Pages: 1 2

 

2008-07-19 08:43:40
Pug
UR father's brother's nephew's former roommate
+652|6543|Texas - Bigger than France

ZombieVampire! wrote:

Pug wrote:

ZombieVampire! wrote:

So they have to negotiate what they do with their sovereign territory now?
So you are under the impression they don't need any US military help at all?
I'm under the impression that my opinion doesn't matter.
Why do you feel that way?

Other nations SHOULD be pressuring the countries responsible for conflict for peace ASAP...of course in this case, how many countries approved of force in Iraq?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multinatio … ce_in_Iraq
2008-07-19 08:45:12
Pug
UR father's brother's nephew's former roommate
+652|6543|Texas - Bigger than France

CameronPoe wrote:

Pug wrote:

ZombieVampire! wrote:

So they have to negotiate what they do with their sovereign territory now?
So you are under the impression they don't need any US military help at all?
Well the Iraqis seem to think they can dispense with them in the forseeable future.
As does the US.

Why exactly is this bad news again?
2008-07-19 08:46:31
usmarine2
Banned
+233|5792|Dublin, Ohio

Pug wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

Pug wrote:


So you are under the impression they don't need any US military help at all?
Well the Iraqis seem to think they can dispense with them in the forseeable future.
As does the US.

Why exactly is this bad news again?
because he will lose 90% of stuff to talk about.
2008-07-19 08:47:12
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6557

Pug wrote:

As does the US.

Why exactly is this bad news again?
I don't see any indication from the US that they want to/foresee a homecoming.
2008-07-19 08:48:12
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6557

usmarine2 wrote:

Pug wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

Well the Iraqis seem to think they can dispense with them in the forseeable future.
As does the US.

Why exactly is this bad news again?
because he will lose 90% of stuff to talk about.
Yeah my first Iraq thread in about two years = 90% of my 'stuff to talk about'. lol
2008-07-19 08:48:37
Pug
UR father's brother's nephew's former roommate
+652|6543|Texas - Bigger than France
Right, because there shouldn't be any kind of forethought about leaving Iraq at all.  They should just leave so you can have your civil war that you wish to have.
2008-07-19 08:49:53
usmarine2
Banned
+233|5792|Dublin, Ohio

CameronPoe wrote:

Yeah my first Iraq thread in about two years = 90% of my 'stuff to talk about'. lol
you bring it up in damn near every thread.  give me a break.
2008-07-19 08:52:17
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6557

Pug wrote:

Right, because there shouldn't be any kind of forethought about leaving Iraq at all.  They should just leave so you can have your civil war that you wish to have.
Do you honestly think you can prevent civil strife from occurring for the rest of eternity in Iraq by staying longer? You must realise that the moment you leave - whether it's now, in 5 years time or in 20 years time - the whole thing will fall to shit with a wholesale movement of Al Qaeda types into the country, the Mehdi Army unleashing itself on the country and Iran meddling in the background. No length of stay can avoid that. Iraq will basically become another Pakistan - having the vestiges of a unified country but having to cope with continuous low level internecine violence and difficult to manage borders. Basically the US traded a brutal dictator keeping things in check for a permanent presence in Iraq.

Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-07-19 09:01:10)

2008-07-19 08:53:35
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6557

usmarine2 wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

Yeah my first Iraq thread in about two years = 90% of my 'stuff to talk about'. lol
you bring it up in damn near every thread.  give me a break.
You must be drinking extra hard these days. Nonsense.
2008-07-19 08:54:16
usmarine2
Banned
+233|5792|Dublin, Ohio
right o
2008-07-19 08:59:33
Pug
UR father's brother's nephew's former roommate
+652|6543|Texas - Bigger than France

CameronPoe wrote:

Do you honestly think you can prevent civil strife from occurring for the rest of eternity in Iraq by staying longer? You must realise that the moment you leave - whether it's now, in 5 years time or in 20 years time - the whole thing will fall to shit with a wholesale movement of Al Qaeda types into the country, the Mehdi Army unleashing itself on the country and Iran meddling in the background. No length of stay can avoid that.
Okay, so Saddam was a humanitarian.  The multinational force shouldn't have been involved.  But now that it is involved, it means nothing.  The Iraqis will always kill each other, and would have whether the multinational force was there or not.

So my question to you is:
Why do you care?  If I have already accepted doom for the Iraqis I certainly wouldn't be posting comments about it.
2008-07-19 09:03:40
ZombieVampire!
The Gecko
+69|5828

Pug wrote:

ZombieVampire! wrote:

Pug wrote:


So you are under the impression they don't need any US military help at all?
I'm under the impression that my opinion doesn't matter.
Why do you feel that way?
Because it's not my country.  If they want the US out, the US should leave.
2008-07-19 09:05:39
Pug
UR father's brother's nephew's former roommate
+652|6543|Texas - Bigger than France

ZombieVampire! wrote:

Because it's not my country.  If they want the US out, the US should leave.
It'll happen.
2008-07-19 09:06:18
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6557

Pug wrote:

Okay, so Saddam was a humanitarian.  The multinational force shouldn't have been involved.  But now that it is involved, it means nothing.  The Iraqis will always kill each other, and would have whether the multinational force was there or not.

So my question to you is:
Why do you care?  If I have already accepted doom for the Iraqis I certainly wouldn't be posting comments about it.
Saddam as we all know was not a humanitarian. He was however the only kind of leader that had the iron fist to keep the country, albeit artificially, unified. Why I care? I don't like the sovereignty and self determination of any nation to be trampled upon. Each nation should be governed by their own whether that nation be Ireland, Iraq, Tibet or whoever. I didn't like the Brits imposing themselves on us, I didn't like the USSR imposing themselves on eastern Europe and I don't like western nations imposing themselves on others.

Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-07-19 09:08:02)

2008-07-19 09:10:33
Pug
UR father's brother's nephew's former roommate
+652|6543|Texas - Bigger than France

CameronPoe wrote:

Saddam as we all know was not a humanitarian. He was however the only kind of leader that had the iron fist to keep the country, albeit artificially, unified. Why I care? I don't like the sovereignty and self determination of any nation to be trampled upon. Each nation should be governed by their own whether that nation be Ireland, Iraq, Tibet or whoever.
I hope you see the irony inherent in your response re: Saddam.

I don't think the US is looking to make Iraq the 51st state, and the US presence will dwindle with time.  I'm not exactly patient with the situation either.
2008-07-19 09:13:35
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6557

Pug wrote:

I hope you see the irony inherent in your response re: Saddam.

I don't think the US is looking to make Iraq the 51st state, and the US presence will dwindle with time.  I'm not exactly patient with the situation either.
It's not ironic at all. Why? Because Saddam was Iraqi. If Iraqis didn't like him - then they should have started a sustained insurgency against him and should have overthrown him - self determination. They put far more energy into the anti-coalition insurgency than into any demonstration of anti-Saddam activity.
2008-07-19 09:18:10
Pug
UR father's brother's nephew's former roommate
+652|6543|Texas - Bigger than France

CameronPoe wrote:

It's not ironic at all. Why? Because Saddam was Iraqi. If Iraqis didn't like him - then they should have started a sustained insurgency against him and should have overthrown him - self determination. They put far more energy into the anti-coalition insurgency than into any demonstration of anti-Saddam activity.
Ok, sounds good.  I disagree based on the Mugabee principle.
2008-07-19 09:19:58
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6557

Pug wrote:

Ok, sounds good.  I disagree based on the Mugabee principle.
We will have to agree to disagree here as I don't believe in intervention with Mugabe. I mean what are you going to do afterwards? Almost 50% of the country support him. The only external party that has a right to intervene would be South Africa as they seem to be bearing the brunt of his idiocy.

Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-07-19 09:20:46)

2008-07-19 09:24:12
Pug
UR father's brother's nephew's former roommate
+652|6543|Texas - Bigger than France

CameronPoe wrote:

We will have to agree to disagree here as I don't believe in intervention with Mugabe. I mean what are you going to do afterwards? Almost 50% of the country support him. The only external party that has a right to intervene would be South Africa as they seem to be bearing the brunt of his idiocy.
True.  I'm always of the mind it should be tried if possible.  The less we are involved in the Middle East the better, but I do understand why we're there.

Have a good Saturday.
2008-07-19 09:48:29
ZombieVampire!
The Gecko
+69|5828

Pug wrote:

ZombieVampire! wrote:

Because it's not my country.  If they want the US out, the US should leave.
It'll happen.
Yes, but the US seem set to do it one their time, not the Iraqi's.
2008-07-19 17:48:47
Pug
UR father's brother's nephew's former roommate
+652|6543|Texas - Bigger than France

ZombieVampire! wrote:

Pug wrote:

ZombieVampire! wrote:

Because it's not my country.  If they want the US out, the US should leave.
It'll happen.
Yes, but the US seem set to do it one their time, not the Iraqi's.
You're absolutely right.

Earlier this week on Wednesday?, the Iraqis for the first time decided to hold negotiations with the US to establish the timetable.  Probably over lunch.  They should have had it all ironed out by the time they had to tip the waiter.

 

Pages: 1 2

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard