I really doubt that. However, media blackout in combination with a true police state over there would.GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
media blackout will equal victory in iraq.
i disagree. if the assholes knew that their deeds had no witnesses except for the victims of their crimes, they would lose their support. people think because the amount of casualites means we are losing the military conflict. bullshit, they cant stand a lick of defense against our forces over there. but people are attracted by the shock value of 60 dead here 30 dead there because their not used to hearing about so many people dying in their immediate areas so the attitude will be "oh dear, they must surely be winning if they could kill so many..." bullshit. i hate the media. i hate politics and im starting to dislike civilians for the most part. and those are the actual 3 key ingredients to an insurgent victory, no matter how many times they are actually defeated on the battlefield. alot more people in that part of world would love a chance to end their pitiful little existances with a bang
/winGunSlinger OIF II wrote:
i disagree. if the assholes knew that their deeds had no witnesses except for the victims of their crimes, they would lose their support. people think because the amount of casualites means we are losing the military conflict. bullshit, they cant stand a lick of defense against our forces over there. but people are attracted by the shock value of 60 dead here 30 dead there because their not used to hearing about so many people dying in their immediate areas so the attitude will be "oh dear, they must surely be winning if they could kill so many..." bullshit. i hate the media. i hate politics and im starting to dislike civilians for the most part. and those are the actual 3 key ingredients to an insurgent victory, no matter how many times they are actually defeated on the battlefield. alot more people in that part of world would love a chance to end their pitiful little existances with a bang
Great post well thought out and put forward, might not be in total agreement with all of it, but for the most part I can see where your coming from.GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
i disagree. if the assholes knew that their deeds had no witnesses except for the victims of their crimes, they would lose their support. people think because the amount of casualites means we are losing the military conflict. bullshit, they cant stand a lick of defense against our forces over there. but people are attracted by the shock value of 60 dead here 30 dead there because their not used to hearing about so many people dying in their immediate areas so the attitude will be "oh dear, they must surely be winning if they could kill so many..." bullshit. i hate the media. i hate politics and im starting to dislike civilians for the most part. and those are the actual 3 key ingredients to an insurgent victory, no matter how many times they are actually defeated on the battlefield. alot more people in that part of world would love a chance to end their pitiful little existances with a bang
thanks fellas. id like to add...
i know the middle east. i know the sentiment. to believe that these people want democracy any less than us is folley. to believe that they dislike freedom any less that us is just wrong. the lack of a political history and culture. due in part to western ignorance in the 1920's and ottoman rule (or lack there of) we see the middle east the way it is today. a group of people who for the most part are of the same genetic type but who are so divided that peace seems a far cry. bullshit. they like life and freedom just as much as you or I. to say that a police state will keep them in line is like saying that they arent advanced enough for democracy and i totally disagree. the fact is, there has never been a true democracy in that part of the world. these people have been ruled by one group or another for so so many centuries. i may be wrong, but thats just the way i see things.
*EDIT* only problem is, when you are in an area with rampant poverty and exploitation, you will find religion being a major part of a persons day to day life. and when a strong fundamentalist attitude is so common, you will, due to natural human nature, find those within that very group willing to exploit the weaknesses of the masses for their own personal glory.
i know the middle east. i know the sentiment. to believe that these people want democracy any less than us is folley. to believe that they dislike freedom any less that us is just wrong. the lack of a political history and culture. due in part to western ignorance in the 1920's and ottoman rule (or lack there of) we see the middle east the way it is today. a group of people who for the most part are of the same genetic type but who are so divided that peace seems a far cry. bullshit. they like life and freedom just as much as you or I. to say that a police state will keep them in line is like saying that they arent advanced enough for democracy and i totally disagree. the fact is, there has never been a true democracy in that part of the world. these people have been ruled by one group or another for so so many centuries. i may be wrong, but thats just the way i see things.
*EDIT* only problem is, when you are in an area with rampant poverty and exploitation, you will find religion being a major part of a persons day to day life. and when a strong fundamentalist attitude is so common, you will, due to natural human nature, find those within that very group willing to exploit the weaknesses of the masses for their own personal glory.
Last edited by GunSlinger OIF II (2007-01-25 19:29:44)
Hmmm... Usmarines quote reminds me of someone else. I think there name begins fancy and ends Bollux. They seem to post mindless attention whoring crap all the time. Occasionally visiting serious topics to seem like they dont just spam shit.Fancy_Pollux wrote:
QFTusmarine2007 wrote:
His strategy is to have as many posts about the same thing as possible.
I see where you are coming from. In a way, you're correct.GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
i disagree. if the assholes knew that their deeds had no witnesses except for the victims of their crimes, they would lose their support. people think because the amount of casualites means we are losing the military conflict. bullshit, they cant stand a lick of defense against our forces over there. but people are attracted by the shock value of 60 dead here 30 dead there because their not used to hearing about so many people dying in their immediate areas so the attitude will be "oh dear, they must surely be winning if they could kill so many..." bullshit. i hate the media. i hate politics and im starting to dislike civilians for the most part. and those are the actual 3 key ingredients to an insurgent victory, no matter how many times they are actually defeated on the battlefield. alot more people in that part of world would love a chance to end their pitiful little existances with a bang
The part where I disagree is that it's more than just the media holding us back. It really is chaotic as hell over there because of how many sides are in this conflict. The main reason why I think withdrawal is the best option is because of how difficult and expensive true victory would be.
Think about this.... We've spent about $400 billion in the last 3 years on Iraq. How much have we accomplished? You can blame some of our failures on the repercussions of media coverage and on the fickle nature of politics, but a harsh reality in this is that insurgency is so effective because of entropy.
Like in physics, it's much easier to destroy something than to rebuild it. All it takes is a few thousand psychos willing to blow themselves up to make life a living hell in an area. We have the misfortune of being sitting ducks in a country that, in large part, doesn't even want us there. We build a school after months of work, and in one murderous moment, they can blow it up. If you concentrate enough psychos into one area, order really does become futile.
I would agree that the loss of soldiers pales in comparison to how many insurgents we've killed. However, look at the financial costs. Look at how many police departments here have become shorthanded because we've had to deploy most of our reserves and national guard over to Iraq. Look at the resulting rise in crime in cities like Minneapolis.
Overall, what we're looking at is an operation that is only winnable through massive costs, questionably feasible methods (since blacking out all media in an area these days is nigh impossible due to portable technology and the internet), and brutal tactics (which we haven't done yet, but would be necessary in instilling order). Is it really worth all that?
Once it became apparent that this conflict would just continue to atomize (with dozens of militias fighting each other over various cities), to me... it just strengthened the argument for withdrawal. I realize that the majority of Iraqis are probably not that different from us, but there is apparently a large enough portion of their population (and a large enough portion of insurgents being smuggled in) to make order nothing much more than a pipe dream. It's sad to see the majority suffer for the whims of the few, but c'est la vie.
the most intelligent statement I've seen yet. and GunSlinger, I think you've completely missed the point. I believe that when the Americans wanted their oppressors out and won, they were called patriots, not terrorists.Vilham wrote:
Hmmm... Usmarines quote reminds me of someone else. I think there name begins fancy and ends Bollux. They seem to post mindless attention whoring crap all the time. Occasionally visiting serious topics to seem like they dont just spam shit.Fancy_Pollux wrote:
QFTusmarine2007 wrote:
His strategy is to have as many posts about the same thing as possible.
The sad thing is a lot of the Iraqi people are hating the US and UK troops, because of the Insurgents blowing there own people up all the time, because thats all they see all the time on the media
They think if our troops leave the bombing would stop, the thing is if we go too soon, before the government is stable, it will be a shit storm as the country tears itself apart in a civil war and we could end up with a hell of a lot worse Iraq than when Saddam was in power.
I'm sure that they are 1000's of Iraqis just wanting peace, but as GunSlinger OIF II says until the media get behind our troops over there, that includes the Middle eastern media, then peace is going to be a long way off.
They think if our troops leave the bombing would stop, the thing is if we go too soon, before the government is stable, it will be a shit storm as the country tears itself apart in a civil war and we could end up with a hell of a lot worse Iraq than when Saddam was in power.
I'm sure that they are 1000's of Iraqis just wanting peace, but as GunSlinger OIF II says until the media get behind our troops over there, that includes the Middle eastern media, then peace is going to be a long way off.
it seems an impossible task to change a tradition that has been going on for centuries (militias). thats all they really know. but, i cant give up on iraq for the simple fact that as long as the wanting for a free society exists by even the smallest number of people, we should do what we can to fix this mess. I dont believe we should have ever invaded and ill leave it at that. but we're there now. and ill leave that at that. this soldier right here has the best intentions for the iraqi people and the worst nightmare for the militias and insurgents.Turquoise wrote:
I see where you are coming from. In a way, you're correct.GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
i disagree. if the assholes knew that their deeds had no witnesses except for the victims of their crimes, they would lose their support. people think because the amount of casualites means we are losing the military conflict. bullshit, they cant stand a lick of defense against our forces over there. but people are attracted by the shock value of 60 dead here 30 dead there because their not used to hearing about so many people dying in their immediate areas so the attitude will be "oh dear, they must surely be winning if they could kill so many..." bullshit. i hate the media. i hate politics and im starting to dislike civilians for the most part. and those are the actual 3 key ingredients to an insurgent victory, no matter how many times they are actually defeated on the battlefield. alot more people in that part of world would love a chance to end their pitiful little existances with a bang
The part where I disagree is that it's more than just the media holding us back. It really is chaotic as hell over there because of how many sides are in this conflict. The main reason why I think withdrawal is the best option is because of how difficult and expensive true victory would be.
Think about this.... We've spent about $400 billion in the last 3 years on Iraq. How much have we accomplished? You can blame some of our failures on the repercussions of media coverage and on the fickle nature of politics, but a harsh reality in this is that insurgency is so effective because of entropy.
Like in physics, it's much easier to destroy something than to rebuild it. All it takes is a few thousand psychos willing to blow themselves up to make life a living hell in an area. We have the misfortune of being sitting ducks in a country that, in large part, doesn't even want us there. We build a school after months of work, and in one murderous moment, they can blow it up. If you concentrate enough psychos into one area, order really does become futile.
I would agree that the loss of soldiers pales in comparison to how many insurgents we've killed. However, look at the financial costs. Look at how many police departments here have become shorthanded because we've had to deploy most of our reserves and national guard over to Iraq. Look at the resulting rise in crime in cities like Minneapolis.
Overall, what we're looking at is an operation that is only winnable through massive costs, questionably feasible methods (since blacking out all media in an area these days is nigh impossible due to portable technology and the internet), and brutal tactics (which we haven't done yet, but would be necessary in instilling order). Is it really worth all that?
Once it became apparent that this conflict would just continue to atomize (with dozens of militias fighting each other over various cities), to me... it just strengthened the argument for withdrawal. I realize that the majority of Iraqis are probably not that different from us, but there is apparently a large enough portion of their population (and a large enough portion of insurgents being smuggled in) to make order nothing much more than a pipe dream. It's sad to see the majority suffer for the whims of the few, but c'est la vie.
Your intentions are noble, but my hope for Iraq has completely died. My cynicism toward its future seems heavily supported by what we've seen over the last 3 years, and I certainly wouldn't give my life for these people. Again, I admire your ideals, but I can't help but find them unrealistic.GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
it seems an impossible task to change a tradition that has been going on for centuries (militias). thats all they really know. but, i cant give up on iraq for the simple fact that as long as the wanting for a free society exists by even the smallest number of people, we should do what we can to fix this mess. I dont believe we should have ever invaded and ill leave it at that. but we're there now. and ill leave that at that. this soldier right here has the best intentions for the iraqi people and the worst nightmare for the militias and insurgents.
GunSlinger OIF II another great post getting great points across without the gun ho nuke em all mentality, a lot of other poster on here should read what you have wrote and how you have wrote it.
I would +1 one you again if I could.
I would +1 one you again if I could.
thanks dude, this is my last for the night. early day tomorrow.
peace in the middle east.
peace in the middle east.
This topic has been discussed previously -- Please use the search feature to find the previous thread. {quote}
If you want some questioned answered, try Google. If you want to spark a debate, it's too late - there are so many now on this subject.
If you want some questioned answered, try Google. If you want to spark a debate, it's too late - there are so many now on this subject.
[Blinking eyes thing]
Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/tzyon
Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/tzyon