Debt of gratitude?

[mightymouse72]

On 60 minutes last night, Bush stated the Iraqis owe the US a debt of gratitude.
If you put your personal opinions about the war aside, he is right on.
Over 3,000 of our soldiers have died trying to give them a better way of life.
It would be nice if more of them would make a stand to protect their own country so we can get the hell out of there.   



http://www.theotheriraq.com/

[240 is Back]

Many in and out of the Iraqi govt were very unhappy about the 21,500 number.  They want us out too.

If the majority of the US pop wants us gone, and the majority of the Iraqi pop wants us out...

Why are we still there?

[mightymouse72]

because leaving would create more problems

[240 is Back]

because leaving would create more problems

mighty, there are 3 options.

1) Pull out entirely.
2) Put in 21,500 men - a maintenance level.
3) Put in 200k+ soldiers - conquer them.

Now, before you become a predictable neocon and start bashing lousy dems for wanting option #1, can you tell us... Should the US go with option 2, or 3?

[mightymouse72]

1) Pull out entirely.

not an option, i think you'd agree with that.


2) Put in 21,500 men - a maintenance level.

ok, IF the other changes made will work- no restrictions on where we can and can't go,  more pressure on iran

 
3) Put in 200k+ soldiers - conquer them.

my solution.  has been from the start.  kill or detain anyone associtated with the insurgency.  no questions

back to original question- do YOU think iraq owes the US any "thank yous"??

[Dos Equis]

On 60 minutes last night, Bush stated the Iraqis owe the US a debt of gratitude.
If you put your personal opinions about the war aside, he is right on.
Over 3,000 of our soldiers have died trying to give them a better way of life.
It would be nice if more of them would make a stand to protect their own country so we can get the hell out of there.   



http://www.theotheriraq.com/

I agree. 

[ToxicAvenger]

personal opinions about the war aside,

hmm i wonder the friends and family members of the dead iraquis feel the same...and can put their personal feelings aside..

i wonder the wife/girl friend of the dead american soldier feels the same...

what we did ws create a situation where we can NEVER leave (which is exactly what bush wanted)

leaving would create a breeding ground for a 1000 osamas..


afghanistan created 1.....

[240 is Back]

ok, IF the other changes made will work- no restrictions on where we can and can't go,  more pressure on iran

the 21,500 number is a simple 15% increase to match the 15% increase in insurgent numbers.  It's an inflationary adjustment.  The ONLY reasonable expectation is that nothing will change as a result.  Simple warfare - you increase your number in proportionate to the increase in the enemy and nothing changes. 

This leads the reasonable man to believe Bush wants to maintain the status quo - as that is obviously a status quo number.  And the Gates mandate for the next 5 years is 92k men, which is 18k a year.  More of the same.  Maintenance force levels for 5 years.

So when you say this options is "okay" it means you're okay with the current level of progress - close to zero.

back to original question- do YOU think iraq owes the US any "thank yous"??

hell yes they do.

[mightymouse72]

the 21,500 number is a simple 15% increase to match the 15% increase in insurgent numbers.  It's an inflationary adjustment.  The ONLY reasonable expectation is that nothing will change as a result.  Simple warfare - you increase your number in proportionate to the increase in the enemy and nothing changes. 

This leads the reasonable man to believe Bush wants to maintain the status quo - as that is obviously a status quo number.  And the Gates mandate for the next 5 years is 92k men, which is 18k a year.  More of the same.  Maintenance force levels for 5 years.

So when you say this options is "okay" it means you're okay with the current level of progress - close to zero.


hell yes they do.

what you say makes sense, however, it's all based whether your prediction of "nothing changing" comes true.  it doesn't matter how many we send in anyway, what matters is the amount of force the military is allowed to use.  in other words, bush could call back the 21,500 send in 2 or 3 bombers, drop a few daisy cutters and it's over.  he could send in half of those troops and they could level baghdad.  if they were allowed. 
so i don't believe bush wants to keep the status-quo, if his statements about no restrictions is true. 
 
of course you would be right if the reinforcement troops were sent in with no changes and having to succumb to the same political correctness.  that would be maintaining the status-quo.

[240 is Back]

we don't want to kill a million women and children, do we?

[Slin1]

On 60 minutes last night, Bush stated the Iraqis owe the US a debt of gratitude.
If you put your personal opinions about the war aside, he is right on.
Over 3,000 of our soldiers have died trying to give them a better way of life.
It would be nice if more of them would make a stand to protect their own country so we can get the hell out of there.   

FUCK YOU!!!

[luike101]

Was Iraq not capable of governing itself at all once Sadam was taken out of power?  Also I dont understand why we had to destroy whole cities just to capture one man.  Why are we responsible for fixing there governments infrastructure?  I understand that we didnt want to go through all this just to have the area fall into the wrong hands again but...   WE should be pulling back and hitting the bad areas with precision type shit and letting our intelligence do its job.  All of the men and women of the military dying for this is just ridiculous and they waNT US OUT?  yES THEY OWE US gratitude but I guess we owe them for the military spending, the deaths of our neighbors and family members and of course all the oil that we could do without if there wasnt so much left to make a profit on.!!!!!   I dont wish for anymore people to die, especially our people!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Fulgorre]

we don't want to kill a million women and children, do we?

One American solider life is worth the lives of all the Iraqi men, women, and children.  The way we got into this mess is by over valuing non-American lives.  For example, rather than destroy a building full of guerillas with a missle we send in ground troops to storm it hoping to reduce civilian casualities.  Result?  Guerillas dead but a few of Americans lost.  Once things have progressed to war you can't be nice and try to save lives.  It is unfortunate but true.  War is about killing the enemy and using maximum force.  The Iraqis can see we are wussying out, they know we won't use full force, so the insurgent ranks swell.  Finally, why am I paying for stealth bombers, fighter planes, missles if those items are not going to be used?  haha, classic political correctness over common sense.

[GroinkTropin]

Was Iraq not capable of governing itself at all once Sadam was taken out of power?  Also I dont understand why we had to destroy whole cities just to capture one man.  Why are we responsible for fixing there governments infrastructure?  I understand that we didnt want to go through all this just to have the area fall into the wrong hands again but...   WE should be pulling back and hitting the bad areas with precision type shit and letting our intelligence do its job.  All of the men and women of the military dying for this is just ridiculous and they waNT US OUT?  yES THEY OWE US gratitude but I guess we owe them for the military spending, the deaths of our neighbors and family members and of course all the oil that we could do without if there wasnt so much left to make a profit on.!!!!!   I dont wish for anymore people to die, especially our people!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The war is profitable, and it helps that we have a miilitary buildup/stronghold overseas. It provides presence, sort of like in small towns, cops are encouraged to drive their squad cars around when they're off duty. We also are totally dependant on oil, our prez made an oath to protect us, and securing our nations energy for the future is a big responsibilty. I strongly feel it's more neccessary for us to be there than we think it is, I don't think our present situation was as simple as deposing of saddam. If that were the case, we would have taken him out in the 80's. What changed from then to now? Well, the cold war ended, cutting military spending, and our oil consumption became pretty voracious. I'd say those are 2 huge reasons right there.

[luike101]

Mike, I was being somewhat sarcastic.   If you remember the american people were given 3 reasons why we were going to war.  2 of them never panned out.  My point is fine lets clean up the area but have we made no progress, what have we been doing?  Also I know the troops dont have all the equip. they need but there is no way they are superior to us in technology,weaponry,intelligence, etc........  Dont understand seems as if we should have been able to get more done in the last few years, I mean how MORE years are we going to need?  I dont think more US casualties is the answer.  Backoff a little restrategize and then go back in with the technology and machines not the humans.  Intelligence and the fact that we know where certain groups are should make it no problem to fire a few cruise missles at the groups that are causing so many "problems".  Personally I think 21000 more troops are for other reasons ie other countries.  I pray I am wrong!!!!!!!!11111111111!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1???///!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[GroinkTropin]

Mike, I was being somewhat sarcastic.   If you remember the american people were given 3 reasons why we were going to war.  2 of them never panned out.  My point is fine lets clean up the area but have we made no progress, what have we been doing?  Also I know the troops dont have all the equip. they need but there is no way they are superior to us in technology,weaponry,intelligence, etc........  Dont understand seems as if we should have been able to get more done in the last few years, I mean how MORE years are we going to need?  I dont think more US casualties is the answer.  Backoff a little restrategize and then go back in with the technology and machines not the humans.  Intelligence and the fact that we know where certain groups are should make it no problem to fire a few cruise missles at the groups that are causing so many "problems".  Personally I think 21000 more troops are for other reasons ie other countries.  I pray I am wrong!!!!!!!!11111111111!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1???///!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

+

It's hard to say, I think the increased troop count has more to do with bush trying to seem like something is getting accomplished more than anything else. Personally I think the gov def wants troops over there, for a variety of reasons. They used bush and saddam and WMD's as an excuse, now they are stringing us along a bit by having bush give an empassioned speech and sending more soldiers. The GOVERNMENT, not bush personally, wants this to drag out, if not congress would have cut funding off years ago. Notice, before the democrats took back over the house, all you heard was pullout and phased withdrawl and all that crap, now surprise surprise they all agree we need more troops. Total bullshit is what we the american people get, and thats probably what we deserve.