Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
I wasn't trying to derail anything. From what I saw of the Iraqi people, if money isn't involved, they just don't care. Now then, why should you help someone who chooses not to help themselves? Sure they'll "help" if they're getting money out of it, but that's the only reason they do it. Again, just my observations from my experiances.
If you need me, I'll be busy wiping the layers of dust off my dice.
Apart from not invading in the first place, I don't know if the outcome could of been much different. As soon as you got rid of Saddam a whole can of mega size worms was opened up it was too big a task for anyone.
My feeling of US forces, from what I've seen over the years, is that they great at bringing the "rain", but not so good at the follow up part. It seems to me it only takes a few "sneaky beaky" attacks and your forces snap, they want to take out city blocks / cities in response. which isn't great at making you friends. You also seem to take great offense if you aren't welcomed as liberating heroes, you get frustrated if people fail to thnakful for what you've done for them.
Us Brits have the experience of Northern Ireland, but Iraq is on a much bigger scale, so harder to deal with. Plus I believe we weren't getting clear messages from the politicians from home. You can also say that the Iraqi's are blame as well, especially when you consider the numbers. How many insurgents v general population? They could of all said, no, enough is enough and stood up / informed on them. This could of then led to the forces being able to sort out the electricity / water and other services.
Perhaps if the West had been genuine in it's intentions we would of been trusted more. In hindsight, and I don't know if it was done, wouldn't the sensible thing been to get the main representatives of the main factions together and said "look we know you don't want us here and don't like us, so what do we do about it?" Once everyone has vented, the negotiations can start. We expected Israel to take attacks on the chin so that peace talks can proceed, but we didn't do that ourselves.
Live your life that the fear of death can never enter your heart. Trouble no one about his religion. Respect others in their views and demand that they respect yours. Love your life, perfect your life. Beautify all things in your life. Seek to make your life long and of service to your people. When your time comes to die, be not like those whose hearts are filled with fear of death, so that when their time comes they weep and pray for a little more time to live their lives over again in a different way. Sing your death song, and die like a hero going home.
Lt. Rorke - Act of Valor
I can now be found on Facebook under the name of Wulfstan Design
Phryxis wrote:
It's a shame that people like to blame "our" decisions on Bush.
They blamed the fething weather on him... of course Iraq was all his fault.
It's as if he orchestrated, pushed, then ran into the ground the entire war! Come on, this is some of the lamest trolling I've ever seen, to pretend that iraq wasn't a war all of Bush and Rumsfelds making is simply putting your head in the fething sand.
----------------
Do you remember that time that thing happened?
This is a bad thread and you should all feel bad
Phryxis wrote:Would it provoke too much arguing if I were to suggest that pretty much ANY American President was going to go to war in Iraq after 9/11?
Don't know... I'm pretty sure it's wrong, though. Afghanistan was inevitable, because it was directly tied to 9/11. There were no ties between 9/11 and Iraq (although Bush liked to tie the two together as often as possible) so it wasn't as automatic a connection.
I would point to heavy non-partisan support he got heading into the thing as evidence that pretty much everyone wanted to go attack something.
It's a shame that people like to blame "our" decisions on Bush.
I think you're making a big mistake in assuming the level of bi-partisan support he received was an inherent state of affairs. Bush led the call to war, and given the mood at the time and the information presented by the administration people were happy to follow and afraid to oppose, but the causes and reasoning for the war came entirely from Bush and his administration. In the wake of 9/11 the President was claiming that Saddam had WMDs and represented a real threat to the world, and people followed.
At which point you ask yourself is another President would have viewed that same intel and have decided that Hussein had a WMD program that represented a real threat to the world. The answer is almost certainly 'no'.
Phryxis wrote:Under Saddam there was organization, a modicum of prosperity, and I think that the average Iraqi who was willing to shut up and do their job would be relatively happy. While all that was going on, Saddam was murdering huge numbers of people, probably more than are being lost to the current violence, and the country was generally poisoning itself with violence and oppression.
People talk about Saddam's death toll a lot, but they typically omit the fact that almost all the killings were during and in the wake of the Iran Iraq war, with another spike following the first Gulf War. When his power was established, he wasn't killing lots of people. This is by no means a defence of Saddam, he was a bastard, but the idea that loads of people would have died in the 2000s with Saddam at the helm is not true.
If you want to go about invading countries to stop murder go to Zimbabwe, or to the Sudan.
I also think the US deserves some credit for the generally altruistic mission it attempted in Iraq. I don't think it was executed especially well, nor was the outcome a great success, but it was more success than failure, and was done with good intentions.
I think the US should place a great deal of pride in the conduct of it's troops. They were by no means perfect, but peacekeeping is incredibly difficult at the best of times, and despite the incredibly poor pre-planning they completed the task assigned extremely well.
People like to screech about the warmongers, the military industrial complex, Halliburton and war profiteering, but at the end of the day, the war in Iraq was, at its core, a foolishly optimistic attempt to do good in the world.
Sufficiently stupid altruism is indistinguishable from evil.
While the plan was to create a wonderful democratic middle east, the big lesson was that people are complex, and don't work like grand world visions expect they will. Invasions based around grand visions will get loads of people killed and achieve little, whether the intent is altruistic or not.
CrashUSAR wrote:Because they(Iraqi citizens) don't give a damn about themselves.
Wow.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
SlaveToDorkness wrote:They blamed the fething weather on him... of course Iraq was all his fault.
No, people blamed him for appointing a man who gave an inadequate response to Hurricane Katrina. Which is very obviously different, and I refuse to believe you're so stupid you can't tell that. As such, I have to ask why you're happy to believe things you know to be nonsense.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2010/09/08 07:37:08
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
Because it's easier to blame them than admit any level of responsibility.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
LunaHound wrote:I cant ever imagine ( if there are ghosts and after life ) What is going on in the head of the Iraq civilian if they know thats how countries deals with them.
And what rage the ones still alive must deal with.
They listen to Bush talk about the issue, and never recognise the slightest fault, so they throw their shoes at his head.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
CrashUSAR wrote:Seb - Read my follow-up post, that in hindsight, I should have attached to my first.
I'm not sure it helped, dude. Are you claiming there's a greater level of altruism elsewhere in the world, a less mercenary approach? Do think that matters much at all to the problem compared to, you know, the inherent level of survival that kicks in when you're on your own in a war zone?
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2010/09/08 07:42:02
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
Seb - You raise a valid point. I go back to "advise and assist" at some point in the near to semi-near future. I'll update you all on the behavior of the Iraqi people (again, in my own opinion) then.
If you need me, I'll be busy wiping the layers of dust off my dice.
LunaHound wrote:Certainly doesnt that just proof how barbaric they are?
If a guy sent his army in to blew up a load of it up for reasons that were never really explained, and then held a press conference to talk about how well everything was going, throwing a shoe at him would be my least barbaric response.
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
Throwing the shoe was a very symbolic response. It's a HUGE insult to show someone the sole of your foot/shoe, you may was well be saying "you're lower than the crap beneath my feet."
If you need me, I'll be busy wiping the layers of dust off my dice.
LunaHound wrote:Certainly doesnt that just proof how barbaric they are?
If a guy sent his army in to blew up a load of it up for reasons that were never really explained, and then held a press conference to talk about how well everything was going, throwing a shoe at him would be my least barbaric response.
Kilkrazy wrote:Well that's true, but everyone who also supported it shares a part of the burden of guilt. That's why a lot of people are so defensive about it.
True, but it's international affairs, it's incredibly complex. Everyone gets stuff wrong all the time. What matters is learning from it, being honest about what really happened, and trying to make a better choice next time.
For what its worth, I was opposed to the war but still managed to be very wrong about the whole thing. I believed there were chemical weapons (I mean, what government would be so stupid as to make WMDs the reason for the war when they weren't going to find any once they invaded?) but felt it set a dangerous precedent for pre-emptive invasion. Abandoning the basic element of sovereignty would encourage other countries to militarise and build WMDs of their own.
Turns out I was wrong on both counts. Bush's government really was stupid enough to make WMDs the core reason, and didn't realise there might be a problem when they invaded and couldn't find any. But then the whole thing was such a debacle that it looks like no-one will be invading anywhere for long time without a really good reason (although I might be wrong on that count, the drums for an invasion of Iran are already beating...)
Automatically Appended Next Post:
CrashUSAR wrote:Seb - You raise a valid point. I go back to "advise and assist" at some point in the near to semi-near future. I'll update you all on the behavior of the Iraqi people (again, in my own opinion) then.
Cheers. I am reluctant to try and explain things to someone who's actually been there, and if your point is that what happens to the Iraqis from here is up to them, then I agree. I just don't think it's reasonable to expect huge levels of altruism and long term nation building vision from people who've been living day to day.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2010/09/08 08:37:29
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
ShumaGorath wrote:I'm ten thousand percent certain none of you read the article and I'm just as certain most of you never will.
I read the article. I also read a similar, less emotionally manupulative article in The Times last week. It was written better. Less corny.
Well I can't post that. Thats in the before time and it's on paper. I didn't find the article particularly emotionally manipulating personally. Whats so bad about it?
I dunno babe, I'm just not into the whole 'lying in bed sweltering, unable to sleep, waiting for the electricity to come back on so they could power their air conditioner' thing. I mean, what are we supposed to say? 'Woah, so life in Iraq is BAD? Well, I'll be damned...'
It's just... I dunno, I don't want to start a whole UK vs. USA thing because that's not my intention, but there seems to be an instinct to go straight for the heart-strings on your side of the pond, that sort of 'folksy' thing (see: Joe The Plumber). Maybe I'm just a repressed Brit.
Thats ok. IN the US is Its a left/right thing. Yellow journalism has been pulling at heartstrings since before the War of Northern Aggression. Its what we do. After all, won't someone think of the children!!!!
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Phryxis wrote:Is it me, or was it slightly anti-Obama?
Racist!
You're not thinking of the children!
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2010/09/08 12:07:08
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
LunaHound wrote:Seems like not many people that posted in the thread give a damn about the Iraq civilians.
Why is that?
Why should I? I don't give a gak about Canada. Why would I care about Iraq?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
LunaHound wrote:
sebster wrote:
LunaHound wrote:Certainly doesnt that just proof how barbaric they are?
If a guy sent his army in to blew up a load of it up for reasons that were never really explained, and then held a press conference to talk about how well everything was going, throwing a shoe at him would be my least barbaric response.
LunaHound wrote:Yes , and im done here before i get too emotional :'<
Why are you getting emotional?
Because some people's ego and pride , apparently is worth more than a stranger's life.
Get on your high horse much?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2010/09/08 12:13:21
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
Australia (Recently ravaged by the Hive Fleet Ginger Overlord)
CrashUSAR wrote:Throwing the shoe was a very symbolic response. It's a HUGE insult to show someone the sole of your foot/shoe, you may was well be saying "you're lower than the crap beneath my feet."
And here I was thinking it was some sort of friendly compliment.
Frazzled wrote:
LunaHound wrote:Seems like not many people that posted in the thread give a damn about the Iraq civilians.
Why is that?
Why should I? I don't give a gak about Canada. Why would I care about Iraq?
LunaHound wrote:
sebster wrote:
LunaHound wrote:Certainly doesnt that just proof how barbaric they are?
If a guy sent his army in to blew up a load of it up for reasons that were never really explained, and then held a press conference to talk about how well everything was going, throwing a shoe at him would be my least barbaric response.
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
Wolfstan wrote:
My feeling of US forces, from what I've seen over the years, is that they great at bringing the "rain", but not so good at the follow up part. It seems to me it only takes a few "sneaky beaky" attacks and your forces snap, they want to take out city blocks / cities in response. which isn't great at making you friends. You also seem to take great offense if you aren't welcomed as liberating heroes, you get frustrated if people fail to thnakful for what you've done for them.
Well it's a good thing you don't know a damn thing about US Forces then, cause your impression is dead wrong.
A nuke will let you go back in time and get rid of one slightly stupid President?
Would it provoke too much arguing if I were to suggest that pretty much ANY American President was going to go to war in Iraq after 9/11?
I would point to heavy non-partisan support he got heading into the thing as evidence that pretty much everyone wanted to go attack something.
It's a shame that people like to blame "our" decisions on Bush.
I would think so. It took a lot of hype and build up for the war to get started.We can also point to the heavy use of "SADDAM HAS WMDs" and other such sensationalist lines such as Saddam's industrial plastic shredder where he threw dissidents to his regime (which turned out to be completely false) probably drummed up support for the campaign which could have easily been avoided.
Throwing the shoe was a very symbolic response. It's a HUGE insult to show someone the sole of your foot/shoe, you may was well be saying "you're lower than the crap beneath my feet."
As an Arab myself, I always wondered why people always come to mystifying conclusions about the whole shoe throwing thing. Shoes are dirty, so I throw shoes at people I hate because of that. End of Story. It's like throwing rotten tomatoes in the west.
Or I'm just confused and throwing my shoe at someone in the US will get me a thank you?
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
Wolfstan wrote:
My feeling of US forces, from what I've seen over the years, is that they great at bringing the "rain", but not so good at the follow up part. It seems to me it only takes a few "sneaky beaky" attacks and your forces snap, they want to take out city blocks / cities in response. which isn't great at making you friends. You also seem to take great offense if you aren't welcomed as liberating heroes, you get frustrated if people fail to thnakful for what you've done for them.
Well it's a good thing you don't know a damn thing about US Forces then, cause your impression is dead wrong.
Cite examples to the contrary then. Wolfstan isn't saying that the US forces aren't good 'war fighters', he's saying that they don't have a great record in policing actions. I'm inclined to agree, and I'm not the only one.
All of western Europe
North Africa
Germany
Japan
South Korea
Bosnia
Kosovo
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
Frazzled wrote:All of western Europe
North Africa
Germany
Japan
South Korea
Bosnia
Kosovo
And keep in mind to that alot of these places there is joint occupational history with other organizations, whether it is the UN or the Allies.
Allies and UN at best irrelevant, at worst a hindrance.
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
