• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Iraq Missmanaged

JOHNYJ

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 9, 2005
Messages
567
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
The question peoploe always ask or are asked.
" Do You Support The War " is the wrong question !
It should be, " Do You Think The War Is,Missmanaged "
The Answer would be Hell Yes !
 

FinnMacCool

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 23, 2005
Messages
2,272
Reaction score
153
Location
South Shore of Long Island.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
I must admit it is rather redundant to ask why we are in Iraq because we already are in Iraq and we are commited to this task now even though I don't think we should be there at all or at least not at this state. However, yeah I do think the war was mismanaged.

People often ask if we are winning in Iraq but seriously how do you win in Iraq? Perhaps this is something that we didn't consider when we tried to invade Iraq.

we just decided to support the Shi'ites and they, of course, are happy cause now they are gonna be in power ( you might want to note that the Shi'ites are the radical muslims that believe in Jihad) so we will just kill everyone else like the Sunni insurgents and its really messed up. They will not stop fighting each other and once we leave, IF we leave that is, they will keep killing each other. Its absolutely insane.

Its weird cause it seems like the same thing happened in Vietnam and its almost like we haven't learned from our mistakes.

I have to admit sometimes I wonder if we are fighting the right people. Even if the Sunnis did support Saddam, because the Shi'ites are pretty extreme themselves. I mean when Saddam commited some barbaric acts on his political opponents cause it seemed to him the only way to keep them at bay and I dunno. its just really messed up
 

Canuck

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 2, 2005
Messages
849
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
FinnMacCool said:
I must admit it is rather redundant to ask why we are in Iraq because we already are in Iraq and we are commited to this task now even though I don't think we should be there at all or at least not at this state. However, yeah I do think the war was mismanaged.
Do I understand your question man ,is it hopeless and forlorn
why we should always remember ,why we fight wars ,is so that we dont repaet our mistakes.
if we don't keep it fresh in our memory, then it is hopless and forlorn


why you are in Iraq is to kill everything that reaises a cane, and says yanky go home.

you are there because a bunch of terrorists ,mostly from saudi Arabia, with strong ties to president bush's friends ,and the royal family of S Arabia ,of the oil con sortium of Saudi Arabia and even some members of the royal faimly of Saudi Arabia and a member of the cia blew up the WTC down town USA
who have American bases on their soil

can you see how the dots line up
can you now see why you are at war
can you see the dots
is it hopeless and forlorn
 
Last edited:

AK_Conservative

Active member
Joined
Sep 21, 2005
Messages
499
Reaction score
0
Location
Eagle River, Alaska
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
JOHNYJ said:
The question peoploe always ask or are asked.
" Do You Support The War " is the wrong question !
It should be, " Do You Think The War Is,Missmanaged "
The Answer would be Hell Yes !
I think that is a very good interpretation Johnyj! I believe the war could be going better, but this is a new enemy we are facing, one we havent delt this highly in reguard before! Kissinger would be a great additive to Bush's cabnit and in my opinion would be going better with him in it! Many of you would differ your opinion about Kissinger since it was mainly Him and Nixon who drove the NSC during his presidency, but they got alot accomplished and did amazing things internationally!
 

Canuck

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 2, 2005
Messages
849
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
AK_Conservative said:
I think that is a very good interpretation Johnyj! I believe the war could be going better, but this is a new enemy we are facing, one we havent delt this highly in reguard before! Kissinger would be a great additive to Bush's cabnit and in my opinion would be going better with him in it! Many of you would differ your opinion about Kissinger since it was mainly Him and Nixon who drove the NSC during his presidency, but they got alot accomplished and did amazing things internationally!
no it's the same one you have been fighting since the declaration of independance

the Elite's puppet
that why election after election the elephants and the asses are at each others throats and blaming each other for each others failures
one failure after another
like a drunken harlot
admin to admin
is it hopeless and forlorn !
 

AK_Conservative

Active member
Joined
Sep 21, 2005
Messages
499
Reaction score
0
Location
Eagle River, Alaska
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Canuck said:
no it's the same one you have been fighting since the declaration of independance

the Elite's puppet
that why election after election the elephants and the asses are at each others throats and blaming each other for each others failures
one failure after another
like a drunken harlot
admin to admin
is it hopeless and forlorn !

Ahh see, youre twisting my words! This is a different enemy in the means:
Desert warfare, civilian insugents, terrorism, and not to mention, some of the top terrorist leaders believe this is a religious war, as well as some of the citizens which makes it even harder to deal with! They will go to ANY means to make sure they win, even blowing themselves up and killing hundreds of the FELLOW citizens
 

JOHNYJ

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 9, 2005
Messages
567
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Troop strength and equipment.Two points the administration has bungled incredibly. Colin Powel in his Book said that you needed,'overwhelming strength ! to defeat an enemy,139,000 troops is not overwhelming.The chief of staff of the army said 300,000 and was fired for his opinion. No body armour ,no armoured humvees. To this day,still not enough.Remember this was a war of choice,the administration picked the starting date.
 

cnredd

Major General Big Lug
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 5, 2005
Messages
8,682
Reaction score
262
Location
Philadelphia,PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Canuck said:
no it's the same one you have been fighting since the declaration of independance

the Elite's puppet
that why election after election the elephants and the asses are at each others throats and blaming each other for each others failures
one failure after another
like a drunken harlot
admin to admin
is it hopeless and forlorn !
And the cheese stands alone...
 

Canuck

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 2, 2005
Messages
849
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
cnredd said:
And the cheese stands alone...

would that be the revolusionist cheese that the founding fathers of america
smelled of
 

Canuck

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 2, 2005
Messages
849
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
JOHNYJ said:
Troop strength and equipment.Two points the administration has bungled incredibly. Colin Powel in his Book said that you needed,'overwhelming strength ! to defeat an enemy,139,000 troops is not overwhelming.The chief of staff of the army said 300,000 and was fired for his opinion. No body armour ,no armoured humvees. To this day,still not enough.Remember this was a war of choice,the administration picked the starting date.
Everything about it is underwhelming
the objective is oil they plan on staying their and fighting tooth and nail along time.They dont want to win!
 

Canuck

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 2, 2005
Messages
849
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
AK_Conservative said:
Ahh see, youre twisting my words! This is a different enemy in the means:
Desert warfare, civilian insugents, terrorism, and not to mention, some of the top terrorist leaders believe this is a religious war, as well as some of the citizens which makes it even harder to deal with! They will go to ANY means to make sure they win, even blowing themselves up and killing hundreds of the FELLOW citizens
no it's the same one you have been fighting since the declaration of independance

the Elite's puppet
that why election after election the elephants and the asses are at each others throats and blaming each other for each others failures
one failure after another
like a drunken harlot
admin to admin
is it hopeless and forlorn
you bet it is

rich ELITE with off shore BANK ACCOUNTS pull the DONkey and THE elephant
in front of the electorate like a three ring circus
when in 2000 the stk makt crashed bubles, and enrons toppoled
and savings and loans scandals
WTC scandal
katrina scandal
the elite needs money they lost their shirts in the 2000 crash
they mean to turn America into a third world to get there money
by using walmart chinese consortiums to rid you of jobs
and build up chinese miltary
allow bussiness to hire illegal aliens by the trains full
watch and learn how the harlot's dance unfolds

America has been cold clocked and is in a fog
 
Last edited:

Tashah

wʜɪтe яussɪaи
DP Veteran
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
18,379
Reaction score
9,226
Location
ישראל • אמריקה
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Centrist
The Iraq War has been mismanaged in the extreme. Despite US military doctrine, Rumsfeld has tried to wage war on the cheap.

The US military is structured to win battles, but not necessarily win wars. To win the war in Iraq requires the same allocation of US resources that were expended in Germany and Japan after WWII. The Bush administration is ignoring this truism... ergo US forces in Iraq win isolated battles but cannot establish the peace using this methodology.

The US military is also ill-structured for the looming new battlefields of the 21st century. The US military is trained and equipped to wage conventional warfare. With the demise of the Soviet Union, the equation has changed. New antagonists are well aware that they cannot defeat US military forces in a conventional theater of war. Warfare against the US in the new century will encompass what is termed '4GW' which is shorthand for Fourth Generation Warfare. In essence, this is asymmetrical warfare in the mode of Al-Qa'ida, Hamas, Hizb'allah, etcetera. The US military must undergo critical restructuring from the Pentagon on down to platoon level to properly address 4GW.

An example. The US military training exercises (war games) usually consist of two elements... a US force vs. a conventional opposition force. The new 4GW conflicts render such scenarios obsolete and a throwback to Cold War military tactics. War games should in fact reflect current realities... US forces vs. a myriad of asymmetrical forces. War games should also encompass all elements of force... military, diplomatic, economic, et. al. With the advent of the Information Age, the Pentagon could also host war games on the Internet which would accept the input of American civilians. This would throw curves at the military that would be unexpected... ergo asymmetrical warfare. American ingenuity would thus be applied to help prepare the military for unforeseen circumstances.

I could go on for days, but what is articulated in this post should provide some food for thought. An additional tidbit... the officer corps of the US military has not been reorganized in over one hundred years. The same ranks and responsibilities are the same now as they were when a young Einstein penned his Nobel Award winning paper on the Photoelectric-effect. In other words, the US military officer corps is still structured to wage World War I.



 

Canuck

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 2, 2005
Messages
849
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Tashah the invinceable
 

scottyz

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
1,575
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Moderate
Things have definitely gone much differently than what the American people were sold. Two years there and the only thing we really occupy is the green zone and we're still launching offensives. This was suppose to be a quick in and out war. Maybe Jr. now realizes why Sr. didn't take Baghdad?

Back in '92 Cheney said...
"And the question in my mind is how many additional American casualties is Saddam worth?" Cheney said then in response to a question.

"And the answer is not very damned many. So I think we got it right, both when we decided to expel him from Kuwait, but also when the president made the decision that we'd achieved our objectives and we were not going to go get bogged down in the problems of trying to take over and govern Iraq."
 

robin

Banned
Joined
Jun 9, 2005
Messages
1,045
Reaction score
0
Location
UK
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
No military can be restructured so as to be particularly successful in fighting ideologies with no centre & with no boundaries & with 800,000,000 potential suicide bombers worldwide. The British army couldn’t have stopped the London bombers. The police along with the right intelligence was what was needed there.
Japan & Germany had geographic centres & figureheads that could be taken out. Islamist extremism does not. Post WWII Germany had lost their figurehead Hitler & Japan’s figurehead had surrendered, therefore they are completely different to extremist Islamists.
Herein lies the danger with belief’s that hold their figurehead to be an immortal God… because you cannot kill their figurehead like you can kill an Adolf Hitler.
The militarist approach to Terrorism is highly costly, at around $250,000,000,000 so far in Iraq that had nothing to do with 911 & is a vast sum spent in pursuit of the avoidance of terrorist incidents that cost relatively very few deaths compared to other causes such as gun related homicides in US, road traffic accidents & yesterday in Pakistan we saw ten times as many people killed in a natural disaster as killed in 911. We recently saw many times as many killed in N.Orleans as in 911.
Approximately a 911 death toll happens every month from car accidents in the USA & the same again monthly from gun homicides or every day from malaria worldwide. America's lashing out at Iraq & Saddam becuase they didn't succeed in heading Bin Laden off at the pass, is all out of proportion to the number of 911 deaths & isn’t even the right place to lash out.
$250,000,000,000 spent on police to control guns or traffic would have saved many many times more American lives.
The Iraq war has had the opposite effect becuase the only reason another 1900 Americans are now dead is not due to terrorist attacks but because they were stupid enough to invade Iraq.
'Mismanaged' is an understatement in terms of Iraq & in terms of the broader war on Terror.
How can you fight a war on the highly infectious virulent mental sickness of extreme mind virus’s (Islam).
One would have to make human beings inherently less stupid & considering how educated many terrorists are such as Mohamed Atta was with his degree in urban planning, I don’t see even how education can even be of benefit.
My experience of people has been that education is absolutely no gaurantee against stupidity.
The outlook is not good.
$250,000,000,000 could have saved so many more lives if spent more wisely.
As it stands, it’s actually cost lives.
 
Last edited:

purplehaze

New member
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
43
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
An example. The US military training exercises (war games) usually consist of two elements... a US force vs. a conventional opposition force. The new 4GW conflicts render such scenarios obsolete and a throwback to Cold War military tactics. War games should in fact reflect current realities... US forces vs. a myriad of asymmetrical forces. War games should also encompass all elements of force... military, diplomatic, economic, et. al. With the advent of the Information Age, the Pentagon could also host war games on the Internet which would accept the input of American civilians. This would throw curves at the military that would be unexpected... ergo asymmetrical warfare. American ingenuity would thus be applied to help prepare the military for unforeseen circumstances.

I could go on for days, but what is articulated in this post should provide some food for thought. An additional tidbit... the officer corps of the US military has not been reorganized in over one hundred years. The same ranks and responsibilities are the same now as they were when a young Einstein penned his Nobel Award winning paper on the Photoelectric-effect. In other words, the US military officer corps is still structured to wage World War I.
The US armed forces are always changing tactics and training to match the nations threats. There are so many Special forces and special ops groups within the armed forces I think saying
the US military is also ill-structured for the looming new battlefields of the 21st century. The US military is trained and equipped to wage conventional warfare
is unfair.

Special ops units are being used in large numbers, to great effect in tracking down individuals and terrorist cells. They have only been focusing on terrorism as their main training for a few years, this will only get better. Conventional forces are still needed to provide security to large areas. I think we need to increase conventional forces on the ground in Iraq (it would be great if the UN would get involved and do their job) in order to provide security to the cities and construction sites.

The government knows conventional war is most likely a thing of the past, and is changing its training and creating new organizations to deal with these new threats. However this is a new thing, and it is of course going to take time to get right. I still say, right now, our special forces are more than capable of dealing with these terrorist cells and civilian populations. Our conventional forces are getting more specialized training in this area also. I believe the failure in Iraq is due to mismanagement and bad strategy at the top of the command chain. Not in the structure and small unit tactics of our military. Which is arguably the best/most thouroughly trained in the world.
 

Ima Troll

Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2005
Messages
81
Reaction score
0
Location
Chicago
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
JOHNYJ said:
The question peoploe always ask or are asked.
" Do You Support The War " is the wrong question !
It should be, " Do You Think The War Is,Missmanaged "
The Answer would be Hell Yes !
Bush left his last management job, as i recall
 

Canuck

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 2, 2005
Messages
849
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
scottyz said:
Things have definitely gone much differently than what the American people were sold. Two years there and the only thing we really occupy is the green zone and we're still launching offensives. This was suppose to be a quick in and out war. Maybe Jr. now realizes why Sr. didn't take Baghdad?

Back in '92 Cheney said...
"And the question in my mind is how many additional American casualties is Saddam worth?" Cheney said then in response to a question.

"And the answer is not very damned many. So I think we got it right, both when we decided to expel him from Kuwait, but also when the president made the decision that we'd achieved our objectives and we were not going to go get bogged down in the problems of trying to take over and govern Iraq."

they must be back peddling now
notice they have the dumbed down natl gaurd there not their professionals
they wont risk there best to stand in harms way on a suicide mission

if they lose alot of natl gaurdsmen they are only losing nintendo and paint ball kids

I dont think the atrocities in Iraq are directives ,as much as, that they are caused ,by a bunch of punks ,that only know,nintendo, war games ,and paint ball.
where u can kill without remorse.
have we failed our youth or have they failed us
physclogical problems in those natl gaurdsmen will be devastating

_________________________________________________________________

Tashah The Iraq War has been mismanaged in the extreme. Despite US military doctrine, Rumsfeld has tried to wage war on the cheap.
_________________________________________________________________
Tashah there is no war on Iraq it is a war on terror
and when we the north Americans get to the bottom of it the terrorists will be brought to justice that includes all terrorists ,of all nationalities.
be they zionist extremists ,american extremists ,evangelist extremists ,or other.

Already Candians are screaming " use the black watchman to track and expunge all the terrorists"

__________________________________________________________
 
Last edited:

Navy Pride

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
39,883
Reaction score
3,070
Location
Pacific NW
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
JOHNYJ said:
The question peoploe always ask or are asked.
" Do You Support The War " is the wrong question !
It should be, " Do You Think The War Is,Missmanaged "
The Answer would be Hell Yes !
Sadly when you have a war things don't always go as planned.......

In the landing on Omaha beach at the end of WW2 we lost 6,000 men in one day.......I am sure that was not as planned.......
 

Bergslagstroll

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 26, 2005
Messages
4,970
Reaction score
938
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Well I think the Iraq war have been sucessful with one thing, stop people from thinking about Afganisthan and the really bad situation there.
 

OdgenTugbyGlub

Active member
Joined
Sep 29, 2005
Messages
292
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Well if we experience a sudden surge in Heroin use and opiate related crime we have the good old Afghan war to thank. Poppy production went from under 50 tons a year to upwards of 1000 tons in the first year after the taliban was eliminated. An unpleasant side effect to freedom.
 

scottyz

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
1,575
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Moderate
Bergslagstroll said:
Well I think the Iraq war have been sucessful with one thing, stop people from thinking about Afganisthan and the really bad situation there.
Or just stopping people from thinking at all.
 

FinnMacCool

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 23, 2005
Messages
2,272
Reaction score
153
Location
South Shore of Long Island.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Sadly when you have a war things don't always go as planned.......

In the landing on Omaha beach at the end of WW2 we lost 6,000 men in one day.......I am sure that was not as planned.......
Wow did you just compare our invasion of Iraq to World War 2? Its strange how you always manage to sneak in these little bits that while doesn't neccesarily make you wrong is almost always something I can't agree with.
 

SouthernDemocrat

Pragmatist
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
22,311
Reaction score
13,542
Location
KC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Tashah said:
The Iraq War has been mismanaged in the extreme. Despite US military doctrine, Rumsfeld has tried to wage war on the cheap.

The US military is structured to win battles, but not necessarily win wars. To win the war in Iraq requires the same allocation of US resources that were expended in Germany and Japan after WWII. The Bush administration is ignoring this truism... ergo US forces in Iraq win isolated battles but cannot establish the peace using this methodology.

The US military is also ill-structured for the looming new battlefields of the 21st century. The US military is trained and equipped to wage conventional warfare. With the demise of the Soviet Union, the equation has changed. New antagonists are well aware that they cannot defeat US military forces in a conventional theater of war. Warfare against the US in the new century will encompass what is termed '4GW' which is shorthand for Fourth Generation Warfare. In essence, this is asymmetrical warfare in the mode of Al-Qa'ida, Hamas, Hizb'allah, etcetera. The US military must undergo critical restructuring from the Pentagon on down to platoon level to properly address 4GW.

An example. The US military training exercises (war games) usually consist of two elements... a US force vs. a conventional opposition force. The new 4GW conflicts render such scenarios obsolete and a throwback to Cold War military tactics. War games should in fact reflect current realities... US forces vs. a myriad of asymmetrical forces. War games should also encompass all elements of force... military, diplomatic, economic, et. al. With the advent of the Information Age, the Pentagon could also host war games on the Internet which would accept the input of American civilians. This would throw curves at the military that would be unexpected... ergo asymmetrical warfare. American ingenuity would thus be applied to help prepare the military for unforeseen circumstances.

I could go on for days, but what is articulated in this post should provide some food for thought. An additional tidbit... the officer corps of the US military has not been reorganized in over one hundred years. The same ranks and responsibilities are the same now as they were when a young Einstein penned his Nobel Award winning paper on the Photoelectric-effect. In other words, the US military officer corps is still structured to wage World War I.
While you bring up a lot of great points, but your arguments are largely neo-conservative dogma. I am not a fan of Rumsfeld at all, but early on he tried to institute many of the same reforms you just mentioned. Of course, he got nowhere with it.

The problem in Iraq is that these types of conflicts are historically impossible to win. We are in almost the exact same situation the Soviets had in Afghanistan. There are those who argue that while the Soviets were offering only communism to the Afghans, we are offering freedom to the Iraqis. That is true of course, but the problem is that the Islamic Extremists that largely make up and fuel the insurgency are no more interested in democracy than communism. In the 10 years the Soviets occupied Afghanistan they killed at least 90,000 insurgents yet they were no closer to securing the country than they were the day they went in. I just think the war is almost impossible to win no matter how it is managed.
 

getinvolved

Member
Joined
Oct 11, 2005
Messages
155
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
JOHNYJ said:
The question peoploe always ask or are asked.
" Do You Support The War " is the wrong question !
It should be, " Do You Think The War Is,Missmanaged "
The Answer would be Hell Yes !
Mismanaged is an understatement. Did we have ANY plan for this war. Any plan for how we would rebuild? I know that rebuilding a nation takes time. But I feel like the given reasons we went to war were so misrepresented. I feel like we are at the point of no return and our leadership has no idea what to do next.
 
Top Bottom