The War in Iraq is "Over"

[ConHog]

Uh Jim I apologize, I wasn't sure of your position on Where the WMDs Saddam had (long ago) came from. That's why i put the word "maybe" in my post, I'm sure Gaffer said it because it was recently he was rebutting a point i made with that idea.
Sorry Jim.




Gunny, you said a pet peeve was words meaning things in the constitution thread. your words taken as a whole in that one post did Imply that. Though I hoped you didn't mean it that way. So i put a point on it with my reply.

Now it seems your still upset because if the soldiers aren't at war then they will be jobless,

But Ok Here let me try to put this in the best light i can think of based on your words
You think that we NEED to Finish the "JOB" (whatever that is to you, you won't say).
But Not because soldiers need work.
SO if the "Job" was Finished (whatever that is to you). It would be Ok to bring the troops home but since it's not it's twice as bad to bring them home because there are no jobs.
That's the best i can make of what you saying I may be to slow to pick it up your full intent.

But I'm not sure what question you all want me to answer. that your so hot on?
If you want to answer What "Obama is going to do with the troops" I've got no idea what his plans might be. If your asking me, Well this is America, I believe in capitalism and self sufficiency. The Troops have access to the renewed GI bill with access to education and designated loans for housing and business loans. Which I think is deserved. If they are out of the service they have to make their way like the rest of us. There are no guaranteed jobs in the U.S. last I checked. Maybe some of these troops can create the Jobs the country needs rather than wasting their talents in the M.E.. For those that want to stay in the military if we close some bases overseas I'm not sure why we can't put a couple extra of bases on the Mexico boarder, stations some troops there. that one thing. I can give a few more ideas but the post might be longer than what you want to reply too.

The "job" at this point is to make sure that Iraq is strong enough to stand on its own after we leave. That's what some of you don't seem to get. We went to take out saddam and give the Iraqi people the opportunity to have their country back. It does no good to kill Sadaam if 10 years later we just leave and someone worse steps into the void. We created a mess over there , and frankly we owe it to Iraq to clean it up.

Personally, I think Bush screwed up. He should have sent team 6 in and just killed the fucker and his sons and told the Iraqi people "do what you want, but if the next guy fucks with us, he's dead to."

[jimnyc]

ANd I asked So When is the War Over Gunny?

Rev, let me ask you, when is ANY war over? Short of one side waving the white flag and surrendering, or an agreement/treaty being reached - when is ANY war "over"? Are these the ONLY ways a war can be over?

[Gunny]

Uh Jim I apologize, I wasn't sure of your position on Where the WMDs Saddam had (long ago) came from. That's why i put the word "maybe" in my post, I'm sure Gaffer said it because it was recently he was rebutting a point i made with that idea.
Sorry Jim.




Gunny, you said a pet peeve was words meaning things in the constitution thread. your words taken as a whole in that one post did Imply that. Though I hoped you didn't mean it that way. So i put a point on it with my reply.

Now it seems your still upset because if the soldiers aren't at war then they will be jobless,

But Ok Here let me try to put this in the best light i can think of based on your words
You think that we NEED to Finish the "JOB" (whatever that is to you, you won't say).
But Not because soldiers need work.
SO if the "Job" was Finished (whatever that is to you). It would be Ok to bring the troops home but since it's not it's twice as bad to bring them home because there are no jobs.
That's the best i can make of what you saying I may be to slow to pick it up your full intent.

But I'm not sure what question you all want me to answer. that your so hot on?
If you want to answer What "Obama is going to do with the troops" I've got no idea what his plans might be. If your asking me, Well this is America, I believe in capitalism and self sufficiency. The Troops have access to the renewed GI bill with access to education and designated loans for housing and business loans. Which I think is deserved. If they are out of the service they have to make their way like the rest of us. There are no guaranteed jobs in the U.S. last I checked. Maybe some of these troops can create the Jobs the country needs rather than wasting their talents in the M.E.. For those that want to stay in the military if we close some bases overseas I'm not sure why we can't put a couple extra of bases on the Mexico boarder, stations some troops there. that one thing. I can give a few more ideas but the post might be longer than what you want to reply too.

The OP is rather clear and concise.

Wrong answer. When you send them off to war, then bring them back and put them out, all that access to this and that you talk about is a bunch of bunk. What about the married with children personnel? How about I come take away your job, in this market, put you and your family in the street living out of your car?

Create jobs the country needs? Does reality EVER cross your mind?

[Gunny]

Rev, let me ask you, when is ANY war over? Short of one side waving the white flag and surrendering, or an agreement/treaty being reached - when is ANY war "over"? Are these the ONLY ways a war can be over?

The mission is over when the government of Iraq, elected by the people can stand on its own, as CH posted. Obama and the left calling the US military being used as Iraqi policemen a "war" is quite a stretch.

Rule #1. WE made this mess. Pointing fingers is BS. The mess is made. Last I checked, when one makes a mess, one cleans it up, NO MATTER HOW LONG IT TAKES.

And this is in response that little gem you quoted of Rev's, Jim, not your post. I'm just too lazy to dig through all the mumbo-jumbo to find it right now.

[ConHog]

The mission is over when the government of Iraq, elected by the people can stand on its own, as CH posted. Obama and the left calling the US military being used as Iraqi policemen a "war" is quite a stretch.

Rule #1. WE made this mess. Pointing fingers is BS. The mess is made. Last I checked, when one makes a mess, one cleans it up, NO MATTER HOW LONG IT TAKES.

And this is in response that little gem you quoted of Rev's, Jim, not your post. I'm just too lazy to dig through all the mumbo-jumbo to find it right now.

Hey Gunny, I've done a quick search and I just can't find anywhere where Obama or any of his supporters are clamoring to bring the troops home from Korea, and I'd say THAT war is far more concluded than the one in Iraq. Could it possibly be that this is just a political stunt and Obama and his loons neither know nor care about a war actually being over?

[revelarts]

The mission is over when the government of Iraq, elected by the people can stand on its own, as CH posted. Obama and the left calling the US military being used as Iraqi policemen a "war" is quite a stretch.

Rule #1. WE made this mess. Pointing fingers is BS. The mess is made. Last I checked, when one makes a mess, one cleans it up, NO MATTER HOW LONG IT TAKES.

And this is in response that little gem you quoted of Rev's, Jim, not your post. I'm just too lazy to dig through all the mumbo-jumbo to find it right now.

Nation Building. Great.
Any real benchmarks for that in your REALITY. Stand on it's own is kinda vague it seems to me. Cleaning up the mess is kinda vague to.

I'm not sure how the world will make it without us were bankrupt and can't even pay the troops.

[ConHog]

Nation Building. Great.
Any real benchmarks for that in your REALITY. Stand on it's own is kinda vague it seems to me. Cleaning up the mess is kinda vague to.

I'm not sure how the world will make it without us were bankrupt and can't even pay the troops.

This country has ALWAYS been a nation builder. Don't like it, go dig up James Monroe and spit on him.

As for the mess being vague. It is not our fault that you don't have an understanding of exactly what we did to Iraq. Bush screwed up , plain and simple. Iraq was a fairly urbanized country in 2002 , albeit ran by an asshole . Most of the nation had what we would consider to be standard urban utilities and such, and if we had just taken said asshole out and let Iraq just put someone new in place we wouldn't have created such a mess. But no we shock and awed an urban country into the stone age. By the time we were done, Iraqis didn't even have power, or the capability to pump oil, or the ability to defend themselves. We killed most of their top military so even if we just turned things over, it would be like giving command of a battalion of the US Army to a corporal and telling him to defend Nevada when California attacks. Good luck.

Are things going as quickly as they should? Obviously not, but unless you've actually been in country you can't possibly know the extent of the mess we made.

Imagine someone carpet bombing Texas and then just walking away and telling them to fend for themselves.

I am proud of the soldiers who have stayed on all this time out of honor to help correct what we caused.

[revelarts]

Rev, let me ask you, when is ANY war over? Short of one side waving the white flag and surrendering, or an agreement/treaty being reached - when is ANY war "over"? Are these the ONLY ways a war can be over?

"..one side waving the white flag and surrendering, or an agreement/treaty being reached.."
those are the standard ways.
We've installed a new gov't in Iraq and Afghanistan , for what it's worth, and If they can't maintain it that's their problem. Just as If the revolutionary war here had ended and all of the states broke into pieces or small civil wars it wouldn't have been the French's job to maintain a U.S. federal gov't, It's our country's problem. And it's taken 200 years and a civil war for us to get to the place we are now.

Unless you folks are saying we have other interest in the region -in the real world- that compel us to stay and CONTROL the direction of other people's gov't. So far your point are flimsy at best. and Fiscally unsustainable. But i've been told that Oil is NOT a reason for a "WAR we NEED to FINISH" . But cleaning up messes and nation building is...go figure

[ConHog]

"..one side waving the white flag and surrendering, or an agreement/treaty being reached.."
those are the standard ways.
We've installed a new gov't in Iraq and Afghanistan , for what it's worth, and If they can't maintain it that's their problem. Just as If the revolutionary war here had ended and all of the states broke into pieces or small civil wars it wouldn't have been the French's job to maintain a U.S. federal gov't, It's our country's problem. And it's taken 200 years and a civil war for us to get to the place we are now.

Unless you folks are saying we have other interest in the region -in the real world- that compel us to stay and CONTROL the direction of other people's gov't. So far your point are flimsy at best. and Fiscally unsustainable. But i've been told that Oil is NOT a reason for a "WAR we NEED to FINISH" . But cleaning up messes and nation building is...go figure

Sure, our own national interests play into the decision. That is just part of it. BUT you're comparison is silly. We weren't an already established nation that the french blew into oblivion, so they owed us NOTHING. We put Iraq in the situation the find themselves in today. Do you understand that? If we hadn't bombed them, a new leader could have stepped right in and had the third strongest military in the region and plenty of oil income to keep that country viable. We took all of that away from them.

[revelarts]

This country has ALWAYS been a nation builder. Don't like it, go dig up James Monroe and spit on him.

As for the mess being vague. It is not our fault that you don't have an understanding of exactly what we did to Iraq. Bush screwed up , plain and simple. Iraq was a fairly urbanized country in 2002 , albeit ran by an asshole . Most of the nation had what we would consider to be standard urban utilities and such, and if we had just taken said asshole out and let Iraq just put someone new in place we wouldn't have created such a mess. But no we shock and awed an urban country into the stone age. By the time we were done, Iraqis didn't even have power, or the capability to pump oil, or the ability to defend themselves. We killed most of their top military so even if we just turned things over, it would be like giving command of a battalion of the US Army to a corporal and telling him to defend Nevada when California attacks. Good luck.

Are things going as quickly as they should? Obviously not, but unless you've actually been in country you can't possibly know the extent of the mess we made.

Imagine someone carpet bombing Texas and then just walking away and telling them to fend for themselves.

I am proud of the soldiers who have stayed on all this time out of honor to help correct what we caused.

What your taking about is Restoration or reparations and rebuilding.
Well Talk to Bremmer and ask him where all the Billions the U.S. and the millions of from the Iraqis own bank accounts went to DO ALL OF THE REPAIRS your talking about went. He was the Occupation leader in Iraq when all that money for that got pissed into the wind with corruption on all sides. Soldiers and airmen generally don't repair utilities, they blow them up. Soldiers don't rebuild skycrappers, they target them. That's what they are trained to do and yes many are honorable and great folks. But nation rebuilding is not thier job BUILDING CONTRACTORS do that. and they can be civilians from any country as long as they get paid. Unless your saying that the Army corp of engineers should exclusively do the work. I might work with you there. But Sure we Screwed the Iraqis Royally and they deserve better I'm not sure we have ever been willing to do right by them or if we can make up for it But the average Soldiers shouldn't be rebuilding stuff it's not the military's job.

[ConHog]

What your taking about is Restoration or reparations and rebuilding.
Well Talk to Bremmer and ask him where all the Billions the U.S. and the millions of from the Iraqis own bank accounts went to DO ALL OF THE REPAIRS your talking about went. He was the Occupation leader in Iraq when all that money for that got pissed into the wind with corruption on all sides. Soldiers and airmen generally don't repair utilities, they blow them up. Soldiers don't rebuild skycrappers, they target them. That's what they are trained to do and yes many are honorable and great folks. But nation rebuilding is not thier job BUILDING CONTRACTORS do that. and they can be civilians from any country as long as they get paid. Unless your saying that the Army corp of engineers should exclusively do the work. I might work with you there. But Sure we Screwed the Iraqis Royally and they deserve better I'm not sure we have ever been willing to do right by them or if we can make up for it But the average Soldiers shouldn't be rebuilding stuff it's not the military's job.

I'm not talking about rebuilding their building Rev. I don't care if their building get rebuilt. I'm not talking about rebuilding their infrastructure. Roads, utilities, military leadership, emergency response units, that sort of thing.

And perhaps civilian contractors COULD do the job ( and in fact they are in conjunction with the military and have been since almost the start) but I'm sure you've seen the insurgents there shooting people on TV? Those people are there as a direct result of OUR actions. There certainly weren't insurgents killing people on the streets when Saadam was around (he made sure that only HE did that)

As for corruption, that exists no matter what.

Is Iraq ready for us to leave and stand on their own? I don't know. But I do know that this President hasn't shown me a single reason to trust HIS judgement on the matter.

Oh, one other thing. Where is your thread about it's time to bring the troops home from Korea?

[revelarts]

I'm not talking about rebuilding their building Rev. I don't care if their building get rebuilt. I'm not talking about rebuilding their infrastructure. Roads, utilities, military leadership, emergency response units, that sort of thing.

And perhaps civilian contractors COULD do the job ( and in fact they are in conjunction with the military and have been since almost the start) but I'm sure you've seen the insurgents there shooting people on TV? Those people are there as a direct result of OUR actions. There certainly weren't insurgents killing people on the streets when Saadam was around (he made sure that only HE did that)

As for corruption, that exists no matter what.

Is Iraq ready for us to leave and stand on their own? I don't know. But I do know that this President hasn't shown me a single reason to trust HIS judgement on the matter.

Sounds like You blow off Billions in corruption but bemoan our wholesale devastation of the country... and think Soldiers staying for a long time can fix it ...without the money to rebuild? well .. Ok.

Umm ,But you mention roads etc being destroyed by us. However Insurgents stop shooting at U.S. troops if we leave,. And just As i mentioned in my Revolutionary war analogy, if we started shooting at each other, Once we had freedom , it's our problem. not others. Saddam managed to keep internal peace in ways that are not democratic. It may take some time for the Iraqis to work out the regional , economic and religious issues that we've handed them , with the "freedom" from Saddam. But it seems to me we can't/shouldn't dictate by force their "peace" without remaining Dictators it seems to me.

Oh, one other thing. Where is your thread about it's time to bring the troops home from Korea?

I think we should close most of the bases around the world. why stop at Korea? do you want a thread I'll start one. BTW I ddin't start this thread.
but Gunny doesn't want that because there are no jobs for troops. And never will be enough i guess.

[ConHog]

Sounds like You blow off Billions in corruption but bemoan our wholesale devastation of the country... and think Soldiers staying for a long time can fit it ...without the money to rebuild? well .. Ok.

Umm ,But you mention roads etc being destroyed by us. However Insurgents stop shooting at U.S. troops if we leave,. And just As i mentioned in my Revolutionary war analogy, if we started shooting at each other, Once we had freedom , it's our problem. not others. Saddam managed to keep internal peace in ways that are not democratic. It may take some time for the Iraqis to work out the regional , economic and religious issues that we've handed them , with the "freedom" from Saddam. But it seems to me we can't/shouldn't dictate by force their "peace" without remaining Dictators it seems to me.

I think we should close most of the bases around the world. why stop at Korea? do you want a thread I'll start one.
but Gunny doesn't want that because there are no jobs for troops. And never will be enough i guess.

I don't blow off corruption. ANd in fact I think that they should have an equal financial stake in rebuilding their country to our own (meaning oil) but that doesn't mean we can or should just leave without making sure they can take care of their own.

[revelarts]

SO here's another Question for you Hog, and it goes to others here as well who are EXTREMELY concerned about Iran.

You've spoken clearly and others have agreed it seems that the Attack on Iraq was a mistake in the way it was handled, at least. That and has left them "a mess" with no infrastructure and a vacuum in leadership that could turn out to bite us in asre later if we don't stay and nation build or "fix it"
You've probalbly guessed my Question.
Why should we attack Iran, when we can end up with the SAME situation. there's no seal team 6 to kill Ahmadinejad that's going to change the situation. Another Ayatollah may rise in his place. Or MANY. And convert action could Spur a more radical element and rouse Iranian populous Away from any U.S. sentiment. BUT all out war will create another horrible Mess that we don't need and can't afford and don't know how to "Fix" and more ,OH well, Corruption. Politically who will we try to put in place IF we can win a ground war there. They already have a some democracy, are we to kill all the devout Shia for the Saudis or what?
Any Airstrike will alone will be an Act of war on our part and Iran would be justified in ANY type of retaliation on U.S. troops close by in Iraq or Afghanistan on it boarders or a Strike Here on the US mainland in the form of terrorist or Assassinations. Not to mention that Russia and China may not take kindly to the U.S. attacking there old Buddy.

What GOOD would a U.S. strike on A so called Iranian Nuke base do?

And are you folks SERIOUSLY afraid that if Iran gets 1 nuke that they will instigate an Attack on the U.S. or Israel? In the light of the hellish devastation ConHog describes we've wrought in IRAQ and Afghanistan that Iran can see clearly from their boarders?

Won't we be Worse off if we attack? and the ME in a bigger mess cause by US?


PS: Muslim Pakistan hates Hindu India but somehow the nukes haven't flown.

[Gaffer]

SO here's another Question for you Hog, and it goes to others here as well who are EXTREMELY concerned about Iran.

You've spoken clearly and others have agreed it seems that the Attack on Iraq was a mistake in the way it was handled, at least. That and has left them "a mess" with no infrastructure and a vacuum in leadership that could turn out to bite us in asre later if we don't stay and nation build or "fix it"
You've probalbly guessed my Question.
Why should we attack Iran, when we can end up with the SAME situation. there's no seal team 6 to kill Ahmadinejad that's going to change the situation. Another Ayatollah may rise in his place. Or MANY. And convert action could Spur a more radical element and rouse Iranian populous Away from any U.S. sentiment. BUT all out war will create another horrible Mess that we don't need and can't afford and don't know how to "Fix" and more ,OH well, Corruption. Politically who will we try to put in place IF we can win a ground war there. They already have a some democracy, are we to kill all the devout Shia for the Saudis or what?
Any Airstrike will alone will be an Act of war on our part and Iran would be justified in ANY type of retaliation on U.S. troops close by in Iraq or Afghanistan on it boarders or a Strike Here on the US mainland in the form of terrorist or Assassinations. Not to mention that Russia and China may not take kindly to the U.S. attacking there old Buddy.

What GOOD would a U.S. strike on A so called Iranian Nuke base do?

And are you folks SERIOUSLY afraid that if Iran gets 1 nuke that they will instigate an Attack on the U.S. or Israel? In the light of the hellish devastation ConHog describes we've wrought in IRAQ and Afghanistan that Iran can see clearly from their boarders?

Won't we be Worse off if we attack? and the ME in a bigger mess cause by US?


PS: Muslim Pakistan hates Hindu India but somehow the nukes haven't flown.

While Pakistan would love to nuke India, they don't dare, because India would nuke them in return. The MAD scenario works there. On the other hand iran is a different colored horse. The mullahs in charge and the president, are believers in the 12th imam. They believe a catastrophic war is necessary for his return. The fact iran might be annihilated doesn't matter to them. So their having even one nuke is very dangerous. Not to mention they could transport that nuke through help of their various terrorist organizations. And you can bet that when they announce they have a nuke it won't be one nuke.

Iran has a plan to create a new caliphate in the middle east with themselves as the center. The maneuvering and fighting is already under way. Iraq is going to be carved up. The kurds are under attack from both iran and Turkey. Syria is being protected by iran and will be used as a base of operations for them. Turkey is well within range of iranian missiles. Egypt is fragmented but could provide support to the saud's. Iran is the 21st century nazi regime. There's a major world war coming and it will be centered in the middle east. We can act to prevent it or we can sit back and watch until it comes to our shores.

We are not involved in many wars in the middle east. It's all one war. The war with islam. No one has the guts to come out and say that. They are all afraid to name the enemy because it might offend a few. Since there are muslims that are on our side the govt and news media walk on egg shells instead of calling things what they are. Anyone that believes in the "tiny minority of radicals" is a fool.

Two nation building successes were Germany and Japan. Why was that? Because we had direct say in how their new govt's were formed. The nazi's were outlawed and Bushido and emperor worship were outlawed. Religion was not a part of their new constitutions.

Rev your always thinking outside the box. But you really need to go back in the box once in a while to get a full perspective.