| Author |
Message
|
| 425 Chaotic Requisition |
 Posted: Mon Nov 12, 2007 12:28 pm Post subject: War on terror. Are we winning? |
 |
|
The Doctor
Joined: 18 Jun 2007
Posts: 3320
Location: England, UK.
|
The British troops recently got back in great numbers from Iraq, but are still in Afghanistan. The US are there in both still. But like Vietnam the West are not absolutley good at winning a guerilla tactical enemy. We are not keeping the situation together in Iraq, in fact perhaps have worsened it, so the question is 'are we winning?' That is of course is if there is anything to win  .
_________________
"Victory is in trying. Defeat is in not". - SVRDW. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| Jeremyhfht |
| Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 1:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
Resident Psychologist
Joined: 18 Jul 2006
Posts: 2247
|
| Um. Sorry to bust your bubble. We already lost. What we're doing now is wasting resources. We lost. Game over. Leave the imbeciles to their civil war. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Pendragon |
| Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 5:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
Moderator
Joined: 07 Jan 2005
Posts: 1160
Location: Nederland
|
You can't win if your goals aren't clear. There was no "imminently dangerous" Saddam regime with WMD's, so it's not clear to me what the purpose of occupying the country was / is.
The invasion itself has caused the Iraqi civil war and the infection of the country with terrorists (there were hardly any islamofascist terrorists in Iraq before 2003), so the only purpose of the Iraq war is to solve the problems it has itself caused.
Should the US and it's so called coalition stay in Iraq? Yes, they made a mess of the country and now it's their job to clean it up. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Jeremyhfht |
| Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 5:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
Resident Psychologist
Joined: 18 Jul 2006
Posts: 2247
|
| Pendragon, no. That's bullshit. That country was fucked up before the USA even got there. don't allow yourself to be brainwashed by mainstream view. The USA had dick all to do with most of what's going on in that country. All they did was overthrow a dictator. What happened afterwards is largely Iraq's fault. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| 425 Chaotic Requisition |
| Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 5:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
The Doctor
Joined: 18 Jun 2007
Posts: 3320
Location: England, UK.
|
| Jeremyhfht wrote: |
| Pendragon, no. That's bullshit. That country was fucked up before the USA even got there. don't allow yourself to be brainwashed by mainstream view. The USA had dick all to do with most of what's going on in that country. All they did was overthrow a dictator. What happened afterwards is largely Iraq's fault. |
What is a catalyst?
_________________
"Victory is in trying. Defeat is in not". - SVRDW. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Ophiolite |
| Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 6:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Radioactive Isotope
Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 4804
Location: Scotland
|
The function of terrorism is to induce a state of confusion in the enemy's mind; distraction in the enemy's goals; disruption in the enemy's economy; and uncertainty in the enemy's confidence. On that basis the acts of terrorism in the US, Europe and elswhere have been outstandingly successful. By generating a misguided, ill conceived, poorly planned, abyssmally implemented, reaction , the terrorists have won a remarkable victory. By converting an ephermeral dichotomy of outlook between east and west, 'Christian' and 'Muslim', the terrorists have set the game plan for the next three or four decades of geopolitics.
Historians in the future may see the 911 attacks as pivotal in the 21st century, but what gave those attacks their potency was US (and British) reaction.
_________________
The Universe is not only weirder than we imagine it is weirder than we can imagine. J.B.S.Haldane. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Pendragon |
| Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 9:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
Moderator
Joined: 07 Jan 2005
Posts: 1160
Location: Nederland
|
| Jeremyhfht wrote: |
| Pendragon, no. That's bullshit. That country was fucked up before the USA even got there. don't allow yourself to be brainwashed by mainstream view. The USA had dick all to do with most of what's going on in that country. All they did was overthrow a dictator. What happened afterwards is largely Iraq's fault. |
Iraq was fucked up in many ways, but it was not ravaged by islamofascist terrorist groups before 2003. They were attracted by the US soldiers, and partly created by disbanding the Iraqi national army. Iraqi separatism is not something new, but it could've been a managed process rather than a civil war. The US just took the whip from the sunni's and gave it to the shiites, not a very well designed plan if you ask me..
My point is that the US started the invasion with a plan designed to solve a problem that didnt exist (scary Saddam with his WMD's), and in the process set in motion a chainreaction of real problems for which the US had no plan whatsoever. If the US had not invaded Iraq the civil war might still have occured at some point, and it wouldn't have been the responsability of the US (apart from supporting Saddam for decades; and the UK is responsable for creating the incoherent monstrosity called Iraq in the first place). But the US and UK (and others) did take over Iraq, and whatever problems already existed they made worse through bad management. So they turned Iraq's problems into their own, and now they have to solve them. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Twaaannnggg |
| Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 9:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Junior
Joined: 30 May 2007
Posts: 260
|
| Pendragon wrote: |
My point is that the US started the invasion with a plan designed to solve a problem that didnt exist (scary Saddam with his WMD's), |
Now that's a new one  Buck Fush had a PLAN????????????
How did you get that idea, I'd like to know? For all I know, he's a delusional ex-junky willing to show his belief in a non-existant deiity is stronger than the fundamentalists'. While doing so he does not give a damn about how many people have to be killed (women, children.....all the same, for him just collateral damage. And Irakis at that, they do not deserve better) or sent to die a horrible death or be mangled by IEDs and MPGs. Hey, I do not buy in this Michael Moore BS either (allthough he has some valid points) but it's a fact that the risk of death for your average Iraki nowadays is around 10 to 50 times higher than before the invasion.
| Pendragon wrote: |
| and in the process set in motion a chainreaction of real problems for which the US had no plan whatsoever. If the US had not invaded Iraq the civil war might still have occured at some point, and it wouldn't have been the responsability of the US (apart from supporting Saddam for decades; and the UK is responsable for creating the incoherent monstrosity called Iraq in the first place). But the US and UK (and others) did take over Iraq, and whatever problems already existed they made worse through bad management. So they turned Iraq's problems into their own, and now they have to solve them. |
Agreed.
Oh, BTT: does the term "asymetrical warfare" mean anything to you?
Money needed to pull off 9/11: Around 100.000$
Money spent in operation "Fucked up freedom" Around 1.000.000.000$ per month.
Terrorists killed during 9/11: 20
People killed in the Irak war: more than 30.000
_________________
Build a man a fire and he will be warm for a day, set a man on fire and he will be warm for the rest of his life. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Ophiolite |
| Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 10:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Radioactive Isotope
Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 4804
Location: Scotland
|
| Pendragon wrote: |
| But the US and UK (and others) did take over Iraq, and whatever problems already existed they made worse through bad management. |
This is what I cannot forgive - incompetence on a disgusting scale - made possible only through a combination of over reaching arrogance and unbelievable ignorance.
| twaaaanngg wrote: |
| People killed in the Irak war: more than 30.000 |
You should probably add a zero.
_________________
The Universe is not only weirder than we imagine it is weirder than we can imagine. J.B.S.Haldane. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jackson33 |
| Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 9:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Professor
Joined: 10 Oct 2006
Posts: 1281
|
| Would some one please explain to me, just which war was fought w/o error. Aside from that, Gulf II, was completed rather rapidly. Any misjudgment may have come after wards, as revenge fighting between the previous rulers and the previously oppressed, outside influences and the War of the media, was misjudged......IMO. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| dejawolf |
| Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 10:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Ph.D.
Joined: 31 Dec 2006
Posts: 696
Location: Norway
|
some history:
during the 1980s, iran and iraq was fighting heavily. called the iran-iraq wars.
the americans supported iraq, and got saddam into power, while supplying him with money.
the russians supported iran.
there was a saying back then in the US.
"saddam is a son of a bitch, but he's OUR son of a bitch".
i think some of you might remember a desktop game from the mid-90s where you shoot saddam moving shopping trolleys full of rockets.
well, after the fall of the soviet union, saddam overstepped, and invaded kuwait, which was a catalyst for the first gulf war in 1991.
the united states went in, fought all their way into baghdad, leaving the whole iraqi army a smoldering pile of junk, and then went home with minimal losses.
theres a similar story with taliban.
back in the 80s, the mujahideen terrorized the soviet union, and as a response, soviet invaded afghanistan, and did what they could to flush out the mullahs out.
united states, being in a cold war with the USSR, decided to put pins in their wheels, by training the mullahs in guerilla warfare.
back then, one of the most effective anti-mullah weaponry was the mi-24 hind gunship, which the soddy RPG-7 simply wasn't capable of reaching out and touching.
well, that changed when the US supplied taliban & co with stingers.
suddenly the gunships were falling down left and right. the soviets were forced to police afghanistan with tanks and apcs.
the situation detoriorated, like currently in iraq, and the soviets gave up.
USA said "mission accomplished" and left afghanistan in ruins.
this was around 1990.
with afghanistan completely unable to take care of itself, taliban took over,
and ruled until about 2003, when they attacked the twin towers.
just FIY, afghanistan had been a peaceful, if undeveloped country for 50 years, prior to the afghanistan war.
_________________
only a fool puts art above science.
Last edited by dejawolf on Thu Nov 15, 2007 8:35 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| dejawolf |
| Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 10:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Ph.D.
Joined: 31 Dec 2006
Posts: 696
Location: Norway
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Guest |
| Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 12:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Add to "some History;
The US supported *The Shaw of Iran* Pahlavi, who did everything possible to set up Democratic Society for his people. We did not support the extremist Cleric, which later took control. Pahlavi, exiled to the US where he later died. The hostage situation of the US diplomatic core did little to help relations and when War broke out between Iran/Iraq, the US had little choice in who to support....
Saddam, was tolerated until he invaded Kuwait. At this point and the possibility he would take the invasion to Saudi Arabia, our National Interest (Worlds oil supply) allowed nothing short of Gulf War I. Short of UN limited support, I have no idea why we didn't complete the War, THEN...(mistake?)
Afghanistan "a peaceful nation". The 1978 revolt and Russian invasion might be signs of peace, but as the Russians retreated (with-out rebuilding the government or infrastructure, which the US did or is trying to do in both Afghanistan and Iraq) anarchy and tribal rule/dominance was not peaceful nor was the strict version of Muslim rule, was anything but peaceful. In fact 20-30 million Afghans migrated to Pakistan or Iran to escape Taliban influence. (3-4 million or so have returned).
Some of your comments, I do not understand, but the US has not left Afghanistan. As for use of superior air power, think thats what war is about. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jackson33 |
| Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 12:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Professor
Joined: 10 Oct 2006
Posts: 1281
|
| Thought I was logged in; above post is my resposibility...not guest. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Cat1981(England) |
| Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 1:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Ph.D.
Joined: 09 Sep 2006
Posts: 948
Location: Mind your own business
|
^^ Never seen that before  .
-------------------
| Pendragon wrote: |
| My point is that the US started the invasion with a plan designed to solve a problem that didnt exist (scary Saddam with his WMD's), and in the process set in motion a chainreaction of real problems for which the US had no plan whatsoever. |
I don't thing the US can take all the blame for the mess, many country's around the world supported them, including the Dutch.
_________________
When we talk to God it's called a prayer. When God talks back it's called schizophrenia. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
