Is it civilian warfare? or is it civil unrest ?

[bootle]

Whatever it is, if this report is only 50% accurate we certainly need to get a handle on this madness, the sooner the better <br /><br /> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4905770.stm

 

[JB]

Re: Is it civilian warfare? or is it civil unrest ?

I would call it phase III, the third war. <br /><br />The first was to depose Saddam. We clearly won that one.<br /><br />The second was the "insurgency", orchestrated, I think, by those who want theocracy only in the middle east. We have neither won nor lost that one but neither have they.<br /><br />Phase II has partly morphed into the Sunni vs. Shiite guerilla war in which we are mostly spectators. I see no way to intervene in Phase III without making it worse, if it can get any worse. On the other hand, I don't think we can just pull out either.<br /><br />My solution? UN intervention and the creation of seperate states for Sunni, Shiite and Kurd. The US and UK forces get replaced by UN peacekeepers (from Muslim countries). That would be similar to the partition of the former Yugoslavia, except most of the wealth is concentrated in a few areas and it might be awfully hard to get any of them to surrender any of the oil to others in order to get peace. I see real risk that Iran and Syria will intervene more than they already have.<br /><br />I don't think there is a way for the US to solve it (Phase III) or to force a solution without full UN backing.<br /><br />This is no longer the war that we contemplated or were prepared to win. They have the democratically elected "government" that GWB promised, but they cannot agree on anything or get anything done and now call our support "meddling" in their affairs.<br /><br />Makes a can of worms seem orderly.

 

[bootle]

Re: Is it civilian warfare? or is it civil unrest ?

I agree that pulling out is not an option, however it would ease the drain of our resources if we can get some of our allies to bear some of the financial burden.

 

[rolmops]

Re: Is it civilian warfare? or is it civil unrest ?

We found ourselves in the same situation in Lebanon in the eighties.The marines were sent in to stabilize a country and before we knew it we were manipulated by the local tribal interest groups and instead of bringing peace we lost over 200 marines in a revenge suicide attack against the barracks.While we ended up having the US Missouri bombarding the people we were supposed to pacify.<br />The arab world looks at us as a hugely strong stupid giant that is ready to be used.<br />We can either play that role as we are currently doing,or we can get out and use our money to invent an alternative to oil ,and let the arabs choke on their oil. .

 

[bootle]

Re: Is it civilian warfare? or is it civil unrest ?

There are certain merits to the historical facts stated, your solution to the present conflict is much easier said than done, the consequences of cutting and run would be much more costly in the long term than is commonly anticipated.

 

[JB]

Re: Is it civilian warfare? or is it civil unrest ?

I agree, Darth.<br /><br />My "solution" would require UN cooperation, which is unlikely, and it would require a fair division of Iraq's natural resources which is equally unlikely.<br /><br />I also agree that pulling out, whatever we call it, would be a very bad mistake unless we are turning it over to UN control.

 

[PW2]

Re: Is it civilian warfare? or is it civil unrest ?

We have to get them to get some sort of government together, and that is going to take some sort of deadline with some sort of teeth in it.<br /><br />I read even Newt favors some sort of pull out as well.<br /><br />In my view a "cut and run" description of the Murtha Plan is and always has been an inaccurate and unfair description of what he was suggesting, but the notion of finding a "good" solution to this mess is dreamland, in my view.<br /><br />We need to find a solution, and with all the warnings we heard from other UN members about this action in the first place, it is hard to imagine they would want to step forward now. We would need to do some serious grovelling if it were to happen, and I can't imagine either Condi or GWB will find that an attractive option.

 

[steamboatwilly]

Re: Is it civilian warfare? or is it civil unrest ?

I agree with what everybody says.Am I wrong believing that sadam hussin had the place under control????Better than anybody else ever will?? I believe he spoke the only language those idiots will ever understand.I think ONE AMERICAN LIFE is worth more than twenty-thousand of them!!!!.

 

[rolmops]

Re: Is it civilian warfare? or is it civil unrest ?

oh come on.<br />Wars in the middle east are not won or lost on the battle field.The current one is just another example of that simple fact.<br />In the middle east,wars are lost and won in the imaginary fantasy world of the muslem mind.I believe that the American spinmasters can create an imaginary battle or two in which there are victories and prophesies fulfilled.Exaggerate them properly and you will have touched the muslem mind in the right place.It is that or some serious wholesale killing, which will probably be less effective but certainly understood.The problem with that solution is that it will haunt us for generations to come.<br />Remember,we are not dealing with western rationally thinking people.We are dealing with ruthless people of a very cruel and surreal(in our eyes)culture.They do not want democracy.They want a muslem leader sent to them by Allah.So let's play Allah and give them a leader with a lot of semi religious and fairy tale blabla so they can feel good about themselves.Then let's get out and stay out!

 

[rodbolt]

Re: Is it civilian warfare? or is it civil unrest ?

nope<br /> we gotta stay the course. el presidente says so, maybe we can change the constitution again so Bush and company can get another 4 years.<br /> as long as we stay the course all will be well. what do ya want? mushroom clouds in new york ?<br />although I did see his speech that he is gonna let the next president figgure out what to do with his mess.<br />typical G W. make a mess,start something then bail/not show up and let someone else pick up the pieces.<br /> actually there is no solution. that part of the world does not understand our ways and we dont understand theirs and if they wanted democracy they would have had it 3000 years ago.<br /> even some of the democracies we dismantled in that reagion of the world in the 50's and 60's were closer to a theocracy.<br /> UN intervention is a joke. they wanted the US to stay out of Iraq in the first place, the current admin cherry picked data and whooped up some fear with smoke and magic and basically brow beat what allies we have to go with us. now that the WMD theory was proven to be a spin or a figment of an alcoholics immagination they just want out.<br /> so far no one has put forth any evidence that any recognized govt anywhere sponsered the 9/11 event or anyother event on US soil.<br />yes saddam was a mean rat, yes we aided in his coming to power and helped keep him there for many years.<br /> however he did have control of iraq.<br /> the kurds rebelled and he supressed a rebellion, rather brutally but it was effective.<br /> but the UN is a joke. to corrupt at the upper levels.

 

[bootle]

Re: Is it civilian warfare? or is it civil unrest ?

rolmops <br />Commander <br />Member # 6820 <br /><br /> posted 13 April, 2006 09:33 PM <br />--------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br />oh come on.<br />Wars in the middle east are not won or lost on the battle field.The current one is just another example of that simple fact <br />__________________________________________________________________________________________________<br /><br />Rolmops, sometimes you astound me, i had to stop and say something before reading the rest of your post.<br /><br />You simply cannot really believe some of the things which you say?<br />You of all people must know that, had Israel not acquired their victories on the battlefield, the existence of the jewish peoples would've merely been an afterthought in the anals of history.

 

[18rabbit]

Re: Is it civilian warfare? or is it civil unrest ?

Originally posted by Darth D Invader:<br /> I agree that pulling out is not an option ...

This ain’t about safe sex...we ain’t pullin’ out! I guarantee it, and I’m willing to bet JB’s farm/hideout on it, too. I think we’re going into Iran, from Iraq, thinking we’ve been planning to for at least a couple of years now. I think we will be in Iran before Shrub is out of office; just to be sure it happens as it’s supposed to. Gotta play the international diplomacy game. That’s what’s happening now, but there is no way Iran can avoid us (US/GB) from taking over that country, too.

 

[bootle]

Re: Is it civilian warfare? or is it civil unrest ?

18R, I totally disagree with your assumption, although i'm sure that there will be military action against Iran, it will definitely not be a full scale invasion, more than likely it will be in the form of airstrikes and missile strikes.<br />We are up to our neck in Iraq, a country of around 20 million divided people. <br />What makes you think that we can at this time mount a full scale invasion into Iran, a country more than twice the size of Iraq with a population of more than 60 million nationalistic zealots?<br />And what about the contingency planning?<br />If the senario turns out to be as you've described it, there is Hizbulla to think about, therefore Israel will end up having to invade Lebanon again and more than likely Syria as well.<br />With the influx of decreased foreign capital investments, obviously since China, japan and Europe, the main countries that presently bankroll our national debt, will certainly be under tremendous stress from having their already high energy costs doubled, i seriously doubt that our economy will be able to hold its footing under such an enormous task.

 

[rolmops]

Re: Is it civilian warfare? or is it civil unrest ?

Good morning Darth.<br />I stand by my statement.True, Israel won all the battles on the battlefield,but every time the moslem world completely ignored the results of the battlefield and their propaganda machine turned every defeat into a great victory of the "united arab moslem forces aided by the presence of Allah".<br />The result of this became obvious when negotiators tried to meet and the arabs could only come up with demands and not with concessions such as a looser would normally do.Israel has always won on the battle field and lost the peace afterwards.That is why Israel at this point no longer negotiates,but unilaterally sets up a final borders situation without negotiating with the other side.<br />In order to win the war in Irak,The USA has to dominate the imagination of the moslem mind.This is either done by fear of total destruction or by some very inventive imaginary tales that they want to believe.Something like: stop fighting or we will nuke Mekka.

 

[Haut Medoc]

Re: Is it civilian warfare? or is it civil unrest ?

Haut Medoc <br />Commander <br />Member # 44666 <br /><br /> posted April 14, 2006 08:19 AM <br />--------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br />If we even think about going into Iran, we better re-instate the draft & be prepared to use our own nuclear arsenal......<br />I don't think that Iran will be a pushover like Iraq was .....<br />We need to quit trying to install democracy in countries that don't want it....<br />The government's policy with regards to Iran should be scorched earth & withdrawal, if they refuse to back down & play nice.....<br />Now that would be a legacy that "W" could be proud of .....JK<br /><br />--------------------<br /> <br /> C&P from my other post but as you can see, I agree with you, Rolmops....<br />If we go in there has to be dire consequences, like the threat of total annihilation & let Allah sort the good from the bad .....JK

 

[BassMan283]

Re: Is it civilian warfare? or is it civil unrest ?

The idea that you can get the religious factions in Iraq to form a nice little democracy and work together is pure fantasy. Their only interest is to seize power and impose their will on the other two factions. The only thing that will work is to bankroll some ruthless, power-hungery sob like Saddam to pound the dissidents into submission and rule with an iron thumb. Like Saddam, this guy will probably go rogue on us sometime in the future but maybe by then we'll be smart enough to deal with it by assassination rather than full scale military action. That's why we have the CIA. First to find these guys, as they did with Saddam, then to "replace" them as we SHOULD have done with Saddam.

 

[PW2]

Re: Is it civilian warfare? or is it civil unrest ?

We are pulling out now. By election time it will be under 100k troop level, and it will go lower yet.<br /><br />After 6 years of GWB, one learns that you have to pay attention to what he does much more than what he says he's doing.

 

[bootle]

Re: Is it civilian warfare? or is it civil unrest ?

Originally posted by PW2:<br /> We are pulling out now. By election time it will be under 100k troop level, and it will go lower yet.<br /><br />After 6 years of GWB, one learns that you have to pay attention to what he does much more than what he says he's doing.

Not if we are going to war with Iran.<br /><br />Your second statement applies to every politician through out history, singling out GWB for having as much integrity as every politician, does not raise much in eyebrow dept unless you are a good smirker.

 

[ztim]

Re: Is it civilian warfare? or is it civil unrest ?

Bassman, there are others than CIA to do black work. The gov has on it's payroll orgs that do it w/o having to bow down to hurddles in the law.

 

[bootle]

Re: Is it civilian warfare? or is it civil unrest ?

Originally posted by ztim04:<br /> Bassman, there are others than CIA to do black work. The gov has on it's payroll orgs that do it w/o having to bow down to hurddles in the law.

If you mean the mercenaries that we employ under contract, the sanitized euphemism is "Independent Contractor".