in case you thought Patraeus was apolitical ... - Page 7 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 09-13-2007, 11:45 AM   #91
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,475
Local Time: 07:31 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by AEON


You are missing the part about moral and legal. He has every right as an American officer to disobey an unlawful or immoral order.


we're missing the forrest for the trees here.

why are we in Iraq? what is to be gain by "the surge"? why is Petraeus not being held accountable for the clear failure of the central goal of said surge -- political reconciliation? all that's going to happen so far is that the surge is going to end, and we'll be right where we were at the end of 2006, none of the goals achieved, but with much more wasted blood and treasure. our present forces are too small to actually subjugate a population, but large enough to enrage the rest of the Muslim world. it is making us less safe, and Petraeus knows this, but he can't say this, so he ducked the question

it seems to me that we have two options:

1. the surge is not working, and in order for it to work, we must send in 300,000 troops and fully occupy the country; all you kids out there, get ready to be drafted

2. the surge is not working, political reconciliation is impossible, so it's time to withdraw and leave the Iraqis to their own devices.

instead, we're choosing option 3: stall, and run out the clock, pass it on to the next administration, and then spend the rest of your life talking about how the surge just wasn't given enough time and we were "stabbed in the back" by murderous revolutionary Cindy Sheehan, the woman who toppled an empire in the Middle East. the surge was designed to give the Bushies the opportunity to say, "see, if we'd just stayed a little longer, we would have won," and those who grew up under the illusion of the invincible American Army (and by conventional terms, it is, but these are not conventional operations).

i thnk we are looking at a proxy war. if forced to choose, the US will side with the Sunnis against the Shiite controlled government that's controlled by Tehran. we're going to get a civil war that's a stand-in for a US vs. Iran, and that's going to spread throughout the Middle East.

and how ironic. for posters who were so *obsessed* with the threat that Saddam posed to the precious Saudi Arabian oil fields, it now seems as if there's a vastly greater, less containable threat than Saddam. and that's a regional war that the US will be funding, and what's worse, will have taken sides.
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 09-13-2007, 11:56 AM   #92
Resident Photo Buff
Forum Moderator
 
Diemen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Somewhere in middle America
Posts: 13,236
Local Time: 06:31 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by AEON


Like Deep said, he can't speculate on something as vague as the overall safety of the country. He is mission focused. He is about facts and figures.
But it is not something as vague as the overall safety of the country. It is much more precise. As the general in charge of the entire operation in Iraq, it would be wise, especially before embarking on the mission, to take the time to determine whether the mission will increase, decrease or have little effect on our safety, based on the enemy we are fighting. To not do so runs the risk of embarking on missions that may end up decreasing the safety of the country he is trying to protect.

I think, quite honestly, that if the goals were clear from the beginning, the plan was laid out well, the administration was straight with the American people as to the challenges ahead, the surge actually really did what it was supposed to do, then Petraeus should have no problem saying "yes, I believe we are safer because of this." The fact that he couldn't is telling.
__________________

__________________
Diemen is offline  
Old 09-13-2007, 12:58 PM   #93
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Vincent Vega's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Berlin
Posts: 6,615
Local Time: 01:31 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by AEON


Like Deep said, he can't speculate on something as vague as the overall safety of the country. He is mission focused. He is about facts and figures.

Additionally, there is nothing blind about his service. I would imagine his daily responsibilities dwarf anything most of us will be assigned in our entire lifetime.

(btw - it is not just a degree from Princeton, it was a PhD)
Okay, PhD, technicalties of the English language I don't know.

Though this wasn't my point exactly. You argued that a soldier doesn't need to know "the entire reason he or she is being sent into battle", talking about Generaly Petraeus, the leading officer of this multi-national force in Iraq. And that makes him more than just a soldier carrying out orders from the politicians back home. This makes him responsible to know exactly what he does, and what it will cause.

A soldier, or a General, should serve the citizens of his country, not the political leaders alone. And this is why he should make up his mind whether the "why we are here" really is answered by the powers that lead him.

But you are probably aware that the US Army and the German Bundeswehr have different philosophies regarding this very topic.
__________________
Vincent Vega is offline  
Old 09-13-2007, 01:56 PM   #94
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 30,343
Local Time: 07:31 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Diemen
I think, quite honestly, that if the goals were clear from the beginning, the plan was laid out well, the administration was straight with the American people as to the challenges ahead, the surge actually really did what it was supposed to do, then Petraeus should have no problem saying "yes, I believe we are safer because of this." The fact that he couldn't is telling.
Quote:
Originally posted by phillyfan26
Let's say they were fighting al-Qaeda. If someone asked him, "Is this making America safer?" He'd definitely respond, "Absolutely."

The difference is that we're not fighting al-Qaeda.
__________________
phillyfan26 is offline  
Old 09-13-2007, 03:27 PM   #95
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,475
Local Time: 07:31 PM
i guess i want to know if supporters of the Bush administration are willing to do what it takes.

are you willing to occupy Iraq for at least another 10 years and watch a good 5,000 Americans die in the process (and god knows how many Iraqis), have a generation walk around on prosthetics, and spend billions?

is getting the hell out really that much worse?
__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 09-13-2007, 03:52 PM   #96
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 04:31 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511
i guess i want to know if supporters of the Bush administration are willing to do what it takes.

are you willing to occupy Iraq for at least another 10 years and watch a good 5,000 Americans die in the process (and god knows how many Iraqis), have a generation walk around on prosthetics, and spend billions?

if it were only that simple and that was the cost

and the result was starting a change in the Mid-East for representative governments, free markets, more open governments

and an atmosphere where terrorists find it difficult to operate, recruit and expand?

look at the costs the U S paid in Korea

to answer your question?




the answer would be, yes.
__________________
deep is online now  
Old 09-13-2007, 05:36 PM   #97
Blue Crack Supplier
 
kellyahern's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: 8 years and I still can't think of anything witty to put here
Posts: 34,698
Local Time: 08:31 PM
^ Funny that you mention Korea.


Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511

are you willing to occupy Iraq for at least another 10 years and watch a good 5,000 Americans die in the process (and god knows how many Iraqis), have a generation walk around on prosthetics, and spend billions?

Guess what? It might be longer than that:

Korea may be Bush's model for Iraq, officials say

Quote:
President Bush is looking at the decades-long U.S. troop presence in South Korea as a model for a future U.S. role in Iraq, senior administration officials said Thursday.

More than 38,000 U.S. troops are stationed in South Korea and along the demilitarized zone between North and South Korea more than 50 years after the end of the war on the Korean Peninsula.
Wtf?
__________________
kellyahern is offline  
Old 09-13-2007, 05:48 PM   #98
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 05:31 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511
i guess i want to know if supporters of the Bush administration are willing to do what it takes.

are you willing to occupy Iraq for at least another 10 years and watch a good 5,000 Americans die in the process (and god knows how many Iraqis), have a generation walk around on prosthetics, and spend billions?

is getting the hell out really that much worse?
I hear ya gf!

Stalin, Hilter and Mao was such better philanthropists!

snap!

dbs
__________________
diamond is offline  
Old 09-13-2007, 06:33 PM   #99
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Vincent Vega's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Berlin
Posts: 6,615
Local Time: 01:31 AM
First apple and oranges from Bush, then from diamond.
__________________
Vincent Vega is offline  
Old 09-13-2007, 06:38 PM   #100
Resident Photo Buff
Forum Moderator
 
Diemen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Somewhere in middle America
Posts: 13,236
Local Time: 06:31 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by diamond


I hear ya gf!

Stalin, Hilter and Mao was such better philanthropists!

snap!

dbs
What in the hell do they have to do with anything?
__________________
Diemen is offline  
Old 09-13-2007, 06:46 PM   #101
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 30,343
Local Time: 07:31 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by diamond
I hear ya gf!

Stalin, Hilter and Mao was such better philanthropists!

snap!

dbs
Not only is this irrelevant, but I'm sensing a bit of a trend here.
__________________
phillyfan26 is offline  
Old 09-13-2007, 06:53 PM   #102
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
AEON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: California
Posts: 4,052
Local Time: 05:31 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by kellyahern
^ Funny that you mention Korea.




Wtf?
I think the point is that the US suffered over 33,000 combat deaths to keep Korea free. The result has been a thriving, globally competitive democracy.
__________________
AEON is offline  
Old 09-13-2007, 07:28 PM   #103
Blue Crack Supplier
 
kellyahern's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: 8 years and I still can't think of anything witty to put here
Posts: 34,698
Local Time: 08:31 PM
nevermind, I give up.
__________________
kellyahern is offline  
Old 09-13-2007, 07:46 PM   #104
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,475
Local Time: 07:31 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by AEON


I think the point is that the US suffered over 33,000 combat deaths to keep Korea free. The result has been a thriving, globally competitive democracy.

and the creation of the biggest nuclear threat since WW2. and things in iraq aren't nearly as clear as in Korea. Baghdad isn't Seoul. and this isn't a penninsula in the Pacific; this is the heart of the Middle East.

but if you're willing to do this, to sacrafice 5,000+ Americans and perhaps 50x that many Iraqis, just go ahead and say so.

but tell me what you hope to achieve.
__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 09-13-2007, 08:27 PM   #105
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 30,343
Local Time: 07:31 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511
and the creation of the biggest nuclear threat since WW2. and things in iraq aren't nearly as clear as in Korea. Baghdad isn't Seoul. and this isn't a penninsula in the Pacific; this is the heart of the Middle East.

but if you're willing to do this, to sacrafice 5,000+ Americans and perhaps 50x that many Iraqis, just go ahead and say so.

but tell me what you hope to achieve.
Exactly.

As I said earlier:

Quote:
Originally posted by phillyfan26
What have we accomplished in Iraq, what are we going to accomplish in Iraq, and how does it make America safer? Those are important questions.
__________________

__________________
phillyfan26 is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:31 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com