as history is concerned, it is much too early for anyone of good conscious to offer harsh judgments on the success/failure in the GWOT.

And finally, both nations are on their way to becoming democratic, and will do so in short order compared to how their transition would have gone had their not been an intervention. Above all there is one overriding benefit to these nations being democratic: Democracies rarely, if ever (and I say rarely because of Murphy’s law) go to war with each other.

[Firefly26]

Yeah ? There have been numeros attacks on westerners in Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia still supports and is the base for Wahabism around the world. Wahabism has proved itself to be the perfect breeding ground for Terrorists. Millions are floating around from there to around the world to support their idiology. Still Saudi Arabia is feeling no big open pressure. Why ? Maybe because they have a lot of Oil and billions over billions invested in the west ?

Yes, SA is fully capable of issuing a worldwide economical catastrophy. But that shouldn't matter because they are not the threat. They have a few bad apples living there, but so does Germany, the USA and everywhere. Are you really accusing the whole country of being responsible? It's the people, and they only get caught when they make mistakes, and when they do, the Saudis do crack down on them.


You can't tell me that most wars these days are done because the west or whoever is a noble knight on a white horse who just loves to see other enjoying freedom and democracy. Business and business interests , a stable Middle-East for example and all that plays a major role - And there isn't even anything that bad about.

Macs, believe it or not, some of us do aspire to be noble knights. I think John F. Kennedy of all people said it best: "Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe to assure the survival and the success of liberty." Think of the wars we've been in. More times than not, it has been for a noble cause. Iraq was a noble cause fought under drunkedness in my opinion.


The other thing is, that if these guys on Sandals and with just enough food/water support can escape into Pakistan I believe the military with the biggest spending in the history of this planet should be able to do something about it. Political "problems" seem to forbid it, largly.

Have you seen Waziristan with your own eyes?

[DS73]

If someone comes in my country and kill more than 600.000 (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/10/AR2006101001442.html) of my people, i would fight them with all i have. So does a big part of the iraqi people.
It's the swirl of violence the "Operation Iraqi Freedom" has started and this swirl never end until the occupying forces leaves the country.

Perhaps in this future no more GI's get killed over there because the US has left the Iraq. But in this case, the poor bastards of US-Vasalls like Poland or Canada etc. will get killed in iraq.

Are you sure sectarian violence will stop when americans will leave Iraq?
Kurds will become exemplary iraqian citizens, shiits will share power with suni, and suni will be open to cooperated with shia neighbors..:roll: Manjana.

btw.600000 is the estimated number of 'Excess' deaths in Iraq. Not killed by americans and not even necessary killed in that time.
Iraq was doomed to self distruction with death of Saddam, no matter with americans around or not. It is just so much "love" accumulated there.

[Nephilim]

personally i think removing soldiers from iraq (or ghan) will atm have no benefit at all.
the situation is unstable and will remain for quite a long time.
so from that perspective i cant imagine that the US could bear troops there for a very long time, especially with eventually new theaters .(peeking into iran, n.korea etc etc all of thise "villains" ;) ).

in the means of installing a democracy, some arabic countries have kinds, so why not iraq? they should at least have the choice.
a democratic monarchy would be pretty much possible.

but im no politics whiz so .. whatever :|

[jokuhuna]

Another thing is, i can't find any historic examples of a situation similiar to the one in Iraq. I mean an example with a somewhat happy ending. Yougoslavia is abit like it, different etnicitys ruled by one strong guy. What we have now is new nations forged in blood there.
Should this be an example? Dividing Iraq in maybe 3 new countries? I'm certain there could be soloutions found for the destibution of natural resources, industry, religious sites and resettlement of ethnicitys that are fair. Even so they would bring new moral dilemmas. But all the money thrown into the war now could be used for that and enforcing the peace between the new countries and nighbors like turkey. And the international community and UN would probably throw alot of money at it too and would help with peace keeping troops.
It would certainly be a bold plan but atleast a plan.

It would certainly be more realistic then the average Iraqy Muhammed or Isha suddenly rising up and lynching averyone who tries to do bad things.
All this "enough is enough" attitude is beeing sucked up into the factions.

[brainplay]

Should this be an example? Dividing Iraq in maybe 3 new countries? I'm certain there could be soloutions found for the destibution of natural resources, industry, religious sites and resettlement of ethnicitys that are fair. Even so they would bring new moral dilemmas. But all the money thrown into the war now could be used for that and enforcing the peace between the new countries and nighbors like turkey. And the international community and UN would probably throw alot of money at it too and would help with peace keeping troops.
It would certainly be a bold plan but atleast a plan.


Or we could kill every insurgent and anti-government militia member giving the Iraqi government breathing room to solve their political issues while allowing more Iraqi security forces to complete their training and picking up combat experience while being embedded with Allied forces. We could also slowly improve logistics chains and infrastructure while providing more jobs.

Oh wait...someone already thought of that plan. And it seems to be working pretty good right now. woot

The reasons for OIF were pretty clear but hindsight is a bitch. And while 15 of the guys were from SA, that info is pretty irrelevant. The training, command staff, and orders came from A-stan. Did the IQ is this thread suddenly drop? There are several more informative threads detailing all of this.

Now you boys want to stay on topic for the rest of the time?

[budgie]

Or we could kill every insurgent and anti-government militia member giving the Iraqi government breathing room to solve their political issues while allowing more Iraqi security forces to complete their training and picking up combat experience while being embedded with Allied forces. We could also slowly improve logistics chains and infrastructure while providing more jobs.

Oh wait...someone already thought of that plan. And it seems to be working pretty good right now. woot



I believe it's time to end the myth that the surge was all it took to stabilise Iraq and it will lead to a land of milk and honey.

People ignore the fact that the convenient bribing and co-opting of Sunni insurgents in Anbar was a separate policy and started earlier than the surge for starters. These guys have no real love for America and may turn their arms on the Shiites once AQ is completely out of the picture. There has also been a 'truce' with the Sadrists and they may not hold forever. Moreover despite the security gains of this truce and the surge, there are still attacks, suicide bombings and the Green Zone is still a capital under seige, behind high walls for protection. Also the security forces are still unstable and riven with ethnic divisions.

The stability gains netted in the past twelve months may yet lead to the illusion that there has been 'victory' and the Iraqi government is ready to stand on its own two feet, but without a real desire to kiss and make up that government could easily degenerate into warring factions, succumb to a coup or even turn on its own people and become a dictatorship.

There have been some successes but, as the OP implies, these are a mixed blessing. Given the continued chaos despite improvement I think it's much to early to call the whole policy o invading a resounding success - especially not when you consider that the Bush administration had no desire to stay so long and engage in nation-building in the first place.

[Gat0r]

They are attacking us because we're free, what a load of bs, this reasoning is arrogant to say the least Calanen. Characterizing bin Laden as some islamic madman bent on apocoliptic destruction is incorrect. He is following the principles of a defensive jihad against America because of our intervention in the land which they see as a threat to their way of life. We continue to support oppressive dictatorships such as the Saudis, Kuwait, EAU that are despised by a great many arabs, all so we can get oil, they see this as America stealing their wealth, we also have military bases on their land, in Saudi Arabia, of course we have moved out of there but continue to occupy Iraq/Afanistan, we have bases in Kuwait and Qatar, imperical ambitions, and imposing santions on Iraq in the 90's that killed thousands of Iraqis didnt help either. bin Laden has explained these reasonings time and again in his videos but people seem to turn off what he's saying and just percieve him as some illogical religous wacko, when in reality he is an intelligent leader of an organization with clearly stated grievances agaisnt the west. Caladen I suggest you read Imperial Hubris, which is written by Michael Scheuer who was the head of the CIA's Osama bin Laden unit, there arent very many more qualified persons to write on this topic.

[Moriarti]

Characterizing bin Laden as some islamic madman bent on apocoliptic destruction is incorrect. He is following the principles of a defensive jihad against America because of our intervention in the land which they see as a threat to their way of life.

Actually - Bin Laden is a Wahabbi that is bent on OFFENSIVE jihad in order to subjugate all infidels, apostates and people of the book. His goal is to establish a global caliphate under 7th century muslim doctrine and sharia law.

In his OWN words -

"We should fully understand our religion. Fighting is a part of our religion and our Sharia. Those who love God and his Prophet and this religion cannot deny that. Whoever denies even a minor tenet of our religion commits the gravest sin in Islam."
"Hostility toward America is a religious duty, and we hope to be rewarded for it by God . . . . I am confident that Muslims will be able to end the legend of the so-called superpower that is America. Time Magazine

"And as I was looking at those towers that were destroyed in Lebanon, it occurred to me that we have to punish the transgressor with the same, and that we had to destroy the towers in America..." Al Jazeera

"Every Muslim, from the moment they realize the distinction in their hearts, hates Americans, hates Jews and hates Christians."
Messages to the World: The Statements of Osama bin Laden

"now address my speech to the whole of the Islamic nation: Listen and understand. The issue is big and the misfortune is momentous. The most important and serious issue today for the whole world is this Third World War, which the Crusader-Zionist coalition began against the Islamic nation. It is raging in the land of the two rivers . The world’s millstone and pillar is in Baghdad, the capital of the caliphate…
Audio Message Posted on Jihadist Web Sites

And his Buddy Ayman al-Zawahiri's OWN WORDS:

The critical importance of the Jihad in Iraq and Afghanistan becomes clear, because the defeat of the Crusaders there -- soon, Allah permitting -- will lead to the setting up of two mujahid emirates which will be launch pads for the [I]liberation of the Islamic lands and the establishment of the Caliphate. Video released by as-Sahab Media

The Jihad in Iraq requires several incremental goals: The first stage: Expel the Americans from Iraq. The second stage: Establish an Islamic authority or emirate, then develop it and support it until it achieves the level of a caliphate -- over as much territory as you can to spread its power in Iraq....The third stage: Extend the jihad wave to the secular countries neighboring Iraq. The fourth stage...the clash with Israel...The mujahedeen must not have their mission end with the expulsion of the Americans from Iraq, and then lay down their weapons, and silence the fighting zeal. Letter to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi


It's not like they deny ANY of this - I do agree that they BLAME us being involved in SA, IZ etc, etc, etc....but read what they want to do AFTER we leave...

[Moriarti]

people ignore the fact that the convenient bribing and co-opting of sunni insurgents in anbar was a separate policy and started earlier than the surge for starters.
previously mentioned: The anbar awakening.

these guys have no real love for america and may turn their arms on the shiites once aq is completely out of the picture.
but thus far have not.


there has also been a 'truce' with the sadrists and they may not hold forever.
true, it may not hold forever - but sadr himself stated that jam will from here on be a spiritual force - and not allowed to carry arms - however...diplomacy - should we give up?

Moreover despite the security gains of this truce and the surge, there are still attacks, suicide bombings...
(very much less than in the past 2 years...and there are still attacks worldwide.)

and the green zone is still a capital under seige, behind high walls for protection.
actually, the iz (green zone is a misnomer) is where i am right now, and while it is not yet completely "open" thousands of iraqis work here every day and the plan is to have it completely open by jan.

also the security forces are still unstable and riven with ethnic divisions.
is this the same isf that just ran aqiz out of baghdad, mosul and working on baquba, and the same isf that cleared basra of jam? Yes they still have issues - but they are working very hard to solve them.

the stability gains netted in the past twelve months may yet lead to the illusion that there has been 'victory' and the iraqi government is ready to stand on its own two feet, but without a real desire to kiss and make up that government could easily degenerate into warring factions, succumb to a coup or even turn on its own people and become a dictatorship.
i agree completely with this - hence we need to stay until they can stand up on their own.

there have been some successes but, as the op implies, these are a mixed blessing. Given the continued chaos despite improvement i think it's much to early to call the whole policy o[f] invading a resounding success - especially not when you consider that the bush administration had no desire to stay so long and engage in nation-building in the first place.
agreed - mistakes were made - it is life...war ...all uncertain - you must learn that what is true today may not be true tomorrow - situations change and we learn to adapt or we perish

12345678901234567890

[Moriarti]

imposing santions on iraq in the 90's that killed thousands of iraqis didnt help either.
umm... You mean the 68 (sixty eight) palaces that saddam built with "oil for food" money between 1991 and 2003 - or what was left of it after the criminals in the u.n. Scraped their cut off of the top - had nothing to do with "thousands of iraqis" that died - you mean to say that his repeated violation of the cease fire agreement and 12 (twelve) u.n. Resolutions between 1991 and 2003 had nothing to do with continuing sacntions? Pah.

bin laden has explained these reasonings time and again in his videos but people seem to turn off what he's saying and just percieve him as some illogical religous wacko, when in reality he is an intelligent leader of an organization with clearly stated grievances agaisnt the west.
yes he has clearly stated his grievences - as well as his plan for sharia law encompassing the entire globe when they re-establish the caliphate and kill all infidels, apostates and people of the book. (see his own words above.




12345678901234567890

[Gat0r]

It just goes to show that the UN is a complete joke and something we shouldnt be a part of, I dont care about these UN resolutions its a lame excuse for us to justify the war, its no connection to "fighting terrorism after 9/11" ahh this has been rehashed almost daily here. It was Our hand in putting those sanctions in place that did end up killing Iraqi's thats all the matters to bin Laden, do you think he cares about UN resolutions, or that Saddam built palaces with that money, hardly, to him its another action by the US that harms muslims.

Would bin Laden like to have sharia law rule the world, no doubt but im sure there are christians and people of other religions with the same feeling reguarding their particular religion. bin Laden and his ogranization could in no way achieve this goal of worldwide sharia law its a pipe dream. We've pretty much gone back to square one reguarding Al Qaida in iraq, from a small number up in Kurdistan before the war to the expolsion of AQI after the invasion and now to dare I say their defeat and rejection from the Iraqi's.

I believe it was the leader of Iran back in the 70's (I remember reading about this dont remember dates or names though) that tryed for several years to incite acts of violence against the US, the reasoning? Our "sinful" way of life, he failed.

[Moriarti]

I suppose we shall see - Posterity will judge us in a more harsh light than we judge ourselves. I only hope that the posterity of which I speak of follows the rule of Constitutional Law and not Sharia. I personally am VERY attached to the freedoms that I have, that we have fought and died for since the inception of our great nation. I fear that if we do simply do nothing, or worse yet continue on this Chamberlinesque apeasement trend that we seem to be on...and even if we are not taken by force - the alternate plan of quiet jihad, masked by takkira will ultimately erode the freedoms of non-muslims in the west - at best - or at worse, make us all subjugated boot licking Dhimmi. I personally do not want to live like that - or have my children live like that.

But we won't even be allowed to protest it then...

Amazing the dicotomy of liberty - it is our very liberty that allows the dissent that may destroy us.

[budgie]

I only hope that the posterity of which I speak of follows the rule of Constitutional Law and not Sharia.

Even if the US army hung up their cammies and went home tomorrow there wouldn't be a chance in hell of that ever happening mate.

[Calanen]

They are attacking us because we're free, what a load of bs, this reasoning is arrogant to say the least Calanen. .

Don't think I ever said that.

I will cop to being arrogant however.

[LongShot]

After reading Imperial Hubris one might pick up Jihad Vs. Mcworld, then perhaps move on to The Prize and after such, find a copy of Guns, Germs and Steel and then Militan Islam Reaches America....this provides a much more rounded view of the geo-political situation covered in this thread than what only Imperial Hubris can offer....

[brainplay]

I believe it's time to end the myth that the surge was all it took to stabilise Iraq and it will lead to a land of milk and honey.

People ignore the fact that the convenient bribing and co-opting of Sunni insurgents in Anbar was a separate policy and started earlier than the surge for starters. These guys have no real love for America and may turn their arms on the Shiites once AQ is completely out of the picture. There has also been a 'truce' with the Sadrists and they may not hold forever. Moreover despite the security gains of this truce and the surge, there are still attacks, suicide bombings and the Green Zone is still a capital under seige, behind high walls for protection. Also the security forces are still unstable and riven with ethnic divisions.

The stability gains netted in the past twelve months may yet lead to the illusion that there has been 'victory' and the Iraqi government is ready to stand on its own two feet, but without a real desire to kiss and make up that government could easily degenerate into warring factions, succumb to a coup or even turn on its own people and become a dictatorship.

I'm not following any myth here although what you posted seems to be something akin to that. The "bribery" as you put it and the surge were there to augment the plan that was already in place. The "awakening" had already started to happen and the money paid was there to secure the deal and give the unemployed gangs/tribes there another option instead of taking al Queda/Iran/extremist money. The surge solidified the deal even more by showing that we were not going away and were willing to up the ante. Extremist groups were already feeling the hurt and more and more of their people were killed or caught. The increased pressure just accelerated the event and no one wants to be on the losing side. Especially when 30mm death suddenly appearing out of nowhere blowing up insurgents gets to be a popular talking point amongst the locals.

There is no illusion here. No one is declaring victory yet. The Iraqi government is still getting their feet under them. They are still short of specialists as denoted by their recent budget surplus but the lack of procurement and finance employees/experts. The Iraqi security forces are getting stronger and able to handle more on their own. Yes there are still attacks but those attacks are becoming fewer and fewer and those that participate are at higher risk. The attitude of the population there isn't in favor of the extremists after their PR guys mistakeningly decided that beheading and criminal behavior would go over well with the locals.

Could it all go to hell in a handbasket still? Yes, it can. However, every day that possibility grows smaller. If nothing else the largests threats to Iraqi now are political in nature. Luckily al Sadr has exiled himself and lost alot of credibility in his own country. As far as the "kiss and make up" you seem to have failed to study up on current policy making there and noticed that most if not all of the benchmarks have been met and/or currently in practice with more and more beneficial ones on the way. Heck they're even buying more hardware from the US and not just basic rifles anymore.

There have been several informative posts on these forums detailing all of this. It might help to search for a few to get caught up. The daily KOS is not a good source of info.

[Moriarti]

it just goes to show that the un is a complete joke and something we shouldnt be a part of,
i could not agree more - get the u.s. Out of the un and the un out of the u.s.

i dont care about these un resolutions its a lame excuse for us to justify the war, its no connection to "fighting terrorism after 9/11" ahh this has been rehashed almost daily here.
fact: Sh offered $10k to the family of any palastinian who "martyred themselves" and killed israeli jews.

it was our hand in putting those sanctions in place that did end up killing iraqi's thats all the matters to bin laden, do you think he cares about un resolutions, or that saddam built palaces with that money, hardly, to him its another action by the us that harms muslims.
but wait - i thought that saddam had nothing to do with bin laden? - fact: There is captured documentary evidence that *dispite* ubl's hatred for the morted apostate regime of sh - the sh regime was actively trying to get ubl into a meeting. And besides - ubl didn't donate any of his billions to the relief of iz kids - in fact it seems that ubl didn't give a frack about iz until the us was in occupation.

would bin laden like to have sharia law rule the world, no doubt but im sure there are christians and people of other religions with the same feeling reguarding their particular religion.
i agree - heck i call some of my family "christian wahabbis" (i am not christian or jewish btw) the difference is that the last time that either the "church" or even the "zionists" actually advocated this type of behavior, much less attacked innocents in order to further a cause, it was hundreds of years ago. It seems that the western "people of the book", largely, have learned to live and let live - and that the current rule of law is more important that what some "prophet" said must happen. You don't hear about some catholic priest of some baptist minister raging about putting the satanic muslim infidel hords to the sword. You don't seem them in any real numbers protesting with signs that say "to hell with freedom" and "behead those that insult the prophet" -

bin laden and his ogranization could in no way achieve this goal of worldwide sharia law its a pipe dream.
only becuase we have chosen to fight this dream. Remember that facism and communism were only the dreams of a few at one point...

we've pretty much gone back to square one reguarding al qaida in iraq, from a small number up in kurdistan before the war to the expolsion of aqi after the invasion and now to dare i say their defeat and rejection from the iraqi's.
i think that we are on that path - yes.

i believe it was the leader of iran back in the 70's (i remember reading about this dont remember dates or names though) that tryed for several years to incite acts of violence against the us, the reasoning? Our "sinful" way of life, he failed.
and so did khadaffi
and hirohito
and hitler
and saddam
and kruschev
- they untimately failed because we had the intestinal fortitude to stand up for truth, justice and the american way....errrmmmm.... I mean for what is right ;)


12345678901234567890

[ColinP]

If someone comes in my country and kill more than 600.000 (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/10/AR2006101001442.html) of my people, i would fight them with all i have. So does a big part of the iraqi people.
It's the swirl of violence the "Operation Iraqi Freedom" has started and this swirl never end until the occupying forces leaves the country.

Perhaps in this future no more GI's get killed over there because the US has left the Iraq. But in this case, the poor bastards of US-Vasalls like Poland or Canada etc. will get killed in iraq.

As mentioned that study is flawed as much as a study can be, far better to look at Iraqbodycount, they are much closer to the real numbers and dissed the study you mentioned. As for Canada, we never went to Iraq!!!!! :roll: