Author Topic: What's next Yanks?  (Read 2436 times)

Offline NUKE

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8599
      • Arizona Greens
What's next Yanks?
« Reply #30 on: June 27, 2003, 11:16:27 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Boroda
I admire your media, and it's ability to manipulate public opinion. Even if it's free as you tell me ad nauseum - it's like an "opium for the people", to reduce the pain and make the world a happy idiot's daydream, simple and clear and easy.

:( [/B]


"Our" media is the world's media..... we have access to whatever the rest of the world has access to. You think you have a media source that we don't and that it  is somehow more truthful?


"Blues leaves in Russia, tough born in the US-Say"

Offline Fishu

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3789
What's next Yanks?
« Reply #31 on: June 28, 2003, 04:20:44 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Gunthr
One more thing. A lot of the people who say they hate America and call Bush a POS would be like that EVEN IF AMERICA HADN'T LIBERATED IRAQ. It goes with the territory.


Never ever say 'who' 'hate america' 'call bush a pos' in same sentence.
Since thats totally wrong way to say things.
I don't think theres many on these boards who 'hate america'


Nuke,

They have reporters with better imagination.

Offline StSanta

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2496
What's next Yanks?
« Reply #32 on: June 28, 2003, 05:48:51 AM »
Hey dudes, don't confuse me with Boroda or some of the other more extreme people on this board.

Like Eagler, who says 'shut up coz we number one we be bellybutton kickerz yaaaah we no have no problems never we always do right' :D



Give it time. Worked in Germany and Japan, but that is comparing apples to oranges. Two totally different geopolitical situations. One was after aggressive war supported by the population which was eventually throughoutly defeated, where both sides showed they'd not care too much about enemy casualties (nuke sorta proves the point; we want this war won now, and we want peace now - or else). After that war the population of say japan was included in the 'losers' bit, thanks to their active and adamant support for the armed forces. The situation in Iraq is very different. Here the liberated Iraqis are themselves victims. Lots of other differences I won't go into.

And Afghanistan Udie, is a mess still. US has some control in Kabul, and while it is not very much reported to, tribal rivalry is rampant with lots of small skirmishes and the occasional assassination. Hardly a stable country, and hardly one where one can say the US is in firm control. Iraq and Afghanistan also have some noticeable differences - including the speed at which a provisional government was formed.

Thing is, Iraqis don't see any progress, they don't hear about it. They have some hopes about the distant future, but what stares them in the face is the possibility of having their country run by Americans indefinitely. To an Arab that is a very humiliating thought. And all the evidence points in that direction if you're of an Arab mindset. No visible steps towards provisional government is equalled to US wish to keep the status quo. Read just about any Arab newspaper editorial if you do not believe me.

What I fear ist hat casualties will mount and the US will be forced to pull out before the job is done properly. This is why there needs to be visible progress.

No knee jerk reactions please. Think it through and gimme a decent answer, I deserve that at least. *Stay out of our business' isn't valid - you're in Iraq, if you do not stay out of Iraq's business, neither will I business. And your presence and doings in Iraq is Iraq's business beyond your own. Man, my logic is bulletproof -  'business by proxy' argument it shall be called! Sucks to be caught up like that eh? :D
System: Kill: 'outta our business argument' killed by Santa :D

'America is number one'. Doesn't mean the US never have failed to achieve their goals. The US does really well at large scale conflicts. There's more problems when it comes to 'insurgency wars', as Vietnam proved. So, this argument fails because the US being number one is not a guarantee (or a decent argument) that things will work out.

'Give it time' is a reasonable answer. It begs the question, however; how to keep the insurgency and casualties so low that the US public won't start demanding 'bring back our GI's'?

Offline Dowding

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6867
      • http://www.psys07629.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/272/index.html
What's next Yanks?
« Reply #33 on: June 28, 2003, 06:04:50 AM »
If you think Afghanistan is a model of stability and a good measure of success in re-building a country...
War! Never been so much fun. War! Never been so much fun! Go to your brother, Kill him with your gun, Leave him lying in his uniform, Dying in the sun.

Offline Toad

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18415
What's next Yanks?
« Reply #34 on: June 28, 2003, 07:15:22 AM »
Say, Dowding....... your country has loads of experience in stabilising and rebuilding other countries after military conquest...

how long should it take?
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!

Offline GRUNHERZ

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 13413
What's next Yanks?
« Reply #35 on: June 28, 2003, 07:17:00 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Toad
Say, Dowding....... your country has loads of experience in stabilising and rebuilding other countries after military conquest...

how long should it take?


LOL :)

Offline _Schadenfreude_

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2036
What's next Yanks?
« Reply #36 on: June 28, 2003, 07:23:48 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Toad
Say, Dowding....... your country has loads of experience in stabilising and rebuilding other countries after military conquest...

how long should it take?


Couple of hundred years - oh and you ALWAYS get kicked out in the end.

Offline GRUNHERZ

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 13413
What's next Yanks?
« Reply #37 on: June 28, 2003, 07:27:44 AM »
Oh yes, of corse we mean to colonize Iraq.... :rolleyes:

Offline Toad

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18415
What's next Yanks?
« Reply #38 on: June 28, 2003, 07:36:16 AM »
Maybe he just means the British model might not be the most applicable in this case Grun.  ;)

It may be really hard to get an "official" estimate of how long this may take.
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!

Offline Dowding

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6867
      • http://www.psys07629.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/272/index.html
What's next Yanks?
« Reply #39 on: June 28, 2003, 08:06:33 AM »
You'll find I was referring to Udie's implied point that Afghanistan was A-OK:

"Haven't heard anybody complaining about afgan and that's been almost 2 years now."

Is that ok by you? Next time I'll email prior to posting, just to point out the bloody obvious clarifications and save BBS server space.

And BTW, it takes a good long while to stabilise a country after conquest. Your comparison of Iraq with British colonial conquests made centuries ago is very glib; however, by implication Iraq is a colonial conquest. Given that is a very unpopular view with you in the past, I'll simply conclude it was cheap shot.
« Last Edit: June 28, 2003, 08:12:46 AM by Dowding »
War! Never been so much fun. War! Never been so much fun! Go to your brother, Kill him with your gun, Leave him lying in his uniform, Dying in the sun.

Offline _Schadenfreude_

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2036
What's next Yanks?
« Reply #40 on: June 28, 2003, 08:07:50 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Oh yes, of corse we mean to colonize Iraq.... :rolleyes:


Perhaps not, however it would seem that the Iraqi's would disagree with you.

Do you think that casualty rates of the current levels would have an effect on the run up to the Presidential election?

I only ask this as long term low intensity conflict can be extremely sapping for a modern democracy.

Offline Lance

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1316
What's next Yanks?
« Reply #41 on: June 28, 2003, 08:53:08 AM »
This is just in my circle of friends and family, who run the gamut from pretty conservative to pretty liberal, but I don't hear anything like "Oh ****, we've got ourselves into another Vietnam" regarding either Iraq or Afganistan.  Most are disturbed by the lack of WMD evidence, and most of them who supported the war are starting to question whether it was necessary or in our best interests.   That may have an effect on the election, but as for a perception that this is becoming anything like vietnam -- well, its just a long ways off still.

Hell, I was very much against the war, and I think we've got to stay over there till we get a government in place that can stand on its own two feet.  The absolute worse possible outcome of this would be for Iraq to become a radical, fundamentalist muslim theocracy that funnels its considerable resources into terrorist causes.  If just left to chance, it is very possible that this would happen, and the new Iraq would be much, much more of a threat to the U.S. than the old Iraq ever was.

Anyway, I think it would take something like the tet offensive to really shake up the American public.  Several hundred U.S. troops getting killed in a coordinated attack or something.  Then you might see some real wavering in terms of people thinking we should stick it out in these countries.

Offline Krusher

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2246
What's next Yanks?
« Reply #42 on: June 28, 2003, 10:05:10 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by StSanta
Give it time. Worked in Germany and Japan, but that is comparing apples to oranges. Two totally different geopolitical situations.  


That well may be true but again I say,  give it TIME.

If it took 7+ years there you cant possibly think it will take less time in Iraq? We have been in the Balkans 6 years longer than we were supposed to be (and counting).  We have spent decades keeping North Korea away from south Korea. Germany started two world wars that resulted in the deaths of a 100 million people, should we have pulled out in 1946 and trust them not to go for three?

I am not saying you are one of them StSanta, but you know as well as we do that many Europeans are silently (and not so silently) cheering every American death, every American failure and every American setback. Watching from the sidelines waiting to shout their "I told you so's". They want to  rub our collective noses in every piece of news that supports their point of view. Try and remember that when you see a post on this board that isn't very complimentary of the European point of view. The collective "piling on" of some of our friends is starting to wear thin.

Offline john9001

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9453
What's next Yanks?
« Reply #43 on: June 28, 2003, 10:23:21 AM »
i'm curious, some people imply that bush will lose the 04 election because of iraq, what do you think a democrat president would "do" with iraq?

A) bomb baghdad

B) withdraw all US troops from iraq

C) do what bush is doing

D) non of the above(explain)

Offline Arfann

  • Parolee
  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 609
What's next Yanks?
« Reply #44 on: June 28, 2003, 11:12:54 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by john9001
i'm curious, some people imply that bush will lose the 04 election because of iraq, what do you think a democrat president would "do" with iraq?

A) bomb baghdad

B) withdraw all US troops from iraq

C) do what bush is doing

D) non of the above(explain)


D) Scramble around trying to find a way to recover from the horrible mess Dubya's gonna leave.