The Iraq Thread 2

[Baron von Beer 0]

Is interesting. Imagine a large SAM would be an ideal delivery device though. Take out the guidance system, and you have a large warhead rocket. (Well, some.. SA2 through 6, etc) (rig a simple detonator for low air burst).

If RPGs were used, that is a devilishly clever use, if not user friendly, or overly effective. (Don't suppose the one doing the delivery is too safe when firing a bio-rocket a few hundred meters away, certainly a good idea to boost faith in the gas masks before hand! Kinda like that Crocket (or something like that) idiotic nuke projector the US Army made back in the 50's. Troops were to hide in a slit trench to fire it, as they would be in the outer blast area.

If in RPG rockets, easy to hide. How many inspectors do you suppose have been checking the inside of an RPG round? Also easy to conceal.. throw a few in with a nice stack, and the chance of discovery is minute, outside of a total, systematic search. However, if that information WAS given in a reoport, one would presume that such items have been searched. Or rather, with some of the decisions made, one would hope.

[bn880 5]

Sounds like a bunch of trash to me. He doesn't know what he is talking about, probably struck some deal with someone, in exchange for not being killed or something

Oh yeah, WMD's in RPG launchers, oh no, those could reach Israel, Kuwait, and who knows maybe USA.

EDIT: What the heck do you think you're going to successfully deliver in an RPG? It's BS.

[Frisbee 0]

No reason? They have plainly stated their reasons over and over and over again, but maybe you don´t watch the news: To kick the Coalition out of Iraq.

They´re Iraqis. Americans are not. No matter how justified the occupation is, it´s more their country than America´s.

To kick the coalition out of iraqi? Do you understand the resistance wants the old governent back! The coalition is trying to prevent that because when saddam was in power he killed his own people and limited their religon. Even in 1998 Saddam suspected of his crimes. Saddam stockpiled chemical weapons for a long time and the us even has to take them away. Do you think it's fair to let the old government come back? For iraqis to kill each other with nerve gas? For religons celebrations not to take place? Do you think it is fair to let the iraqi people suffer from tyrants like saddam?

Well,then aren't they killing soldiers for a reason?

If those WMD RPG rounds exist,i would imagine they would've been used by now,instead of suicide bombings they could eliminate large concentrations of americans with relative ease,which hasn't happened yet,so i'm inclined to suspect that it's indeed a bunch of BS.

[HOBOMAN 0]

I mean overall, but you new statement had sources. It's just that you keep talking, but you never pointed out any real references to prove it. That's all.

Sure I will cite my resources from now on

[HOBOMAN 0]

When I look back this whole forum, and the only aguments are the interepretation of the evidence. All the facts are pretty accuarate it's just what we make of them.

[bn880 5]

Quote[/b] ]When I look back this whole forum, and the only aguments are the interepretation of the evidence. All the facts are pretty accuarate it's just what we make of them.

There is evidence?

[walker 0]

Hi HOBOMAN

I think it would help if we state the current position:

(1)WMD and the threat of Sadam

The initial given reason for the War was a preemptive strike to defend the US and other countries alied to the US against the possiblity of WMD being used either by his friends who were terrorists or by his own millitary using intercontinental rockets

(2)Regime change

A secondary reason for the war was to remove a tyrant, Sadam, and his powerbase, the Baath party, from power.

In both these aims the coalition has failed.

(1a) Failure to find WMD and ICBMs

No WMD has been found. Not even factory parts other than the ones destroyed by the UN.

No inter continental rockets have been found. Not even factory parts other than the ones destroyed by the UN.

We know the WMD existed in the past because the chemicals and plant to make them were sold to Sadam by the current US Vice president.

We know they had the rockets because the Russians gave them the medium range rockets and their very educated workforce (many of the worlds top scientists were educated in Iraq) were working on extending the range of these missiles. The UN found some and destroyed them.

Neither of these were found so either they were given to terrorists in which case attacking Sadam was a real big booboo or they were given to Syria or Iran both nations could now in theory obliterate Israel with them, another big booboo.

A more likely probablility is that they were destroyed by the UN as has been said by the Sadam govenment when it was in power and most world inteligence services including the CIA believed.

Political consequences of the TBA's and TBA2's private inteligence departments failure to correctly access the Iraq threat

TBA = The Bush Administration

TBA2 = The Blair Administration

Political Consequences of Coalition Failure to find WMD

If the US and UK administrations don't come up with the proof of WMD.

It does not matter if the administrations lied (straight criminal behaviour)

Or were stupid (criminal neglegence)

Both are resignation matters in a true democracy.

If they dont resign then a true democracy must remove them

by Vote of No Confidence for the UK and Impeachment for the US.

Otherwise they are no diferent than Sadams Regime.

(2a)Failure to find Sadam

The Coalition has not found him

We know he existed because there are pictures and film of him shaking hands with members of the curent US administration after he gassed the Kurds in Halabja.

Either he escaped to another country or he is still in Iraq nobody in the US inteligence knows, like they dont know where Bin Laden is.

Political Consequences of Coalition Failure to find Sadam

In failing to find Sadam the coalition is left with a continuous focus of resistance and threat to any future democratic government in Iraq. This means many more Coalition must stay there while he is a threat and more Coalition soldiers will be killed.

In failing to find Sadam the Coalition are seen as loosers.

When those who back winners see you as loosers they switch sides.

Failing to rebuild a country after you smashed it apart in a war makes the people who live there resent you.

If you can not even find the person who you blame it on they resent you more.

If you can not even find the WMD, for which you fought the war, they resent you more.

If while you are failing to find the WMD or Sadam you smash up the wrong peoples houses or shoot their inocent family members, friendly fire happens accepted but it dont alter how people feel, they will resent you more.

This would mean a former Evil Tyrant, Sadam will begin to be seen as a Robin Hood.

Before GW2 Sadam was not involved in funding the training or attacks of any Terrorist orgnisations. He was singularly hated by Al Queda as he was the head of a secular state founded around the communist ideals of Baath party. Al Queda was initialy grown by the CIA as a conduit and control system for anti communist activity in Afghanistan but it went rogue in the 90s.

After GW2 Sadam got out with LOTS of money much in offshore numbered accounts and at least 3 container loads of Dollars were seen leaving the Iraq National Bank in the days before the US secured Bahgdad. Sadam's pocket change.

Now US inteligence has found evidence to believe that the former enemies Al Queda and Sadam have found common cause in attacking the coalition.

Al Qeda after the fall of Afghanistan could afford to do one attack somwhere in the world every 6 months.

Now with Sadam's economic backing it is managing 1 or 2 a month.

Sadam had perhaps a few thousand fanatical supporters in his own country now he has access to the Al Queda and as a result of the inept actions described a growing local following in Iraq.

Consequences for the War on terror

Before GW2 Al Queda was significantly weakened by the attacks in Afghanistan. Afgahanistan had a sufficient force of Coalition trops there to prevent the reemergence of the Taliban. Effort was being made to rebuild the country and remove it as an Al Queda recruiting base. Since GW2 the number and quality of these troops has been reduced to feed in to the increasing demand on troop numbers in Iraq.

The mistake of fighting a war on two fronts

Any one with a brain can see that is fighting a war on two fronts always costly and considered a strategic error.

As a result the US and the Coalition members are in more danger of terrorism than before GW2 or are the higher number of attacks my imagination? It may even include a WMD threat. Let us just pray the WMD was not there in Iraq in the first place.

TBA and TBAs failure at a time of War

So both TBA and TBA2 have failed us at a time of war by increasing the number of enemies the coalition faces and by failing to deal with those dangerous enemies.

The single biggest sin a democratic administration can make is failure in war. It is considered a terminal error.

Still we live in democracies we can get rid of lame duck administrations. I do not feel our democracies both the UK and US will have any legitamacy if they atempt to remain in power without finding the WMD. So we will have to lose these lame duck administrations in that case.  It is a cheaper option than having them continue on unable to govern.

TBA2 Tied up in ivestigations

Allready the UK government has had to spend months of adminstration time and money explaining its actions with regard to the whistle blower Dr David Kelly and its PR department has wasted more doing a hatchet job on the reporter Andrew Gilligan. All for what to say it did not lie when it said the Iraqis had WMD that could be fired in 45 minutes (it was refering to WW1 style Gas shells that it could fire maybe 25 miles) but it left everyone with the impression this was WMD that could be fired on UK bases in Cyprus. The results of inquiry are due out this month. Then there is the inquiry into the UK going to war on inccorect evidence to be started.

TBA Tied up in ivestigations

In the US the investigation into which whitehouse official revealed the identity of the CIA agent in charge of finding ilegal nuclear weapons materials is due to start early next year. As is the investigation into failures of US inteligence in the run up to GW2. The CIA has allready made it clear they blame TBA's private inteligence firm. Why TBA employed that bunch of amatuers is beyond me.

Legal consequences for TBA and TBA2 of not finding WMD

It maybe that Iraqi citizens will be within their rights to make claims for compensation for loss of life property and earnings in pursuit of a wrongful war if no WMD is found. Their first port of call should be the personal fortunes of the members of the adminstrations not US and UK tax payers. As a tax payer in one the countries involved I would prefer that the members of an adminstration that fails to come up with proof of WMD have their personal fortunes so reduced as to cause them to live in a council / housing project before I pay for it.

We then come to the matter of investigating a possable war crime this would be for the future Iraqi government or better a referendum of the Iraqis to decide. It may well be that such a government decides that the removal of Sadam was a worth while venture.

They have to pull their fingers out and find that WMD to stand a chance of staying in power and prevent our taxpayers from having to cough up for their (mistakes or lie) does not matter which.

Kind Regards Walker

[quicksand 0]

I agree completly walker...

and all this WMD got me thinking..When 8 months since the end of the war pass,you have acces through all of Iraq,you detain iraq scientiests who have famillies and if they knew something they would gladly tell you to let them free,the fact that Saddam didn`t have wmd is cristal clear..

Now my issue..

-Could the TBA pull the biggest scam of the century and when nobodoy expects it near the ellections,plant the WMD in Iraq..

Imagine that,their support would go skyrocket..I know a little bit leaning too conspiracy stuff but can you really trust a gouverment that it`s made of lies...

[theavonlady 2]

Now my issue..

-Could the TBA pull the biggest scam of the century and when nobodoy expects it near the ellections,plant the WMD in Iraq..

So many people here were so sure that the US would plant WMDs in Iraq after the major battles subsided and nothing was being found. It just never happened.

[Longinius 1]

Quote[/b] ]So many people here were so sure that the US would plant WMDs in Iraq after the major battles subsided and nothing was being found. It just never happened.

I don't think people were actually sure, more along the line of not being suprised if it happened. And I still wouldn't put it past them.

[walker 0]

Hi all

What all of you are failing to grasp is that finding WMD at this late a stage is actualy worse.

For it means it has almost certainly found its way into terrorist hands.

Better to pray it never existed.

Then just get rid of TBA and TBA2 for their stupidity.

Sadly Walker

[denoir 0]

So many people here were so sure that the US would plant WMDs in Iraq after the major battles subsided and nothing was being found. It just never happened.

There is still time

And it wouldn't be too surprising. Planting some stuff in the desert is much less of a deal than starting a war under false pretenses....

Anyhow, news: 41 US soldiers wounded in explosions

[ozanzac 0]

Walker, somewhere on that list, you might want to add that both Ms Rice and Mr Powell were quoted as saying on national TV mid-2001 that Iraq posed no threat to the western world or it's neighbours.

After 9/11, TBA convieniently forgot what they said, covered it up as much as they could, and fabricated evidence (such as the 45 min deployment of WMD's capability) to allow for the invasion of Iraq on the basis that Iraq had WMD's, that just two years earlier, key players of TBA denied they were a threat.

*Sighs* If only America had a revote back when Bush was 'elected'.

[Longinius 1]

A US chopper was just shot down in Iraq, near the city of Falluja. Not much info yet, but they said it was hit by grenadefire and then went down. I found the news on a Swedish site, but I reckon there will be more info on it in a bit.

[Gollum1 0]

@Hoboman:

WTF, why are you putting words in my mouth, "hoboman"?

I said they have a REASON FOR KILLING COALITION SOLDIERS, TO KICK THEM OUT OF IRAQ.

As to the ownership issue, I was replying to your opinion that you somehow "own" the country and the rebels should be "chased out".

Do I think it is FAIR to let the Iraqi people suffer from tyrants like Saddam? NO. Where did you get that ridiculous idea?

[Acecombat 0]

Walker, somewhere on that list, you might want to add that both Ms Rice and Mr Powell were quoted as saying on national TV mid-2001 that Iraq posed no threat to the western world or it's neighbours.

After 9/11, TBA convieniently forgot what they said, covered it up as much as they could, and fabricated evidence (such as the 45 min deployment of WMD's capability)  to allow for the invasion of Iraq on the basis that Iraq had WMD's, that just two years earlier, key players of TBA denied they were a threat.

*Sighs* If only America had a revote back when Bush was 'elected'.

What for ?

The americans will reelect him , whats the use of going through all the crap again .....

[walker 0]

Walker, somewhere on that list, you might want to add that both Ms Rice and Mr Powell were quoted as saying on national TV mid-2001 that Iraq posed no threat to the western world or it's neighbours.

After 9/11, TBA convieniently forgot what they said, covered it up as much as they could, and fabricated evidence (such as the 45 min deployment of WMD's capability)  to allow for the invasion of Iraq on the basis that Iraq had WMD's, that just two years earlier, key players of TBA denied they were a threat.

*Sighs* If only America had a revote back when Bush was 'elected'.

What for ?

The americans will reelect him    , whats the use of going through all the crap again .....

Hi Acecmbat and ozanzac

There is US presedential election next year indications are that failures in Iraq will be the key issue along with the failure to find Bin Laden.

For the UK our Primeminister is having problems keeping his party in line and the results of the Hutton enquiry are not even out. Many Labour voters are saying they will abstain if Blair is still leader of the party. So I think a visit from the men in grey suits is probably on the cards, say some time in June to September 2004. The backing and profile of the UKs Chancelor of the Exchequer has been increasingly seen in the media. He has been the best chancelor we have ever had. My only sadness is that he would no longer be running the UKs finances. If he were to take up the Primeministership then it would give him time to cement his position for the next elections.

Kind Regards Walker

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

Now my issue..

-Could the TBA pull the biggest scam of the century and when nobodoy expects it near the ellections,plant the WMD in Iraq..

So many people here were so sure that the US would plant WMDs in Iraq after the major battles subsided and nothing was being found. It just never happened.

1.) Something like this needs careful preparation. (after the latest fake proofs failed so miserably)

2.) ever played poker? Use the right card at the right time!

[theavonlady 2]

Now my issue..

-Could the TBA pull the biggest scam of the century and when nobodoy expects it near the ellections,plant the WMD in Iraq..

So many people here were so sure that the US would plant WMDs in Iraq after the major battles subsided and nothing was being found. It just never happened.

1.) Something like this needs careful preparation. (after the latest fake proofs failed so miserably)

There was never a definitive authorized claim that lasted for more than about a day or two before it was disputed and/or corrected.

Let's put things into proportion.

[walker 0]

Now my issue..

-Could the TBA pull the biggest scam of the century and when nobodoy expects it near the ellections,plant the WMD in Iraq..

So many people here were so sure that the US would plant WMDs in Iraq after the major battles subsided and nothing was being found. It just never happened.

1.) Something like this needs careful preparation. (after the latest fake proofs failed so miserably)

2.) ever played poker? Use the right card at the right time!

Hi Albert Schweizer

As I already said the card is unplayable as it means that terrorists will have had access to the WMD in the mean time. better to pray the WMD never existed in the first place.

While the political reasons for going to war would be justified; the cackhanded, inept way the process was started and carried out mean that TBA and TBA2 have failed in their war aims thus bringing the coalition nations to a higher degree of risk.

If your going to start a war you had better be sure you can finish it. Trying to do it on the Cheap as the US and UK have is bound to lead to problems. With the escalating degree of violence in Iraq the US needs to bring at least 4 times the amount of troops it has deployed. And those troops need to be peacekeeper trained troops. On the ground doing foot patrols. Not hiding in bunkers, tanks and helicopters. They need to be holding the ground not giving it up to the bombers.

So a draft of mature first responder types from the US Police, Fire, and Ambulance services is inevitable. All troops need training in Arabic to high degree of fluency as well as Iraqi Arab culture. How else can you access inteligence?

I dont live in the US but perhaps one who is there can tell me: Are there lots of adverts for recruiting and are they aimed particularly at first responders? In other words in police, fire and ambulance worker publications.

Kind Regards Walker

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

Now my issue..

-Could the TBA pull the biggest scam of the century and when nobodoy expects it near the ellections,plant the WMD in Iraq..

So many people here were so sure that the US would plant WMDs in Iraq after the major battles subsided and nothing was being found. It just never happened.

1.) Something like this needs careful preparation. (after the latest fake proofs failed so miserably)

There was never a definitive authorized claim that lasted for more than about a day or two before it was disputed and/or corrected.

Let's put things into proportion.

Lady, I am talking about the claims made before the war started. I dont mean the shaky dossier I mean the Iraq is reconstituting its nuclear-weapons program… Satellite photographs reveal that Iraq is rebuilding facilities at sites that have been part of its nuclear program in the past. Iraq has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes and other equipment needed for gas centrifuges, which are used to enrich uranium for nuclear weapons. We don’t know whether or not he has a nuclear weapon. He recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa, according to the British government

Faky faky faky! And he played that game for more than a few days. And last but not least it wasnt TBA that came up with the truth, it was the press. I just remember the african deal and the clearly FAKED signature!

[theavonlady 2]

Faky faky faky!

LOL!

I think it was more like goofy! goofy! goofy!

If you know what I mean.

I think intelligence stank and they blew it big-time.

Of course, this assumes that nothing has been gathering dust in the parking lot of the Damascus Drive In Theater for the last 6+ months.

Hey! I'm just postulating.....................

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

Quote[/b] ]With the escalating degree of violence in Iraq the US needs to bring at least 4 times the amount of troops it has deployed. And those troops need to be peacekeeper trained troops. On the ground doing foot patrols. Not hiding in bunkers, tanks and helicopters. They need to be holding the ground not giving it up to the bombers

Misconception. Take Israel for example. Increasing the amount of soldiers might have short-term effect. But wether the Iraq-mission is successful or not is decided by whether the US troops are considered as occupiers or peace-keepers.

Palestine is not such a bad example after all. The evil guys, without any doubt, are the fundamentalistic terorist organisations. But the palestinian civillian population sympathises because they feel occupied not protected! Kids and teenagers throwing rocks at tanks might soon not only happen in Israel, but also in Iraq. Watch and learn!

[walker 0]

Hi Albert Schweizer

I can not be bothered to go through this argument again so I will just post this answere to the same quesions put by Crazysheep you may wish to go back to that part of the thread so your up to speed on this bit.

Then if you make your critique replies to my quoted passage we will be advancing the argument.

Hi FSPilot

I hope the US generals are not underestimating Sadam as you are that is how they lost the vietnam war.

Plain facts about Sadam

He is brave

He is inteligent

He is cunning

He is vicious

He is brutal

He probably a psychopath at least one of his sons was.

He is evil

Facts about beating Sadam

Talk is cheap

War is not cheap

You cannot win geurilla war with tanks and air planes

You must own the ground by soldiers on each street corner

You loose face with civilians in an occupied country when you fail to achieve your aims.

When you start to loose face you percieved as a looser

People who back winners switch sides when they think your a looser.

You get peoples backs up when you are a foreigner wondering around telling them what they must do after you bombed the crap out of their country.

The US needs to get control of the seccurity situation in Iraq.

It needs at least 4 times as many troops as are there now.

These troops need to be infantry on the ground.

For that it is probably going to have reintroduce the draft.

Aims Failed

WMD not found

Sadam not Found

Security getting exponetialy worse

Services not working

Iraqi government not established

These aims have to be achieved and the security situation improved or the US and unfortunately the country I live in are going to have to go through a long drawn out Vietnam style war with tens of thousands of coalition casulties and hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians will die.

Pessimisticly Walker

You must own the ground by soldiers on each street corner

You loose face with civilians in an occupied country when you fail to achieve your aims.

I disagree there; I think winning public support is a better way of weakening resistance. If you have soldiers on every street corner, it leads to three problems:

1) Iraqis will feel their security is being invaded and begin to resent troops

Yes that is true in short term but they will also feel safer as there will be less crime and see my reply to point 3

2) It would be quite easy for Iraqis to take shots at random troops from inside a building then run away

Actualy no because there is a soldier on every corner you can close down streets meaning it is easier to catch the sniper. There is a secondary affect in that the resitance are prevented from moving weapons. There are going to be soldiers killed it is inevitable you just have to suck it up.

3) Mistakes happen in war; more troops present would mean more civilians killed in the crossfire.

Properly handled the soldiers can act as a conduit for inteligence and building a better relationship between the coalition and the civil population. This is the process the 101 Airborne and the UK Army are using. The main cause of civilian casulaties is wrong tactics and over reliance on technological weapons. Technology is great for intel or big wars but it just does not have the granularity to deal with a Guerilla war. The proper process is to swiftly form a cordon of the area of the attack. Invite all people to leave the area through a checkpoint with body search and chemical check for gunpowder residue. Conduct a house to house search in the area of the attack.

So while temporarily making it harder for the resistance, it will give the resistance more supporters; then there might be relatively large scale attacks on a few more isolated guardposts, and some carnage on the streets. This will only cause problems.

You are advocating giving up the land, that is when they own you. You sit in your secure bunker and have zero effect. To win you have to own the ground.

That means getting out, learning the language; how else do you know the intel? Learning the customs understanding the people round you. Then you will win over the people cause you are no longer the Alien invader. You are the guy down the street who's family photos they have seen and who helped you get a Job fixing the new power station or in the new factory making concrete.

This is after all the NEW purpose of the invasion after failing to find the WMD.

Kind Regards Walker

Kind Regards Walker

[Bordoy 0]

Plain facts about Sadam

He is brave

He is inteligent

He is cunning

He is vicious

He is brutal

He probably a psychopath at least one of his sons was.

He is evil

He is brave? i do slightly dis-agree with that, no i fully dis-agree with that, he ran, lost control of his troops. Now he sends out his suicide bombers, car bombers and the rest.