The U.S. may seek help from the U.N.

[_Schadenfreude_]

Basically Iraqi's neither like nor dislike the US, they want them to fix what they destroyed, they want a democracy and they want them to leave in a couple of years.

http://www.channel4.com/news/2003/07/week_3/images/iraq_survey.html

[zonta123]

I am interested to see what people DO, as opposed to what they SAY.  And that is for time to show.  I have learned not to trust statistics when it comes to peoples opinions because 1: they can change very easily (and radicaly too) 2: It is a good way to decieve the uninformed.  The sample information is very limited.  It only gives the number of people and where they live (Baghdad). And even this limited info shows that this statistic offers info on the Baghdad population only and not all of Iraq (you are well aware that people in the North are very different from those in Baghdad, and those in the South -ethnically and culturaly)  If they conducted this in the town of Duhok (which is in kurdish controlled area), I'm sure it would have yielded a very different result.  Or if it was conducted in Najaf, where the Shiites live, a totally opposite outcome might have emerged.

Anyhow, "Iraq is a very hostile place for foreign troops at this time, and any government who sends in troops will have to take great risks (politically and economically) without ant gains" is my point.  By the way, what happened to the Polish? They were supposed to send substantial (a division at least)troops months ago? (They promised it even before the war, if I recall correctly) And how about the Spaniards?  They too were, if i recall correctly, very enthusaistic about the whole thing.

[Dowding]

I notice you haven't given me the sources which you use to come to your conclusion.

[zonta123]

Conclusion :"Iraq is a very hostile place for foreign troops at this time, and any government who sends in troops will have to take great risks (politically and economically) without any gains"

My sources?  They are the same as anyone elses (and yours too) :  watching and reading the news. What other source can there possibly be, unless one is a government official with high intelligence clearence?  It is amusing the way you argue, tho.  That is you do not state opinions (for possibly you do not have one) but instead you do (poorly) what we call demagogie (Not sure what the English word for it is).  

Please be so kind as to state and argue what you disagree with.  It appears that you oppose my view "the Invasion of Iraq is very similar to Soviet Invasion of Afghanistan."  If that's so, check your email... I do not wish to go beyond the scope of this thread.  The reason I gave that example was to argue why and how Iraq is hostile to foreign troops, and that it is very risky to send in troops there.  It wasnt my intention to fundemantaly argue the similarities of those two conflicts.

Let us kindly hear what you think about the thread  topic (to remind you: the possibility of the UN, or countries other than the US and the UK,  getting involved in the security duties in Iraq).

[SLO]

if help is needed....then help will be sent.

they did an excellent job in Iraq....(even tho I disagreed with the WHY Bush used)....all that now doesn't matter.

what matters is gettin those young American an Brit soldiers outta there.....give em a big slap on the back and say "well done soldier....now go home".....

send in the International force too maintain the peace.....maybe if the iraqis see UN instead of US(no insult intended) they will calm down and make it easier on everyone else......too many have died already.

and comparing Iraq to Afhgan(commi's) is like apples and oranges.....they have nothing in common.....1 is to get a dangerous person outta there....the other to instill communism.

[batdog]

Originally posted by Dowding
Unable to argue on the subject at hand, you seek to demonize the opposition with a red herring about gloating over dead soldiers, Batdog?

Hardly...those/these where the nations at the forefront of "The UN needs to send a mandate to invade" AND "The UN SHOULD play a large role in the reconstruction of Iraq".

NOW...that is called IRONY, and its hardly a red herring.

As far as demonising the opposition I CLEARLY remember certain indiv's who seemed to relish the prospect of a US bloodbath in Iraq. When said didnt happen... they faded away. I'm simply waiting in a pragmatic way for them to crawl out from whatever rock they slithered under to begin with.

I actualy agree w/SLO on this to a point and I will WILL concide that we should bring the UN in... primarly what we need are Arabic peace Keepers. This is impossiable unfortantly as to my knowledge I dont think there ARE any Democratic Arabic nations that could provide a force and help bring about a democratic Iraq.


Also to Frenchy and yes you Dowding you liberal butthead. I respect you and many others of your liberal views...I did NOT wish to say you guys where enjoying the events of late. There are some here that are... I'm sure.

[Udie]

Originally posted by SLO
if help is needed....then help will be sent.

they did an excellent job in Iraq....(even tho I disagreed with the WHY Bush used)....all that now doesn't matter.

what matters is gettin those young American an Brit soldiers outta there.....give em a big slap on the back and say "well done soldier....now go home".....

send in the International force too maintain the peace.....maybe if the iraqis see UN instead of US(no insult intended) they will calm down and make it easier on everyone else......too many have died already.

and comparing Iraq to Afhgan(commi's) is like apples and oranges.....they have nothing in common.....1 is to get a dangerous person outta there....the other to instill communism.

 whoa,  I agreed with something you posted...  I feel kind of funny,  I wonder if this is one of those acid flashbacks I was warned of

[type_char]

The UN should get more involved in world issues.

[Dowding]

Fair enough, Batdog, fair enough. There were those that enjoyed the idea of Coalition casualties - but they were limited to that 'junior member' AM tard who posted briefings from a highly dubious Russian 'intelligence group' and the like.

I actualy agree w/SLO on this to a point and I will WILL concide that we should bring the UN in... primarly what we need are Arabic peace Keepers. This is impossiable unfortantly as to my knowledge I dont think there ARE any Democratic Arabic nations that could provide a force and help bring about a democratic Iraq.

Although not arabic, Turkey would be a good choice. Jordan and Egypt are westernized and secular.

But personally, it is laughable that the US et al gave a finger to the UN when it suited them, but when the going gets tough, they might call in the boys in blue hats. To keep any kind of face in this, the Coalition has to bring Iraq to a civilized state on its own,

[SLO]

Originally posted by Udie
whoa,  I agreed with something you posted...  I feel kind of funny,  I wonder if this is one of those acid flashbacks I was warned of

Acid.....ya thats the ticket.

last week I had 1 very interesting conversation with 3 diff. arabs....2 are Muslims(religious) other is Athiest(couldn't believe that one myself...none the less its true) he actually left his country in fear of this.....

but all 3 said the same thing.....

conclusion......

Muslims like to BLAME others but themselves......they've been doin for thousands of years and they will keep doin it.

I did not come to that conclusion myself.....they did....and they told me why.....

so it doesn't really matter WHO is in Iraq....UN or US.....but it would look a little better if it was UN with some Arab support.....

[Virage]

This is not new.  The US has been open in its intentions for the UN and other Countries to help flip the bill in Postwar Iraq.

[batdog]

Originally posted by Dowding
Fair enough, Batdog, fair enough. There were those that enjoyed the idea of Coalition casualties - but they were limited to that 'junior member' AM tard who posted briefings from a highly dubious Russian 'intelligence group' and the like.



Although not arabic, Turkey would be a good choice. Jordan and Egypt are westernized and secular.

But personally, it is laughable that the US et al gave a finger to the UN when it suited them, but when the going gets tough, they might call in the boys in blue hats. To keep any kind of face in this, the Coalition has to bring Iraq to a civilized state on its own,

Well...I dont think we gave the finger to the UN as much as a certain group of nations in the farce called the "Security Council".

They DID NOT block the Coalition invasion or try to for lofty reasons..it was pure economics and self interest. They where quite willing to allow Saddam to stay in power as long as they reaped some benefits.

Yes... I KNOW the US isnt some sainted nation. This time we where in the right... and we where spurned. The quick success of the campaign was a source of severe shock to those who predicted a bloody extended war vrs hoards of die hard Iraqi's.

Those same nations that more or less gave US the finger in the face then more or less demanded to be included in the reconstruction. Well..now they might get a chance but it aint gonna be a free ride. They need to show some serious commitment and a good way would be supporting a new UN resolution for UN "Peace Keepers" w/the US as the main contact there. Hell we are typicaly the back bone of the UN regardless.

Time will tell...

[-dead-]

Originally posted by Dowding
Although not arabic, Turkey would be a good choice.

 Oh yeah, the Kurds would just love Turkey to be in charge.