Increase bombing, I would form together a collation of countries which would include Saudi Arabia/othe arab nations and get boots on the ground asap.
Alone?Would posters prefer we left Iraq to fight alone even if this meant that ISIS took full control of the region?
It was the US presence in the region that caused the terrorist threat to exist in the first place. Hussein may well have been a repressive dictator but he kept such groups well in check and was no friend of Muslim fundamentalism which threatened his own position.
Hussein and his offspring were the devil we knew and could cope with. Now look what we've got
Alone?
I thought Russia, Iran and some other countries were offering assistance.
Also, is there some middle which you have excluded in the options you listed?
We've been bombing places for 14 years now, has that produced anything? We had many boots on the ground for these 14 years, where are we? I mean something tangible. Do you have an actual plan for securing the ME and for the vilians of the countries to hold their governments once we are gone?
No plan, no dice. Our intervention has made matters worse, not better. More of the same will not miraculously reverse the trend. Real plans, real goals, real time lines. If ya got one, then let's figure it out. If you don't, then we shouldn't be fighting. "No Plan" is not a way to run an interventionist, occupation war.
It isn't my sole statement - it is a consensus that you are going against. I don't get the feel that the Bush administration would invade Iraq if they knew what we now know. Do you?
Politics are as much about what you don't know than what you know. It's easy to be armchair analysts here with the benefit of retrospect, but for Hussein, apparent weakness in his own country was something he couldn't have survived. Beside, the idea the US attacking Iraq was almost surrealistic before it happen - a solid part of the planet figured it was just posturing, since it was clear that there was no reasons to invade Iraq whatsoever.
So Israel and the KSA can do but Iraq can't? You can't be the policemen of the world if you have a measure for each weight that you come across. Poeple just see throught this, you know, and hardly accept such geometrically variable values. Be consistant.
Are ISIS and Iran the only choices on the buffet?Well, then, would Americans prefer that Iraq become a puppet of Iran?
Are ISIS and Iran the only choices on the buffet?
Saddam murdered an estimate of 1 million people in his 25 years in power. ISIS is small time compared to Saddam.
Lets not forget who his buddies were at the height of his killing spree
View attachment 67184779
» Donald Rumsfeld Shakes Hands With Saddam Hussein
- Possibly not. Possibly they would have done it differently. "What if" won't get us anywhere. At the time and with the knowledge available it was decision that was not wrong.
- You are right that politics is often about statistical type knowledge.
After leading in the region for so many years, sure a stumble to allow ISIS to raise, wouldn't it be the height of irresponsibility to now just walk away?
After all Pottery Barn rule - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, true?
How much harsher the judgement and distrustful the allies if the US just walks away? Can we really afford that?
That wasn't the height of his killing spree. That was taken in 1983.
- Possibly not. Possibly they would have done it differently. "What if" won't get us anywhere. At the time and with the knowledge available it was decision that was not wrong.
- You are right that politics is often about statistical type knowledge. In the case of Saddam the debriefing of the his inner circle indicated that he wanted the neighborhood to think he still had the wmd and that Putin, Schröder and Chirac would protect him from invasion. Even this might be wrong and the various people lying, but it is a believable explanation.
- Yes. As far as I am concerned it is better Israel have Nukes than Iraq or Iran. No doubt in my mind.
That would change, if the the UN were reliably responsible for robustly protecting populations and stopping wars. But as it is? Everyone responsible for family and friends themselves? Nope. Not now the way it is.
You see, it is not a question of fairness and all that. It is much more archaic. It is a question of allies and enemies in deadly circumstances.
Which was the bloodiest year of the Iran/Iraq war. A war Hussein initiated with barely a murmer from the US unlike with Kuwait a decade later
But they did have the knowledge that Iraq was no WMD threat and both Colin Powell and Condi Rice were quite up front about it before 9/11
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nUNsv66m8Rw
And its often just outright lies that represent a fabricated means to an end too. The whole WMD thing was just such a lie. Bush needed the Iraq war in light of his failure to find his chosen culprit for 9/11 in Afghanistan. Failure was not an option and another bogeyman had to be found. Hussein fit the bill nicely with the prospect of a short victorious war before the 2004 elections. What wasn't to like ?
Why is that? Nukes can stabilize a region much more than 15 years of peacekeeping. Where's there nukes on both sides, people tend to keep cooler. For my part, I fear much more Israeli nukes than whatever WMDs the Iraqi might have had - they look like "if we lose a war, we suicide everything" kinda nukes, in the hands of, once again, a xenophobic, aggressive military nation that follows the Uber-race vs the Unter-ones narrative in its quest for lenbensraum.
Y'all really don't get it. It's not a matter of overwhelming military might. It's a matter of religious differences, Sunni v. Shi'a. It's almost never a good idea to get in between two people who are fighting, because all too often you get hurt and they both wind up hating you. Same thing there - it doesn't matter who we side with, neither side really wants us there because both of them believe that we don't belong there. To them, all we are is a tool to use to attack the other side...or to rally the faithful i.e. "See how the Great Satan is on the side of the apostate Sunni! Let's rally and defeat them!"
There's a time to take action...and there's a time to walk away and let them sort things out by themselves. This is one of the latter. Thankfully, Obama seems to understand that, too.
Do you have the context of the YouTube?
without it the snippets are not of value. This is especially true after Saddam risking his life rather than showing the inspectors what had become of them.
But he is gone, im talking about right now.
Increase bombing, I would form together a collation of countries which would include Saudi Arabia/othe arab nations and get boots on the ground asap.
You right wingers always want your ****ing boots on the ground. Get Cameron to lead your coalition, the US is OUT!!
M.A.D. only works when neither side wants to die.
What makes you think that we want in ? The last war cost Blair his premiership I doubt Cameron will want to emulate that
There is no sides "that wants to die".
Contrarly to what some might believe, there is but one race, the Human one, and among the human race it is customary to love children and try to have a prosperous life. If you aim to write that some humans are born to kill others without even enjoying life of their own, I think you are subjected to severe, and possibly harmful delusions
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?