Author Topic: New Homes for Iraqis.... (Read 814 times)

muckmaw · « **on:** March 19, 2003, 12:12:29 PM »

Here's a thought that can help spread goodwill from America to the Iraqi people, and show them that we are not fighting them, but thier tyrant.

How expensive can it be to build a simple home in Iraq?

A pound of Potatoes costs 45 cents over there.

What about starting a program, similar to Carter's Habitats for Humanity, for the Iraqi's displaced during the war?

I mean, people are going to lose their houses. I hope not, but chances are, they will.

So we collect some money, send it to Jimmy Carter, ans ship him over there to set up a home depot.

This is what I do when it's slow at work.

Please forgive this mindless post.

midnight Target · « **Reply #1 on:** March 19, 2003, 12:14:53 PM »

You wanna build homes out of potatos?

Hangtime · « **Reply #2 on:** March 19, 2003, 12:14:53 PM »

we could send 'em all the perrier and evian sittin on the docks here..

if they freeze it, they can make igloos.

babek- · « **Reply #3 on:** March 19, 2003, 12:20:04 PM »

Send them Freedom Fries - I am sure that they will be very thankful and forget all the bombs then...

muckmaw · « **Reply #4 on:** March 19, 2003, 12:26:11 PM »

are you serious, Hang?

People are really boycotting that stuff? Or were you just making that up.

Look, we're not asking them to forget the bombs, but whats worse; bombing their house (hopfully they will have left) and saying, "too bad, so sorry" or bombing their house, and rebuilding it?

I know I would not be AS pissed off. Actually, there is so much toejam wrong with my house, I might welcome a government sponsored demolition/rebuilding. I wonder if I can get it moved to Baghdad in time....hmmm....

batdog · « **Reply #5 on:** March 19, 2003, 12:41:09 PM »

There's a heavy equipment operator in Israel that will help...

batdog · « **Reply #6 on:** March 19, 2003, 01:42:37 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Oedipus
IMO that's a really good idea and one that would go well to mending the US's reputation.

"are you serious, Hang? "

Probably. BTW, anyone know if, or what, products of the USA that the French boycotted after President Eisenhower left them to fry at DienBienPhu?

Oed

I heard its deoderant....and they still are

Rasker · « **Reply #7 on:** March 19, 2003, 01:45:00 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Oedipus
IMO that's a really good idea and one that would go well to mending the US's reputation.

"are you serious, Hang? "

Probably. BTW, anyone know if, or what, products of the USA that the French boycotted after President Eisenhower left them to fry at DienBienPhu?

Oed

well, we had been financing about 75% of their war effort in Indo-China, but we werent about to drop nukes to bail them out, tho Admiral Radford, Chairman of the JCS recommended that.

Raubvogel · « **Reply #8 on:** March 19, 2003, 01:56:45 PM »

I'm sure there will be plenty of available holes for house foundations.

Puke · « **Reply #9 on:** March 19, 2003, 10:06:28 PM »

Fighting to keep imperialistic France in power in Indochina is not the same as supporting a indigenous S Vietnaman striving for democracy while being invaded by a communist country.

Hangtime · « **Reply #10 on:** March 20, 2003, 10:30:21 AM »

americans, flying resupply during the seige.. died at DienBienPhu.

don't recall seeing any french support during khe sanh.

diddly the french.

boycott vichy water.

straffo · « **Reply #11 on:** March 20, 2003, 10:45:16 AM »

James McGovern and Wallace Buford were civillian no ?

Toad · « **Reply #12 on:** March 20, 2003, 11:06:31 AM »

"Left them to fry"?

You MUST be kidding. As pointed out, we were giving the French HUGE amounts of aid, both military and civilian oriented at that time.

What exactly are you suggesting that we failed to do?

Did we fail to fight the battle of Dien Bien Phu FOR them? They picked that place, the chose the fight... against a WHOLE LOT of advice not to do so from both within and without their military establishment.

Have you ever delved into Dien Bien Phu in depth? Somebody did indeed leave those troopers to fry... but it wasn't the US.

Toad · « **Reply #13 on:** March 20, 2003, 11:35:29 AM »

The entire strategy was flawed from the beginning and there were French commanders that tried to point that out. Putting troops at the bottom of a bowl-shaped river valley, about 10 miles long with troops and supplies basically only able go get in from the air was a plan doomed to fail. They did have a chance to pull out IIRC before things got too far but they continued to reinforce instead.

The opposing forces were close, as well. There were no "smart" weapons; those B-29 and CV aircraft had their limitations. Bomb close enough to help and it's certain you'd have had "friendly fire" casualties as well.

You contention is that we should have provided the air assets requested? Can you provide any sort of argument that it would have made a difference tactically? That it would have changed the final outcome of the battle?

IIRC, the French asked for nukes delivered by air too. Do you think we should have done that?

Put yourself in Ike's shoes; he was a respected military commander. Do you think maybe he evaluated the situation and could see no way for the US to truly make a difference once the French had decided to hold DBP at "all costs"?

Is your contention that we should have engaged anyway, even if we thought the battle was inevitably a lost cause?

Toad · « **Reply #14 on:** March 20, 2003, 11:53:16 AM »

AN ANALYSIS OF THE FRENCH DEFEAT AT DIEN BIEN PHU

A good, relatively brief overview of why it happened the way it did.

AUTHOR Major Harry D. Bloomer, USA