Um yeah....Iraq

[Nick]

I'll preface this with the obligatory "It would be nice to have been proven right except for the hundreds of thousands of innocent deaths."

Seriously though, does anyone have any ideas on Iraq can now be saved/fixed?

The current Administration appears to think that the troop surge will in some way bring the country under control before July, paving the way for a much celebrated pullout sometime next year. This is obviously retarded.

As everyone knows, the religiously based civil war/sectarian violence will continue for at least a decade or two at this point, unless we have some sort of ...oh I dunno....dictator in charge.

A complete pullout now won't go down well with the people who actually have a desire to see America deemed successful, and equally so with people who have the naive hope that occupation will provide some stability.

It's well known by now that most of Iraq wants the occupying forces out now, not later, as they seem to think they only exacerbate the problem.

The alternative? A lawless, corrupt, violent warzone.


Woopdefuckingdo.

Personally I see no way out of this absolute clusterfuck whatsoever except a painfully slow diplomatic process (decades long - and that's me being optimistic). So I ask, since America created this fiasco, do any Americans have any suggestions that could speed up the process a little bit?

I don't really think it makes any difference whether the troops pull out now or in a year or 6 months ago, the damage was done the minute they set foot in the Middle East (there is however a danger that a prolonged American occupation will only hurt the US moreso than it already has in the long run).

Has the Iraq war made America any more free of Islamic "terror"?

What will the troop surge achieve? Surely it will be meaningless after a pullout, since insurgents and freedom fighters will simply wait until us "goodies" leave before they enact such horrific violence on whichever faction they deem to be the infidels. The troop surge is futile imo.

Has "liberating" Iraq actually made the Iraqi's better off? (No imo - easily backed up by actually looking at Iraq for 10 seconds).

Are Americans better or worse off now for supporting it?

Does anyone else think this whole debacle has pretty much sealed the deal on whether or not the US will face serious attacks (maybe even Nuclear?) in the coming decades?

Why should people "support the troops" if they are fundamentally opposed to the war? It seems quite a ridiculous thing the US has been caught up in.

Do Americans realise what a fucking awful mockery they have made of their entire belief system/nature/attitudes to everything outside their own country?

Why do people care more about the Soldiers than some random Hazeem Ikbal that got tortured to death in the most excruciating way just because he was a Sunni/Shiite? They are both victims. If anything, at least the soldier deliberately put himself in the retarded position of going to an unnecessary warzone, whereas Ikbal had the unfortunate bad luck to have been born in a country decimated by Imperialism where vigilante religious psycho groups have been given the perfect opportunity to kill innocent people.

I know we have an above average intelligence level on VV (/flex) (some moreso than others of course ) and am interested in seeing whether or not all those countless posts 3/4/5 years ago whereby anyone who was against the Iraq war was proclaimed a "fucking moron" are still percieved as valid today when faced with the reality on the ground.

Ps - I was right

[Nick]

For the guy who still supports the Iraq war, why?

I won't just piss down your throat or anything, feel free to post why you feel that way

[Winnow]

I haven't voted yet.

Things are looking up over there. Stay the course.

Exit strategy:

Use some nukes before leaving. Make the border between Iran and Iraq glow in the dark so the two nations can't fight or help each other.

Sterilize families of any Iraqi that can't operate an oil rig.

Don't take threats of Jihad. Anyone that looks at an American without a shit eating grin on their face, shoot that face.

For each American that dies in Iraq from here on out, wipe a city in Iran off the map until they get the hint to stop supporting terrorism. Target all religious buildings. We need to weaken Iran anyway, this will be a more satisfying way to do it.

Rename the entire European continent France, because you're all a bunch of pussies! (except Poland and a few Spanish and English)

Since the world hates us so much, it's time to crackdown and kick some ass.

[Nick]

[Arborealus]

Things are looking like a civil war there...

Really I don't think anything will improve as long as we unilaterally occupy Iraq (no I'm not forgetting Poland). We need to engage the UN and any Muslim nations who will actually work with us meaningfully and sort out a multilateral force to hold off all out chaos...

Hrmmmm yeah that seems pretty hopeless too...I think we are straight up fucked and I don't have any good solution now. As long as it looks and feels like a US occupation I think it will continue to escalate. If we could get a muslim multinational peacekeeping force involved we might have a chance...but hopes for that are nil...I think any peacekeeping force that is compose of primarily westerners is going to be seen as occupying...

I believe that if anything we are a higher priority terror target than before this asshattery. I think the whole muslim world bristled at Afghanistan but kind of knew it was just. Then we attacked a country for no particular reason other than an obvious grudge.

Americans are certainly worse off for it having happened on many levels (Economic, Diplomatic, etc.)

Supporting the troops is simply supporting people who were sent by and largely against their will into a hellish place by an idiot for what amounts to a crusade for cash. They aren't, for the most part, evil people. They were misguided and misled and abused by their superior. Clearly their were some really sadistic bastards and criminals over there. But I'll bet there were about the same number of saints sent over (at least by the military.) The "private contractors" for the CIA I think were probably all sadistic bastards...

I wouldn't say we care more for the soldiers than for the innocents who got caught up in the middle of it all. But you have to feel for anyone who gets thrown into that meat grinder. Most people in the Army are poor bastards who have fewer options and they hope the get in and out before a war occurs and get a bit of money for school, starting a business etc. The army is a volunteer force but not necessarily happily employed. Defending one's country is an honourable desire. Unfortunately sometime we get idiot commanders in chief. Clearly the poor Iraqis caught in the middle had the worst of it.

[Nick]

I agree with pretty much 100% of what you say mate.

Really I don't think anything will improve as long as we unilaterally occupy Iraq (no I'm not forgetting Poland). We need to engage the UN and any Muslim nations who will actually work with us meaningfully and sort out a multilateral force to hold off all out chaos...

I guess this is about the only realistic choice left. Getting the rest of the Middle East on board to talk legitimately and possibly put forces down on the ground for any hope of this working properly.

The main danger of that is us pre-empting a proxy war between Saudi Arabia and Iran.

Fucking hell, there is literally no way out of this fiasco.

Why didn't they just leave it all alone and concentrate on Afghantisan

That's not to say Afghanistan succeeded, it's a complete fiasco as well (although of course not as bad as Iraq). I recently heard about a women hanged to death for Adultery after being tried by the "official" government for adultery. Some humans really are testing my optimism in terms of what constitutes a human these days. It seems like we have "humans" and "fucking moronic apes" to deal with

Fuck Sharia law. Fuck religion actually, it's a right bastard. Never did anyone any good.

[kyoukan]

I know we have an above average intelligence level on VV (/flex) (some moreso than others of course )

give yourself a big old pat on the pack for being such a clever little boy!

[Spang]

The US is still occupying Japan and Germany. I don't think the US will ever leave Iraq. One day, just like Japan and Germany, Iraq will be a decent place to live.

In the long run, I think a lot of good will come of this. I'm for the war because I don't think leaving will improve the situation. As I said the last time we had this same exact discussion, we need more boots on the ground - atleast 300,000 troops.

I'm looking forward to the same exact thread in 3 to 4 months!

[vn_Tanc]

We should let the country dissolve into 3 distinct entities controlled by Shia, Sunni and Kurd respectively.

That way the US can occupy the 2 with the oil fields and leave the 3rd alone. You get slightly less war and occupy 2 countries for the price of 1 which will make the monkies who think like Winnow all the happier.

Really, I can't see any losers here.

[Funkmasterr]

I'll preface this with the obligatory "It would be nice to have been proven right except for the hundreds of thousands of innocent deaths."

Seriously though, does anyone have any ideas on Iraq can now be saved/fixed?

The current Administration appears to think that the troop surge will in some way bring the country under control before July, paving the way for a much celebrated pullout sometime next year. This is obviously retarded.

As everyone knows, the religiously based civil war/sectarian violence will continue for at least a decade or two at this point, unless we have some sort of ...oh I dunno....dictator in charge.

A complete pullout now won't go down well with the people who actually have a desire to see America deemed successful, and equally so with people who have the naive hope that occupation will provide some stability.

It's well known by now that most of Iraq wants the occupying forces out now, not later, as they seem to think they only exacerbate the problem.

The alternative? A lawless, corrupt, violent warzone.


Woopdefuckingdo.

Personally I see no way out of this absolute clusterfuck whatsoever except a painfully slow diplomatic process (decades long - and that's me being optimistic). So I ask, since America created this fiasco, do any Americans have any suggestions that could speed up the process a little bit?

I don't really think it makes any difference whether the troops pull out now or in a year or 6 months ago, the damage was done the minute they set foot in the Middle East (there is however a danger that a prolonged American occupation will only hurt the US moreso than it already has in the long run).

Has the Iraq war made America any more free of Islamic "terror"?

What will the troop surge achieve? Surely it will be meaningless after a pullout, since insurgents and freedom fighters will simply wait until us "goodies" leave before they enact such horrific violence on whichever faction they deem to be the infidels. The troop surge is futile imo.

Has "liberating" Iraq actually made the Iraqi's better off? (No imo - easily backed up by actually looking at Iraq for 10 seconds).

Are Americans better or worse off now for supporting it?

Does anyone else think this whole debacle has pretty much sealed the deal on whether or not the US will face serious attacks (maybe even Nuclear?) in the coming decades?

Why should people "support the troops" if they are fundamentally opposed to the war? It seems quite a ridiculous thing the US has been caught up in.

Do Americans realise what a fucking awful mockery they have made of their entire belief system/nature/attitudes to everything outside their own country?

Why do people care more about the Soldiers than some random Hazeem Ikbal that got tortured to death in the most excruciating way just because he was a Sunni/Shiite? They are both victims. If anything, at least the soldier deliberately put himself in the retarded position of going to an unnecessary warzone, whereas Ikbal had the unfortunate bad luck to have been born in a country decimated by Imperialism where vigilante religious psycho groups have been given the perfect opportunity to kill innocent people.

I know we have an above average intelligence level on VV (/flex) (some moreso than others of course ) and am interested in seeing whether or not all those countless posts 3/4/5 years ago whereby anyone who was against the Iraq war was proclaimed a "fucking moron" are still percieved as valid today when faced with the reality on the ground.

Ps - I was right

I am not going to even bother posting on the rest of this - but the one bolded comment above is ridiculous. The reason people should "support the troops" is because they are fighting for their country. Whether you agree with it or not (hell, im sure a lot of people fighting there don't agree) but they are doing their job all the same and are getting shot at while people like you think they have the right to belittle them.

[Cartalas]

Id rather fight them on in their country then ours.

[Tristinn]

Thanks for your input Mr. Hannity.

[Nick]

I am not going to even bother posting on the rest of this

How come?

but they are doing their job all the same and are getting shot at while people like you think they have the right to belittle them.

Your argument is that people should support the troops because they are doing their job and getting shot at?

And what's wrong with belittling troops? Why do people seem to think that it's pretty much unthinkable to criticize troops? Why should I give them any extra sympathy or hold them up to some sacred ordered respect over say, a child who's been bombed by them?

[Midnyte_Ragebringer]

No.

I no longer feel we should be there. It would be fine if the people of Iraq started a revolution for freedom and democracy and we came in to assist the fight, but Bush used the fervor of 9/11 to go attack a dictator who his daddy didn't get.

It could have ended well, but with the terrorists seemingly being like roaches who get meaner and more hatefilled with each passing moment, it just doesn't seem to have been a good prospect...in hindsight.

America really fucked up on it's chance to cash in on the worlds sympathy from 9/11. I'd like to see us pull out and fortify our borders and terrorist identification tactics to try and weather the storm of terrorists who will try and duplicate 9/11 over the next 10 years. Maybe even do more covert action on terrorist cells in other countries. But, not a full on war.

Hopefully some new blood in the government will make this happen.

[Soreali]

I am not going to even bother posting on the rest of this

How come?

but they are doing their job all the same and are getting shot at while people like you think they have the right to belittle them.

Your argument is that people should support the troops because they are doing their job and getting shot at?

And what's wrong with belittling troops? Why do people seem to think that it's pretty much unthinkable to criticize troops? Why should I give them any extra sympathy or hold them up to some sacred ordered respect over say, a child who's been bombed by them?

I wasn't going to post on this because I'm kind of torn between the two sides but this has to be answered.

Our soldiers are the ones who are putting their lives on the line so we can sit here in our nice comfy homes/offices and say how much we(Not I) hate Bush and the war is fucking pointless and waste of time. Without them, there'd be no freedom here. Now I know we have a lot of folks from other countries here who don't really have the same mindset but as an american, who has one of his closest buddies in Afghanistan right now defending my country and my right to sit here and post this message, I fully support him and all of our troops over there keeping that from coming over here.

I know that might not make much sense and after I read it again I'll probably edit it to clarify it a little more. But basically what I'm trying to say is without our troops to defend our country, we'd be just as fucked as they are.

[miir]

The US is still occupying Japan and Germany. I don't think the US will ever leave Iraq. One day, just like Japan and Germany, Iraq will be a decent place to live.

In the long run, I think a lot of good will come of this. I'm for the war because I don't think leaving will improve the situation. As I said the last time we had this same exact discussion, we need more boots on the ground - atleast 300,000 troops.

I'm looking forward to the same exact thread in 3 to 4 months!

There's a huge difference between "having troops stationed in" and "occupying" a country.

I can't believe you're even trying to draw a comparison between Iraq and Japan/Germany.

Iraq had not declared war on the US. They did not initiate any hostile action towards the USA. There was little-to-no military resistance when the US rolled into Iraq. It was a hostile invasion and occupation of a sovereign nation that had no intention or desire for military conflict.

It can be argued that outside of the green zone in Baghdad, the US has very little (if any) control over the country.



In case anyone was keeping track, the Muslims are now 2-0 when they face-off against the so called superpowers.
They drove the Russians out of Afghanistan and they have embarrased the mighty American military machine in Iraq.

[miir]

Our soldiers are the ones who are putting their lives on the line so we can sit here in our nice comfy homes/offices and say how much we(Not I) hate Bush and the war is fucking pointless and waste of time. Without them, there'd be no freedom here. Now I know we have a lot of folks from other countries here who don't really have the same mindset but as an american, who has one of his closest buddies in Afghanistan right now defending my country and my right to sit here and post this message, I fully support him and all of our troops over there keeping that from coming over here.

You should be fucking outraged that your government is even sending soldiers to Iraq and Afghanistan.

Nothing they have done there has made your country safer.
They are not protecting your freedom.
They are not fighting terrorism.
They are not fighting for your or anyone elses freedom.

They are fighting and dying for your governments agenda to install a US friendly regime in Iraq.

[Spang]

Because there were no conflicts in those countries before the US decided to station troops there.

[Winnow]

In case anyone was keeping track, the Muslims are now 2-0 when they face-off against the so called superpowers.
They drove the Russians out of Afghanistan and they have embarrased the mighty American military machine in Iraq.

It depends on what you think our real goals are in the Middle East. It's certainly not about spreading democracy. Our goal is to keep the oil flowing and to maintain instability in the region. The last thing we want is the Middle East, minus Israel, united under a single leader. That's why we can't leave Iran as it is with Iraq so beaten down.

The west has always meandered into the Middle East and caused chaos. It's what we do.

The U.S. has failed in it's strategy, post steam rollings, but unless the oil stops flowing from the Middle East, they haven't won anything as that's all we care about.

[Soreali]

Our soldiers are the ones who are putting their lives on the line so we can sit here in our nice comfy homes/offices and say how much we(Not I) hate Bush and the war is fucking pointless and waste of time. Without them, there'd be no freedom here. Now I know we have a lot of folks from other countries here who don't really have the same mindset but as an american, who has one of his closest buddies in Afghanistan right now defending my country and my right to sit here and post this message, I fully support him and all of our troops over there keeping that from coming over here.

You should be fucking outraged that your government is even sending soldiers to Iraq and Afghanistan.

Nothing they have done there has made your country safer.
They are not protecting your freedom.
They are not fighting terrorism.
They are not fighting for your or anyone elses freedom.

They are fighting and dying for your governments agenda to install a US friendly regime in Iraq.

Like I said, I dont agree with the fact they're in Iraq. But the minute some radical muslims made an attack on US soil, you bet your ass I was and still all for sending our troops over there to make them regret it. By going to Afghanistan they've stopped more attacks like 9/11 from coming here. By going to Afghanistan they've fought and brought down a terrorist regime. By going to Afghanistan they are protecting mine and every other american here to live in a safe enviornment(for the most part) and argue with you on this board..

Now notice the pattern there. Saddam may have been a douchebag but I really dont feel we have any reason to be there still. The whole "Funding terrorism thing" may have been or may not have been true.. we'll never really know. The whole WMD thing turned out to be a fucking sham as it is right now.. I'm not buying the whole "Buried in sand, shipped to Iran" crap. That being said, I don't really believe we should still be there because for the most part its our fault that this radical muslims are blowing themselves up..

[Nick]

Our soldiers are the ones who are putting their lives on the line so we can sit here in our nice comfy homes/offices and say how much we(Not I) hate Bush and the war is fucking pointless and waste of time. Without them, there'd be no freedom here. Now I know we have a lot of folks from other countries here who don't really have the same mindset but as an american, who has one of his closest buddies in Afghanistan right now defending my country and my right to sit here and post this message, I fully support him and all of our troops over there keeping that from coming over here.

All evidence suggests that the soldiers actions are in fact making your comfy home less safe. Why would you support that?

I don't buy into the fact that anyone here is safer just because there are troops in Afghanistan.

I think we could also spend hours debating whether or not Afghan's is actually "free" at all.

This "fight them over there so we don't fight them here" soundbite really has becoming embarrasingly popular. It's not even true. It's not like some crazy Muslim army would somehow materialise in Ohio or Pittsburgh if the soldiers came home from Iraq.

If you're for the war I can at least understand why you would support the troops. However, if you are against it it seems impossible to think that you could both support the troops yet be against their actions. It's compartmentalising at its worst.

[Soreali]

Because they aren't the ones who chose to go to war. They didnt just grab their guns and gear one day and say "Fuck it, lets go start some shit I'm bored". They were given the order to go. So, I can't fault them or hold it against them. They knew what they were getting into when they enlisted and its what they were trained to do. So to say "The soldiers actions are in fact making my comfy home less safe" is a load of shit. It's the government giving out the orders, they're doing what they were trained to do and following them.

[Nick]

The fact that the soldiers are only following orders does not change the reality that their actions are arguably endangering the USA.

How is that "shit"? It's the reality of the situation. Are soldiers absolved of personal responsibility just because they are soldiers? If so, what the fuck?

[Kilmoll the Sexy]

The fact that the soldiers are only following orders does not change the reality that their actions are arguably endangering the USA.

How is that "shit"? It's the reality of the situation. Are soldiers absolved of personal responsibility just because they are soldiers? If so, what the fuck?

Yes....it does absolve them of being responsible for anything they did within the "rules" of war. The individual soldiers did not all just throw a kegger in the barracks and decide it would be a greta idea to go blow some people up. The only way a military is able to function is of they have unwavering dedication and faith in their leaders. They follow orders because failure to do so would result in the death of them and their squads when faced with combat. They get no say in what they do or where they go.

this is not to say that the individuals that would be responsible for illegal and heinous acts should be respected.....those few should be paying with their lives if convicted.

[Winnow]

How is that "shit"? It's the reality of the situation. Are soldiers absolved of personal responsibility just because they are soldiers? If so, what the fuck?

U.S. soldiers follow the orders given to them down the line of command from elected officials on down to their commanding officers. There's no reason to hate the troops and you're a fucking asshat throwback to the Vietnam era if you haven't figured that out. You, not being a U.S. citizen, basically just need to bend over and take whatever the U.S chooses to shove up your ass, but Americans can use their votes to change things as they see fit. It's a slow process and creating a chaotic situation by hating the grunt on the frontline isn't going to solve anything. We have no need for an NRA or to throw stones and molotov cocktails in the United States. Americans either need to enjoy their cheap (relatively speaking) oil or get off their asses and demand alternative energy from their candidates as a top priority and maybe 30 years from now things will change.

[miir]

Like I said, I dont agree with the fact they're in Iraq. But the minute some radical muslims made an attack on US soil, you bet your ass I was and still all for sending our troops over there to make them regret it.

Over where?
I don't think any of the people involved in the 9/11 attacks was of Iraqi background. The majority of them were Saudi, if I'm not mistaken.

By going to Afghanistan they've stopped more attacks like 9/11 from coming here. By going to Afghanistan they've fought and brought down a terrorist regime. By going to Afghanistan they are protecting mine and every other american here to live in a safe enviornment(for the most part) and argue with you on this board..

I fail to see the how dumping troops into Afghanistan (supposedly to catch Bin Laden) stopped terrorist attacks.
OK, granted there have been no attacks on american soil in the past 5 and a half years... but where is the correlation? How many terrorist attacks on american soil occurred in the 5 and a half years previous?

Now notice the pattern there.

I fail to see the pattern.
Unless you think that giving muslim fundamentalists American targets to kill in the comfort of their homeland helps secure your safety.
Invading their countries and killing their people only fosters more hatred towards americans.
If a moderate muslim's children/family/friends get killed in an american rocket attack it pushes them closer to becoming a radical. Having nothing left to live for is pretty compelling motivation to strike back at those responsible. Your government is creating more terrorists.
Exactly HOW does that make you safer?

[Nick]

U.S. soldiers follow the orders given to them down the line of command from elected officials on down to their commanding officers. There's no reason to hate the troops and you're a fucking asshat throwback to the Vietnam era if you haven't figured that out. You, not being a U.S. citizen, basically just need to bend over and take whatever the U.S chooses to shove up your ass, but Americans can use their votes to change things as they see fit. It's a slow process and creating a chaotic situation by hating the grunt on the frontline isn't going to solve anything. We have no need for an NRA or to throw stones and molotov cocktails in the United States. Americans either need to enjoy their cheap (relatively speaking) oil or get off their asses and demand alternative energy from their candidates as a top priority and maybe 30 years from now things will change.

What a load of horseshit.

[Wulfran]

I generally agree with your assessment of Iraq, Miir, but I disagree with this:

I fail to see the how dumping troops into Afghanistan (supposedly to catch Bin Laden) stopped terrorist attacks.
OK, granted there have been no attacks on american soil in the past 5 and a half years... but where is the correlation? How many terrorist attacks on american soil occurred in the 5 and a half years previous?

By taking military action in Afghanistan and removing the Taliban, Al-Qaeda has essentially lost their largest "safe haven". As well, troops in Afghanistan have been able to engage AQ and have killed/captured some of their leadership over the past 5 years. Its disruptive to their agenda and forces them to be at least partially reactive instead of just being able to embark on whatever activities they like, when they like.

That doesn't mean everything is safe and good because bin-Laden obviously still has other bases to operate from, resources at his disposal, etc. The Taliban is still fighting to regain control of the country, and may well provide that haven again if NATO and company withdraw and allow them to. Until the Taliban is either defeated or metamorphoses into being a legimate political entity (and not provide aid to groups like Al Qaeda), the fight will continue in Afghanistan.

[Funkmasterr]

U.S. soldiers follow the orders given to them down the line of command from elected officials on down to their commanding officers. There's no reason to hate the troops and you're a fucking asshat throwback to the Vietnam era if you haven't figured that out. You, not being a U.S. citizen, basically just need to bend over and take whatever the U.S chooses to shove up your ass, but Americans can use their votes to change things as they see fit. It's a slow process and creating a chaotic situation by hating the grunt on the frontline isn't going to solve anything. We have no need for an NRA or to throw stones and molotov cocktails in the United States. Americans either need to enjoy their cheap (relatively speaking) oil or get off their asses and demand alternative energy from their candidates as a top priority and maybe 30 years from now things will change.

What a load of horseshit.

No, what is horseshit is what you and miir keep spewing in this thread. The fact of the matter is that your opinion doesn't matter - just the facts. This means your opinion of whether or not we are supposed to be there or your OPINION of whether or not anything is safer or your OPINION of anything else related do not mean a fucking thing.

The fact is the people in the military are doing their job, taking orders and thats it. They have no control over that - many of them didn't even know they would be in iraq when they first joined. The fact is that they are doing something that most people don't have the fucking balls to do during any time of conflict.

What do you think would happen if everyone said they didn't agree with Iraq and didn't enlist? There would have been a draft, and people would have went unwilling - then you assholes would have really been spraying your diarrhea(sp?) all over this forum.

[Lalanae]

Against it then, against it now, although I'm still on the fence about whether withdrawing troops at this point will make things better or worse. It's such a fucking mess we created over there.

As far as the troops, the troops who keep their head's down and follow orders (provided they aren't orders that violate codes of conduct) I sympathize with and support. Most of them are from lower-class families where there are little options. They join the military as a way to better their lives. They don't have the option of not participating without making their lives (and in many cases their families lives) a bigger nightmare. Its just not economically feasible for them.

The troops who go over there and act like a bunch of cowboys make me sick, but I'm not going to lump them all into that category.

[Xatrei]

I never supported the Iraq invasion, so there's not really an option in this poll that matches my position. For the record, I'm a U.S. Army veteran that served in the early 90's in a combat arms role. Thankfully, I never had to go into combat, but I would have without reservation if I was called upon to do so. When I signed up, I understood that I might be called upon to do things by my government with which I may not agree. I'm not against military action when it's justified, but that was certainly not the case with our current involvement in Iraq.

I believe that it was a mistake of gargantuan proportions, but the reality is that we're there, and we have an obligation to try to fix the mess that we've created. I don't think that the U.S. is doing anything to fix the situation currently, and I doubt we will as long as the right-wing holds as much influence as it does currently (they need to lose the executive and several more seats in both houses of congress). I believe that the only solution for this situation is a diplomatic one, and that will take considerable time to achieve. Military meddling will only prolong the mess we've created.

The invasion of Afghanistan is a different issue entirely. The Taliban government of Afghanistan was providing a safe harbor for al-Qaeda, and there was more than sufficient justification in taking military action. We've managed to have a significant disruptive impact on their organization and ability to pursue their goals. We should have been focusing on this region for the last several years instead of allowing ourselves to be distracted by Iraq. As a result, the Taliban and al-Qaeda have both managed to significantly reconstitute their organizations. In fact, I'm convinced that our occupation of Iraq has driven more people into their fold either as direct participants or as sympathizers.

[Kilmoll the Sexy]

I fail to see the how dumping troops into Afghanistan (supposedly to catch Bin Laden) stopped terrorist attacks.
OK, granted there have been no attacks on american soil in the past 5 and a half years... but where is the correlation? How many terrorist attacks on american soil occurred in the 5 and a half years previous?

Since 1983 there have been 5 fairly large terrorist attack directed against US government entities and 2 more on US soil directly targeting the WTC. Five of those attacks came while your ole pal was getting blowjobs in the Oval Office between 1993-1998. The last one came 9 months after GWB was sworn into office......now I am no statistical fucking genius, but I am kind of leaning towards you shutting the fuck up.

[Markulas]

I'm not if I ever had an ounce of support of the war. The rational reasoning for going to war was never there. The reasoning to go to Iraq in the first place boggles me. Iraq was pretty much void of terrorist groups against the US, but now we have decade long (and it'll be much longer than that) war on "terror". What should have happened was a quick and multilateral action towards al-Qaeda to show that terrorist groups will be shut down. Instead, we have a tireless campaign against an enemy that we dont even know.

The support for the war is at 32% in this country, yet we barely can get half of congress to debate on whether we should even be there still. What's so sick about this continued occupation is that we did not even see this coming. No one planning this foresaw a continued aggression in Iraq.

Bush: "I'm driven with a mission from God. God would tell me, "George, go and fight those terrorists in Afghanistan." And I did, and then God would tell me, "George, go and end the tyranny in Iraq" And I did".

Hell even Bush won't admit of fighting terrorists in Iraq in 2003, but now for some reason there are. And does anyone else using God as an agrument for war just like medieval or jihadist?

[Arborealus]

You have to wonder who briefed them on how this would go down. Or more likely how they heard what was said to them. In what world does a power vacuum in a country with 3 tribes all of whom hate each other resolve itself quickly and peaceful. I saw this end game from day one and said as much then. God must have given the administration some rose coloured glasses.

[Nick]

No, what is horseshit is what you and miir keep spewing in this thread. The fact of the matter is that your opinion doesn't matter - just the facts. This means your opinion of whether or not we are supposed to be there or your OPINION of whether or not anything is safer or your OPINION of anything else related do not mean a fucking thing.

The fact is the people in the military are doing their job, taking orders and thats it. They have no control over that - many of them didn't even know they would be in iraq when they first joined. The fact is that they are doing something that most people don't have the fucking balls to do during any time of conflict.

What do you think would happen if everyone said they didn't agree with Iraq and didn't enlist? There would have been a draft, and people would have went unwilling - then you assholes would have really been spraying your diarrhea(sp?) all over this forum.

Feel free to get involved in the discussion Funk, but for gods sake lets keep this nonsense to a minimum.

[Siji]

Americans can use their votes to change things as they see fit.

Sort of like electing a new president and then that person not actually becoming president?

Right.

[Funkmasterr]

No, what is horseshit is what you and miir keep spewing in this thread. The fact of the matter is that your opinion doesn't matter - just the facts. This means your opinion of whether or not we are supposed to be there or your OPINION of whether or not anything is safer or your OPINION of anything else related do not mean a fucking thing.

The fact is the people in the military are doing their job, taking orders and thats it. They have no control over that - many of them didn't even know they would be in iraq when they first joined. The fact is that they are doing something that most people don't have the fucking balls to do during any time of conflict.

What do you think would happen if everyone said they didn't agree with Iraq and didn't enlist? There would have been a draft, and people would have went unwilling - then you assholes would have really been spraying your diarrhea(sp?) all over this forum.

Feel free to get involved in the discussion Funk, but for gods sake lets keep this nonsense to a minimum.

Thats exactly what I did sir, half of the shit you and miir (and other posts i didnt bother reading as well, im sure) are saying in this thread makes me sick to my stomache, and by no means am I going to honor it with any kind of retort.

Also, my opinion hasn't changed since any of the last 75 threads made about this, just like no one elses has.

[Nick]

What exactly qualifies as "the shit you and Miir are saying"?

And why/how/what do you disagree with?

[Fairweather Pure]

Where's the option for "Never did"?

[miir]

What exactly qualifies as "the shit you and Miir are saying"?

And why/how/what do you disagree with?

Logic and rational thinking make him sick to his 'stomache'.

I think maybe because we are not american, we are not entitled to have an opinion on their hostile invasion and occupation of a sovereign nation.

[Kilmoll the Sexy]

Noooo.....I think it is more that you have no respect for military people that volunteer for a job and then are sent somewhere they don't want to be, fighting and dying for peole they may not even like.....and nitwit political experts like you two schmucks that know everything post their little thoughts about how they are just over there for fun and excitement to kill babies and innocent little grandmothers.

You two clowns would be the last people I should expect to really get it though. Nick would last about 18 seconds in the military before they tossed his scrawny ass out and I think Miir would just get pummeled by his platoon like Pyle in FMJ.

[Funkmasterr]

What exactly qualifies as "the shit you and Miir are saying"?

And why/how/what do you disagree with?

Read your own posts in this thread. I would have to re read them to be sure, but I can say with a fair amount of confidence I do not agree with a single thing you have said. And yes, what Kilmoll said is the biggest part of it.

Yes I am able to distinguish the difference (there is obviously a big one) but had you two been my fathers age, you would have been one of the people protesting Vietnam and spitting on soldiers that came home - effectively making him feel like shit about what he did when it should have been the other way around.

[miir]

Noooo.....I think it is more that you have no respect for military people that volunteer for a job and then are sent somewhere they don't want to be, fighting and dying for peole they may not even like.....and nitwit political experts like you two schmucks that know everything post their little thoughts about how they are just over there for fun and excitement to kill babies and innocent little grandmothers.

You two clowns would be the last people I should expect to really get it though. Nick would last about 18 seconds in the military before they tossed his scrawny ass out and I think Miir would just get pummeled by his platoon like Pyle in FMJ.

What the fuck are you talking about?
I haven't made a single disparaging remark about american soldiers in Iraq or Afghanistan. My disgust is directed soloely at your government sending troops over there to be slaughtered for no good fucking reason.

Learn to read, idiot.

[Sylvus]

Why should people "support the troops" if they are fundamentally opposed to the war? It seems quite a ridiculous thing the US has been caught up in.

You should "support the troops" because they're doing a pretty-much thankless job. A job that doesn't allow them to selectively decide what they'll take part in. They sign up to do something that I would never do, and at times throughout history they have taken part in conflicts that it was very important that they be around for. I support the troops because I know it is important that they be there when there is a legitimate threat to my freedom or safety. I support the troops because they don't have a choice which conflicts they'll be a part of, they have to go where they're told.

I am fundamentally opposed to us being in iraq. There is no reason whatsoever for a single American, Iraqi or anyone else to die for the reasons that we've been given for this war. It has been based on bad intelligence or downright lies without the appearance of any sort of strategy. It has done not one thing to make us any safer, if anything it has done the opposite.

But that's not the fault of the troops. They are doing what they were told to do, just as they would if they were fighting a legitimate threat to our way of life. I will respect and support them in either case, and appreciate what they are doing for me. I think it's pretty heinous the way troops are treated by our government, from the low pay they receive to the protection they don't to the medical care and disability that seems way below the standard I would find acceptable. Mostly it's the disregard that the higher-ups seem to have for human life that I find deplorable.

Supporting the troops and loathing the administration (or officers, but in this case it's the administration) that orders them into battle are not mutually exclusive.

What the fuck are you talking about?
I haven't made a single disparaging remark about american soldiers in Iraq or Afghanistan. My disgust is directed soloely at your government sending troops over there to be slaughtered for no good fucking reason.

I think the disconnect probably comes from Nick's position in his first post in this thread (that I am referencing here), and your agreement with Nick about our government. I think others might be taking that as agreement on all of his points, including not supporting the troops.

[vn_Tanc]

The slight derail has been caused by this kind of bullshit:

The fact that the soldiers are only following orders does not change the reality that their actions are arguably endangering the USA.

How is that "shit"? It's the reality of the situation. Are soldiers absolved of personal responsibility just because they are soldiers? If so, what the fuck?

Of course it absolves them of personal responsibility. Stop being a twat.

The last thing anyone wants is soldiers who question their orders and prevaricate. When they are told to go somewhere and shoot at people the correct response should always be "sir, yes sir" and as long as that is the case they deserve our unstinting admiration no matter what we think of the politics of any given war.

What we now laughingly call "collateral damage" is always a part of war but again it's not the soldiers' fault unless they go on a nutjob massacre spree like those few that have been convicted of just that. Occasionally soldiers have been given immoral orders that they should have refused to carry out (check obvious historical references) but catching civilians in the crossfire of a normally-prosecuted war is not such an instance. Nor is it a war crime. It's just sad.

[kyoukan]

Invoking Godwin and pointing out that most German soldiers weren't members of the 3rd Reich. Do you support them too? What about African soldiers who are ordered to hack up women and children from a different tribe with machetes? They are just following orders. What is the difference between being ordered to do that and following orders when you pinpoint bomb some family's house because the CIA told you that the omg terrorists were in there? The end result is a bunch of corpses.

Every American soldier that gets blown up and every one that gets shot brings the USA's generally fat and somewhat moronic population clued into the fact that there is a whole bunch of dying and violence going on over there and it needs to stop. Unfortunately so far the response has been "SEND MORE!" So maybe it is not having the intended effect. Although Vietnam has shown us that they generally don't catch on very quickly. TV is very distracting. Once enough of them fucking die, however, eventually they will abandon the place grumbling about how they don't deserve to be free.

I support keeping a military force occupying Iraq because now that there is no one in charge (he was hung), leaving yet another power gap is going to start a civil war that will see a lot more innocent Iraqis dead. America is solely responsible for the current mess, but sadly they are far too stupid to solve it. Eventually they will beg the UN to step in and solve it for them while they foot the bill for it. Paying for George W. Bush's legacy for the next 40-50 years. I'd like to say that it will be a valuable lesson to the country about invading sovereign nations to enrich their country's leaders, but it won't be. Even fucking dogs learn lessons faster than Americans.

[vn_Tanc]

Invoking Godwin and pointing out that most German soldiers weren't members of the 3rd Reich. Do you support them too? What about African soldiers who are ordered to hack up women and children from a different tribe with machetes?

The percentage of card-carrying nazis in the german armies of WW2 is a debate still going on. In general I have no moral problem with the actions of the Wehrmacht (professional soldiers generally doing their jobs) but despise the SS (nazi fanatics). This is the historical point i alluded to in my post - I was trying to avoid invoking Godwin's

Hacking up women with Machetes is of course an order no soldier should follow.

[Sylvus]

Ooh, what a juicy little troll! I await the response of the mouth-breathers.

The percentage of card-carrying nazis in the german armies of WW2 is a debate still going on. In general I have no moral problem with the actions of the Wehrmacht (professional soldiers generally doing their jobs) but despise the SS (nazi fanatics).

Right. I personally don't agree with what the germans were doing, but of course my point of view is different than someone living in germany at the time. Plus my view isn't tainted by german patriotism/jingoism, while it probably is at least a little toward the US. They probably either thought that their soldiers were protecting them, in which case you can't fault the soldiers, or they felt similarly to how I feel now in that their soldiers were following orders and that they should feel contempt for the people giving those orders, in which case you similarly cannot fault the soldiers. I must admit my historical ignorance here, what was the penalty for defying orders in the german military?

Hacking up women with Machetes is of course an order no soldier should follow.

Sexist! That should read "Hacking up [civilians] with Machetes..."

[Arborealus]

This does bring up a question that may need clarification. The rulings at Nuremberg indicate that a soldier does not abrogate legal or moral responsibility and must disobey an unlawful or immoral order.

But what level order? An order from an immediate superior for specific action? An order from the commander in chief for a generally immoral action? Or some intermediate level?

Once it became clear that we invaded Iraq on at best "bad intelligence," at what point does an individual soldier's culpability begin?

[cadalano]

insubordination for the german military in WW2 would be execution afaik until later in the war when defeat was looming and manpower was too valuable to throw away. at that point it was more common to be discharged from your unit and sent to work detail doing things like minesweeping, digging graves and trenche. Hunger & starvation could be expected because supplies went to the fighters. If it was an officer in defiance often his subordinates would also be punished. thats just based on my knowledge of the russian campaign but eh


as for Nazi's in the german military... an individual in the Wermacht was not allowed to be a member of a political group and they couldnt even vote. Most of the leadership was conservative and favored the old republic, although much of that leadership was replaced with appointee's from Hitler after he came to power. Either way, when Hitler's many personal directives ended up being disastrous for the military... whatever sympathy they had for the socialists was diminished. In fact most of the dissenters and german resistance members within her own military came from the Wermacht

a'course none of that means they didnt blatantly commit war atrocities. my point is that they dont need to be Nazi's in order to be vilified. In fact, since a common attitude was that of distaste towards their government its even more shocking and wrong that they did so many terrible things.