Iraq - time to admit it's a disaster?

[Lanesra]

Originally posted by Felix The Assassin: quote: Originally posted by Lanesra: Well they may well be weak at heart but they aren't on IW!! As for what you would like the objective to be - I'd guess "The World"

You say NOT HERE, but yet YOU posted it here!
By using one of the top most liberal writings there is, then yes surely you live in a left handed world.

[/QUOTE]The quotes were reprinted in The Independent but were direct quotes from people on the Right. Are you being deliberately obtuse?!!

[Timber Loftis]

Originally posted by Azred: Although it was pretty cracked when we got there, we helped break it so we should help put it back together. Simple. I must admit that Sun Tzu is probably rolling his eyes in disbelief at the prolonged deployment. The easiest exit strategy would be for the Iraqi government convene and vote for a resolution asking us to leave.

QFT

[pritchke]

It is a disaster kind of like a plugged toilet. It is at the stage were the water is flowing over the bowl that you should not of flushed a second time. At this stage it is to late to pull out and you are in damage control. They need to obtain stability before pulling out even if it means getting a bigger plunger.

[ 03-13-2006, 02:48 PM: Message edited by: pritchke ]

[Black Baron]

The objective, as Felix had put it, is not gained yet. One can't retreat when started.

USA had done a great thing- it has toppled a raving and a psychotic dictator, that was sponsoring terror. Now we have a terrorist training grounds. These grounds must be obliterated. The way to do it, is to complete the pre war abjectives in full. To run away now will achieve nothing at all. To run now will be to admit that the death of USA, British etc soldiers and of the iraqi people had been for nothing.

In 1941 it was "pretty obvious" that Hitler would win the war. I wish to know what was sayed to the ones that wanted to sign seperate peace with Adolf. This is also a war of such a proportion.

It may sound idiotic, but i view this war as a war of Light Vs Dark. The Light must win. Period.

Otherwise the next exploding bus will be in your country.

[Timber Loftis]

I view this war as one where people are killing people in a struggle for power over each other.

As are all wars.

Monikers like "light" and "dark" are immediately subjective. Evil is a point of view, Anakin.

And in 1945 victory over Hitler had been gained, in just a bit more time than we've been camped in Iraq. Comparing WWII with Iraq only belittles our soldiers and their efforts, because look what mountains the great generation moved in 4 years. And look at the problems we're having with our little sand hill.

[ 03-17-2006, 10:03 AM: Message edited by: Timber Loftis ]

[Iron Greasel]

Originally posted by Black Baron: The objective, as Felix had put it, is not gained yet. One can't retreat when started.

Yes you can. It's like with those money games you put coins in and sometimes get coins out of. If you have just lost 400 dollars, should you continue feeding the thing because it is probable that eventually you will win?

USA had done a great thing- it has toppled a raving and a psychotic dictator, that was sponsoring terror. Now we have a terrorist training grounds. These grounds must be obliterated. The way to do it, is to complete the pre war abjectives in full. To run away now will achieve nothing at all. To run now will be to admit that the death of USA, British etc soldiers and of the iraqi people had been for nothing.

What's wrong with dictators? For someone who's going to spend his entire life as a ruler, the continued stability of his country means the continued existence of him. And his retirement fund. What does someone elected for a few years at a time get out of making any long-term plans?

Have you considered giving in to the terrorists' demands so that they wouldn't have to be terrorists anymore? then you wouldn't have to obliterate them and they wouldn't have to obliterate you. And if you just want to obliterate someone, start a nuclear war.

In 1941 it was "pretty obvious" that Hitler would win the war. I wish to know what was sayed to the ones that wanted to sign seperate peace with Adolf. This is also a war of such a proportion.

I wouldn't know, but I assume it's something carrying the message of "Join us, and we won't kill you." As an example of this kind of thinking let us take a look at Britain. Should they have chosen to offer their military support for Iraq, they would have made US very angry. And you don't want to make a country, that is probably going to win the war, angry.

It may sound idiotic, but i view this war as a war of Light Vs Dark. The Light must win. Period. Otherwise the next exploding bus will be in your country.

So some nations and people are inherently evil and it's your moral duty to kill them all? Evil is subjective. I, for example, think that killing people without a very good and preferably personal reason is sort of evil. And sending other people to do the killing for you is definitely evil. You obviously don't. Who should decide who is evil and who is not? You? Some manner of committee? Or should everyone just tag all who disagree with them as evil and the ones who survive get to write history and justify their actions? No, I think it's best to at least try the peaceful co-existence before the genocide.

The exploding buses are to be expected. You can't just attack and occupy a nation without making someone angry. And killing everyone isn't going to help either.

[Timber Loftis]

Have you considered giving in to the terrorists' demands so that they wouldn't have to be terrorists anymore? then you wouldn't have to obliterate them and they wouldn't have to obliterate you. And if you just want to obliterate someone, start a nuclear war.

Well, now hold on. It's not like they have said just leave them alone. They do believe it is ultimately their duty to rid the world of those not of their view, beginning with Israel. I mean, let's not ignore this.

[Timber Loftis]

Iraq - time to admit it's a disaster?

Evacuate? In out moment of triumph? I think you overestimate their chances!

(Sorry, couldn't resist.)

[Black Baron]

Yeah, sure i will give in to terrorist demands. I will also order mine coffin beforehand too.

Iran and Iraq (with saddam) shouted with all their might that "israel must be wiped out from the earth". Iran still shouts it. What the point caving in to the demands of these crazy maniacs? They will take more and more untill they will try to wipe us out more actively. Biological/chemical bombs, a-bombs...

Lets's say that some one with the will to destroy Finland starts shouting: Destroy Finland in the name of (fill the slot). He does not have the power to do so, but he sponsors terror which damages your economy and kills your citizens en masse. Finland's nemesis also starts enriching uranium and kicks out the UN experts from the enrichment centers.

My point is obvious.

99% of terrorists are Iran/saddam sponsored, and therefore they are part of iran to kill us. It is pointless to talk to them. They must be hanged, and "hanged high".

The problem with people that say "lets give them what they want and maybe they will leave us alone", is that either they live in a places that did not experience terror in full.

[shamrock_uk]

Originally posted by Black Baron: 99% of terrorists are Iran/saddam sponsored, and therefore they are part of iran to kill us. It is pointless to talk to them. They must be hanged, and "hanged high".

Agree with all your post BB, apart from this little snippet. The Saudi's are by far the largest financer of terrorist organisations, usually channeling them through charitable organisations as a front. Iran does pick up the tab for a fair amount of the rest, especially the likes of Hezbollah, but Saddam was hardly a great terrorist sponsor. In fact the only claim I've heard about this is the much bandied around one that he paid the families of suicide bombers money. He was more interested in squashing Islamic militants than aiding them.