BF2S Forums The US troop increase in Iraq.

ATG wrote:

TheEternalPessimist wrote:

I'm just glad the UK isn't planning on sending more troops, I'm not happy that my country has anyone involved in this fucking farce in the first place. Yeah I do blame Bush (Blair is a pussy bitch puppet who's far to eager to follow, I'll be glad when he's gone), and it's sad that people had to die coz he's decided to 'bring order to the world' whether they want it or not.

I don't honestly know if the US sending in more troops is a good thing or not, it's pretty much a lost cause anyway. Iraq is a different world to what we live in, trying to bring about a few hundred years worth of political progress in the space of months is just a rediculous notion.

Best outcome I can see is leave, let them have their civil wars and riots and in a few years and a lot more deaths they'll have their own balance of power established again, I wouldn't be supprised if another Saddam type ended up in power (lets face it he kept people in line).

Stop being so goddamned pessimistic.

Not exactly the stuff winners are made of. If Europe wouldn't have fucked the borders up in the first place this entire mid-east problem may have been non existent.

I can't help it lol.

TheEternalPessimist wrote:

I'm just glad the UK isn't planning on sending more troops, I'm not happy that my country has anyone involved in this fucking farce in the first place. Yeah I do blame Bush (Blair is a pussy bitch puppet who's far to eager to follow, I'll be glad when he's gone), and it's sad that people had to die coz he's decided to 'bring order to the world' whether they want it or not.

I don't honestly know if the US sending in more troops is a good thing or not, it's pretty much a lost cause anyway. Iraq is a different world to what we live in, trying to bring about a few hundred years worth of political progress in the space of months is just a rediculous notion.

Best outcome I can see is leave, let them have their civil wars and riots and in a few years and a lot more deaths they'll have their own balance of power established again, I wouldn't be supprised if another Saddam type ended up in power (lets face it he kept people in line).

ATG, I think this guy has summed up my view on this really well.

The way I see it, these people want to kill each other, with or without us there.  So, who are we to stop them?  Besides, most of them will just resent us for getting involved.  Fuck them.

EDIT: Pessimistic = Realistic in this situation.

Last edited by Turquoise (2007-01-10 19:07:24)

ATG wrote:

jonsimon wrote:

Illegitimate war = bad idea.

Okay, just for the record, defiine EXACTLY what made the war illegit.

The lack of a moral, just, or legitimate reason for it? Our politicians used an unrelated attack as leverage and loaded images of terrorism, nuclear weapons, and chemical warfare to doubletalk their way into Iraq so they can protect the economic interests of the US by creating a new puppet government. First of all, the bullshit and lying is just down right sadistic and blowing someone up to protect your economy is the equivilent of punching someone in the face during a basketball game. It just isn't fair play. I simply cannot support an illegitimate war. I can't offer any alternate solution except diplomacy and negotiation, but we already forfeited that option after we toppled their government.

Good>>>>>

Troop increase will increase security in areas that were not able to keep the proper amount of troops to keep the area secure.  Also the new policy giving the troops access to areas that were previously not allowed will result in more insurgency dead or captured. Also making benchmarks that the Iraqi govt has to meet will help better adjust tactics. 

finally 3000 dead.....how many enemy combatants killed or captured?  Oh yeah they don't give those numbers in the media.   There have been tens of thousands maybe one hundred thousand plus killed or captured.  I am not saying 3000 dead is good but if the y would report the fucking enemy combatants killed that 3000 would be a minuscule number.

Leaving Iraq is not an option.  A person saying that it should happen is an idiot because it would result in a whole hell of a lot more then 3000 dead.  On top of it becoming a terrorist haven and cash cow.

Oh and the new law or policy for sharing the oil wealth with the people.  Great idea.  Look at the United Arab Emirates.

Kmarion wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

TheEternalPessimist wrote:

I'm just glad the UK isn't planning on sending more troops, I'm not happy that my country has anyone involved in this fucking farce in the first place. Yeah I do blame Bush (Blair is a pussy bitch puppet who's far to eager to follow, I'll be glad when he's gone), and it's sad that people had to die coz he's decided to 'bring order to the world' whether they want it or not.

I don't honestly know if the US sending in more troops is a good thing or not, it's pretty much a lost cause anyway. Iraq is a different world to what we live in, trying to bring about a few hundred years worth of political progress in the space of months is just a rediculous notion.

Best outcome I can see is leave, let them have their civil wars and riots and in a few years and a lot more deaths they'll have their own balance of power established again, I wouldn't be supprised if another Saddam type ended up in power (lets face it he kept people in line).

ATG, I think this guy has summed up my view on this really well.

The way I see it, these people want to kill each other, with or without us there.  So, who are we to stop them?  Besides, most of them will just resent us for getting involved.  Fuck them.

They will resent us no matter what. The Islamic world has been around for over 1200 years and look at their current state of death and despair. They need a great Satan to blame. With the west being as successful as it is it makes it an easy target.

Following that logic, shouldn't we just leave them alone and increase domestic defense?

Kmarion wrote:

ATG wrote:

TheEternalPessimist wrote:

I'm just glad the UK isn't planning on sending more troops, I'm not happy that my country has anyone involved in this fucking farce in the first place. Yeah I do blame Bush (Blair is a pussy bitch puppet who's far to eager to follow, I'll be glad when he's gone), and it's sad that people had to die coz he's decided to 'bring order to the world' whether they want it or not.

I don't honestly know if the US sending in more troops is a good thing or not, it's pretty much a lost cause anyway. Iraq is a different world to what we live in, trying to bring about a few hundred years worth of political progress in the space of months is just a rediculous notion.

Best outcome I can see is leave, let them have their civil wars and riots and in a few years and a lot more deaths they'll have their own balance of power established again, I wouldn't be supprised if another Saddam type ended up in power (lets face it he kept people in line).

Stop being so goddamned pessimistic.

Not exactly the stuff winners are made of. If Europe wouldn't have fucked the borders up in the first place this entire mid-east problem may have been non existent.

Sorry but no... that has shit all to do with it. Iraq was and is a fucked up country nothing has changed really, the US by which I mean Bush, decided to go invade and took little boy Blair along for the ride.

This hasn't got a thing to do with past events it's all very much in the present, the whole 'war on terror' thing going to peoples heads and goverments wanting so desperatly to be seen to be doing somthing that they jumped on the Iraq bandwagon and ended up in this fucking mess were in now, good men have died because both our countries are run by complete morons, Bush is a retard this much is known but Blair must be worse to follow the dimwit.

the whole things fucked up beyond recognition, neither nation has a place in Iraq, we should never have gone there in the first place. Yeah leaving will leave the population to do as they will, but IMO thats what we went there for wasn't it? Give a country it's free will back? If they want to have a civil war and bring about their own rulership and power base who are we stop them? is it our country? No it isn't, do we even have a right to be there? no we don't.

I remeber seeing something that pretty much summed up the Bush mentallity. "Peace through superior firepower" roughly translated means "bomb the shit out of them til they submit" which is the most moronic attitued I've ever come across and it kinda sums up the idea of sending in yet more troops, "oh we havn't won" "ok then send in more people to bomb the bad guys". Sorry but we arnt the ones that are going to win this, we simply can't, it's not our fight, it's the Iraqi's, and always will be til we fuck off and let them sort it their way.

Turquoise wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

ATG, I think this guy has summed up my view on this really well.

The way I see it, these people want to kill each other, with or without us there.  So, who are we to stop them?  Besides, most of them will just resent us for getting involved.  Fuck them.

They will resent us no matter what. The Islamic world has been around for over 1200 years and look at their current state of death and despair. They need a great Satan to blame. With the west being as successful as it is it makes it an easy target.

Following that logic, shouldn't we just leave them alone and increase domestic defense?

No we should help provide them with hope, since the lack thereof is what spawns terrorism. We should also support moderate Islam and allow them to take their religion back from these murderous fucks. Only moderate Islam can defeat militant Islam.




TheEternalPessimist you need to learn to think beyond your current lifetime. It's kind of small minded to think this is all the result of one man.

Last edited by Kmarion (2007-01-10 19:22:41)

Colfax wrote:

Iran and Syria are supplying them.  We do know that.

that is a hint to leave.......Iran has looooong money to keep pumping the juice into this "war"

shadowkila wrote:

11sog_raider wrote:

i feel its a good idea, buti think 20,000 isnt enough

Hey heres a great fucking idea, why don't you or someone in you family join and head over to Iraq.or whereverthefuck.

Been there done that.. your turn asshole!

Turquoise wrote:

Colfax wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Following that logic, shouldn't we just leave them alone and increase domestic defense?

Like in WWII?  Oh wait we got attacked anyways

Comparing this to WW2 is like me comparing Bush to Hitler.  Don't do it.

He is comparing the pacifist attitude in both situations.(Not the actual wars)

Last edited by Kmarion (2007-01-10 19:25:27)

we need to get out revamp the whole attack.....3rd Infantry Division  has welcome home signs that havent came down in 4 years.........I kid you not