so where is the stability in iraq?

[wu_trax]

35 attacks per day doesnt look like anything at all of the so called us-strategy works out.
just wondering. at least bush cant blame the un now

[G_frog]

western nations in "terrible foreign policy" shocker.

[ParraCida]

western nations?

[wu_trax]

Originally Posted by ParraCida

western nations?

well, there were quite a few in the 'axis of willing' or whatever it was called.
the funny thing is that the war went perfect for the us, and now they compeltly ****ed up the peace, because they dont seem to have any concept whatsoever.
they even want to bring in 10,000 turks, for even more quality entertainment. why only annoy two groups within the population, if you can start a war with all three of them?

i dont see any way how this whole thing could work. if they really do something against the terrorists (or whatever you want to call them) they only create more enemies. if they dont they fail to increase the security situation in iraq.

[G_frog]

This situation is the result of lots of western nations (yeah, broad brush) conducting foreign policy on the basis of local and/or international political expediency for decades (or centuries if you want to take that view). The US and the Uk might have the dirtiest hands, but i don't think anybody is innocent of at least tacit complicity.

[Marilyn Manson]

They have only been there for a couple of months, although you can, and I do, question the logic behind the idea's behind the occupation and whether they will eventually results in any sort of 'normality', if you can use such a word, for Iraq.

[Kurashima]

Originally Posted by wu_trax

well, there were quite a few in the 'axis of willing' or whatever it was called.

Have you ever seen the list?

It includes , but is not limited by , such world superpowers as


The Cook Islands
Azerbaijan
Turkmenistan
Upper Volta

etc etc etc

Pretty much any nation that wasnt in Dubbya's pocket said "no" to signing it.

[wu_trax]

Originally Posted by Kurashima

Have you ever seen the list?

It includes , but is not limited by , such world superpowers as


The Cook Islands
Azerbaijan
Turkmenistan
Upper Volta

etc etc etc

Pretty much any nation that wasnt in Dubbya's pocket said "no" to signing it.

yes, they dont really count, but there were also spain and italy, not to forget uk.
(although none of them would ever have come up with the idea of starting a war, that was bush alone.)

(sorry, my grammar becomes worse every day, dunno why )

[W]

They don't have much choice at this point. It's not like they can bring back Saddam to restore unity.

[wu_trax]

Originally Posted by W

They don't have much choice at this point. It's not like they can bring back Saddam to restore unity.

no, if they retreat now there would most likely be civil war in iraq and EVERYONE would blame the us for it (which would be correct).
i dont see any way for anything.

[Bunga]

A good first step to solving it would be bringing in 10000 policemen or allowing the soldiers already there to tackle "civilian" issues, such as theft, murder, rape. Then hold a real fake election and grant the government a bit of power, arm the native policeforce and fix the infastructure.

Once there is a semblance of law and order, and people have food, water and electricity, things might just calm down a tad, at least. And the more they calm down the more they will allow the government (both native and USA) to restore "normality" thereby creating more calm, etc.

I wonder why they don't give it a try, rather than sell all of Iraq's oil to US oil companies. Oh yeah, I forgot.

Money.

[wu_trax]

bush doesnt have money to bring in more troops and i doubt the soldiers could handle civil affairs because a) they dont have training for that and b) they are already bussy protecting themselfs.
another funny thing is: they had 400,000 men who know they country, who could have provided security and who had some experience in holding the country under control. the us send them home, now these very same people commit attacks against the us.

[MrL_JaKiri]

The UK ones can handle civil affairs, and have done so admirably thoughout.

The US soldiers are just rubbish.

[Nusselt]

it'd have been lol lol LOL if paul wolfwhislte had been hai karated by those missisles

[wu_trax]

looks like they at least have a plan on how to rebuild the country

[Tietäjä]

Afghanistan is degenerating back into a drug-producing Al Qaeda farm.

[Tactitus]

Originally Posted by wu_trax

looks like they at least have a plan on how to rebuild the country

Friable asbestos?! There's your WMD!

[Bloomers III]

don't blame america! blame exrtremists!

[Insane. Badger]

wu_trax in America bashing shocker

[W]

Originally Posted by Insane. Badger

wu_trax in America bashing shocker

Insane Badger in ridiculing anti-american sentiment total NON-shocker.

Or something.

[acropolis]

apparently you all don't realize that more attacks that are getting deadlier and more organized means that the enemy is getting "more desperate" and therefore we are clearly winning.

hail to you, dear leader!

anyway i don't see a valid complaint that bush has been unwilling to spend the money necessary to stabilize iraq.

[Bunga]

When did you get deleted IB? How could I miss something like that?

[wu_trax]

Originally Posted by Tietäjä

Afghanistan is degenerating back into a drug-producing Al Qaeda farm.

they already retook 1/3 of the country, so much for the democratic future of afganistan. give them 1-2 more years and they will hang kazai and his goverment in the streets of kabul. nice try though. either do things or dont. everything between is just a waste of resources.
we send even more soldiers now, but where do we send them? in an area that already is relativly safe and they are not even allowed to do something against the drug production. pure brilliance.dead soldiers would be bad for the public opinion and who gives a damn about afganistan anyway?

[Intrepid00]

I am telling you, carpet bomb the whole ****ing middle east with atom bombs and pave it over. World's larget parking space.

[Texan]

Originally Posted by Bunga

A good first step to solving it would be bringing in 10000 policemen or allowing the soldiers already there to tackle "civilian" issues, such as theft, murder, rape. Then hold a real fake election and grant the government a bit of power, arm the native policeforce and fix the infastructure.

Once there is a semblance of law and order, and people have food, water and electricity, things might just calm down a tad, at least. And the more they calm down the more they will allow the government (both native and USA) to restore "normality" thereby creating more calm, etc.

I wonder why they don't give it a try, rather than sell all of Iraq's oil to US oil companies. Oh yeah, I forgot.

Money.

The United States is not making a monetary profit out of Gulf War II. Where do you get these ideas? Oh, never mind. You just make them up.

[Texan]

Originally Posted by MrL_JaKiri

The UK ones can handle civil affairs, and have done so admirably thoughout.

The US soldiers are just rubbish.

Hmm, UK has been pacifying countries for centuries. I hope the UK is better at it than the United states.

[wu_trax]

Originally Posted by Texan

The United States is not making a monetary profit out of Gulf War II. Where do you get these ideas? Oh, never mind. You just make them up.

the usa doesnt, but all of bushs and cheneys friends do, on the costs of the iraqies and the us-tax-payers.

[Bunga]

Originally Posted by Texan

The United States is not making a monetary profit out of Gulf War II. Where do you get these ideas? Oh, never mind. You just make them up.

I know the US is not making a profit. I never said they were making a profit. Where did you read that?

Oh never mind. You made it up.

Back on track, and without the personal insults you are very good at making (congrats btw), what I said and meant was that the reason the USA is not actually fixing the infastructure of Iraq is that it would cost them even more money. Since the USA has only relativley recently begun any non-loss operations in Iraq, they are loathe to spend even more money there.

[Perle]

Originally Posted by Texan

The United States is not making a monetary profit out of Gulf War II. Where do you get these ideas? Oh, never mind. You just make them up.

dont you just love the sight of iraqees dancing on burning american military vehicles??

It really warms my heart!!!

[wu_trax]

im still waiting...
but as bush said it, it very well worth it. after all these attacks are just carried out by the evil saddam supporters (who become more and more every day, but who cares about such details?)
at least the usa now has a plan on how to make iraq finally free and democratic: they just copy israels methods: bomb random house, threaten civilians and imprison and humilate random people. yes, this is the way to go, the people of iraq will thank you for this.
go usa !!!

[Ste]

I remember in the days before the war, me and you wu_trax were practically lone voices on GD protesting against the war.

Isn't it nice to be proved right!

[wu_trax]

Originally Posted by Ste

Isn't it nice to be proved right!

given the cirumstances and all those iraqies suffering, no, not really. but that doesnt mean i can say that i was right (and right about afganistan aswell, as we can see now. the taliban retook most of the south, the security situation is terrible and noone gives a damn)

[I am Idler]

going to war was the right thing to do really..

they didnt really "live" in iraq, so the idea itself was great. people died, but hey...

its the iraqi people who are simply to "Allah'ed" to understand that all will be good if they stop strapping TNT to their bodies and believing in 1000 virgins when they go to heaven

[wu_trax]

most of them dont. usually they use normal weapons to shoot at the us-troops

[I am Idler]

well, fair enough.. but surely you see my point.. they arm themselves to throw out the americans because they threw out one of the worlds worst dictators..

its amazing what a government propaganda machine can do to a entire population.. (no so does america comment tho, its a bit to obvous )

[Radical Edward]

Originally Posted by Texan

Hmm, UK has been pacifying countries for centuries. I hope the UK is better at it than the United states.

they weren't proper countries when we took them over because they didn't have flags or a queen.

[I am Idler]

Brazil is a proper country

and they got a president!!!"!

[MrL_JaKiri]

Originally Posted by Ste

I remember in the days before the war, me and you wu_trax were practically lone voices on GD protesting against the war.

This isn't the GD I remember, that mocked everyone who supported bush.

[Aviendha]

Originally Posted by Texan

Hmm, UK has been pacifying countries for centuries. I hope the UK is better at it than the United states.

Ah yeah, how could i forget, ofcourse the UK has a history of 'pacifying' countries. Nothing to do with conquering, invading, beating their enemies, add new lands under their ruling. I remember a British-Danish war, thank god the Brits wanted to pacify the danish eh, those savages Or China and Japan for example, at least the Spanish dragged themselves down there under the blanket of missionary work, or did the Brits hid anglican priests in the hulls of their cargo-ships?

I believe the Brits are quite proud of their historical dominance on the matter of warfare, don't let them hear you call them 'Pacifiers'

[I am Idler]

Originally Posted by Aviendha

I believe the Brits are quite proud of their historical dominance on the matter of warfare, don't let them hear you call them 'Pacifiers'

I remember Norwegians killing english by the thousands, taking their land and half of Europe with it..

we were first! ner ner ner

[wu_trax]

Originally Posted by I am Idler

well, fair enough.. but surely you see my point.. they arm themselves to throw out the americans because they threw out one of the worlds worst dictators..

do you see my point? these people dont think of saddam as an evil dicator. he gave them power, money and so on. they want him. and it was quite obvious from the beginning that these people exist. but did the us have a plan? no, lets just go in and bomb the shit out of everyone. after that people will be happy and there is nothing more for us to do. most naiv policy EVER.
and now, what does the wise american military do? they bomb houses and imprison people, just to make sure that there is even more support for these people. if it wasnt for the danger of turning the whole middle east into an anti-western warzone i would laugh about this stupidity.

[Aviendha]

Originally Posted by I am Idler

I remember Norwegians killing english by the thousands, taking their land and half of Europe with it..

we were first! ner ner ner

Lol true, now we need an Italian to reply alike, and the Waves will be a bit less Ruled for a minute.

Bring Back Thatcher !! (Falklands anyone?)

[djbass]

I think that it mostly broils down to anti-us sentiment. Clearly the troops are needed there still to try and keep the peace (not that it's been overly effective so far), however understandably they just want their country back and under their own control rather than that of America.

I know they've already tried to re-establish an Iraq lead law enforcment but there seems to be too few of them to be effective. If they can manage to do that then I feel people would be a bit more at ease including possibly some of the terrorist cells themselves, any remaining threats could then be dealt with locally.

=[DJ Bass]=

[Vermillion]

I was more or less for the war in Iraq, largely because I accepted the WMD argument (And I work for the intelligence community!) and given that argument, I felt that the deposing of Hussein was a necessary Evil.

I also wrote extensively about my concerns with the post-war Iraq, and the lack of any coherent plan for civil control or dealing with the aftermath.

Now it has reached a point where the public opinion in Iraq is turning steadily against the United States ( http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2003/11/12/iraq_cia031112 ) due to their failure to provide the basic tenants of a modern society: Peace, Order and good government. Much of Iraq lives in a state of anarchy, and no real attempt has been made to establish an effective civil administration.

In the meantime; crime is rampant, murder is common profiteering and the black market have now subsumed the normal economy and the normal boundaries that encapsulate any society, even Hussein's Iraq, are either fading or absent.

Much of the country is without power, or has irregular power, and even potable water is scarce in some areas of the country, which never happened under Hussein. Bush declared that all oil profits would be put in trust for the Iraqi people, but Iraq has sold far less oil since the war then in the same period of time before the war, when there were sanctions in place.

Yes, people have freedom from governmental tyranny, but that has been replaced by ordinary criminal tyranny, which is far more frightening to the average folk.

Please remember that to the ordinary Iraqi, they never had any encounter with the Iraqi police, and to them oppression was some far away thing that happened to political activists. They had power, clean water and a daily newspaper, and could read outside at night without being killed or their shoes. The current state of affairs is in every way far worse for this typical Iraqi family, so no wonder they are turning against the seeming completely ineffective US presence.

Lastly, as if that was not bad enough, Iraq has become a hotbed for foreign nationals with an axe to grind against the US. Mujahadin, anti-US fanatics, likely even al Quaida have sent volunteers, equipment and possibly even expertise to fight the 'Great Satan' in the quagmire of occupation. Thus, pipelines are blown up, roadside bombs go off, military presence increases, freedom diminishes, and the Iraqi now feel just as oppressed as under Hussein, but this time by a foreign power...


The US has to do something, and do it soon, because right now we are seeing just the tip of the iceberg. Things will get far worse before they get better, and the US may find itself in the position of the USSR in Afghanistan, suffering an open wound which depletes morale, funds and public opinion in equal measure.

[wu_trax]

Originally Posted by Vermillion

The US has to do something, and do it soon, because right now we are seeing just the tip of the iceberg. Things will get far worse before they get better, and the US may find itself in the position of the USSR in Afghanistan, suffering an open wound which depletes morale, funds and public opinion in equal measure.

the question is what can they still do? they send home iraqs entire army after the war, an organization that could at least have provided some basic security at low costs. now these people are fighting against them.
the harder the us now acts against the terrorists / freedom fighters the more support they will get by the iraqie public.
i dont see any easy way out for them anymore.

[Marilyn Manson]

The post-war situation would have been difficult under any circumstances, but the past and continuing incompetence of The US in reconstruction is making the task much more difficult than it had to be.

[wu_trax]

now the us bombs southern bagdad, thatll teach them

[W]

Originally Posted by Marilyn Manson

The post-war situation would have been difficult under any circumstances, but the past and continuing incompetence of The US in reconstruction is making the task much more difficult than it had to be.

You know the real problem?

Budgetting incompetence. Helping the Iraqi is going to cost _alot_ more money than they had planned for.

[MrL_JaKiri]

Originally Posted by W

You know the real problem?

Budgetting incompetence. Helping the Iraqi is going to cost _alot_ more money than they had planned for.

Plus american soldiers don't have the right frame of mind for being a police force.

[Marilyn Manson]

Originally Posted by W

You know the real problem?

Budgetting incompetence. Helping the Iraqi is going to cost _alot_ more money than they had planned for.

Practically ever resource is going to cost tons more than was planned for, in so far as there was any plan; time, effort, money, manpower - everything.