• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's 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.

Iraqi Leaders Want the US to Go!

M14 Shooter

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
2,622
Reaction score
68
Location
Toledo-ish OH
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
nkgupta80 said:
Now if you are talking of the war against Islamic extremism and minimizing its hold on the mid-east region, then yes it may be possible.

This is, I think, what reasonable people hold the "war on terrorism" to mean.
 

YNKYH8R

Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2005
Messages
130
Reaction score
0
Location
RedSox Nation
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
M14 Shooter said:
Thats simple - in concept anyway-
You remove the appeal that terrorism offer to those that would become terrorists.

The first, best way for that to happen is for people to live in open, liberal, capitalist democracies -- because free, prosperous people dont blow themselves up in school busses.

Oh, there will -always- be some disaffected invidiuals that think the way to get what they want is to kill innocent people, but you dont have to eliminate ALL of these people to win the fight against terrorism.
Okaaaaaay. But most of the bombers are from Syria, and from Saudi Arabia; or at least other countries other than Iraq. Plus if you give democracy to Iraq (for example) then the leadership could effectively pass a resolution to declare war on us.
My point is this. People become terrorists and blow themselves up not because they have no jobs. It’s because they’re pissed. If you want to defeat terrorism (which is bullshit like he said) you have to take away the targets. Stop making America a target and people won’t be pissed enough to attack us or our allies. Which is easier said than done because there is no way an Islamic Nation is going to take the advice of an Judeo-Christian country.
Terrorism is like racism it’s handed down. To defeat racism you have to change the self image of the affected group the same is here. When you kill people and destroy life and homes you only create more reason to promote terror on us.
 

M14 Shooter

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
2,622
Reaction score
68
Location
Toledo-ish OH
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
YNKYH8R said:
Okaaaaaay. But most of the bombers are from Syria, and from Saudi Arabia; or at least other countries other than Iraq.
And...?

Plus if you give democracy to Iraq (for example) then the leadership could effectively pass a resolution to declare war on us.
When was the last time a democracy declared war on another democracy?

My point is this. People become terrorists and blow themselves up not because they have no jobs. It’s because they’re pissed. If you want to defeat terrorism (which is bullshit like he said) you have to take away the targets.
An appeaser. I should have known.
"Lets not **** off the people that hate us and want to kill us because they might hate us more and want to kill us more."

People become terrorists because they dont have credible alternative to the Islamofascist hate being preached to them by their zealot leaders. You give them that credible alternative and they will be far less likely to blow themselves up among little children.

What it comes down to is that The Enlightenment hasnt yet taken hold in the Muslim world. Once it does, the terrorism will stop.
 

YNKYH8R

Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2005
Messages
130
Reaction score
0
Location
RedSox Nation
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
M14 Shooter said:
And....? Those countries aren't democracies. And they won't become them anytime soon.
M14 Shooter said:
When was the last time a democracy declared war on another democracy?...
There is always a first. What if that democracy becomes an islamic state.
M14 Shooter said:
An appeaser. I should have known.
"Lets not **** off the people that hate us and want to kill us because they might hate us more and want to kill us more."

People become terrorists because they dont have credible alternative to the Islamofascist hate being preached to them by their zealot leaders. You give them that credible alternative and they will be far less likely to blow themselves up among little children

What it comes down to is that The Enlightenment hasnt yet taken hold in the Muslim world. Once it does, the terrorism will stop.
Not for a looooong time. Not my grandchildren's lifetime anyway.
 

M14 Shooter

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
2,622
Reaction score
68
Location
Toledo-ish OH
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
YNKYH8R said:
And....? Those countries aren't democracies. And they won't become them anytime soon.
Again - and?

If 5 years ago someone told you that in 5 years Iraq would have a government formed by free, democratic elections, and a Constution written and approved by the people of Iraq, what would you have said?

So, what makes you think it can't happen in Syria or Iran or Saudi Arabia?

The war on terrorism is a long-tem investment; if you look at it short-term, you'll never see the gains.

There is always a first. What if that democracy becomes an islamic state.
"There is always a first" and "what if" works both ways, doesn't it? What if Iraq becomes democratic Islamic state, and a staunch ally of the US?

Not for a looooong time. Not my grandchildren's lifetime anyway.
And...?

You apparently proceed from the position that Muslims can't or won't change. You sell these people short.
 

Hoot

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 8, 2004
Messages
1,686
Reaction score
18
Location
State of Confusion
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
I posted this in another thread, but it's worth repeating...

A recent poll by the British Defense Ministry states that 82% of Iraqi's "strongly oppose all foreign troops on Iraqi soil."

Why not have a referendum? Allow the Iraqi people to vote on whether U.S. troops stay or go.

If they vote "stay"...we finish the job until the Iraqi government is firmly in place and can maintain its own security.

If they vote "leave," we immediately begin troop withdrawal.

Isn't that a democracy? Isn't that what we are now using for the reason of being in Iraq? So Iraq can have a democratic government?

Why should we allow Bush to decide whether troops stay or go? Allow the Iraqi people to make this decision. This way, we would save face and prove to the world that we are only interested in establishing a free and democratic Iraq...an Iraq that determines its own destiny.

To do otherwise only makes the United States hypocrites in the eyes of the world.
 

M14 Shooter

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
2,622
Reaction score
68
Location
Toledo-ish OH
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
A recent poll by the British Defense Ministry states that 82% of Iraqi's "strongly oppose all foreign troops on Iraqi soil."
This may be true. But this doesnt mean that they want us to leave before the Iraqi government is ready to stand on its own.

Why not have a referendum? Allow the Iraqi people to vote on whether U.S. troops stay or go.
Thats up to the Iraqi government -- assuming that it wants to put such a ting to a vote rather than making the decision itself.

Isn't that a democracy? Isn't that what we are now using for the reason of being in Iraq? So Iraq can have a democratic government?
Like the US, Iraq isnt a democracy - its a representative republic. You're arguing a strawman.

To do otherwise only makes the United States hypocrites in the eyes of the world.
Only in the eyes of people that are inclined to think so way anyway.
 

YNKYH8R

Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2005
Messages
130
Reaction score
0
Location
RedSox Nation
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
One thing that has beena reaccuring theme in my mind has been "do the ends justify the means" and "what will this say about future military engagements"(but that is for another post.)?

Leaving is crucial, when we do leave we need to get all the way out. 2006 seems like the right time.

What about interim elections? Will the congress (if power shifts to the democrats) have the ability to force a return is (say) 6 to 9 months?
 

M14 Shooter

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
2,622
Reaction score
68
Location
Toledo-ish OH
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
YNKYH8R said:
Leaving is crucial, when we do leave we need to get all the way out. 2006 seems like the right time.
Leaving is less crucial that winning.
You think we will have won by sometime in 2006?

What about interim elections? Will the congress (if power shifts to the democrats) have the ability to force a return is (say) 6 to 9 months?
Force a return....of what?
 

YNKYH8R

Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2005
Messages
130
Reaction score
0
Location
RedSox Nation
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
M14 Shooter said:
Leaving is less crucial that winning.
You think we will have won by sometime in 2006?
Hmmmm.....depends on your perspective. Do we want to sit back and have Iraq be perceived as our puppet? I would much rather have Iraq fight to defend it's own democracy. Distance ourselves. They will be taken more seriously if they have the ability to defend what we gave them rather than us being there to hold their hand for all eternity.
M14 Shooter said:
Force a return....of what?
Troops...back home. I do speculate that after troop withdrawl you'll see a sudden decrease in sucicide bombings in Iraq. it will be the Iraqi troops job to find the training camps in their country and forcably remove them.

As to appeasement there is no appeasement if you take the target off America. Other countrys get attacked because of the whole "guilt by association" aspect. We get attacked for more basic fundimental reasons. If America didn;t stick it's nose in some other countries affairs it's possible we wouldn't be seen as the enemy we are.
 

MSgt

Stabler Genius
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 10, 2005
Messages
26,272
Reaction score
11,626
Location
Highlands Ranch, CO
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
One of the best things that could have happened…happened yesterday. For two decades, military analysts and Washington think tanks have been predicting a future where Islamic terrorism and our direct intervention into Arab affairs was inevitable. The idea that a democratic Arab country in the Middle East seemed far fetched, but democracy in the Middle East was the only prescription to the Arab disease that has given birth to global Islamic terrorism. Saddam Hussein gave us that chance, but we failed to take it the first time around. Instead, our Presidential administration (who knew better) listened to the appeasing UN and to the ignorance of our state representations and allowed the opportunity to slip away - then came 9/11. As tragic as it was, it gave us our next opportunity. This time, the current Presidential administration took it.

The easy part was the military action. Operation Iraqi Freedom was one of the most successful military campaigns in history. Saddam Hussein and his regime were shattered. Baghdad fell, to the collective shame of those Islamists in power who prefer homegrown despots to Western-inspired democracy. The hardliner Islamist revenge was to slaughter their civilians in the name of “Allah” and this is where the difficulty ushered in. Every day, Iraqis are more engaged in defending their own country. The Iraqi people have been revolted by the terrorists' barbarities. They may not want U.S. troops in their streets forever, but they do not want to be ruled by fanatical murderers. Kidnapping aid workers and lopping off heads on videotape horrifies decent Muslims. The slaughter of unarmed Iraqi recruits for the police and their army does not win hearts and minds and tell us something about the resolve of the Iraqi people. Earlier this year, the people of Iraq turned out to vote proudly for a future they want and showed their purple fingers to the world to defy their murderers and to declare that they will not be intimidated into the Middle Eastern status quo. This angered their fanatic legions and the violence worsened. Recently, their constitution passed through another Iraqi vote. The insurgency has been beaten, however not gone. What remains, largely, is the Sunni population that has shown descent - understandable given both the fact that they had enjoyed special privileges under Saddam, and those who are now denied those privileges are making life difficult for everybody.

Then came yesterday. The Iraqi government has made the public announcement that they would like a “timetable” for U.S. retrograde. This “timetable” would be in accordance to the continued build up of their military and security. This isn’t to be taken at its extreme literal meaning, but more simple guidelines that are already in place. This is not what people should focus on, because it is eerily close to what the U.S. Government has been saying all along and it is extremely probably that the U.S. and Iraq collaborated on this before the announcement. What is important is the impact it will have on our departure from their country and on our security in this “War on Terror”…

1) The Iraqi Government has made this request public in an attempt to unite the Sunni with the popular Shi’ite and Kurdish sentiment inside Iraq, thereby making an effort to stop Iraq on Iraq violence. This was a very tactful political move.

2) As I’ve stated before, there will be a substantial decline of troops in Iraq by next fall. The timing of the Iraqi governments request is impeccable - too perfect for it to not be by design. In any count, by the Iraqi government announcing their wishes publicly, our future movements will show the Muslim world that the legitimate Iraqi government has spoken and the U.S. is honoring the wishes of another Democratic Nation. The Middle East is watching, but they have spent generations being taught to be skeptical and paranoid of the West. The people of Syria who are currently being oppressed by their Baathist Party and their reformist that are keen to Bush’s sense of change for the Middle East are curious. 70 percent of the Iranian population is below thirty years old and they are disenchanted with their Mullahs and the Iranian theocracy. This is our chance to show them that we are not the enemy and our intentions are good. We do not wish to rule them. We simply wish to live peacefully with them and as long as their extremists oppress them, dictators, Arab blasphemy, and theocracies this is never going to happen.

3) Al-Queda is reeling from the beating they have taken since 9/11. We destroyed the Taliban in Afghanistan, destroyed countless of their “martyrs” through the insurgency into Iraq, and we have engaged them in other countries around the world (though not too publicly). Their finances have been frozen or squandered and no Muslim country’s government wants anything to do with them. The signs of this are obvious from their recent targets of choice. Throughout the 90’s, they targeted U.S. military installations, embassies, a Naval Ship, disrupted a UN peace mission, and attacked military barracks’ - and our ignoring of these acts culminated into their ‘master piece’…9/11. Since 9/11 they have been on the run and their desperate attempt to show the millions of Muslim cheerleaders in the Middle East that they are still a formidable force have allowed them to merely attack fellow Muslims inside Iraq and in other Muslim countries - Bombings in Jordan and Bali being the most recent. Not to smart when trying to maintain a certain illusion. (The “apocalyptic” terrorists never leave themselves a path to peace. Destruction is their only goal and they do not care where it takes them.) Al-Queda is not the only extremist group. There are many others, but they have remained silenced through this. Islamic groups inside the Middle East had merged into Al-Queda only to be killed off or they have simply dissipated. Our leaving Iraq on “Iraqi government terms” is the final blow to these zealots and to the Middle Eastern leadership who wish to maintain their “sovereignty” through the oppression of its people.


Make no mistake…Iraq will not be the end to this “War on Terror.” Future administrations will have to deal with this. Islam’s militants and their legion of adherents are determined to be at war with us in any fashion. Aggressive diplomacy with Syria, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Indonesia, India, Pakistan, North Korea, and China are ongoing. Current military actions in the Philippines are ongoing and there will be future endeavors. We must work our way in from the hopeful, unsettled frontiers, from Africa through Asia, in the Balkans, and in North America. The complex, exasperating, and frequently inspiring world of Islam faces a historically unique challenge. An entire religious civilization, of remarkable variety, must change if it is to survive economically and culturally. We are foolish if we do not do what lies within our power to enable that change to occur. Success will never be final, but always a matter of degree - which is the difference between a bloody contest of civilizations and the routine ebb and flow of lesser conflicts
 

MSgt

Stabler Genius
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 10, 2005
Messages
26,272
Reaction score
11,626
Location
Highlands Ranch, CO
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
By the way....I didn't want to put this in my commentary, because it doesn't belong, but this is about the time we are going to start seeing Democratic politicians aggressively pushing for a time table, so that they can take "credit" for orchestrating our pull out.:roll:

American politics never change.
 

M14 Shooter

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
2,622
Reaction score
68
Location
Toledo-ish OH
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
YNKYH8R said:
Hmmmm.....depends on your perspective. Do we want to sit back and have Iraq be perceived as our puppet? I would much rather have Iraq fight to defend it's own democracy. Distance ourselves. They will be taken more seriously if they have the ability to defend what we gave them rather than us being there to hold their hand for all eternity.
This isnt a contest where we show off our manliness.
If we leave and they arent ready, then they'll fail. This cannot be allowed, period.

Troops...back home. I do speculate that after troop withdrawl you'll see a sudden decrease in sucicide bombings in Iraq. it will be the Iraqi troops job to find the training camps in their country and forcably remove them.
You clearly dont understand the conflict in Iraq.
The terrorists arent blowing up Iraqis because they're mad at us being there, they're blowing up Iraqis because they dont want a free Iraq. If we leave before the Iraqis are ready to take care of themselves, then suicide bombings may very well decrease, but open warfare will increase and the Iraqi government will fall.

Note that the "insurgents" have resorted to suicide bombings because when they stand and fight us, they get slaughtered.

As to appeasement there is no appeasement if you take the target off America.
Again, you dont understand the conflict. Even if we completely withdrew from the world, the Islamofascists will still come after us, more violently than before.
 

YNKYH8R

Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2005
Messages
130
Reaction score
0
Location
RedSox Nation
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
M14 Shooter said:
This isnt a contest where we show off our manliness.
If we leave and they arent ready, then they'll fail. This cannot be allowed, period.
If they want it badly enough they won't.
 

YNKYH8R

Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2005
Messages
130
Reaction score
0
Location
RedSox Nation
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
M14 Shooter said:
Its not a matter of "want", its a matter of capability.
America, France, and Russia were all capable. I see no reason they could do the same. And you talk about me selling them short.

*Just so that we're on the same page, I don't believe in an immediate withdrawl, just a withdrawl soon. As to the reaons we're there...moot. Since they are then most hotly debated.
 

M14 Shooter

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
2,622
Reaction score
68
Location
Toledo-ish OH
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
YNKYH8R said:
America, France, and Russia were all capable. I see no reason they could do the same. And you talk about me selling them short.
I didnt sell anyone short - I didnt say they'd never be capable, I say they aren't capable YET.

Just so that we're on the same page, I don't believe in an immediate withdrawl, just a withdrawl soon.
Yes - you've made it clear that your requirements for withdrawal are caleandar, not event, driven. You're more interested in brining the troops home then the troops accomplishing their mission.
 

YNKYH8R

Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2005
Messages
130
Reaction score
0
Location
RedSox Nation
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
M14 Shooter said:
I didnt sell anyone short - I didnt say they'd never be capable, I say they aren't capable YET.


Yes - you've made it clear that your requirements for withdrawal are caleandar, not event, driven. You're more interested in brining the troops home then the troops accomplishing their mission.
I'm iterested in the Iraqis completeing their own mission. The US military is almost complete with their mission. The Iraqi Army and security forces will complete, the government in place; don't let the door hit you on the ass on the way out.
 

M14 Shooter

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
2,622
Reaction score
68
Location
Toledo-ish OH
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
YNKYH8R said:
I'm iterested in the Iraqis completeing their own mission
The US military is almost complete with their mission. The Iraqi Army and security forces will complete, the government in place; don't let the door hit you on the ass on the way out.

Good news:
When our mission IS complete, we'll leave.
I guess you don't have much else to worry about.
 

YNKYH8R

Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2005
Messages
130
Reaction score
0
Location
RedSox Nation
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
M14 Shooter said:
Good news:
When our mission IS complete, we'll leave.
I guess you don't have much else to worry about.
It will be complete in........9 months. Kinda like giving birth.
 

M14 Shooter

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
2,622
Reaction score
68
Location
Toledo-ish OH
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
YNKYH8R said:
It will be complete in........9 months. Kinda like giving birth.
What makes you say that?

And if the mission will be complete in 9 months, doesnt that kinda negate the idea that the war in unwinnable, etc?
 

Gibberish

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 18, 2005
Messages
6,339
Reaction score
1,269
Location
San Diego, CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
M14 Shooter said:
What makes you say that?

And if the mission will be complete in 9 months, doesnt that kinda negate the idea that the war in unwinnable, etc?

TheThe only mission that we can accomplish is getting the Iraqi military up to par so that they can defend their country without outside influence.

The war itself is unwinnable since you cannot stop an ideology. We cannot "win" against these radicals that have no country, and no established government.
 

M14 Shooter

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
2,622
Reaction score
68
Location
Toledo-ish OH
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Gibberish said:
TheThe only mission that we can accomplish is getting the Iraqi military up to par so that they can defend their country without outside influence.
That's the "only" mission we can accomplish?
By accomplishing this mission, what other missions will hwe have necessarily accomplished?

The war itself is unwinnable since you cannot stop an ideology.
Ideologies like Fascism, National Socialism and Communism?
 

Gibberish

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 18, 2005
Messages
6,339
Reaction score
1,269
Location
San Diego, CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
M14 Shooter said:
That's the "only" mission we can accomplish?
By accomplishing this mission, what other missions will hwe have necessarily accomplished?

Wrong word use on my part. Getting the Iraqi's established control of their country without relying on outside intervention should be "the" mission. Of course there are accomplishments which get us to the point of completing the mission.

How mnay "missions" do we have in Iraq? We have had how many "mission accomplished" so far?


Ideologies like Fascism, National Socialism and Communism?

These tend to have established governments, countries and armies. Fighting a war against terrorists is like trying to fight a war against people who like the color blue. There is really nothing to tell who really likes the color and who doesnt, unless they are outspoken about it. There are people in every country and all walks of life who like the color and you won't know who they are untill it is to late. So fighting a war against them is a reactive battle.

It ends up being a witch hunt rather then a war.

I am not saying trying to stop these people is a bad thing. They need to be stopped, but stopping them should not be part of the criteria for leaving a Iraq.
 
Top Bottom