Democrats and Iraq - Role Playing

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Aug 11 2006, 08:26 AM) [snapback]301413[/snapback]</div>

I don't think anyone has called for such a thing, making your role playing adventure here to be pure fantasy.

Stick with dressing up like a 4 year old "very very bad" boy with a lolly for your role playing. At least, based on your posts that's what I would guess you'd do.

The stuff you do on here is getting tiresome.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Aug 11 2006, 12:26 PM) [snapback]301524[/snapback]</div>

Well, I agree with Hillary... we should have finished the job in Afganistan first. I'm sure you disagree tho.

And what's wrong with a timetable? Is it too much to ask that our troops be out in 10 years? Or does that upset you too much?

BTW -- Please don't answer until you've answered my previous questions about (a) marriage in Israel, and (B) the Zoroastrians/pagans claims to both Israel and Palestine, since they were there first.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Jonnycat26 @ Aug 11 2006, 08:58 AM) [snapback]301546[/snapback]</div>

Like our timetable for Kosovo?
Aren't we still there? granted only about 2,000 troops, but ists been 10 years, what's our exit strategy?

(PS The invasion of Kosovo was probably the only thing I supported Clinton on, for the same reasons Bush gets my support in Afganistan AND Iraq. (and Iran and Syria and North Korea, and Jordan and Saudi Arabia if necessary!)

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Aug 11 2006, 12:07 PM) [snapback]301553[/snapback]</div>

To the US? Nothing.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Aug 11 2006, 12:32 PM) [snapback]301573[/snapback]</div>

There will be civil war and increased terrorism. Al Qaeda might take over.

Thank Bush & Co; who if I remember correctly, are republican.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Aug 11 2006, 10:32 AM) [snapback]301573[/snapback]</div>

What happens in Iraq? Do we really care? Why not let Israel take over the battle there...as they have a lot more balls when it comes to doing the dirty work.

Eventually it is going to be a free for all there anyways...

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Aug 11 2006, 07:26 AM) [snapback]301413[/snapback]</div>

Unfortunately, by attacking a country unprovoked, unprepared, and with appallingly poor execution, we have left ourselves in a lose-lose situation. The consequenses of pulling out are not much different from the consequenses of staying. We have failed in our mission to "liberate" Iraq. We have no viable plan to correct our mistakes. The longer we stay, the weaker our defense against actual threats becomes.

So, to answer your question, if we redeploy, the civil war will escalate, lots of people will die, and eventually some group will come to power.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Aug 11 2006, 12:32 PM) [snapback]301573[/snapback]</div>

The brown people will continue to kill other brown people. At least our soldiers will be out of the way.

 

Al Quaida won't take over Iraq-no matter when we withdraw. Al Quaida are Sunni fanatics.Sunnis Arabs are only 15% of Iraq's population -Shia Arabs are 60% or more of the population.The Sunni Arabs have more training(Saddam was a sunni) and maybe more weapons-now-but Iran will arm the Shia in Iraq.
The Shia Arabs will probably fight the Sunni to a standstill. The Sunni will be confined" to the Sunni triangle-which doesn't really have the resources(oil or a Sea Port).The Shia have control of the oil and the sea.
The Kurds(mainly Sunni but not Arabs) will stay out of it and control the area they control now.
The main problem with a quick withdrawal is the full scale civil war will disrupt the oil supplies taking 2,000,000 barrels off the world market.
The current run up in gasoline prices might be a blessing since it is forcing conservation/smaller vehicles and other technologies-ethanol, bio diesel, liquid fuel from coal,Nuke plants etc.
If we can eventually make oil less important-cheaper- it will hang our Middle Eastern friends out to dry.They won't have the extra $$ to fund weapons production and purchases(Nukes etc) or to fund groups like Hezbullah.
Sure, we-USA- brought this s_ _ t on ourselves by foolish shortsighted policies
1)(not pushing Israel hard enough after the 1973 war when there was the best opportunity for peace), Moshe Dayan said as much before he died.Now instead of practical nationalist "terrorists" like Fatah,Black Setember who wanted to live to enjoy a "state"-we and Israel- have to deal with religious fanatics who are convinced they will go to heaven if the dies fighting the "good fight".Who would you rather deal with?! These religious fanatics probablywould not exist if peace had been made in the 70's.
2)Reinstalling the Shah in 1953-this brought us the Ayatollah in 1979 and the current religious fanatic.We didn't want a "Socialist"- Mossedeagh- in 1953, so look what we have now!!!
3)We-Repulican administration, but I suspect the Dems would have done the same- backed the 'Holy Warriers" in Afganistan from 1980-1990 in their was against the USSR. What did we get for that-9-11 and Osama!!
These are just SOME of our Mis steps in the Middle East, but you get the idea.
Now we have no choice but to arm ourselves for a long struggle.I-and I don't think anyone- has any idea how to "make peace" with this sort of enemy.
Oh, they aren't ALL POWERFUL, aren't powerful at all-yet. We will defeat them. Unfortunately, they won't "make peace". We will just have to guard our borders, and quit send them our oil money.No money, no power. They are only a significant danger if they get several Nukes.There is a fair chance Israel will NUKE Iran, if the Iranians don't change their stance.
All their power is in the oil money.The willingness and desire to die is a just a small advantage. The money to buy NUKES is the real problem(and Europe having a sizeably number of Muslims). However, I have no doubt that we can rely on the Germans, French etc to suppress and slaughter their Muslim minority if it comes to that.
We-the USA- have this absurd notion that the Europeans are too effete to defend themselves, and are somehow adverse to harsh measures.This is pretty much how the Muslims view the USA!!Ha,Ha-our European cousins invented modern total war, wholesale slaughter stretching over the entire world.They also have a pretty good handle on how to conduct genocide-either religious or ethnic or a combination of both.
I doubt that it would take much to get the Germans Goosesteping on their Muslims. We the USA- have never been adverse to wholesale slaughter. The Muslims must be reading different history books , if they think Europeans/Americans are adverse to killing it what they see as self defense.
Remember, only one country has used Nukes in warfare, and it wasn't the godless Commies or the Nazis.
It wouldn't take much(a NUKE going off) for the USA,Russia,Germany,Japan,Red China,India etc to decide the world would be better off without religious fanatics with H-bombs. They-we alone-could kill 90% of the worlds Muslims in an afternoon. Irans push to become nuclear armed is understandable-they could destroy Israel with them, and scare the USA into not retaliating. Unfortunately for them, the Israelis are aware of this, and will most certainly strike 1st(see 1967 War).
We brought a lot of this mess on ourselves; now we are stuck with the consequences.Luckily-for us-the USA- we have 5000+ deliverable Nukes- and the Iranians will be lucky to have a handful.We- or the Israelis- might end up killing the entire country of Iran.
We are living in interesting times. Not as dangerous-to the USA and Russia as the 50's, 60's- but very dangerous. Thanks.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Dragonfly @ Aug 11 2006, 10:50 AM) [snapback]301633[/snapback]</div>

Dude, I am generally against name calling but MAN you are a defeatist p*s*y!

If we lose, who wins? If your happy with that result then give up now, if not you have to keep pluggin away, continually changing how you go about achieving your goal, to counter those opposing you. We, as Americans are to used to things working out as somebody says they will and we are very intolerant of things when they don't, but most of the world works on the principle that "poop don't go right". Iraq is going as good as ANYONE could have anticipated, yes it could be better and despite what you think it could be a whole lot worse!

We can do whatever we want to do, the question are we willing to do what we have to do!

Yeah things kind of suck now, but all you see is the bad. The news doesn't cover the schools being built, the women getting an education, new power facilities and so on. It sure does cover the "insurgents". (mostly Sunni's trying to start a civil war to gain back the power they lost, since assasination was how they came to power in the first place)

What we should do is stand behind the Iraq government until they can take care of themselves (its only been a year and a half really)

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Devil's Advocate @ Aug 11 2006, 06:03 PM) [snapback]301777[/snapback]</div>

Pay attention now, we've already lost.

Now there's a lovely idea. Too bad that we have not tried it.

I guess you have a point, given the parameters that brought us into it, and the leadership (or lack of I should say) involved. It certainly is not going as well as Rummy anticipated it!!

Well I never said it couldn't.

Lesee, new schools, women getting education, vs. 100 ppl dying every day. This is a fair trade?

What we should do is go after OBL and AQ, who attacked us in the first place, and continue to be the real threat. Seriously. What else we should do is get rid of the idiots that mis-managed us into an untenable situation.

 

An interesting article from Haaretz:

[Excerpts]

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Dragonfly @ Aug 11 2006, 06:22 PM) [snapback]301788[/snapback]</div>

You are so right! Gore and then Kerry would never have gotten us into those foreign wars. We would be fighting them here on our soil. (Sarcasm intended.)

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(prez1 @ Aug 11 2006, 08:46 PM) [snapback]301863[/snapback]</div>

How do you figure? Sadam was not a threat - it's been proven now. And you're right that Gore and Kerry would not have gotten us into the Iraq mess!

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(prez1 @ Aug 11 2006, 08:46 PM) [snapback]301863[/snapback]</div>

Man, the "fighting them over there so we don't fight them here" was some strong Kool-aid! The biggest threats will be those caught by the police, FBI and CIA all around the world. Not by the military in Iraq.