A civil Iraq discussion thread: please leave your hyperbole at the door

[wulfie]

Originally posted by Siaf__csf
It's so easy to judge afterwards.. The question is was the Swiss leadership and banks really aware of the source of the gold? Did the nazi leadership take them for a tour in the concentration camps to show off the source of the gold? I highly doubt that. The fact is that the allied troops were dumbfounded with the sight of the camps when they finally reached them. Now why is that? Nobody knew maybe?

""In the late 1950s details about Switzerland's decision in 1942 to refuse entry to at least 30,000 Jewish refugees began to emerge."

I suppose the 30,000 Jewish refugees trying to flee to Switzerland never mentioned why they were so eager to leave Nazi-controlled Germany? Did the Swiss assume they hated good beer and oompah music?

"Switzerland's war-time record is complex and often appears contradictory. Historians argue that Switzerland suggested to Nazi Germany in 1938 that a 'J' (denoting Jude or Jew) be stamped in German Jewish passports to facilitate recognition by Swiss border police."

So the Swiss had no idea what was going on with the Jews in Germany...and in a completely unrelated action suggested that the Germans specially mark all Jewish passports?

I'm curious what your take is on all of this.

Mike/wulfie

[wulfie]

Originally posted by Monk
Hmmm.......very nice Wulfie.

I think I found a running mate for Toad.

The only political office I would ever hold would have something to do with violence, secrecy, unaccountability, Swedish women under the age of 25, Hemicudas, and Jagermeister and it would be during FunkedUp's Presidency. I'd also probably need lazs on board as some sort of PR/propoganda/foreign ministry official.

When we went down fighting in a blaze of glory, news reports along the lines of this report would surface as they overran my secret compound...

Current Events Real Story:

"BAGHDAD, Iraq - The doors of the town house opened to reveal a playboy's fantasy straight from the 1960s: mirrored bedroom, lamps shaped like women, air-brushed paintings of a topless blonde woman and a mustached hero battling a crocodile.
Next door, where iron sheets were welded over all the windows, they found more than 6,000 Berretta pistols, 650 Sig Sauer pistols, 248 Colt Revolvers, 160 Belgian 7.65 mm pistols, 12 cases of Sterling submachine guns and four cases of anti-tank missiles all still in the unopened original boxes. There were also tens of thousands of rounds of ammunition mortars and cases of old handguns and heavy machine guns."

When Our Grand Scheme For World Unity Fails version of the Story:

"Maui, Hawaii, U.S.A. - The doors of the town house opened to reveal a playboy's fantasy straight from the 1960s: mirrored bedroom, lamps shaped like women, air-brushed paintings of a topless blonde Swedish woman almost certainly under the age of 25 and a naked Jagermeister-coated hero battling a Great White shark. Next door, where depleted uranium sheets were welded over all the windows, they found more than 6,000 Colt 1911 pistols, 650 Sig Sauer pistols, 248 Colt Revolvers, 160 9mm fully automatic Russian pistols (editor note: I always loved 9mm Stechkin MPs)[/i], 12 cases of Thompson submachine guns and four cases of anti-tank missiles all still in the unopened original boxes and loaded into a fleet of Black 'Hemicuda' 'muscle cars'. There were also tens of thousands of rounds of ammunition mortars and cases of old handguns and heavy machine guns, all apparently stockpiled to protect the world's largest freezer containing a nearly unfathomable ammount of Jagermeister and 'Presidential' corndogs'."

FunkedUp for President!

Mike/wulfie

[Toad]

"Like a red-headed stepchild".

Wulfie!

[Monk]

[AKIron]

Originally posted by Siaf__csf
I explicitly expressed my support to the TROOPS that were out there.

I find this statement amusing when made by one of my liberal countrymen as they get in their jabs to the current administration. It is a defensive statement but can be true nonetheless, at least in their case. What goes beyond amusing into the ridiculous is your claim of support for US troops. How do you do this exactly? Support US troops I mean. Lack of criticism perhaps?

Some may contradict me on this but I believe that most US military personel are conservative in their political leanings. If you understood how they felt about folks with your attitude I suspect you'd withdraw your "support" rather quickly.

[wulfie]

Originally posted by Siaf__csf
I HATE to see any american serviceman die because of a stupid powermonger in the politic position. The policies are the only thing I'm criticising...

Well the policies are the responsibility and product of a hell of a lot more people that the CiC, many of them being people who were not elected to their position (intelligence, military, etc.). And in the U.S.A. a powermongering CiC is not given a 'free pass' to go to war wherever and whenever he wants to. The U.S. is in Iraq due to a lot more than the 'whims' of our President. Sorry, but it's not an 'issue' that you can 'pin' on one single elected official. And Superman could be the CiC and we'd still be losing a soldier or two here and there to attacks by insurgents. Howard Dean could be CiC tomorrow and 3 months from now if you looked at how things fared under Dean or Bush they'd probably be the same. Because at that level the CiC isn't making any of the calls. He's not qualified to. Advisors who have made a profession out of military matters, intelligence matters, national security matters, etc. briefed the CiC (which is their job), answered his questions, 'brain stormed' with him, etc. And 'at the end of the day' (really the end of at least several months), when the best course of action was determined based on the professional opinions of numerous persons besides the CiC who also serve the United States of America out of choice, the President informed the Citizens of what was going to be done and why. Similar procedures take place in most Nations that are some form of democracy or republic. The CiC doesn't just 'get a wild hair up his prettythang' and determine that the U.S. is going to attack Iraq.

I'd suggest you read the book 'Bush at War'. It's written by Bob Woodward - the reporter who helped bring Nixon down - and it gives a good day to day picture of 'what goes on' at the Presidential level. You may be disappointed however - the VP doesn't run into the CiCs office every hour screaming "Haliburton needs more $$$ we need to take down Iraq or Saudi George!".

AKIron the only thing that is annoying is that in many cases (but less than 50% - a lot of Citizens just hate the military and/or the government but need a way to say it so they don't look like traitors) people are opposed to military action based on incorrect data. The same situation existed as far back as Vietnam, where the U.S. was exercising 'imperialism' by propping up a regime that was 'opressing' the 'peoples ability to choose their own government'.

When someone tells me they are against war because they don't like to see civilians get killed I can respect that. I try to explain that the only thing you can do is to end the war as fast as possible. But the people who argue that war never works or is not a valid option in extreme circumstances are 'sheep' as opposed to 'tigers'. They are incapable of understanding that sometimes someone or something is going to make it a mission to engage you in combat. And the only two options are to fight and maybe prevail or to not fight and get killed. Running away isn't an option if you want to stay in the history books.

One of my favorite things in the mid '90s was to inform antiwar types that the U.S. actually had a lawyer present to approve targets for the air campaign during the '91 Gulf War (I see it coming already from Dowding - yes Dowding, he probably got beat up while on vacation in England ) and he rejected targets on numerous occasions. Usually the people that are honestly concerned for noncombatants were a little surprised by that revelation. I'd like to think that they maybe had their opinions altered a little by it.

Mike/wulfie

[Torque]

Who would of thought that by nationalizing a country's oil reserves it would send the region into fifty years of death and decay.

[Rude]

Originally posted by Dowding
The emphasis was on WMD and disarmament. It pervaded all of the Coalition's diplomatic overtures and sabre-rattling before things went 'Live'. When Blair persuaded Bush to go the UN route to tackle Iraq, tell me, what was the angle pursued?

WMD's and their possible use....as it should have been.

The UN chief weapons inspector back in 95 admitted himself, that if it had not been for the defection of Sadams son in law and the following intel they recieved from him, they would have just left back in 95. At that time, he told them he had destroyed all of his WMD's.

The man can't be trusted...he has persued WMD's for the past 20 years.

Why would you spend such time defending this man....you must need more direct proof....more dead Americans work for you....then you will let us know if we can act on our own behalf I suppose.

[wulfie]

(first booze in 5+ months here - excuse the grammar and spelling errors, etc.)

Blair especially is not getting a 'fair shake' in my book as he has been campaigning for nonproliferation of WMDs since the day he was 'elected' which was some time before 11SEP01. He made it an issue before anyone else in the upper political circles really considered it a major issue.

Mike/wulfie

[Tumor]

Originally posted by AKIron
......If you understood how they felt about folks with your attitude I suspect you'd withdraw your "support" rather quickly.

[evil grin]YEP[/evil grin]

[Holden McGroin]

Originally posted by Siaf__csf
I HATE to see any american serviceman die because of a stupid powermonger in the politic position. The policies are the only thing I'm criticising -  

Saif__csf:

Intresting that the above statements are contradicting.

Calling someone a 'stupid powermonger' is not a criticism of policy.

I point this out only to help raise the level of rhetoric on this BBS, not to insult you... you idiot.  

[Hortlund]

Ok...

I have been laughing for 15 minutes now. That is probably the funniest quote posted on any bb in the history of the internet.

Hope you dont mind wulfie...I just *had* to steal that quote and put it in my sig.

btw, do you have an email where I can reach you? I was wondering about cmmc2.

[wrag]

Hmmm the reason for the beginning of this thread seems to have gotten lost?

Well hmmm.....

IMHO (constructed after much reading and the examining of many opinions, and the history of that region) we are really really in for it in the middle east, and probably everywhere else unless we are very very careful.  It may already be too late.

I do not think that we can avoid being painted as the Christian West trying to impose our ideals on the Eastern Muslim World.  I am of the opinion that this administration has made a very serious error!  I find myself wondering if Greed (the big oil companies?) has anything to do with it.

We can come up with all sorts of phrases/reasons/etc. that try to tell the people of the area how and why we are being/doing good to/for them.

BUT!  I think it will not much matter.  I think they will refuse to agree with us and continue to kill our troops.

Further I think the situation will only get worse the longer our troops remain.  A sorta of ... why won't these people who claim they have done us good go away now that they are done?  Will possibly become a ... the invaders must be driven forth!!!!  Resistance to tyranny is obedience to God ...  Kinda thing.

We are dealing with a culture that is so different from our own that basic communication in and of itself can be problematic!!!!!!

A Democracy is not what many of them actually seem to want.  Much less a Representative Republic.

The area has been ruled by religion for over 1000 years.  I don't think we can change that in a few months or even years.  Witness the Kosavo( spelling?) situation and the hatred and atrocities that happened there.

We are dealing with a belief system.  A faith situation.  Many Many VERY bloody wars have been fought over such!  What Saddam did may come to matter very little.  He may even, over time, become a martyr if we are not very careful.

Those who believe differently from Islam are already being prosecuted, tortured, enslaved, and killed in countries within that region.  DO NOT take my word for it!  The information is out there.  Look it up!  Don't ask for leads just look it up.  That way when you find it I will not be accused of making a false statement or trying to mislead.

And finally I ask a question of all.....

If a person believes that GOD wants them to fight, and kill, HOW do we argue with them?  You gonna tell em GOD is wrong?  Will you solve it by killing them all?  If so how are you better then Saddam, or Stalin, or Hitler?

Everything here is just some thoughts and opinions I have formed watching and reading and thinking.

[Krusher]

Originally posted by wrag

A Democracy is not what many of them actually seem to want.  Much less a Representative Republic.

maybe not but there is a bright spot. The youth of Iraq

They are nervous about democracy. Asked which is closer to their own view--"Democracy can work well in Iraq," or "Democracy is a Western way of doing things"--five out of 10 said democracy is Western and won't work in Iraq. One in 10 wasn't sure. And four out of 10 said democracy can work in Iraq. There were interesting divergences. Sunnis were negative on democracy by more than 2 to 1; but, critically, the majority Shiites were as likely to say democracy would work for Iraqis as not. People age 18-29 are much more rosy about democracy than other Iraqis, and women are significantly more positive than men. •

taken from
http://www.opinionjournal.com/edito...ml?id=110003991

[Siaf__csf]

Wulfie, thank you for taking time to express your point of view on the issues. However I must point out that my initial meaning was to attack the posters who blindly supported the offensive - and did so in a patronising tone of voice. I had to point out to them that none of the things they thought were blatantly clear ever realised - at least so far. I think it's highly unlikely that the WMD will emerge after this time (I recall Colin Powell stating that they knew the actual positions of the WMD depositories from satellite pictures.)

You pointed out that as guerilla warfare goes your troops aren't doing bad in Iraq. I don't argue that fact - the casualties aren't big considered the job they have to do down there. However I'm under the impression that the public opinnion in your country is that the loss of life is not acceptable regardless of 'how well' your troops do when put into the mission frame. If things continue like this for a longer time, heads will be asked to platter as the spending and loss of life mounts up gradually but certainly. Half of the US can't even properly point out Iraq on the world map, the loss of countrymens lives should be hard to sell in the context. If that happens and political pressure forces US to pull their troops out of the country well before things are stabilized there.. well.

It's very much possible that Iraq will become the second Yugoslavia where the death / removal of a dictator will eventually lead into a civil war. Although the situation in Iraq is not quite as complex, it's still a possibility. Bush1 pointed this out as the reason why he didn't want to remove Saddam from power in gulf1. Sooner or later the US troops will have to leave Iraqi soil.

Wrag made a very good point in his post. The day your troops entered and conquered Iraq, you became the western invading force. Every day that you hold the control of the country further rattles up the arab-islamic community. That fact alone jeopardises the whole plans to stabilize the country.

"Some may contradict me on this but I believe that most US military personel are conservative in their political leanings. If you understood how they felt about folks with your attitude I suspect you'd withdraw your "support" rather quickly."

Someones political views are not a determining factor as what goes with my support for some youngsters life. A human life is a human life regardless of religion or political view. They may even hate me, I still don't want them to die. Period.

It's pitiful that the posts here turn into character assassinations instead of trying to post valid answers.