BF2S Forums Iraq is not Ready for Democracy: Time to Pull Out

Turquoise wrote:

The_Mac wrote:

Our good friend Truman decreed in 1947 that we wouldn't go isolationist. Its not a good idea, especially with hostile forces gone completely bonkers. Communists then, nut Islamis now.

Truman was a wise man in many ways, but there is a HUGE difference between Islamists and Communists.  Communism was officially running countries, while the terrorist brand of Islamism is very limited in its official rule.

We're fighting a large fringe group.  You can't win that kind of fight through invasions.

Truman was a flake who was power hungry and arrogant, you could argue NATO won Korea in spite of his administration rather than because of it.
And I think you can fight off Islam terrorists the way the British fought off communist punks in Malayasia. Isolate them, find the local infrastructure and shatter it. Unsurprisingly, its what we're doing in Iraq, and we're doing a damned good job of it. of course the media wouldn't have you know at all. That wouldn't be informing the public at all.

There's also the fact that Communism and Islam may be very different ideologies, but they both posed a threat to western civilization, but they both have political influence, and the Iranians are most likely funding the terrorists in Iraq and bums hanging around. When Iran blows up because of the nut case ruling the place, radical Islams are going to get slaughtered. good riddance.

Turquoise wrote:

Miller wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Truman was a wise man in many ways, but there is a HUGE difference between Islamists and Communists.  Communism was officially running countries, while the terrorist brand of Islamism is very limited in its official rule.

We're fighting a large fringe group.  You can't win that kind of fight through invasions.

A few dirty fights work though.

A few dirty fights started this mess....  see the Afghan War for one.

I still think nuking the place is the best way to solve the problem of the middle east...

The_Mac wrote:

Truman was a flake who was power hungry and arrogant, you could argue NATO won Korea in spite of his administration rather than because of it..

A power hungry flake willing to push forth civil rights reforms in the military and the postal service long before the Civil Rights Movement?...

A power hungry flake that had to rein in MacArthur?

I don't think so.  Truman was one of the better presidents of the 20th Century.  We could do well to have another like him enter office, Democrat or Republican.

The_Mac wrote:

And I think you can fight off Islam terrorists the way the British fought off communist punks in Malayasia. Isolate them, find the local infrastructure and shatter it. Unsurprisingly, its what we're doing in Iraq, and we're doing a damned good job of it. of course the media wouldn't have you know at all. That wouldn't be informing the public at all.

$400 billion in the hole, 15,000 soldiers wounded, 3,000 dead, and most of the world going from loving us to hating us in a mere 7 years is a good job?....   wtf?

The_Mac wrote:

There's also the fact that Communism and Islam may be very different ideologies, but they both posed a threat to western civilization, but they both have political influence, and the Iranians are most likely funding the terrorists in Iraq and bums hanging around. When Iran blows up because of the nut case ruling the place, radical Islams are going to get slaughtered. good riddance.

Iran is just the tip of the iceberg.  If you want to focus on terrorists, I suggest you look at Afghanistan and Pakistan.  That conflict is far more relevant than Iraq has ever been.

The surge should had been 100,000 troops not 20,000 troops.  Since we have a 'half-hearted' attempt its only going to improve slightly and not enough for the public.  Already polls have the popularity of the war at 66% opposed...that means at least 15% of Republicans are against it.

If things don't change by the end of the year I think an even larger majority are willing to have another Cambodian-like killing fields occur.

I wouldn't be surprised that Iran annexxes 1/3rd the country.

US engineers found some oil . Though there was an arabian country on top of US oil . Not a big deal though ...

The West helped Saddam into power.
The West gave Saddam WMD and urged him to use it on the Iranian civilians.
The West then demonised Saddam.
The West destroyed Iraq in the first Gulf War then starved 1million Iraqis to death and thought it was a "price worth paying"
The West then removed Saddam from power, dismantled all security and civilian infrastructure creating a mayhem of terrorism and poverty, but free oilfields.
Every Western involvement in Iraq has been selfish and catastrophic.

Let them kill eachother as they always have. They seem to like it that way. I just dont want them over here ever again . .

7 years and counting. A step up from 9 in 8 years. All is still well in NYC. . . .


             and we know why.

Last edited by Hunter/Jumper (2008-05-15 15:50:43)

Hunter/Jumper wrote:

Let them kill eachother as they always have. They seem to like it that way. I just dont want them over here ever again . .

7 years and counting. A step up from 9 in 8 years. All is still well in NYC. . . .


             and we know why.

Saddam killing people was good enough reason to intervene, yet when they kill each other it's alright? Consistency in your argument seems to be a missing ingredient.

Hunter/Jumper wrote:

and we know why.

Terrorists don't have to travel thousands of kilometres to kill the 'infidel' anymore?

Hunter/Jumper wrote:

Let them kill eachother as they always have. They seem to like it that way. I just dont want them over here ever again . .

7 years and counting. A step up from 9 in 8 years. All is still well in NYC. . . .


             and we know why.

Iraqis in NYC?

m3thod wrote:

Saddam killing people was good enough reason to intervene, yet when they kill each other it's alright? Consistency in your argument seems to be a missing ingredient.

You are not quoting my argument  here, I said

" " The Surge " worked, Done Deal. Thats why Liberals are avoiding Iraq as a campaing issue, to bad so many Democrats wanted to Surrender. Hindsight must feel like anal sex now.. . . "

I think your lost....again.

Terrorists don't have to travel thousands of kilometres to kill the 'infidel' anymore?

Yes, just as the Nazi's were thrilled when our heavy bombers came right over their homes, because it was so much more convenient for them that way. We were really screwed when the U.S. Warships moored right in Tokyo Bay. Those crafty Japanese !

We date their woman, play with their children, they can read whatever, watch whatever they want now.  Its hard take something away once people have had a taste of  it.

Pray for some disaster, its your only hope !

ps "lol" all you want because we blew the shit out of the right place... dolt

Last edited by Hunter/Jumper (2008-05-15 16:39:23)

try and stay current

Hunter/Jumper wrote:

m3thod wrote:

Saddam killing people was good enough reason to intervene, yet when they kill each other it's alright? Consistency in your argument seems to be a missing ingredient.

You are not quoting my argument  here, I said

" " The Surge " worked, Done Deal. Thats why Liberals are avoiding Iraq as a campaing issue, to bad so many Democrats wanted to Surrender. Hindsight must feel like anal sex now.. . . "

I think your lost....again.

Nope

Hunter/Jumper wrote:

Let them kill eachother as they always have. They seem to like it that way. I just dont want them over here ever again . .

I was referring to this gem.  try to keep up old bean.

Hunter/Jumper wrote:

Terrorists don't have to travel thousands of kilometres to kill the 'infidel' anymore?
Yes, just as the Nazi's were thrilled when our heavy bombers came right over their homes, because it was so much more convenient for them that way. We were really screwed when the U.S. Warships moored right in Tokyo Bay. Those crafty Japanese !

We date their woman, play with their children, they can read whatever, watch whatever they want now.  Its hard take something away once people have had a taste of  it.

Pray for some disaster, its your only hope !

ps "lol" all you want because we blew the shit out of the right place... dolt

The Iraq war is a success? It was a disaster from day one.  The 'intel',  the rumsfeld strategy, the disbandment of the army, the inability to secure strongholds.  The surge cannot contain the violence forever, The US economy cannot labour the Iraq war forever.  US citizens will have to return home.  The Surge is a temprary fix to a far larger long term problem.

WW2 has no relevance to Iraq war.  You will not see carpet bombing, or large scale airdrops and much to your regret nuclear weapons.  There never was a malevolent dictator hellbent on world domination.  Germany and Japan had a population tired of war they embraced the taste of what the Allies brought.   Iraq has always been a divided country, they dont want your playboy and MTV.  They want blood.

Last edited by m3thod (2008-05-15 16:57:43)

The Iraq War was a success in every way you measure a war.

" they dont want your playboy and MTV. "

ok, we shall see. Its a known fact that many who have come over here to " Wage Holy War on our soil ", just bagged it once the had a taste of America.