The Thailand expat forum for Travel, Lifestyle and Fun.

raycarey · 12-11-2006, 11:57 PM

also known as 'junior's made another mess, and dad needs to clean it up'.

but, is it too late for anything that this group recommends to improve the situation in iraq?

as i understand it, they'll either recommend a timed withdrawal, partition the country along sectarian lines, or pull the troops back to neighboring countries.

do you think any of these will make a recognizable difference to the average iraqi? or will the bloodshed continue for the foreseeable future?

stroller · 13-11-2006, 12:41 AM

If this is to be a sincere thread, explain what the 'Iraq study group' is, or include a link.

raycarey · 13-11-2006, 09:16 AM

Quote:

The Iraq Study Group (ISG), also known as the Baker commission,[1] is a US government ten-person panel appointed on March 15, 2006, by the United States Congress, that is charged with delivering an independent assessment, of the situation in Iraq in the US-led Iraq War.

snip

Although the final report will not be released until after the November 2006 midterm elections, media reports have described some possible recommendations the panel will make. Among these are the beginning of a phased withdrawal of US combat forces from Iraq and direct US dialogue with Syria and Iran over Iraq and the Middle East.

Iraq Study Group - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Sir Burr · 13-11-2006, 10:11 AM

If the US was to pull out now, there would be a sectarian blood-bath.
I never agreed with the invasion of Iraq, but, now that it is fact, it is incumbent on the US to try and see it through to whatever conclusion.

I think the best plan is to draw Iran and Syria into the process.

You can't just hand over security to Iraqi forces. If the US can't control the situation, what chance do the Iraqis have?

They can't withdraw "over the horizon", this would be almost the same as if they went back home.

Division of the country is not really an option for two reasons. Firstly, there would be civil war to see who will control the oil. Secondly, this would in effect create a Kurdistan which would infuriate Turkey, Syria and Iran.
Many areas of Iraq have mixtures of Shia and Sunni. If there was partition, the result would be the same as Bosnia and India. A massacre.

Butterfly · 13-11-2006, 10:19 AM

^ agree. The US leaving now would be worst.

The irony of all this is to rely on your ennemies to help you solve a nasty situation. Will that work ? With Israel in between throwing wrenches, this is going to be a tough call.

At the end we all know the outcome already. Iraq will become an Iran style Islamic revolution. And they will have both Nuke.

Mission Accomplished indeed.

Storekeeper · 13-11-2006, 11:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Butterfly

Iraq will become an Iran style Islamic revolution. And they will have both Nuke.

You don't think Israel would have the nads to bomb any nuke plants in Iraq again ?

Milkman · 13-11-2006, 11:53 AM

The Iraq Study is something that should have done before the Americans decided to remove and entire government. It took them...3.5 years?

There was never a plan for afterwards.

Butterfly · 13-11-2006, 01:21 PM

There was never a plan before or after

Just monkeys showing off their cock

man with no head · 13-11-2006, 02:36 PM

I disagree, I think we need to pull out within 12 months or however soon it is logistically possible.

We fucked up. Admit it and move on.

We can't keep throwing money and soldiers at this mess. If we continue to keep pumping money and soldiers into Iraq the Iraqi government will never take the initiative to start acting like a government.

Mr Earl · 13-11-2006, 03:03 PM

More spurious finger pointing which does zip towards solving the problem.

Everyone agreed the situation under Saddam was intolerable.
Not everyone agreed on going in there. Present hindsight makes that view appealing but still does nothing.

Back just before the US and coalition went into Iraq I had some long talks with a pal who had spent several years covering the hostilities in the Balkans. He was convinced the US was making a giant mistake by going into Iraq. His main points were that Iraq never was a country before the Brits carved it out. It's history was always of brutal dictatorships (each subsequent one worse that the one before). His biggest fear was that the US would end up leaving a dictatorship even worse than Saddam.

Personally I think GWB is making history by helping these people have at a democratic republic.
The thing we forget in our "fast food" "internet" age was the USA wasn't created overnight. It took many years.
Present Iraqi difficulties can now been seen as just another reason to persevere. I have little doubt we will as there isn't an other option.
This major blowup in the ME was predicted 30+ years ago. It was just a matter of time. It's likely to get a lot worse.

man with no head · 13-11-2006, 03:18 PM

Quote:

The thing we forget in our "fast food" "internet" age was the USA wasn't created overnight. It took many years.

And most importantly WE WANTED our own self-government and were willing to fight for it. The Iraqis apparently are not that interested in self government, thus, we are wasting our time (and have since the beginning) and we should begin the process of bringing the troops home or repositioning them somewhere where their sacrifices will make a difference. It's time we stop footing the bill (and running up debt).

What is desired will be earned; what is not desired will not.

Sir Burr · 13-11-2006, 04:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by surasak

It's time we stop footing the bill (and running up debt).

I disagree. The decision to go to war with Iraq is directly responsible for the sectarian violence we see today. The USA is morally obligated to clean up the mess, no matter what the cost to the tax-payers. After all, the tax-payers were over-whelmingly for the invasion.

Mr Earl · 13-11-2006, 04:37 PM

Golly now didn't Iraq have elections a year ago this december?
I think so I vaguely remember the pictures of the Iraqi people holding up their purple fingers.
Freedom is contagious

man with no head · 13-11-2006, 04:43 PM

Elections were almost two years ago.

Quote:

"We have [terrorists] today, we had them yesterday, we will have them tomorrow," he said. "The difference will be that the Iraqi people have elected a government that is legitimate that will be much stronger in dealing with them."

Some government. Is the violence less now or worse now than two years ago?

Quote:

"These elections were great, but let's not fool ourselves: They were held under occupation. They were held thanks to the omnipresence of American forces."

I believe that sums it up the best.

raycarey · 13-11-2006, 04:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sir Burr

If the US was to pull out now, there would be a sectarian blood-bath.

a blood-bath is inevitable whether the US pulls out now or in 1 year, 5 years or 10 years. might as well get it over with now...if it is done now, it could be argued that it will end in fewer lives lost....certainly fewer US soldiers' lives.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Storekeeper

You don't think Israel would have the nads to bomb any nuke plants in Iraq again ?

isn't this exactly the sort of senseless, pseudo-macho posturing that got the US into this mess in the first place?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Earl

More spurious finger pointing which does zip towards solving the problem.

has anyone noticed that the only people who start crying about 'finger pointing' and 'playing the blame game' are the ones who fucked up (and their apologists, of course)?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Earl

Personally I think GWB is making history by helping these people have at a democratic republic. The thing we forget in our "fast food" "internet" age was the USA wasn't created overnight. It took many years.

no it wasn't created overnight....and it wasn't forced on the people either...it was organic, not some sort of imported political GMO.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Earl

Present Iraqi difficulties can now been seen as just another reason to persevere.

jesus christ.
tell that to the people who are dying everyday in iraq....."your family members being tortured and murdered is just another reason to persevere."

Butterfly · 13-11-2006, 04:50 PM

Well both side of the arguments have grounds

Now the question is merely a question of choice. Could the US live with a fragmented and unstable Iraq ? or should they be held responsible until the end ?

man with no head · 13-11-2006, 04:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sir Burr

Quote:

Originally Posted by surasak

It's time we stop footing the bill (and running up debt).

I disagree. The decision to go to war with Iraq is directly responsible for the sectarian violence we see today. The USA is morally obligated to clean up the mess, no matter what the cost to the tax-payers. After all, the tax-payers were over-whelmingly for the invasion.

This is somewhat misleading. In 2002-2003 Americans supported the removal of Saddam Hussein overwhelmingly but with conditions: that there was a clear threat, with support of allies, a clear goal, and low casualties.

Without those conditions the support drops solely to the hard-core nutcases who would have gone to war even if all Saddam did was drop a piece of chewing gum on the sidewalk.

man with no head · 13-11-2006, 04:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Butterfly

Well both side of the arguments have grounds

Now the question is merely a question of choice. Could the US live with a fragmented and unstable Iraq ? or should they be held responsible until the end ?

I think the Iraqi government (which was elected almost two years ago) needs to start taking the major share of the burden.

If a patient's heart stops beating the doctors know when to give up, stop injecting epinephrine, and move on to the next patient. It becomes fruitless to keep injecting more and more drugs in hopes that the patient will miraculously recover. It's near that time with Iraq.

stroller · 13-11-2006, 05:08 PM

^
Your graph still shows about 33% in favour of unilaterally invading, are there so many "hard-core nutcases" in the US?
And let's not forget that Bush got re-elected after his lies and deceptions.

The responsibility does morally lie with the US as a nation.

Finish what you started.

12-11-2006, 11:57 PM	#1 (permalink)
raycarey Incoming! Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: deleting posts in issues Posts: 5,579	iraq study group also known as 'junior's made another mess, and dad needs to clean it up'. but, is it too late for anything that this group recommends to improve the situation in iraq? as i understand it, they'll either recommend a timed withdrawal, partition the country along sectarian lines, or pull the troops back to neighboring countries. do you think any of these will make a recognizable difference to the average iraqi? or will the bloodshed continue for the foreseeable future?

13-11-2006, 10:11 AM	#4 (permalink)
Sir Burr Rhubarb, rhubarb, rhubarb Last Online: 06-01-2009 10:33 AM Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Phuket. Posts: 5,010	If the US was to pull out now, there would be a sectarian blood-bath. I never agreed with the invasion of Iraq, but, now that it is fact, it is incumbent on the US to try and see it through to whatever conclusion. I think the best plan is to draw Iran and Syria into the process. You can't just hand over security to Iraqi forces. If the US can't control the situation, what chance do the Iraqis have? They can't withdraw "over the horizon", this would be almost the same as if they went back home. Division of the country is not really an option for two reasons. Firstly, there would be civil war to see who will control the oil. Secondly, this would in effect create a Kurdistan which would infuriate Turkey, Syria and Iran. Many areas of Iraq have mixtures of Shia and Sunni. If there was partition, the result would be the same as Bosnia and India. A massacre. __________________ Phuket - Veni Vidi Veni

13-11-2006, 01:21 PM	#8 (permalink)
Butterfly Suspended Member Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 12,514	There was never a plan before or after Just monkeys showing off their cock Last edited by Butterfly : 13-11-2006 at 03:59 PM.

13-11-2006, 12:41 AM	#2 (permalink)
stroller Kraut Last Online: 01-07-2008 11:03 AM Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: under the headphones Posts: 17,181	If this is to be a sincere thread, explain what the 'Iraq study group' is, or include a link.

13-11-2006, 10:19 AM	#5 (permalink)
Butterfly Suspended Member Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 12,514	^ agree. The US leaving now would be worst. The irony of all this is to rely on your ennemies to help you solve a nasty situation. Will that work ? With Israel in between throwing wrenches, this is going to be a tough call. At the end we all know the outcome already. Iraq will become an Iran style Islamic revolution. And they will have both Nuke. Mission Accomplished indeed.

13-11-2006, 11:53 AM	#7 (permalink)
Milkman Gone Off Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: shelf Posts: 10,354	The Iraq Study is something that should have done before the Americans decided to remove and entire government. It took them...3.5 years? There was never a plan for afterwards.

13-11-2006, 02:36 PM	#9 (permalink)
man with no head Somewhere Travelling Last Online: 11-08-2007 07:39 PM Join Date: Apr 2006 Posts: 5,424	I disagree, I think we need to pull out within 12 months or however soon it is logistically possible. We fucked up. Admit it and move on. We can't keep throwing money and soldiers at this mess. If we continue to keep pumping money and soldiers into Iraq the Iraqi government will never take the initiative to start acting like a government.

13-11-2006, 03:03 PM	#10 (permalink)
Mr Earl The Grand Wazoo Last Online: Today 09:09 AM Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: This is not Kansas Posts: 4,960	More spurious finger pointing which does zip towards solving the problem. Everyone agreed the situation under Saddam was intolerable. Not everyone agreed on going in there. Present hindsight makes that view appealing but still does nothing. Back just before the US and coalition went into Iraq I had some long talks with a pal who had spent several years covering the hostilities in the Balkans. He was convinced the US was making a giant mistake by going into Iraq. His main points were that Iraq never was a country before the Brits carved it out. It's history was always of brutal dictatorships (each subsequent one worse that the one before). His biggest fear was that the US would end up leaving a dictatorship even worse than Saddam. Personally I think GWB is making history by helping these people have at a democratic republic. The thing we forget in our "fast food" "internet" age was the USA wasn't created overnight. It took many years. Present Iraqi difficulties can now been seen as just another reason to persevere. I have little doubt we will as there isn't an other option. This major blowup in the ME was predicted 30+ years ago. It was just a matter of time. It's likely to get a lot worse.

13-11-2006, 04:37 PM	#13 (permalink)
Mr Earl The Grand Wazoo Last Online: Today 09:09 AM Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: This is not Kansas Posts: 4,960	Golly now didn't Iraq have elections a year ago this december? I think so I vaguely remember the pictures of the Iraqi people holding up their purple fingers. Freedom is contagious

13-11-2006, 04:50 PM	#16 (permalink)
Butterfly Suspended Member Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 12,514	Well both side of the arguments have grounds Now the question is merely a question of choice. Could the US live with a fragmented and unstable Iraq ? or should they be held responsible until the end ?

13-11-2006, 05:08 PM	#19 (permalink)
stroller Kraut Last Online: 01-07-2008 11:03 AM Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: under the headphones Posts: 17,181	^ Your graph still shows about 33% in favour of unilaterally invading, are there so many "hard-core nutcases" in the US? And let's not forget that Bush got re-elected after his lies and deceptions. The responsibility does morally lie with the US as a nation. Finish what you started.