The Thailand expat forum for Travel, Lifestyle and Fun.

Texpat

Sen. Carl Levin desparately tried to pound a wedge between Gen Petraeus and PM Maliki at the SASC hearing today in a thinly-veiled attempt to discredit them both. The divide between McCain and Levin was enormous and represents one of the biggest obstacles to quicker success in Iraq. These douchebag senators would rather wrestle for power than help the military and state departments get their shit together and get the hell outta there. Nitpicking each other to death while the mil and state workers (not to mention the Iraqis) sit around wondering what position they'll be in come January. Kinda made me sick to watch it.

Iraq is a soverign country with democratically elected leaders, for two years now, and the US is there in a supporting role. Whatever condition the country is in when the US leaves it will probably change within weeks of the departure. The vacuum will be filled --maybe better, probably not.

Also interesting to note, the Iraqis apparently screwed up a recent attack on Basra. Petraeus claimed it was because they were ill-prepared. Weren't there western troops in Basra until recently training them and making assurances they were up to the task?

Petraeus also said there were no provisions for onward US military basing. Big mistake.

Panda

The US is arming the Saudi Arabian royal dictators and Israel to the teeth with the latest military hardware, reportedly to counter the "so called" threat Iran poses.
US Lawmakers Renew Opposition to US Arms Sale to Saudi Arabia

Hootad Binky

Meanwhile Maliki and Muqtada (both Shia) are starting a civil war. If Mailiki can't beat Muqtada with the Iraqi Army + US air support, guess who the next leader of Iraq's gonna be after the US leave?

Texpat

^ whoever wins the election -- novel idea, eh?

Milkman

Wrong: it's about the Iraqis. Not the Americans.

You're reminding my of Chitown and his brilliant analysis.

"We."

Levin and Petraeus are not IRAQI.

The Iraqis have to do their part - and I don't see it happening.

So, who do you support Tex? Sunni? Shia? Both together in a coalition.

How about the Kurds? Semi, or fully independent?

That's flawed analysis, IMO Tex. The US Senate? What in the heck do they have to do with this? Please inform me.

But you are free to analyze as you wish.

__________________
Military men are dumb, stupid animals, to be used as pawns for foreign policy

sabang

I find this hard to believe actually- Apart from the Fact that Iraq has the worlds largest Embassy, three massive US military bases have been constructed in Iraq. No doubt you can guess the prime contractor- KBR/ Halliburton. If they were just planning to be there a few years, surely they would have used cheaper, temporary infrastructure.

__________________
Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel.

Texpat

No shit Sherlock. But the US Ambassador and Gen Petraeus' testimony to Congress weighs heavily on the sole support the Iraqi government can count on.
Did you watch the testimony? How can you suggest it's not germane?

If Congress would work together and come to an agreement, it would answer a lot of questions and take the uncertainty of a new administration out of the equation. Instead, Levin tries to make Petraeus admit Maliki made poor tactical desisions in Basra. Real nice -- pitting the ranking US mil against the PM -- and to what purpose? Fcuking idiot.

You took your "brilliant" pills again, didn't you? Jeez MM, you're amazing.

I think they're all a bunch of layabouts happy to continue killing each other and sponging off Uncle Sam's tit. They lived with each other before, why can't they now? I wouldn't be against a rapid and wholesale pullout and subsequent massive genocide.

Give it to the Palestinians.

raycarey

errr....it was back in early 2003 before the US invaded.

Hootad Binky

The platitudes espoused by the GWB Bush administration: united country, peace and stability, a functioning government, are just that: pipe dreams. They are not reality, so pointing them out does not make anyone less patriotic or less realistic.

In the end, the future of Iraq will be sorted out in a Shia civil war.

__________________
Most people are other people. Their thoughts are someone elses opinions, their lives a mimicry, their passions a quotation. -Oscar Wilde

Panda

The Iraqi government doesn't have any control over the country. And probably never will, because with massive unemployment, many of its soldiers are simply in the job to earn enough to feed their families and don't really have their heart in fighting for the USAs ideal of how the country should operate. The rebels on the other hand are fighting for a political ideal they believe in.

If and when the Yanks pull out a lot of the government troops are likely to swap sides. It should be over relatitively quickly.

The problem for the Yanks is that such a new government will almost certainly be staunchly anti-American and allie itself with Iran. That would put a very large part of the worlds oil reserves at the mercy of an Iraq/Iran alliance.

Jet Gorgon

It's Yugoslavia all over again. Let them split into three regions. The prob is the Shiite area has all the oil. That's where the problem lies with the Sunnis. Mind, I don't think the Kurds would give a toss if they could just get on with their lives.

Boon Mee

B.S.

Based on GNP, Iraq is costing <5% vs. ~7.5% for Viet Nam and >16% for WW2.

__________________
ผมเป็นคนบ้านนอก

Panda

^ so its cost effective then?
Well, aside from all the dead people I mean.

Norton

At this point debating the reasons we got in the war are irrelevant. As McCain says, "it is what it is".

Assuming these figures are correct, they point out how inadequate the commitment in winning the war really is. If the US is really committed to having a free and independent Iraq, it will take a lot more than a half hearted effort to have any chance of success. If the war is critical to the security of America as GWB would have us all believe, where is the money? Where are the 500,000+ troops needed to secure a country as big as Iraq? Politically impossible so it seems. Then I say get the hell out rather than perpetuate hope for a "victory" without the national sacrifice it takes.

One can only conclude the US administration is not really as "fully" committed as their rhetoric. If a nation decides to go to war it should not be playing political games either domestically or internationally.

Do it right or don't do it at all!!!

__________________
There is such a thing as a nation being so right that it does not need to convince others by force that it is right.

Woodrow Wilson

Panda

ARR.... the US administration didn't think it was going to be this difficult, otherwise they wouldn't have got involved in this shit fight in the first place.
Now they have a destabilized Iraq on their hands with all the ramifications that holds in the Middle East. This folly of a war is costing the USA dearly and the best case scenario is ongoing strife in the region for decades to come.
Thanks a lot Mr Bush!

Milkman

Wrong point.

It's a waste of at least $12 billion per month.

Wasted money; welfare.

You are a welfare queen.

Like the dupes in Iraq.

Hootad Binky

The war is expected to cost $3 trillion now, with no end in sight. Guess that's chump change to Republican warmongers are their corrupt friends at Haliburton et. al., who are happy to borrow money from the Chinese, underwritten by the US taxpayer of course, to continue to finance a substandard war with crap and overpriced support services for US troops, a dream come true for corporate skullduggery and a once-in-a-lifetime chance to plunder the US taxpayer.

With Patraeus and the US Ambassador unwilling to define what conditions would or could lead to a US withdrawal, it seems that criterea will be left in the hands of a divided, incompetent, unmotivated and hopelessly corrupt Iraqi government. So instead of dealing with Al-Queda at its epicenter, namely the Afghani/Pakistani border (where OBL is) the Iraqi "government" (the 16 branches of which are run as personal-enrichment schemes by their ministers) will determine where and when the US applies its very-stretched resources, now and into the foreseeable future.

stroller

Here's an interesting article focusing on Abu Abdullah, which gives a glimpse at the complexity and volatility of the situation in Iraq.

raycarey

the 'prob' is that a president who lacked intellectual curiosity bought a bill of goods from a handful of ideologues, and destroyed a country...and they don't have the slightest idea of how to put it back together again.

it's simply amazing how some people on this board can just brush off the fiasco in iraq as 'their fault'...where is the accountability that these alleged conservatives are forever spouting about.....bear stearns wasn't a bailout, and iraq isn't the fault of the bush administration but rather the iraqi people. what would john galt say?---and no, not the dope who posts on this forum.

and then these same people cavalierly suggest that someone else's country should be balkanized because it would be the politically expedient solution for US domestic politics.

sabang

^ Seconded. Excellent post.