The Iraq Thread 2

[Schoeler 0]

Anyhow, it will be interesting to hear Saddam's next broadcast and hear what he has to say about all this. He lost his both sons, so one could imagine that he is quite pissed off.

Well you know how it goes, Saddam can be pissed as much as he wants, the fact is he didn't even prepare for this war properly, the guy is out of his mind.  He may have thought he's with the good guys since he was wrongfully accused of WMD posession, but he should realize, the truth wins out but not without a real struggle.    

And to the folks still defending any deaths in Iraq, why should anyone else die for a worthless and unjust cause, debating is nice and fun, but sometimes peoples lives are the topic, not OFP AI.  People who are so willing to say I'm glad a war happened, I'm glad they killed this guy or that guy, maybe it's time to go see the real events for yourself.

Worthless? Unjust? I doubt the Iraqis feel that way. I'd love to see your opinion had you lived under that regime. I'm just whistling in the dark here, but I'd bet it would be quite different. For now, you are free to cast the first stone from the safety and comfort of your easy chair as you access such wonderful resources as high speed internet.

[Major Fubar 0]

Worthless?  Unjust?  I doubt the Iraqis feel that way.

Don't fool yourself, a large precentage of the Iraqi population hate the American occupation of their country just as much, if not more, than the atrocities the Saddam regime inflicted on them...

[Schoeler 0]

Thank you, Tex. For a moment I was worried my head was going to explode.

Edit: Re: E6Hotel's comments

Now that I stop to think about it, a smaller-scale SOCOM operation would've been better regardless of whether the objective was to eliminate or capture U&Q. Perhaps there were availablility constraints.

And you're serious about CS being classified as a chemical weapon? Hm, IMO it'd do a lot of good to re-think that policy.

Better talk to the folks in Geneva then.

[Schoeler 0]

Worthless?  Unjust?  I doubt the Iraqis feel that way.

Don't fool yourself, a large precentage of the Iraqi population hate the American occupation of their country just as much, if not more, than the atrocities the Saddam regime inflicted on them...

I'd agree, I bet they do hate the American occupation, but I'd also bet an equally large portion of the Iraqi population adore the fact that Saddam is gone. I hardly consider that a worthless cause. Any time a free people can provide freedom and safety to a tortured and oppressed people, I'd consider that a worthwhile cause, despite whatever excuse their politicians used to justify the act, or whatever the true motivation for the act was. The end result was an absolute good. Now we have, as a people and a nation, the absolute responsbility to follow up on that good, and guarantee a better life for the Iraqis.

I get absolutely nautious when I see simpering, cushy lifestyle, starbucks drinking, apologetic intellectuals cast moral aspersions from the absolute safety and comfort of their coffee house/internet terminal/easy chair at home. How in the fuck can they even begin to imagine how the Iraqi people feel about all of this? Save your western-based morality and liberal opinions for what you know best, your own culture and society. Let the Iraqi people decide for themselves how they feel about the war and whether or not it was worthwhile.

[Major Fubar 0]

Let the Iraqi people decide for themselves how they feel about the war and whether or not it was worthwhile.

I agree with you completely on that point...but it is a fact that a lot of Iraqis didn't want to be liberated and resent the US's actions...but you are right, I do not believe that this neccessarily renders the action worthless. Unjust is another story, if we are talking about the real motivations for going into Iraq. But, like I've said before, the end result of Saddam being removed is definitely a good one.

*sip* ahh, this Caramel Macchiato is great!

[Schoeler 0]

Let the Iraqi people decide for themselves how they feel about the war and whether or not it was worthwhile.

I agree with you completely on that point...but it is a fact that a lot of Iraqis didn't want to be liberated and resent the US's actions...but you are right, I do not believe that this neccessarily renders the action worthless. Unjust is another story, if we are talking about the real motivations for going into Iraq. But, like I've said before, the end result of Saddam being removed is definitely a good one.

*sip* ahh, this Caramel Macchiato is great!  

LOL Fubar, it wasn't you I was referring to. We have a long way to go, and a lot of things left to observe before any of us can have enough information to make a well-reasoned moral judgment about this war. Let's see how things turn out first.

[denoir 0]

I can say that my point of reference for judging the Iraq situation is what I saw in Kosovo and the normalization process there.

The comparison is however not entirely accurate as the people there are Europeans that share the same basic culture as we do. However I fail to see how the difference in culture between ours and the Iraqi would benefit the process there - especially since we are imposing our values and beliefs on them.

On the other hand one could reverse that argument and say that since it is a different culture that it will take longer to get positive changes (positive by the standards of our culture of course).

[The Frenchman 0]

Hahahahah.......

New cartoon from Mark Fiore

[bn880 5]

Ofcourse it's worthless as it's unjust, but aswith everything some good will come of it, maybe more than anyone is expecting in the long run.

Yeah I love my lazy boy as you put it, just I wish you would be in my shoes sometimes Sch.

[Die Alive 0]

Who cares how long it took to kill them. Do the soldiers get paid by the hour?

F'em, they're dead, if they were real heroes, they'd shoot their way out of that house.

I bet they wished they'd still had those human (waste) shields at their disposal like they had earlier in the year.    

-=Die Alive=-

[ralphwiggum 6]

Should media get the images of U&Q dead out, please do not link the image here.

although it would be widely available, i believe it still is violation of forum rules. if you want to see the image if it is released, please try other places.

[Longinius 1]

"O & Q tortured and murdered the Iraqi people for years killing thousands of people. But they still want to protect them simply because they're from Iraq?"

Maybe they want to handle it themselves? Maybe they dont like America to butt in to their business?

[denoir 0]

Three US soldiers killed in Iraq

[Balschoiw 0]

I have seen a nice scene yesterday. US troops searching for what they call nests of resistance.

They came into a village drove all inhabitants out of their houses, made them lie in the dust, yelled at them, threatened them with weapons, even the kids and women and the commander of the brave US troops told the inhabitants that the next time they will come back they will have tanks with them and flatten the houses.

You don´t need to have Udai or Saddam in your back to resist

the US. The US themselfes make sure that Iraqi´s resistance grows daily. Shia´s are already opposing the US in public and they will be part of the coaltion problem very soon.

If the coaltion troops don´t change their methods very soon they will arrest a suspected every day and make 1000 new enemies along with it.

[WhoCares 0]

Thank you, Tex. For a moment I was worried my head was going to explode.

Edit: Re: E6Hotel's comments

Now that I stop to think about it, a smaller-scale SOCOM operation would've been better regardless of whether the objective was to eliminate or capture U&Q. Perhaps there were availablility constraints.

And you're serious about CS being classified as a chemical weapon? Hm, IMO it'd do a lot of good to re-think that policy.

Better talk to the folks in Geneva then.

It's the chemical weapon convention, which was ratified by the USA in 1997. According to it, Teargas is banned from warfare.

This is a link to a topic in the AA:O forum. Inside, I posted another link to another thread in the same board and there I posted a link to the CWC. You might still read the full threads, as beyond a lot of nonsense there are some other informations, eg. Rumsfeld plans to bypass the CWC.

[Balschoiw 0]

Serious threat ? or is comical Ali lose once again ?

[denoir 0]

Shia´s are already opposing the US in public and they will be part of the coaltion problem very soon.

Hmm, yes the Sh'ia issue.. It's not an easy problem. On on hand they were persecuted by Saddam and they are very happy that the UK/US forces got rid of him. On the other hand their agenda for Iraq is diametrically opposed to the one that USA wants. If it was up to the Sh'ia, Iraq would become a theocracy á la Iran. And we know how popular Islamic fundamentalist are today in US foregin policy.

From a realpolitik point of view, one cannot help but wonder if USA did itself a long-term disfavor by removing Saddam. If I put it like this: Many of the Sh'ia leaders are fairly fundamentalist in their world view. The step for them to cooperate with extremists like bin Laden will be much easier to take now with Saddam gone.

[Balschoiw 0]

Quote[/b] ]Hmm, yes the Sh'ia issue..

And don´t forget the PKK issue in the north. Kurds and PKK members are that mixed that coaltion forces threatened them with violent disarming. Another point of the rising heat in Iraq.

[denoir 0]

Pentagon admits Iraq mistakes

Wolfowitz this time..

[theavonlady 2]

Pentagon admits Iraq mistakes

Quote[/b] ]The cost of putting the country back on its feet will be billions.

According to the U.S. administrator in Iraq, Paul Bremer, it will take up to $13 billion "to rebuild and meet foreseeable power demands."

Oh! For the days of the principality of Grand Fenwick!

[FallenPaladin 0]

I have seen a nice scene yesterday. US troops searching for what they call nests of resistance.

They came into a village drove all inhabitants out of their houses, made them lie in the dust, yelled at them, threatened them with weapons, even the kids and women and the commander of the brave US troops told the inhabitants that the next time they will come back they will have tanks with them and flatten the houses.

You don´t need to have Udai or Saddam in your back to resist

the US. The US themselfes make sure that Iraqi´s resistance grows daily. Shia´s are already opposing the US in public and they will be part of the coaltion problem very soon.

If the coaltion troops don´t change their methods very soon they will arrest a suspected every day and make 1000 new enemies along with it.

That brings back some Vietnam memories. Just put that scene into a small Vietnamese village back in the late 60s or early 70s and it fits perfect.

[Balschoiw 0]

Quote[/b] ]"I believe this will go down as the first guerrilla tactic in history in which contract killings, killings for hire, going out and soliciting young men for $500 to take a shot at an American, was the principal tactic employed," he said.

What is so different to US occupant tactics of offering 35 million dollars for two men ?

Quote[/b] ]He says his latest plan will restore electricity, water and healthcare to pre-war levels in Iraq within two months.

No I don´t believe this. Efforts for rebuilding are way to weak at the moment and with growing opposition in Iraq it will get harder every day. You can´t rebuild a country if you can´t even protect yourself from attacks that are results of US tactics and public relations in Iraq.

Quote[/b] ]The U.S. says it also had no idea how badly Iraq's infrastructure had been neglected over the past three decades.

That´s just not true. They were very aware of that as any other nation was aware of it. Lie.

[USSoldier11B 0]

Quote[/b] ]They came into a village drove all inhabitants out of their houses, made them lie in the dust, yelled at them, threatened them with weapons, even the kids and women and the commander of the brave US troops told the inhabitants that the next time they will come back they will have tanks with them and flatten the houses.

1. Got a (credible) source for this?

2. Yelling at people and making them lay on the ground during a search is kind of a procedure thing. What do you expect? Hugs and fruit baskets?

Line infantrymen are by no means diplomats. SF soldiers are trained to deal with Civil Affairs but grunts are not, what do you expect. They are just doing their jobs. Quit demonizing them.

[Longinius 1]

Quote[/b] ]That´s just not true. They were very aware of that as any other nation was aware of it. Lie.

Especially since they helped cause it...

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

It doesnt seem to be so surprising after all. If one dares to shorten all the published articles then we can track the following.

A squad tries to enter the building and is then being shot at from a mean angle. Three get wounded (probably 2 of them during the attempt to get the first wounded one out of there).

They decide to fire some TOWs instead to break the walls from outside. (they slightly exaggerated cause one side of the house is fully blown off).

Being satisfied with the damage the soldiers try once again to penetrate the top floor. Only one left alive is the stupid little spoiled 14 year old son who ends up with a bullet in his head.  

Result. 2 brothers   (not willing to fall into US hands. Prefer to die

        1 bodyguard (probably quite a badass)

        1 14y old boy incappable to participate in the battle

------------------------------------------------------

        3 wounded US soldiers (probably hurt during the attempt to get other wounded soldier out of line of fire)