BF2S Forums The Iraq Situation: What would you do?

leetkyle wrote:

i've seen countless posts on what people would do, but i'd love to get them all bunched up in here. i am aware there are similar threads but i couldn't find one that is like this

You are the US President. Your troops are still in Iraq. What are you going to do?

I am not sure what I'd do. If you pull out, Iraq is likely to destroy itself through civil war, but if you stay in - then you could be making each side even angrier. This is a real tough one.

Withdraw, but keep troops in Afghanistan and Kuwait.  We'll need to remain a defensive force for our oil buddies in Kuwait, and we'll need to divert some of the troops currently in Iraq to Afghanistan to prepare for any trouble we might face from Pakistan.

stupid.

Apparently the solution is to go on vacation. At least if you are the Iraqi parliament.

Turquoise wrote:

leetkyle wrote:

i've seen countless posts on what people would do, but i'd love to get them all bunched up in here. i am aware there are similar threads but i couldn't find one that is like this

You are the US President. Your troops are still in Iraq. What are you going to do?

I am not sure what I'd do. If you pull out, Iraq is likely to destroy itself through civil war, but if you stay in - then you could be making each side even angrier. This is a real tough one.

Withdraw, but keep troops in Afghanistan and Kuwait.  We'll need to remain a defensive force for our oil buddies in Kuwait, and we'll need to divert some of the troops currently in Iraq to Afghanistan to prepare for any trouble we might face from Pakistan.

thats the thing.  with troops in Iraq there is no need for any large bases in Kuwait.  The same bases i flew into Kuwait in the begining of my deployment were tore down or given back to the Kuwaiti military towards the end, and from what I understand, there are even less bases now.

Kuwait was our main strategic presence in the middle east, now its Iraq.

Last edited by GunSlinger OIF II (2007-08-04 18:06:28)

Turquoise wrote:

GS, I see what you mean, but wouldn't you say that you're a lot safer if you're stationed in Kuwait rather than in Iraq.

I don't see much point in keeping bases in an area where supply lines are continually attacked.

that depends on the agenda.  If containmen of Iranian regional influence is the goal, which I think is, then Iraq would be a lot better place to station troops than kuwait or saudia arabia.

Turquoise wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Apparently the solution is to go on vacation. At least if you are the Iraqi parliament.

They must be taking cues from our own government....

I think that would be more like Lincoln going on a thirty day cruise in 1861 ...lol.

What needs to be done is to provide the Afghanistan and Iraqi people with jobs. this is a vital part of building a stable society and sovereign state. when people don't have any work to go to extremist-thoughts tend to grow in societies as you can see proof of in many historical situations. Germany during the 20's and 30's and a small wave that arised during the 90's in Europe. This wave had it's culm. in Yugoslavia, although many other factors was playing a key-role too.

In Afghanistan and Iraq you can either become a cop/military or you can join the other force. the other force is the extremist-kind and this is due to the situation of poor work. there is always many other factors but this one of the key-parts which cannot be neglected.
should the American forces withdraw from Iraq? Will this generate peace in middle-east? i some cases yes cause the government in mentioned countries can then provide the people with jobs to rebuild their country. Unfortunately their police force is not that greatly educated and needs more of that kind. they also need a better system of justice. this is what the American forces can provide and this is also what the rest of the European forces can provide. it's time to stop looking for scapegoats and discussing the moral parts of why the US is in Iraq or why they went there. Us need to provide the folks with stability in forms of work and this is the ONLY way to start building a stable society.

US-forces shall remain but other countries need to help as well. with Great Britain on the run(not judging because I understand why) the US-forces are most of the foreign forces in Iraq. with forces from 10-12 different countries( most of them not members of NATO) the country itself can start seeing for itself that the world is trying and just not hunting. when US stands alone this is probably the message it sends.

1. divide the responsibility among other countries.
2. provide the folks with work. (all kinds of work)
3: give local authorities better education in preferred areas of schooling.
4. and do not leave the country (Iraq or Afghanistan) within the next 3-4 years.

We still have forces in Serbia and other countries of Yugoslavia several years after the war, this is because of the stable environment the soldiers send only by being nearby.

I'm from Sweden if you wonder where this stupid moron got his ideas from. it seems to be somewhat the same ideas as most of you. (sorry for the length of the text, couldn't help myself, my fingers were on fire. have cut it down significantly)

As The President of the United States I am honoured to announce to my loyal troops...


" who's up for pancakes ! "