BF2S Forums Serious discussion on UN's role in Iraq war.

The UN is worthless. Case in point. Darfur had a problem with an uprising of attacks in Rawanda. They, for the cost of 11 million dolars paid for a group of ex-Special forces to defend and erradicate the opposition. 200 special forces and a helicopter destroyed 20,000 enemy troops with in one month. The UN said that this was too violrnt a responce and withdrew the SF. The y replaced them with UN troops at a cost of 100 Million dollars and with in 4 days the UN suffered losses of 24 killed and 10 wounded inside of 4 days. 5 Soldiers were kidnapped for ransom and the Militial regained ground right under the soldiers noses. The UN is a failed unit.

G3|Genius wrote:

I agree that the UN has a lot of blood on their hands.

The UN has proven itself to be ineffective and useless.  Everyone knows that a UN "resolution" is a decision to pretend to care.

I don't think we should be more cruel, as OP suggests.  but I DO think that we need to start kicking ass.  I don't know how.  I am not a commander, and I am not privvy to any information that would give me any credibility for a suggestion, but I, too, am freaking tired of hearing about all the violence in Iraq.  Furthermore, I am freaking tired of the Leftist conclusion that we need to pull out because of it.

I say, NAY NAY!

we need to kick ass HARDER.

that's what I want to see.  harder ass kickin out there.

+1 for bashing the UN, by the way

I'm not suggesting that we be cruel to innocent people in the least.  I'm saying we be cruel to the people that are bombing us.  Send them a message they'll understand.

Onionpaste wrote:

I was having this conversation with my dad the other day, and some interesting points were brought up.  We have Iraqi's blowing our troops up, killing them, kidnapping them, etc.  And we're just taking it.  Why?  Why are we allowing guerrilla terrorists / insurgents to kill OUR troops, OUR people, friends, peers, etc.  Above all, why are we putting another country over the US?

I agree, and this line of thinking is the root of why I believe we should withdraw now.

Onionpaste wrote:

What could we have done differently that might have shifted the "war" into our favor?  I think I know the answer.  It's the UN that caused this.  The UN and their "rules" and "regulations" and "security counsel."  All they are really doing with that is getting US troops killed.  Why?  Allow me to explain.

When we invaded Iraq, we had the UN breathing down our necks.  We invaded Baghdad, captured Saddam after a while, but still we were getting blown up.  Why is this?  How do the insurgents suddenly have the ability to kill us and blow us up.  We, the United States of America, probably have one of the strongest armies in the world.  Why are we letting a bunch of punk Iraqis push us around?

We're letting them push us around because they think we're weak.  And, in a sense, we are.  WWI:  We won.  WWII: We won.  Shortly after WWII, UN was established.  We stopped winning so well afterwards.  The last military action I can think of that we had a reasonable success with, completing our main objective, was the first Gulf War. 

The reason we've stopped winning wars is because of the UN.  If you think about it, all that the terrorists and insurgents listen to is force.  If we try to reason with them, they bomb us.  If we ignore them, they bomb us.  If we wanted to have some sort of margin of success in the War in Iraq, we had to be brutal.  I don't believe that what I'm about to say is morally right, or a good thing to do, but it is necessary.  We cannot hold another country above our own, when it is OUR people getting killed by THEM.  We needed to get more violent.  If it meant hanging bodies up in the streets to show the insurgents that we mean business, that we're not just a bunch of pussies that came to play carebears with their AK-47's.

I disagree on only one point.  It's not the U.N. that is the reason for us losing in Iraq.  We're fighting a guerilla war in Iraq, which is something very different from what our armed forces are used to.  Most of our combat tactics are designed for fighting conventional forces out in the open.  SWAT teams are actually better suited for what we're doing in Iraq, because urban combat is their specialty.  Lately, the military has been adapting its training for this kind of combat, but ultimately, this comes down to what many of you in this thread have hinted at.  We can't play by the same rules as our enemies, because that would make us look bad.

Obviously, this is a major problem for us as an occupying force.  Something that should have been understood even before the war was that invasion usually leads to an insurgency.  Many Iraqis may like what we have done, but it's become painfully apparent that many others do not want us to stay any longer.  When faced with an insurgency, there should be an understanding that the only route to victory is brutality.  We should have been more honest with ourselves by accepting that we would have to become the next Saddam in order to win this.

Unfortunately, the Bush administration was extremely naive and optimistic concerning the mentality of the various ethnic groups in Iraq.  Even though recent history had shown the region to be boiling with ethnic rage, Bush seemed to expect to see us welcomed as liberators.  Once that assumption proved to be bullshit, the administration should have been more honest and either withdrawn or gone ahead and implemented a brutal police state.

These two options are still relevant to the current situation, but withdrawal is a hell of a lot cheaper and has fewer negative repercussions for America than the other option of brutality.  But yes, if you want to "win" this, we'll need to "waste the muthafuckas" as Samuel L. Jackson said in "Rules of Engagement."

Onionpaste wrote:

All the insurgents understand is violence.  They don't listen to peace, or negotiations.  They get what they want or die trying, in most cases.  They're pushing us and we're falling over.  When they push, we need to shoot back, and, again, I don't think this is the best way to do things with most countries, if necessary, BLOW THEIR F**KING HEADS OFF.  Because they will answer to nothing less.

I agree, but we have to be honest and be ready to expect a lot more civilian casualties going this route.  We can't expect this to be a clean operation at this point.  Be also prepared for the world to begin turning away from us diplomatically.

Onionpaste wrote:

Most of the US casualties can probably be linked to the UN and their carebear policies.  In my opinion, if the insurgents are breaking them, we should be able to break them too so that we don't suffer casualties or deaths just because of a few rules.  They are causing more harm to the US and our courageous troops fighting in Iraq than they are saving innocent lives. 

Just my two cents.  Discuss.

Once again, I agree for the most part, but again, withdrawal would seem to be the most practical choice at this point....

IG-Calibre wrote:

Hmmmmmmm I dunno, maybe if the US had actually listened to the UN instead of just invading Iraq themselves, maybe the scenario would be different. So please stop trying to blame the UN for the deaths of US soldiers, the responsibility lands square at the Feet of Bush and none else.  Hey but of course, sure, it's not americas fault it's the fault of the UN, it's everyone's elses fault except America - thanks for giving me a laugh this morning..

You have hit the nail on the head........You guys need to stop defending the US administration.......We went in with very little backup........The only legitimate ally we have in this occupation is the Brits, and Blair and his dummies are catching the same flack as Bush and company...........Everyone needs to stop and think outside of the box.

Answer these questions yourself:  1)What does the country of Iraq have to offer the US besides oil? 2)Why have more Iraqi people died since we invaded, than the 10 years prior? (When Saddam was in power) 3)Why is the largest soldier support company of over there the same company that our Vice president use to run?  4)Why are we spending billions rebuilding Iraq when we have homeless and hungry in our own country? 5)Why would we have a defense budget of over 400 billion and have the majority of it in the "War in Iraq" when we have a two countries (SOUTH KOREA AND IRAQ) forcing their issues on NUKES?  Why have we had more US officials stepped down since like the NIXON days.

There is a lot of dirty business going on in the world right now and I think our country holds a ton of the blame.  People don't want to see or say it, but the situation over there in Iraq has turned into Vietnam Part II..........IMO we have bit off more than we can chew....I think our president's worst decisions have been the people he has appointed around him......He is too much of a "GOOD OL BOY" ....Look who he appointed as Sec Def, a Texan!!!!  I guess it just so happened that the Sec Def is from Texas?  I not bashing Texans......We need a competent administration, but It may be 10 years before we get it.  Look how many people have stepped down in this administration.

I agree that the UN is worthless but they didn't support Invading Iraq so why should they support it now, because Bush is in a bind? 

We have got to have it in our minds that one day there will be a International Government......One day there will be a Woman or a Minority president.  I personally think that we need a woman for president.  Maybe not one of the candidates for this election but we need to do something different before countries start getting wiped off the Planet.  Countries have a right to do what they want to do in their own country.  IMO some foreign governments feel like we are going to treat em like Native Americans, so they rebel at all cost..They even travel to other countries to "Display" their passion or insanity.