The Military Defeat of Imperial USA (1 Viewer)

[TimmyBoy]

I was interested in setting up a poll on whether people believe the US will stay bogged down and ultimately defeated in an unconventional, guerrilla war in Iraq.

 

[TimmyBoy]

Nobody likes my poll or title heh heh.

 

[teacher]

If we were imperialists then wouldn't we still be running Kuwait? Bring some logic to the game please. Next you be calling us a democracy.

 

[TimmyBoy]

If we were imperialists then wouldn't we still be running Kuwait? Bring some logic to the game please. Next you be calling us a democracy.

So, you don't think that the US is imperial? Make your case, why don't you think the US is imperial?

 

[GarzaUK]

Imperialism:the policy, practice, or advocacy of extending the power and dominion of a nation especially by direct territorial acquisitions or by gaining indirect control over the political or economic life of other areas.

Merriam Webster Dictionary
www.m-w.com

Interesting.

 

[TimmyBoy]

Imperialism:the policy, practice, or advocacy of extending the power and dominion of a nation especially by direct territorial acquisitions or by gaining indirect control over the political or economic life of other areas.

Merriam Webster Dictionary
www.m-w.com

Interesting.

Sounds like you are making a case that the US is an imperial power.

 

[GarzaUK]

Sounds like you are making a case that the US is an imperial power.

Well I would but not everything is going to plan for the Bush Admin - it turns out that although they tried they are not very good imperialists. Imperalists replace a government with an government that is friendly to the US, but it will turn out that Iran will be Iraq's main friend and ally after this (assuming there is an Iraq left).

 

[TimmyBoy]

Well I would but not everything is going to plan for the Bush Admin - it turns out that although they tried they are not very good imperialists. Imperalists replace a government with an government that is friendly to the US, but it will turn out that Iran will be Iraq's main friend and ally after this (assuming there is an Iraq left).

The UK was much better at the game of imperialism than the US. Bush should have listened to his UK counterparts more closely.

 

[TurtleDude]

The UK was much better at the game of imperialism than the US. Bush should have listened to his UK counterparts more closely.

different times-can't compare that. the two countries we really conquered-Germany and Japan are thriving. English imperialism created some well known messes including tribal hostilities in parts of Africa and to some extent, Mid Eastern messes as well. However, there is some merit in your comments-an Indian Doctor Friend of mine noted that perhaps the English should have run Iraq since they have had more training in such things (he liked British rule in his homeland)

what UK counterpart are you speaking ofBTW

 

[GarzaUK]

different times-can't compare that. the two countries we really conquered-Germany and Japan are thriving. English imperialism created some well known messes including tribal hostilities in parts of Africa and to some extent, Mid Eastern messes as well. However, there is some merit in your comments-an Indian Doctor Friend of mine noted that perhaps the English should have run Iraq since they have had more training in such things (he liked British rule in his homeland)

what UK counterpart are you speaking ofBTW

Imperialism always creates messy tribal hostilities - I'm living in one (Northern Ireland). The reason why British imperialism worked so well was military and technological gap was so big - its easy to control natives who fight with bows and arrows and colonism. While the gap is not so big in Iraq, natives have Ak47's - the most versatile and durable weapon ever.

Althought I hope Islamic terrorism is defeated (if possible) and I hope the Iraqis can live in peace. I'm kinda glad that the neo-con dream has been shattered and maybe the Republican Party can return to their old policies at last.

 

[TimmyBoy]

different times-can't compare that. the two countries we really conquered-Germany and Japan are thriving. English imperialism created some well known messes including tribal hostilities in parts of Africa and to some extent, Mid Eastern messes as well. However, there is some merit in your comments-an Indian Doctor Friend of mine noted that perhaps the English should have run Iraq since they have had more training in such things (he liked British rule in his homeland)

what UK counterpart are you speaking ofBTW

Well, I just figuired that the UK as a nation was better at the game of imperialism than the USA.

 

[Calm2Chaos]

Nobody likes my poll or title heh heh.

The title seems pretty par for the course for you.

 

[MSgt]

Well I would but not everything is going to plan for the Bush Admin - it turns out that although they tried they are not very good imperialists. Imperalists replace a government with an government that is friendly to the US, but it will turn out that Iran will be Iraq's main friend and ally after this (assuming there is an Iraq left).

Wrong. Study the region.

 

[GarzaUK]

Wrong. Study the region.

Oh and would you like to tell me what is wrong?

Iraq Shias and Iran are very close. Iraqi Shias want an Islamic Republic, just like Iran. I believe Iran was one of the first nations to improve ties with Iraq. Iran is even more delighted then the US that Saddam is gone. Win or Lose. Iran wins.

 

[Deegan]

Some troops will eventually come home, but we are never leaving Iraq friends.

The situation in the region is still very dangerous for our country, and our friends and allies. We still have yet to meet the real threat there, Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, and until that's done, we are not going anywhere. I think Rice made that clear at her last meeting with the Senate, and House, she refused to say when, they asked, "five years.......ten years" she refused to answer. This tells me we are planning to stay for a long time, and we should, because the obvious targets have yet to be eliminated, and this must be addressed!

 

[MSgt]

Oh and would you like to tell me what is wrong?

Iraq Shias and Iran are very close. Iraqi Shias want an Islamic Republic, just like Iran. I believe Iran was one of the first nations to improve ties with Iraq. Iran is even more delighted then the US that Saddam is gone. Win or Lose. Iran wins.

Sure....

No matter how well things go in Iraq, count on fresh predictions of catastrophe. First, the war was going to be a bloodbath. Next, the occupation was bound to fail. Then, Iraq's first free elections were going to be a disaster. Held on schedule, the elections were remarkably successful. Iraqis risked their lives to cast ballots. After this, the new Iraqi Constitution was going to be voted down. Knowing what I know of the social politics of the country, this too will prove the voices of doom wrong. Now the voices that have been wrong about everything else insist Iraq will become "another Iran."

That's dead wrong. Part of the problem is ignorance by some in the news media. Columnists write about the topic of the moment, whether they understand the subject or not. News shows fill segments with talking heads, few of whom have firsthand experience. Far more disheartening are American partisans who would rather see Iraq fail miserably than allow the Bush administration a success. But Iraq will not become a second Iran.

Although a coalition backed by the senior Shi'ite clergy won nearly half the votes, Tehran won't dominate Baghdad. Iraqi Shi'ites have deep differences with their Iranian counterparts. The ethnic rivalry between Arabs and Persians predates the coming of Islam. Saddam Hussein trusted his Arab Shi'ite soldiers to fight their Iranian co-religionists. Did Christianity unite Europe's hereditary enemies? Of course not.

Will the new Iraq have ties to Iran? Of course. Iraqis have to live with their restive neighbor. Even the pro-American Kurds will seek a functional cross-border relationship. As governor of Texas, George W. Bush developed useful ties with his Mexican counterparts, but he didn't sell Texas back to Mexico. During Saddam's reign of terror, many Iraqis, both Shi'ite clerics and common citizens, found asylum in Iran. When Saddam gassed the Kurds, Iran opened its borders to thousands of terrified refugees. And trade, legal and illegal, has continued down the centuries. But Iran's government of mullahs will never be a model for Iraq.

Iraq's key clerics understand that the Iranian model has failed. Far from inaugurating a perfect society, the tyranny of the mullahs alienated the young from religion and generated cynicism toward the clergy. Ayatollah Khomeini's revolution brutalized Islam. Iraq's mullahs likely will press for greater social strictures than we would like to see, but they're not going to bind themselves to an Iranian government that they view as living on borrowed time. There's a greater likelihood that Iraq's free elections will inspire the people of Iran. About 70% of Iran's population is younger than 30, and disenchanted. Iraqi democracy may prove the downfall of Iran's mullahs, not the other way around.

Enlightened?

 

[SKILMATIC]

So, you don't think that the US is imperial? Make your case, why don't you think the US is imperial?

Well why dont you make your case that it is? O wait you have already and you still have failed miserably. It makes no suprise to me that you are a failure. Keep up the good failurment.

The UK was much better at the game of imperialism than the US. Bush should have listened to his UK counterparts more closely.

And you should listen to facts.

Well, I just figuired that the UK as a nation was better at the game of imperialism than the USA.

And you always figure wrong.

 

[MSgt]

Well why dont you make your case that it is? O wait you have already and you still have failed miserably. It makes no suprise to me that you are a failure. Keep up the good failurment.

I'll prove that America is Imperial. We conquered Japan and planted our flag..oh wait...ummm...we safe guarded South Korea and planted our flag...oh wait..ummm...we liberated Kuwait and planted our flag...oh wait..ummm...we liberated Iraq and we planted our flag...oh wait...ummm...we conguered Germany and we planted our flag...oh wait...ummm...etc. Wow, it seems that I can't think of a single country or island where we have conguered or liberated where we have colonized. Shall we begin counting the colonial locales of the Europeans?

It's a pity that people hate their country so much that they would pull out any stop to bash it yet enjoy it's many freedoms along the way. :2usflag:

 

[SKILMATIC]

I'll prove that America is Imperial. We conquered Japan and planted our flag..oh wait...ummm...we safe guarded South Korea and planted our flag...oh wait..ummm...we liberated Kuwait and planted our flag...oh wait..ummm...we liberated Iraq and we planted our flag...oh wait...ummm...we conguered Germany and we planted our flag...oh wait...ummm...etc. Wow, it seems that I can't think of a single country or island where we have conguered or liberated where we have colonized. Shall we begin counting the colonial locales of the Europeans?

It's a pity that people hate their country so much that they would pull out any stop to bash it yet enjoy it's many freedoms along the way. :2usflag:

My sentiment exactly. The fishy thing is how come he doesnt finish up in his previous thread on the military poll question. I think its because he got pwned by me. I seriously doubt he even knows anything on how the world works and what goes on in it.

 

[oldreliable67]

whether people believe the US will stay bogged down

I, for one, do not accept that the US is 'bogged down' in Iraq.

> Have we made mistakes in Iraq? Sure.

> Has there ever been a war in which no mistakes were made? Of course not.

> Will the mistakes that we have made in Iraq prevent us from accomplishing our mission? Certainly not.

> Will Iraq evolve into a theocracy similar to Iran? Maybe. But if it does, it will be by their own choice, a choice which we will have helped to facilitate.

> Will Iran remain a theocracy? Ah, there is an interesting question. There seems to be a fairly strong movement, especially among younger Iranians, to pressure for a more democratic process (witness the last so-called 'election' ).

> When we depart Iraq, will we be viewed as friends of the Iraqi people? If the Iraqi's are succesful in setting up and making a start with a representative government, then probably. If we cut and run now, and abandon the process that has gotten started, then probably not. For fans of polls, one of the chief criticisms of the US by Iraqis has been our inability to provide better security. Clearly, until the Iraqis can do it themselves, if we're not there to provide it, there will be no security whatever. But truthfully, nobody knows.

 

[MSgt]

I, for one, do not accept that the US is 'bogged down' in Iraq.

> Have we made mistakes in Iraq? Sure.

> Has there ever been a war in which no mistakes were made? Of course not.

> Will the mistakes that we have made in Iraq prevent us from accomplishing our mission? Certainly not.

> Will Iraq evolve into a theocracy similar to Iran? Maybe. But if it does, it will be by their own choice, a choice which we will have helped to facilitate.

> Will Iran remain a theocracy? Ah, there is an interesting question. There seems to be a fairly strong movement, especially among younger Iranians, to pressure for a more democratic process (witness the last so-called 'election' ).

> When we depart Iraq, will we be viewed as friends of the Iraqi people? If the Iraqi's are succesful in setting up and making a start with a representative government, then probably. If we cut and run now, and abandon the process that has gotten started, then probably not. For fans of polls, one of the chief criticisms of the US by Iraqis has been our inability to provide better security. Clearly, until the Iraqis can do it themselves, if we're not there to provide it, there will be no security whatever. But truthfully, nobody knows.

Nor should you accept it. It's sad that people need this kind of negative focus to sooth their personal sentiments against the entire effort. We're not "bogged" down. If only people could see what is really going on over there instead of waiting for the next story of "doom" from the media. Out of half of the Iraqi population that went to vote on their new constitution, the media would cover a story about an Iraqi that got blown up on the way to the voters booth and Americans would vringe at the "failures" in Iraq.

 

[Napoleon's Nightingale]

I'll prove that America is Imperial. We conquered Japan and planted our flag..oh wait...ummm...we safe guarded South Korea and planted our flag...oh wait..ummm...we liberated Kuwait and planted our flag...oh wait..ummm...we liberated Iraq and we planted our flag...oh wait...ummm...we conguered Germany and we planted our flag...oh wait...ummm...etc. Wow, it seems that I can't think of a single country or island where we have conguered or liberated where we have colonized. Shall we begin counting the colonial locales of the Europeans?

:lol: Apparently you never learned how we colonized the west, or heard of the Indian Removal Act, or of The Trail of Tears. Western Expansionism was equivelent to imperialism. We conquered Japan, forced a new constitution to our liking down their throat ie forced a change from imperial democracy to a democratic republic, and ravaged the Shinto religion. We're still occupying South Korea. Etc etc.

 

[SKILMATIC]

:lol: Apparently you never learned how we colonized the west, or heard of the Indian Removal Act, or of The Trail of Tears. Western Expansionism was equivelent to imperialism. We conquered Japan, forced a new constitution to our liking down their throat ie forced a change from imperial democracy to a democratic republic, and ravaged the Shinto religion. We're still occupying South Korea. Etc etc.

Apparently, you've never heard that the indian situation was just one of many in this worlds history of how people conquer. Also you apparently dont know there are consequences for your actions(i know its sounds rediculous but there are). And japans consequences was an unconditional surrendor which they agreed to. They couldve not agreed to it and we couldve kept dropping a-bombs on their a$$es. It was their choice. Also we couldve acted like conquerors and annexed japan as another state. We also couldve annexed Kuwait and Iraq as another state. Hell, hate to brake it to you but we couldve annexed the whole world as another state. That is imperialsm. Our ways a far from imperialsm. We have acted as the most kind nation this world has ever layed eyes upon. We saw that it was actualy better to set these countries up as trade partners and allies. And thats what we did. You dont like it? Too bad. Move to Greenland.

 

[Napoleon's Nightingale]

Apparently, you've never heard that the indian situation was just one of many in this worlds history of how people conquer. Also you apparently dont know there are consequences for your actions(i know its sounds rediculous but there are). And japans consequences was an unconditional surrendor which they agreed to. They couldve not agreed to it and we couldve kept dropping a-bombs on their a$$es. It was their choice. Also we couldve acted like conquerors and annexed japan as another state. We also couldve annexed Kuwait and Iraq as another state. Hell, hate to brake it to you but we couldve annexed the whole world as another state. That is imperialsm. Our ways a far from imperialsm. We have acted as the most kind nation this world has ever layed eyes upon. We saw that it was actualy better to set these countries up as trade partners and allies. And thats what we did. You dont like it? Too bad. Move to Greenland.

ROFL. We annexed everything west of the Louisianna Purchase! Then we started colonizing, slaughtering the native americans, and giving them the boot. That is imperialism. We have not acted as the world's most kind nation. Most of our military actions have had imperialistic qualities. I hate to break it to ya but the U.S. could not successfully annex the whole world..the insane level of nationalism you possess baffles me.

 

[MSgt]

:lol: Apparently you never learned how we colonized the west, or heard of the Indian Removal Act, or of The Trail of Tears. Western Expansionism was equivelent to imperialism. We conquered Japan, forced a new constitution to our liking down their throat ie forced a change from imperial democracy to a democratic republic, and ravaged the Shinto religion. We're still occupying South Korea. Etc etc.

Quite a stretch. I see you continue to claw at anything to bash America. Awww..those silly Frenchmen.

Occupying South Korea? And here I thought we were a welcome friend. They were awful friendlt to me when I trained with their ROC Marines. There is a difference between "occupying" and being invited. We are currently "occupying" Iraq. Japan surrendered unconditionally and no matter what was done...they live under their banner and they do as they please. Seems to me that "democracy" has done wonders for them. Shame on us for "forcing" such terror down their throats.

As far as what "we" did to the native Americans..."we" didn't do anything. Europeans invaded this land and their descendants (born Americans) did what what was done later. If you feel so guilty, buy some land and give it to an Indian.