Thread: iraq study group

Bankruptcy. Death. Destruction.

If you spend your time fighting war you don't have time to develop.

Originally Posted by lom

So you are saying that capitalism can not survive on it's own merits

it doesn't and I would argue that the fall of communism was our prelude to the fall of capitalism. Another decade and it will be the 90s again for the west, but this time on the wrong side of the fence.

Originally Posted by Wallace

If you get bombed every time you build something decent, it sort of puts you off.

The US fight their wars on others' territory, they have their military stationed around the globe.

Originally Posted by Sir Burr

Originally Posted by raycarey

....

What am I doing? Nothing.
Why do you think I should do something?
You are the severest critic of the war, never at a loss for words when it comes to a solution. WTF are you doing?

Ditto. Please answer the question Carey. WTF are you doing?

Originally Posted by Wallace

Not sure about your comment Surasak. Europe spent most of the 19th and 20th centuries in one war or another and has developed quite well out of it.
The United States has been constantly at war with someone more or less since the first settlers arrived there.

However, if you mean that when your own country suffers the effects of war, then I agree. If you get bombed every time you build something decent, it sort of puts you off.

What I meant was this: Europe for all practical purposes was destroyed during WWII. America was untouched due to isolation.

Now, we helped rebuild Europe...but I don't think it was out of kindness or generosity. It was more of a long-sighted notion that to keep Stalin in check we needed to get Europe up and running as quick as possible and to try to avoid the economic conditions which lead to the war in the first place. People who were working, rebuilding, etc. didn't have time to sympathize with communists and it was the influx of capital (and American troops) that kept Western Europe free from communism. If we had simply ignored Europe and pulled our troops back home all of Europe would have fallen to the Soviets. The same with Japan and Asia.

The mistake in Iraq is that we destroyed the government from the top down to the bottom, destroyed the infrastructure, and put most Iraqis out of work. We have done little to nothing to rebuild Iraq and get people working again. People who are pissed off and have no money are very likely to get angry at the occupation and the occupation-leaning government and instead sympathize with the insurgents.

The issue with Iraq is that it is a corporate war....a war to secure resources and a war to secure and loot the U.S. Treasury in order to feed the shareholders of the companies 'rebuilding' Iraq. Thus, the U.S. really doesn't give a shit about the plight of the Iraqis.

Originally Posted by RDN

Originally Posted by Sir Burr

Originally Posted by raycarey

....

What am I doing? Nothing.
Why do you think I should do something?
You are the severest critic of the war, never at a loss for words when it comes to a solution. WTF are you doing?

Ditto. Please answer the question Carey. WTF are you doing?

i don't support the war, and never have. therefore, i have no moral obligation to do anything in support of it. how is that confusing?

however, for those who supported the invasion at any point, and who now agree that 'an attempt must be made' , it is only reasonable to assume that they are willing to contribute in that attempt....and btw, watching 24 is not really contributing.

so RDN....i've answered your question, i can only hope that you'll answer mine. i posted it earlier, but apparently you missed it, so here it is again....

Originally Posted by raycarey

i, for one, would like to thank sir burr and rdn for all the sacrfices that they're making in this 'attempt' that must be made.

their sense of service is a reminder to us all.

keep up the good work fellas!



ummmmmm.........remind me again what you guys are doing in this attempt that must be made? are either of you under 42? do you have kids under 42? grandkids? nieces or nephews? here's a link....

GoArmy.com > Contact the Army > How to Join

Originally Posted by surasak

Thus, the U.S. really doesn't give a shit about the plight of the Iraqis.

nor do they care about the additional 20,000 US kids whose lives they are gambling with in the so called, 'attempt that must be made'. but hey, who cares about 'poor' people?

it's over. the US lost....badly.
iraq is a mess and it's not going to get better until the US leaves...whether that be tomorrow or 2010.

Democratic leaders said Tuesday that they intended to hold symbolic votes in the House and Senate on President Bush’s plan to send more troops to Baghdad, forcing Republicans to take a stand on the proposal and seeking to isolate the president politically over his handling of the war.

Democrats Plan Symbolic Votes Against Bush’s Iraq Troop Plan - New York Times

this thread is entitled 'the iraq study group'. let's take a look back.....

The Iraq Study Group(ISG), also known as the Baker-Hamilton Commission,[1] was a ten-person bipartisan panel appointed on March 15, 2006, by the United States Congress, that was charged with assessing the situation in Iraq and the US-led Iraq War and making policy recommendations. It was first proposed by Virginia Republican Representative Frank Wolf.[2]

The ISG was led by co-chairs James Baker, a former Secretary of State (Republican), and Lee Hamilton, a former U.S. Representative (Democrat).

Republicans

In addition to Baker, the panel's Republican members were:

• Sandra Day O'Connor, former Supreme Court Justice
• Lawrence Eagleburger, former Secretary of State
• Edwin Meese III, former US Attorney General
• Alan K. Simpson, former U.S. Senator from Wyoming

Democrats

In addition to Hamilton, the panel's Democratic members were:

• Vernon Jordan, Jr., business executive
• Leon E. Panetta, former White House Chief of Staff
• William J. Perry, former US Secretary of Defense
• Charles S. Robb, former Governor and U.S. Senator from Virginia

Former Members

Two of the panel's original members (both Republicans) resigned before the group's final report was released:

• Robert Gates, current US Secretary of Defense and former Director of Central Intelligence
• Rudy Giuliani, former Mayor of New York City

Gates resigned from the panel after he was nominated for Secretary of Defense on November 8. He was replaced by Lawrence Eagleburger. [3]
Giuliani resigned on May 24 because of a possible Presidential campaign. [4] He was replaced by Edwin Meese.[5]

the report advocated a drawdown of troops, but georgie and his neo-con friends know better....

On January 5, 2007, a rival "hawkish" report was released, titled Choosing Victory: A Plan for Success in Iraq, by the so-called "Real Iraq Study Group" headed by neoconservative Frederick Kagan of the American Enterprise Institute. Kagan was said to have won-over the ear of President George W. Bush. [1]

Iraq Study Group - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

can't say i've read the entire ISG report, but i don't think there was anything about an additional 20,000 US kids.

here it is though....

Iraq Study Group: United States Institute of Peace

Originally Posted by Sir Burr

Who knows, but, the attempt must be made.

true, and then the only solution will be a complete withdrawal, a nice "cut and run" if you will

I understand the point about the US being responsible and the need for them to face the mess they created, but at the same time I am starting to think that raycarey and surasak have a good point: that the US Army is so dysfunctional that there is no point in staying since nothing will improve no matter what. Only more dead US kids. A strange way for "patriots" to show their alliegence.

“Whenever I hear this surge idea, I think of a couple who recently got married but the marriage was never very solid. Then one day they say to each other, ‘Hey, let’s have a baby, that will bring us together.’ It never works. If the underlying union is not there, adding a baby won’t help.”

thomas friedman---an original supporter of the invasion who realizes this is folly.

Originally Posted by Butterfly

that the US Army is so dysfunctional that there is no point in staying since nothing will improve no matter what.

It's the most highly skilled and technologically advanced military in the world!
What makes you think they're not up to scratch?

Well, they have their fair share of sadists, rapists, thugs, uneducated halfwits who'd shoot at anything that moves, cowards and inactive bureaucrats who like to praise themselves for the efforts they never made, but I don't doubt their ability to implement a simple peace-keeping mission to ensure democracy will take root in Iraq.

It requires sacrifice, there will be casualties.
But Republican patriot parents should be proud to know their sons will die for a worthwhile course.

Originally Posted by stroller

It's the most highly skilled and technologically advanced military in the world!

well, all the money in the world will not buy you a victory, it's not about toys but about motivation. It's pretty clear now that the motives to go to war were fabricated and when you take that away, there is not much left to support the troops morale. No wonder war supporters blame the press for breaking the party line, truth hurts and kills.

^ and ^^

The U.S. military isn't the one to blame for this debable, IMO.

It's the civilian masters. The civilian in DoD, NSC, and State, who call the shots.

As well as the CPA which was a disaster.

Gen. Eric Shinseki was right all along. For answering questions honestly, he was humiliated, publicly admonished, and left out in the cold.

Originally Posted by raycarey

..so RDN....i've answered your question, i can only hope that you'll answer mine. i posted it earlier, but apparently you missed it, so here it is again....

Originally Posted by raycarey

...remind me again what you guys are doing in this attempt that must be made? ...

Apparently, I'm doing exactly the same as you are: Fuck all. Why should I do more than you?

Originally Posted by stroller

Originally Posted by Butterfly

that the US Army is so dysfunctional that there is no point in staying since nothing will improve no matter what.

It's the most highly skilled and technologically advanced military in the world!
What makes you think they're not up to scratch?

Well, they have their fair share of sadists, rapists, thugs, uneducated halfwits who'd shoot at anything that moves, cowards and inactive bureaucrats who like to praise themselves for the efforts they never made, but I don't doubt their ability to implement a simple peace-keeping mission to ensure democracy will take root in Iraq.

It requires sacrifice, there will be casualties.
But Republican patriot parents should be proud to know their sons will die for a worthwhile course.

In order to meet recruiting goals standards had to be lowered....this means taking more who didn't graduate from high school and putting them in situations where they will screw up.

The well educated aren't stupid enough to volunteer for war when they can stay at home and reap the profits from investing in stocks of companies making the money from the war. This is why the war will continue despite overwhelming opposition to it now. As long as a few profit those at the top will resist the call to end it and bring everyone home.

The U.S. government is as evil and corrupt as any third world dictatorship. Don't expect the U.S. to aid the Iraqis when there's a buck to be made for the upper elite here.

Originally Posted by Milkman

The U.S. military isn't the one to blame for this debable, IMO.

The US Military is not to blame because they know they are running a dysfunctional and complex machine. That said, they are still the one doing the killing. They know when they are engaging it's going to be ugly.

Originally Posted by surasak

...The U.S. government is as evil and corrupt as any third world dictatorship...

Oh dear, oh dear. Slightly OTT.

Is there really a difference between when Saddam invaded Kuwait and we invaded Iraq? The whole justification for war was based on lies and misleading statements. And now the ISG's recommendations are going to be ignored? I would consider that evil.

Originally Posted by RDN

Apparently, I'm doing exactly the same as you are: Fuck all. Why should I do more than you?

I think what we are trying to say is that cheering for war and not doing your part is a bit "ironic", not to say "hypocrit"

Well, I don't think that's a fair statement. I supported the war initially on the premise that it was just and reasonable.

Given my 180 on the support of the war I don't think one can expect every war supporter to actually volunteer. It simply wouldn't be logistically or financially possible.

I do think, however, that those who benefit from the war ought to be the ones fighting it (or sending their sons/daughters to die for their increases in wealth due to stocks, etc.).

Originally Posted by surasak

I supported the war initially on the premise that it was just and reasonable.

well I think this is where the problem is, how do you define those terms ? they mean different things to different people. I guess doing 180 after finding out you have been lied to is logical and the only sensible thing to do, but it seems that some still want to believe it was the only way. For those they should do their part to fix the problem. Don't you think ?