Life just gets worse in Iraq - Page 21 - 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 12-04-2006, 12:05 PM   #301
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,496
Local Time: 11:17 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2


Most Iraqi's do not wish for the USA to withdraw and there are thousands of Iraqi troops who are well equipped and reliable enough to impose order in the area's in which they operate. No, there are not nearly enough of them yet, but say that none exist is simply false.

After 3.5 years you have the following:

1. two successful democratic elections in which the majority of the population participated.
2. the passing of a constitution
3. Iraq's first elected government coming into office.
4. Over 300,000 military and police forces trained.
5. compromises between the various ethnic groups of Iraq including Sunni acceptence of Maliki as the new leader of the government when Jafferi was seen as unacceptable.
6. Iraqi military units that have performed very well in combat in various operations in Anbar province with little or no support from the US military.
7. The continued professionalism of the Iraqi military and non-sectarianism compared with police forces which have sometimes been caught in engaging in sectarian violence. The problems in the police forces are not seen anywhere near to that degree in the military.
8. Substantial GDP growth across the country.
9. Relative calm and peace in 13 of the 18 provinces of Iraq.
10. Polls in those provinces showing that "security" is not a top concern for the people that live there.
11. The distribution of humanitarian aid, electricity, and other services to many parts of Iraq that had often been denied such items for decades.
12. The standard of living of the average Iraqi is higher than that of the average person in Afghanistan, yet Iraqi's are perceived to be worse off than people in Afghanistan.


and yet, even Henry Kissinger (!!!) says that Iraq is not a nation "in the historic sense." 3,700 Iraqis were ethnically cleansed in November alone. this is not the violence that can be explained as growing pains. this is something totally different and has much more in common with, say, Darfur.

and i eagerly await your plan to help get the US economy off of Middle Eastern fossil fuels!
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 12-04-2006, 02:37 PM   #302
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 04:17 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511




well, you're deliberately obfuscating the democrats position, but the more important point here is the fact that you've completley misunderstood the violence in Iraq. while "the insurgency" is certainly happy about a civil war, they are not the ones doing the fighting. in fact, Al Qaeda is extremely disorganized in Iraq and they only make up 2 to 3% of the enemy forces in Iraq. the other 97% of the combatants in the war (that has no gone on longer htan our involvement in WW2) are ordinary Iraqis now engaging in what must be termed ethnic cleansing.
Once again, the sectarian violence in Iraq is a creation of the Iraqi insurgents and terrorist. Yes, its true that now you do have individual neighborhoods in Baghdad fighting each other independently of either Sunni insurgents or Al Quada Terrorist or the Shia militia's, but the Iraqi insurgency is what created the situation in order to make the situation more difficult for the coalition and to put pressure on the domestic political front in order to force a premature pullout. Sunni insurgents still do engage in fighting designed to keep the sectarian violence going. Sunni insurgents and Shia militia's are not ordinary Iraqi's. The vast majority of Iraqi's are not engaged in any sort of violence at all.
__________________

__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 12-04-2006, 02:51 PM   #303
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 04:17 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511




and yet, even Henry Kissinger (!!!) says that Iraq is not a nation "in the historic sense." 3,700 Iraqis were ethnically cleansed in November alone. this is not the violence that can be explained as growing pains. this is something totally different and has much more in common with, say, Darfur.

and i eagerly await your plan to help get the US economy off of Middle Eastern fossil fuels!
90% of the sectarian killing happens in one area of Iraq, Baghdad. Its been helped along and fed by the Iraqi insurgency which created the situation in the first place. The Democrats have no plan at all to deal with it. Remember, their only plan is to move US troops out of the country as soon as possible.

Its not just the US economy that is dependent on Persian Gulf Oil, its the entire GLOBAL ECONOMY that is dependent on it. Even if you were magically able to get just the US economy off of using oil, it would not change the stakes at all really given the level of US trade and interdependence with the rest of the global economy which would still be using oil.

So when thinking about oil dependence, you have to think in terms of the entire planet, not just one country.

Until an alternative that is cheaper and more efficient than oil comes around, the planet is going to continue to use oil. Once it does come around, Business will pounce on it in order to reduce their cost and increase profits.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 12-04-2006, 03:11 PM   #304
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,496
Local Time: 11:17 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2


Once again, the sectarian violence in Iraq is a creation of the Iraqi insurgents and terrorist. Yes, its true that now you do have individual neighborhoods in Baghdad fighting each other independently of either Sunni insurgents or Al Quada Terrorist or the Shia militia's, but the Iraqi insurgency is what created the situation in order to make the situation more difficult for the coalition and to put pressure on the domestic political front in order to force a premature pullout. Sunni insurgents still do engage in fighting designed to keep the sectarian violence going. Sunni insurgents and Shia militia's are not ordinary Iraqi's. The vast majority of Iraqi's are not engaged in any sort of violence at all.

it doesn't matter what started it, it matters who's engaging in the fighting, and AQ is NOT engaged in the fighting beyond a very small (2-3%) percentage.

this is not an Al-Qaeda problem. this is not an "insurgency" problem. this is an IRAQI problem.

it is sectarian violence and ethnic cleansing.
__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 12-04-2006, 03:15 PM   #305
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,496
Local Time: 11:17 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2
[B]

90% of the sectarian killing happens in one area of Iraq, Baghdad. Its been helped along and fed by the Iraqi insurgency which created the situation in the first place. The Democrats have no plan at all to deal with it. Remember, their only plan is to move US troops out of the country as soon as possible.
no, this is not true at all.

some Democrats are advocating a redeployment of US troops to Kurdistan where they can continue to train the Iraqi army and perform tactical strikes if needed, but it gets them out of Baghdad.

it's very lazy of you to paint people who don't agree with you (which is the American People, at this point) as advocating a complete and total pull out.

there's actuall discussion and debate about the best way to deal with the mess Bush has made in Iraq.



[q]Its not just the US economy that is dependent on Persian Gulf Oil, its the entire GLOBAL ECONOMY that is dependent on it. Even if you were magically able to get just the US economy off of using oil, it would not change the stakes at all really given the level of US trade and interdependence with the rest of the global economy which would still be using oil.[/q]

cool! so i assume you're a big Gore fan? you think Schwarzennager is a great governor? you don't drive much, i assume. you support politicians who are seeking to wean ourselves, and by extention other countries who would surely follow the US example, off of Middle Eastern oil?
__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 12-04-2006, 03:27 PM   #306
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,496
Local Time: 11:17 PM
[q]Iraqi Army division deepens discord
By HANNAH ALLAM
McClatchy Newspapers

BAGHDAD, Iraq - The overwhelmingly Shiite Muslim military force at the forefront of U.S. and Iraqi plans to secure one of the nation's most fractious provinces is accused of arresting hundreds of Sunni men on little or no evidence, threatening to rape a suspect's wife to coerce a confession, and intimidating its commander's critics, according to interviews with Iraqi and U.S. officials.


Backed by U.S. troops, the Iraqi Army's 5th Division on Saturday launched a new offensive to rout suspected al-Qaida-allied terrorists from Baquba, the capital of a province infested with Sunni insurgents, Shiite militias, warring tribes and criminal gangs.


While a U.S. military statement said the weekend operation shows the "commitment of Iraqi army officers and soldiers to protect and secure the people," local residents and Sunni leaders point to the Iraqi division's track record as one of the chief problems plaguing the restive Diyala province north of Baghdad.


Brig. Gen. Shakir Hulayl al-Kaabi, commander of the division, oversees a mostly Shiite force in an area where at least half the population is Sunni. The American officers who previously worked with him have been reported as saying they tried to have him removed for refusing orders and acting on a sectarian agenda. Sunni leaders say his men are waging a campaign of collective punishment because of vicious Sunni insurgent attacks against Shiites and U.S.-led forces.


Despite the laundry list of accusations against al-Kaabi, the Shiite-led government in Baghdad keeps promoting him. With U.S. forces planning to hand over full military control of Diyala and other provinces this spring, the experience of the 5th Division is viewed by many as a harbinger of deep troubles to come as American troops gradually move on.[/q]
__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 12-04-2006, 04:18 PM   #307
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 04:17 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511



it doesn't matter what started it, it matters who's engaging in the fighting, and AQ is NOT engaged in the fighting beyond a very small (2-3%) percentage.

this is not an Al-Qaeda problem. this is not an "insurgency" problem. this is an IRAQI problem.

it is sectarian violence and ethnic cleansing.
I never stated it was an Al-Quada problem. But the Iraqi insurgency is heavily involved in the sectarian killing that is being seen. The tactics and methods as well as intelligence gathered by US forces show this to be the case.

It is also a problem that is primarily confined to one area of Iraq, Baghdad.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 12-04-2006, 04:36 PM   #308
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 04:17 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511


no, this is not true at all.

some Democrats are advocating a redeployment of US troops to Kurdistan where they can continue to train the Iraqi army and perform tactical strikes if needed, but it gets them out of Baghdad.

it's very lazy of you to paint people who don't agree with you (which is the American People, at this point) as advocating a complete and total pull out.

there's actuall discussion and debate about the best way to deal with the mess Bush has made in Iraq.




cool! so i assume you're a big Gore fan? you think Schwarzennager is a great governor? you don't drive much, i assume. you support politicians who are seeking to wean ourselves, and by extention other countries who would surely follow the US example, off of Middle Eastern oil?
The United States has had troops in Kurdistan since 1991. You redeploy US forces to Kurdistan which is only a small sliver of Iraq north of Kirkuk and Mosul, you have completely withdrawn to where US forces were prior to the invasion of Iraq and will be incapable of stabilizing the situation in the country. Bosnia and Kosovo as well as other violenced racked area's of the world were not stablized by troops stationed hundreds of miles away from where the problems were. Again, your not going to be able to effectively train the majority of the Iraqi military and police force from outside or nearlly outside the country. You can't have US advisors imbedded with Iraqi units to train them without also having US combat Brigades on the ground in the country. To many democrats are attempting to paint their total withdrawal plans as anything but that, but its the only goal their achieving with those policies.

How does "redeployment" aka total withdrawal accomplish the goals of stabilizing Iraq and training the entire Iraqi military and police force? The irony is that if you really believe this is the best policy for Iraq, you have to believe that the situation on the ground is better than many claim it is, and that the Iraqi military and police force are more capable than many claim they are currently.



EVERYONE supports an alternative source of energy that is CHEAPER and MORE EFFICIENT than oil. But none exist right now that business's could immediately start using in place of oil to reduce the cost of to their business and increase their profits. The market ultimately will decide if and when an alternative to oil will become the choice of business's worldwide. The GLOBAL Business world does whats best for its bottom line, and until oil prices rise to a level that is greater than what ever the alternative is, or an alternative comes out of no where that is automatically cheaper than whatever the price of oil is at any given time, the planet is going to continue to use oil.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 12-04-2006, 04:43 PM   #309
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,496
Local Time: 11:17 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2


The United States has had troops in Kurdistan since 1991. You redeploy US forces to Kurdistan which is only a small sliver of Iraq north of Kirkuk and Mosul, you have completely withdrawn to where US forces were prior to the invasion of Iraq and will be incapable of stabilizing the situation in the country. Bosnia and Kosovo as well as other violenced racked area's of the world were not stablized by troops stationed hundreds of miles away from where the problems were. Again, your not going to be able to effectively train the majority of the Iraqi military and police force from outside or nearlly outside the country. You can't have US advisors imbedded with Iraqi units to train them without also having US combat Brigades on the ground in the country. To many democrats are attempting to paint their total withdrawal plans as anything but that, but its the only goal their achieving with those policies.

How does "redeployment" aka total withdrawal accomplish the goals of stabilizing Iraq and training the entire Iraqi military and police force? The irony is that if you really believe this is the best policy for Iraq, you have to believe that the situation on the ground is better than many claim it is, and that the Iraqi military and police force are more capable than many claim they are currently.



rave and rant about Joe Biden's suggestions all you like, just don't distort the Democrats as having only a single position and that said position is to bring the troops back to the US.





Quote:
EVERYONE supports an alternative source of energy that is CHEAPER and MORE EFFICIENT than oil. But none exist right now that business's could immediately start using in place of oil to reduce the cost of to their business and increase their profits. The market ultimately will decide if and when an alternative to oil will become the choice of business's worldwide. The GLOBAL Business world does whats best for its bottom line, and until oil prices rise to a level that is greater than what ever the alternative is, or an alternative comes out of no where that is automatically cheaper than whatever the price of oil is at any given time, the planet is going to continue to use oil.
so i assume you make good consumer choices.

good for you.

what color is your hybrid?
__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 12-04-2006, 05:13 PM   #310
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 11:17 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511



rave and rant about Joe Biden's suggestions all you like, just don't distort the Democrats as having only a single position and that said position is to bring the troops back to the US.







so i assume you make good consumer choices.

good for you.

what color is your hybrid?
Mine is red!!!
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 12-04-2006, 05:14 PM   #311
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,496
Local Time: 11:17 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Dreadsox


Mine is red!!!


__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 12-04-2006, 05:23 PM   #312
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,496
Local Time: 11:17 PM
driving a hybrid and supporting a gas tax is the 2006 equivalent of a Victory Garden.
__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 12-05-2006, 01:30 PM   #313
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,496
Local Time: 11:17 PM
[q]Gates Says U.S. Is Not Winning Iraq War

Dec 5, 10:45 AM (ET)

By ROBERT BURNS

WASHINGTON (AP) - Robert Gates, the White House choice to be the next defense secretary, conceded Tuesday that the United States is losing the war in Iraq and warned that if that country is not stabilized in the next year or two it could lead to a "regional conflagration."

At the outset of his Senate confirmation hearing, Gates said he is open to new ideas about correcting the U.S. course in Iraq, which he said would be his highest priority if confirmed as expected.

Gates, 63, said he believes President Bush wants to see Iraq improve to the point where it can govern and defend itself, while seeking a new approach.

"What we are now doing is not satisfactory," Gates said.

"In my view, all options are on the table, in terms of how we address this problem in Iraq," he added.

Asked point-blank by Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., whether the U.S. is winning in Iraq, Gates replied, "No, sir."[/q]
__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 12-05-2006, 03:41 PM   #314
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 04:17 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511
[q]Gates Says U.S. Is Not Winning Iraq War

Dec 5, 10:45 AM (ET)

By ROBERT BURNS

WASHINGTON (AP) - Robert Gates, the White House choice to be the next defense secretary, conceded Tuesday that the United States is losing the war in Iraq and warned that if that country is not stabilized in the next year or two it could lead to a "regional conflagration."

At the outset of his Senate confirmation hearing, Gates said he is open to new ideas about correcting the U.S. course in Iraq, which he said would be his highest priority if confirmed as expected.

Gates, 63, said he believes President Bush wants to see Iraq improve to the point where it can govern and defend itself, while seeking a new approach.

"What we are now doing is not satisfactory," Gates said.

"In my view, all options are on the table, in terms of how we address this problem in Iraq," he added.

Asked point-blank by Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., whether the U.S. is winning in Iraq, Gates replied, "No, sir."[/q]

He didn't say the United States was losing either. He also stated the the United States military has not lost a single battle 4 years into the war. Gates has been President of Texas A&M University for the past few years. He is not the Secretary of Defense yet. He'll be better informed once he gets into that position, and he has also said that the views of top US military commanders will play the most important role in his decision making on Iraq. Once again, General John Abazaid and his views will continue to play the dominating role in what happens in Iraq for the next two years.

Carl Levin, Murtha, or the majority of Democrats who want to see a total US pullout in one year are not going to get what they want. Neither is Joe Biden and others who mistakenly think that splitting Iraq up is the way to go.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 12-05-2006, 07:00 PM   #315
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
randhail's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Outside Providence
Posts: 3,557
Local Time: 11:17 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2



He didn't say the United States was losing either.
That is some great spin right there. That sounds like something the former Iraqi Information Minister would say. Thanks for putting a laugh into my day!
__________________

__________________
randhail 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 11:17 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