Post Iraq takeover? - 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 08-29-2002, 02:26 AM   #1
Refugee
 
bonoman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Edmonton, Canada- Charlestown, Ireland
Posts: 1,398
Local Time: 07:35 PM
Post Iraq takeover?

What does the US do after(if they attack) they takeover Iraq.

Should this question not be answered first before going into Iraq?

Will this curb all the anti-american sediments in Iraq?

We all know the Us couldnt really stay there because the Iraqies would revolt againist them. Which country sends peacekeepers?

What cost to america and the world are we looking at for helping Iraq?
__________________

__________________
bonoman is offline  
Old 08-29-2002, 05:28 PM   #2
War Child
 
CannibalisticArtist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: West Coast babyeee
Posts: 511
Local Time: 06:35 PM
Re: Post Iraq takeover?

Quote:
Originally posted by bonoman
What does the US do after(if they attack) they takeover Iraq.
pipe the oil out.

Quote:
Should this question not be answered first before going into Iraq?
see above.

Quote:
Will this curb all the anti-american sediments in Iraq?
who cares! CUUUZ THEY ALL BE JELOUS OF US ANYWAYS!!11!

Quote:
We all know the Us couldnt really stay there because the Iraqies would revolt againist them. Which country sends peacekeepers?
you mean which country will send in more troops?

Quote:
What cost to america and the world are we looking at for helping Iraq?
FREEDOM YO! and all that good stuff.+oil and middle-eastern tension control.
__________________

__________________
CannibalisticArtist is offline  
Old 08-29-2002, 09:23 PM   #3
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Lilly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: back and to the left
Posts: 8,523
Local Time: 08:35 PM
i spose i'll send some real answers out

Quote:
Originally posted by bonoman
[B]What does the US do after(if they attack) they takeover Iraq.
they try to set up a democracy that best fits their economy (right...so something). just like what happened in afghanistan, bomb them to obliteration, then set up something that will be sure to be our allies in the end.

Quote:
Should this question not be answered first before going into Iraq?
uh, yes yes it should be. chances of the u.s public seeing that answer previous to the war with iraq are almost that of bono coming to my house to tell me he thinks i'm a boofus.

Quote:
Will this curb all the anti-american sediments in Iraq?
i don't think anything can quell the anti-american sentiment there. i don't have that answer, nor have i an hypothesis about it.

Quote:
We all know the Us couldnt really stay there because the Iraqies would revolt againist them. Which country sends peacekeepers?
were we to go to war and win, i think we could stay there all we want without much fear of revolt, no one wants to be defeated twice. and the chances of us staying there are slim. we would probably help them set up their own government then leave.
__________________
Lilly is offline  
Old 08-29-2002, 09:26 PM   #4
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
speedracer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: MD
Posts: 7,573
Local Time: 09:35 PM
Re: Post Iraq takeover?

Quote:
Originally posted by bonoman
What does the US do after(if they attack) they takeover Iraq.
There aren't any immediate candidates for a new president/leader of Iraq. From what I have heard, the Iraqi National Congress (the main opposition party to Saddam) is full of shady characters, so it might be unwise to give them the keys to the kingdom.

Quote:

Should this question not be answered first before going into Iraq?
Yes.

Quote:

Will this curb all the anti-american sediments in Iraq?
Hmm. If the soil on which Iraq rests hates America, there might be problems.

Quote:

We all know the Us couldnt really stay there because the Iraqies would revolt againist them. Which country sends peacekeepers?
It would probably be necessary to have a large UN/multinational peacekeeping force there for a while until a functional government can be established. The country of Iraq has never known democracy.

Quote:

What cost to america and the world are we looking at for helping Iraq?
Some number of lives would be lost in a war (hopefully not too many, if America can finish off Saddam quickly) and several countries would have to commit peacekeeping troops to Iraq for a number of years.

And America had better destroy Saddam's alleged WMDs on the first strike.

Personally, I think the planning of a post-Saddam Iraq is the most salient concern when the US decides whether or not to attack Iraq, not the question of whether or not the US is bluffing when it says that it has evidence that Saddam has rehabilitated his WMD programs.

Saddam Hussein runs a police state and is responsible for the deaths of however many Iraqi civilians since 1991. (That's right, Saddam is responsible, not the UN sanctions. Northern Iraq, which is not under Saddam's control but has been subject to the same economic sanctions, by and large does not share the problems of the rest of Iraq.) Why wouldn't you want to get rid of him?
__________________
speedracer is offline  
Old 08-30-2002, 04:45 AM   #5
War Child
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 940
Local Time: 02:35 AM
Re: Re: Post Iraq takeover?

Quote:
Originally posted by speedracer


It would probably be necessary to have a large UN/multinational peacekeeping force there for a while until a functional government can be established. The country of Iraq has never known democracy.

But if the UN/Multinational Community don't think the US should attack Iraq/don't want the US to attack Iraq, why should they clean up afterwards?
If you don't get a UN mandate in the beginning, it might be entirely up to the US to fix it, and fix it well, at the end.

This of course will open you up to alot of attention and criticism if it doesn't work perfectly. If the US goes it alone, sadly alot of the world will be waiting for you to f*** it up, seeing as they said you shouldn't have done it in the first place. "Told you so" type thing. Plus for Iraqi's it won't feel as much like a liberation, as possibly an occupation, especially for a certain % of the population. Occupied by 'the enemy' and pissed off. Good terrorist farming environment. And the cycle continues....
__________________
TylerDurden is offline  
Old 08-30-2002, 09:56 AM   #6
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
speedracer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: MD
Posts: 7,573
Local Time: 09:35 PM
Re: Re: Re: Post Iraq takeover?

Quote:
Originally posted by TylerDurden


But if the UN/Multinational Community don't think the US should attack Iraq/don't want the US to attack Iraq, why should they clean up afterwards?
If you don't get a UN mandate in the beginning, it might be entirely up to the US to fix it, and fix it well, at the end.

This of course will open you up to alot of attention and criticism if it doesn't work perfectly. If the US goes it alone, sadly alot of the world will be waiting for you to f*** it up, seeing as they said you shouldn't have done it in the first place. "Told you so" type thing. Plus for Iraqi's it won't feel as much like a liberation, as possibly an occupation, especially for a certain % of the population. Occupied by 'the enemy' and pissed off.
It's not completely clear that most of the population of Iraq views the US as an enemy. Of course, it's hard to really know what they think, since Iraq is a police state.

If the US can get rid of Saddam relatively quickly, without causing massive damage to civilian infrastructures, I think the rest of the world will be more willing to help plan a post-Saddam Iraq. It seems to me that the main reason so many countries oppose the possible war is not because they respect Saddam's sovereignity, but because of the short-term loss of life.

Economically, there's no reason Iraq shouldn't be able to recover from a short war, what with all the oil they're sitting on. As long as the oil $ is administered *properly* (and not used to build luxury palaces for the president and such), Iraq should be able to bounce back.

Quote:

Good terrorist farming environment. And the cycle continues....
For a country that's supposedly been ravaged by the US for the last 10 years, the citizens of Iraq have been real good sports about not flying planes into our office buildings.

It's the guy in charge who's been giving $25,000 payouts to families of Palestinian suicide bombers and possibly cutting deals with al-Qaeda.
__________________
speedracer is offline  
Old 08-30-2002, 01:52 PM   #7
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
ouizy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: s p o r a t i c
Posts: 3,788
Local Time: 09:35 PM
Turn the whle friggin joint into a Disney theme park, oh and an oil reserve, of course.
__________________
ouizy is offline  
Old 08-30-2002, 05:33 PM   #8
Refugee
 
bonoman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Edmonton, Canada- Charlestown, Ireland
Posts: 1,398
Local Time: 07:35 PM
I totally agree with tyler. This is lokoing like another Vietnam war. I hate to say it but this is going to blow up in the US's face. Half the congress is up in arms about it. Many people of the world and the US are againist it. Bush is going to slammed. I agree we should take Suddam out but the US needs everyones support and they need to start produce=ing evidence for the rest of the world. They need countries like Canada and Germany and many countries that might not give all milatary support in the war but will commit to send peacekeepers.
__________________
bonoman is offline  
Old 08-30-2002, 05:47 PM   #9
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
speedracer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: MD
Posts: 7,573
Local Time: 09:35 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by bonoman
I totally agree with tyler. This is lokoing like another Vietnam war. I hate to say it but this is going to blow up in the US's face. Half the congress is up in arms about it. Many people of the world and the US are againist it. Bush is going to slammed. I agree we should take Suddam out but the US needs everyones support and they need to start produce=ing evidence for the rest of the world. They need countries like Canada and Germany and many countries that might not give all milatary support in the war but will commit to send peacekeepers.
Besides being unpopular, there are several criteria a war must meet before it can be called a Vietnam War:

1. There must be no concrete objective in sight.
2. It must go on for 25 years.
3. The US's allies in "Vietnam" must be maximally uncooperative.
4. The US must fight a limited war for fear of provoking "Vietnam's" nuclear-equipped big brother.

It's not clear that any of these other four criteria fit the proposed war against Iraq.
__________________
speedracer is offline  
Old 09-02-2002, 12:44 AM   #10
The Fly
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: CA
Posts: 100
Local Time: 02:35 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by ouizy
Turn the whle friggin joint into a Disney theme park, oh and an oil reserve, of course.
Wow, I was going to post the exact same thing!
__________________
garibaldo is offline  
Old 09-02-2002, 01:35 AM   #11
The Fly
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: CA
Posts: 100
Local Time: 02:35 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by ouizy
Turn the whle friggin joint into a Disney theme park, oh and an oil reserve, of course.
Wow, I was going to post the exact same thing!
__________________

__________________
garibaldo 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 09:35 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