Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Thrawn on May 26, 2004, 03:33:45 AM
-
How can the hand over of soveriengty to the Iraqi council on June 30th, be considered such when the US will still be able to conduct military operations without the approval of said council? Sovereignty means ultimate authority within ones boarders. The US still will have ultimate authority, if the Iraqi council can't veto military operations.
I think this question is also important because for the first time the UK and US are openningly at odds over policy regarding Iraq. The UK is also trying to separate itself from the US coallition by having the southern sector under control of NATO, and not the coallition. Apparently this is because the UK is at odds with other US policies regarding Iraq.
I'm surprised this hasn't been discussed yet on this BBS as it seem like a pretty huge shift in the coalltion. Then again, I haven't seen much mention of the issue in mainstream US media.
"May 23, 2004
British fears on US tactics are leaked
By David Cracknell, Political Editor
A LEAKED Foreign Office memorandum has exposed deep misgivings within the British government over America’s “heavy-handed” behaviour and tactics in Iraq.
The document discloses for the first time the extent of private reservations within Tony Blair’s government about Washington’s approach.
It blows apart Blair’s public insistence that there are no differences between Britain and America over military tactics in Iraq.
Under the heading Problems, the memo says: “We should not underestimate the present difficulties . . . Heavy-handed US military tactics in Falluja and Najaf some weeks ago have fuelled both Sunni and Shi’ite opposition to the coalition, and lost us much public support inside Iraq.”
It adds: “The scandal of the treatment of detainees at Abu Ghraib (prison) has sapped the moral authority of the coalition, inside Iraq and internationally.”
The detailed memo, intended for senior ministers and top officials, talks of “the need to redouble our efforts to ensure a sensible and sensitive US approach to military operations”.
The memo acknowledges that Britain is struggling to get the Americans to adopt the more tactful approach that it wants and that there is a need to stop the United States doing anything “which would jeopardise our objectives”."
The rest of the article can be found here.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,1-1120343,00.html
"Blair wants Nato to take control of southern Iraq"
The article can be found here.
http://portal.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/05/23/nirq23.xml
Thanks http://www.osirp.org
-
The hand over is all for show and tell.
Its all Bullchit for the world press.
We aint never gonna get out of there.:mad:
-
Guess it'll be more like autonomity ;)
-
Originally posted by txmx
The hand over is all for show and tell.
Its all Bullchit for the world press.
We aint never gonna get out of there.:mad:
sadly, I have to agree with you there. we may well be garrisoning that god forsaken land for the next hundred years.
-
Originally posted by txmx
We aint never gonna get out of there.:mad:
hehe you will eat what you served
-
Hmmm approximately 800 dead soldiers in fourteen months... Average that out to 55 or so per month or 660 per year (650 or so if we start the count after "mission accomplished").
Optimistic exit... 30 years.. 19,800 dead.
More pessimistic... 40 years.. 26,400.
A democratic Iraq is so worth it! :aok
-
Could you have claimed on 23 November 1943, that 3,133 KIA and 2,186 wounded Marines were “so worth it” after three days of battle?
-
Originally posted by Sandman
Hmmm approximately 800 dead soldiers in fourteen months... Average that out to 55 or so per month or 660 per year (650 or so if we start the count after "mission accomplished").
Optimistic exit... 30 years.. 19,800 dead.
More pessimistic... 40 years.. 26,400.
A democratic Iraq is so worth it! :aok
Or do it the easy way.
A push of a few buttons.
-
Originally posted by Sandman
Hmmm approximately 800 dead soldiers in fourteen months... Average that out to 55 or so per month or 660 per year (650 or so if we start the count after "mission accomplished").
Optimistic exit... 30 years.. 19,800 dead.
More pessimistic... 40 years.. 26,400.
A democratic Iraq is so worth it! :aok
actualy you forget that freedom fighters will improve and get more experiences, they could become more and more effective
i belive that Bush grudged Putin his Checna, so he entered Iraq :D
-
Originally posted by Gyro/T69
Could you have claimed on 23 November 1943, that 3,133 KIA and 2,186 wounded Marines were “so worth it” after three days of battle?
...because the war in Iraq is exactly like WW2.
-
Iraq has been a success so far. I hold promise for it's future and I believe it will be a better future for the Iraqis. Iraq now has it's best chance at freedom than it has ever had.
Can anyone list the reasons why the war in Iraq was a bad thing for Iraq?
-
Stop promise,belive, hope and go check reality in Iraq
-
Originally posted by lada
Stop promise,belive, hope and go check reality in Iraq
what was the negative for the Iraqis?
-
Lada, still waiting...
-
US did nothing, sure US army is holy cow
we will not count year and half of total chaos
ban of free trade, forcing them to buy crappy technology
killing hundreds of civilist
fatal inability to supply public gas station with fuel, in december it took aproximatly 2 days of waiting at Gas station to get gas.
we rather not speak about export
US cooperate with former Bassis guys, many of them are back in their chairs, viva liberalization
actualy what are US doing in Iraq now ? seeking terrorist, hunting evil ditator, seeking WMD or what ?
ahhh.... yeah i forget, that you secure Iraq.... yeah Army whitch provoke uprising is securing.....
Red army used absolutly same rhetoric these days
Stop dreaming and go ask Iraqi to the iraq.
I guess you will be very lucky if you will make home alive.
I were lucky to meet some over here.
I wish you to listen them personaly.
actualy tell me, when US army did something what were consider to be honorable in past 30 years ?
-
im glad you wait, coz here is around 11 am, so we are pretending some socialistic work
-
Originally posted by lada
US did nothing, sure US army is holy cow
we will not count year and half of total chaos
ban of free trade, forcing them to buy crappy technology
killing hundreds of civilist
fatal inability to supply public gas station with fuel, in december it took aproximatly 2 days of waiting at Gas station to get gas.
we rather not speak about export
US cooperate with former Bassis guys, many of them are back in their chairs, viva liberalization
actualy what are US doing in Iraq now ? seeking terrorist, hunting evil ditator, seeking WMD or what ?
ahhh.... yeah i forget, that you secure Iraq.... yeah Army whitch provoke uprising is securing.....
Red army used absolutly same rhetoric these days
Stop dreaming and go ask Iraqi to the iraq.
I guess you will be very lucky if you will make home alive.
I were lucky to meet some over here.
I wish you to listen them personaly.
actualy tell me, when US army did something what were consider to be honorable in past 30 years ?
So Saddam was better for Iraqis than Iraqi's........ I get it. You feel that Saddam was a better option for ruling Iraq than Iraqis ....
-
Originally posted by NUKE
So Saddam was better for Iraqis than Iraqi's........ I get it. You feel that Saddam was a better option for ruling Iraq than Iraqis ....
Where exactly did i speak about it ?
-
Think the June 30th is more Political Goal then anything else. Doubt anything will change on the ground.
...-Gixer
-
Originally posted by NUKE
So Saddam was better for Iraqis than Iraqi's........ I get it. You feel that Saddam was a better option for ruling Iraq than Iraqis ....
Its more like Occupation is not that diferent compare to SH regime.
-
...because the war in Iraq is exactly like WW2.
You may have that forest, tree thing going here. I invite you to expand your thinking a bit further out of the box.
-
Originally posted by Gyro/T69
You may have that forest, tree thing going here. I invite you to expand your thinking a bit further out of the box.
If by thinking outside of the box, you mean thinking apples are oranges, I just don't see the point.
-
If by thinking outside of the box, you mean thinking apples are oranges, I just don't see the point.
Not if casualties are going to use as a litmus test to illustrate the success or failure of an on going operation. There were 6,000 casualties during the six-month operation on Guadalcanal. During that operation, one could argue the myopic view, that the men were being wasted at the rate of a 1000 a month, just to provide freedom for the jungle from the Japanese. At that point in time, that perception would hold water. Looking back with a bit of insight in 1945, the same observation would be dismissed out of hand.
Sorry for the tardy reply. My power supply went south today.
-
Originally posted by Gyro/T69
Could you have claimed on 23 November 1943, that 3,133 KIA and 2,186 wounded Marines were “so worth it” after three days of battle?
The Democratic Nation of Tarawa was worth it. :aok