|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
|
[Poll]
|
War in Iraq
|
| We are in Iraq because of oil |
|
| We are in Iraq to liberate the less fortunate |
|
| We are in Iraq to protect Israel |
|
| We are in Iraq to stop terrorists |
|
| We are in Iraq for some other reason |
|
Total Votes : 427
|
(last vote on : 9/26/2008 12:04:25 AM)
(Poll will run till: -- )
|
|
Login  | |
|
Army criticizes itself - 6/30/2008 10:03:06 PM
|
|
|
rlj
Posts: 1960
Joined: 4/14/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
The U.S. Army's official history of the Iraq war shows military chiefs made mistake after mistake in the early months of the conflict.
-cont
Previous experience "should have indicated that many more troops would be needed for the post-Saddam era in Iraq," historians wrote in the report, "On Point II: Transition to a New Campaign."
"The coalition's inability to prevent looting, to secure Iraq's borders and to guard the vast number of munitions dumps in the early months after Saddam's overthrow are indicative of the shortage," the study found.
About 150,000 U.S. and allied troops were in Iraq after the invasion, at a time when war planners were assuming that Iraq's government would remain functional after Hussein's ouster and that there would be no mass insurgency.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/06/30/iraq.mistakes/index.html
Nothing more to add except that this totally contradicts those who said that we were in for a "long war" from the get-go.
_____________________________
-Roger
This is who I'm voting for. He is from the same party I voted for last time. This is consistent with my belief in the failure of the two party system and my disgust with it.
http://www.baldwin08.com/#
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Army criticizes itself - 6/30/2008 10:10:18 PM
|
|
|
wing2000
Posts: 1053
Joined: 4/14/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
Previous experience "should have indicated that many more troops would be needed for the post-Saddam era in Iraq," historians wrote in the report, "On Point II: Transition to a New Campaign."
...and prior to the war, the Army Chief of Staff testified to that point. The US Army has learned quite a bit since the Viet Nam War. It's a tragedy Rumsfeld and administration summarily dimissed forty plus years of counter insurgency warfare experience.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Army criticizes itself - 7/1/2008 6:30:20 PM
|
|
|
rlj
Posts: 1960
Joined: 4/14/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
All this suggests that Shiite-dominated Iran is waging a proxy war against the United States to secure a dominant role in majority-Shiite Iraq, which has supplanted Lebanon as Tehran's top priority in the Middle East.
"The stakes are much higher in Iraq, where there is a Shiite majority, oil, the shrine cities and borders with Saudi Arabia," said analyst Farid al-Khazen, a Christian Lebanese lawmaker whose party is allied with Hezbollah.
"The big story is Iraq, and the Americans unwittingly opened it up for the Iranians" by their invasion in 2003, al-Khazen said.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080701/ap_on_re_mi_ea/hezbollah_in_iraq_3
I found this interesting.
_____________________________
-Roger
This is who I'm voting for. He is from the same party I voted for last time. This is consistent with my belief in the failure of the two party system and my disgust with it.
http://www.baldwin08.com/#
|
|
|
|
|
RE: War in Iraq - 7/1/2008 8:34:59 PM
|
|
|
rcd33b
Posts: 1
Joined: 7/1/2008
Status: offline
|
I believe fully in our prosecuting the war in Iraq to it's military and political conclusion, and if need be, Iran.
1) The erosion of our freedoms (which include our religious freedom) is and external and INTERNAL threat.
2) The liberation of Iraq from tyranny will also allow the flourishing of Christianity
3) Iraq under Saddam Hussein did indeed possess WMD, namely chemical weapons. He used them to kill tens of thousands of his own people. He had them. What he did with them we don't, as the general public, know at this time.
4) The potential of a nuclear threat from Iran is in and of itself grounds for action against Iran, be it by America, Israel or both.
5) The continuation of the flow of oil to America is a realistic necessity until such time as our liberal/environmental propaganda machine is shut down and we are allowed to drill for the billions of barrels of oil America has in the gound and offshore.
6) There is no such thing as "if I ignore you and allow you to live your life as you please I won't get hurt." To have allowed Iraq to continue under Hussein, and to allow Iran to continue down the saber rattling trail it is going, without consequenses is naive and ridiculous. Man is fallen and lives in a fallen world. Our liberties and freedoms will always be attacked by people insanely jealous of Americas blessed land and culture from without and from within. To ignore or become apathetic about that reality is foolhardy. Christ counselled us to turn the other cheek, but he also advised his disciples that 'he who has no sword let him sell his cloak and obtain one," or words to that effect. Christ justified the use of force for self defense. To love another enough to defend them and be willing to lay down your life for them is Christian.
7) We have already saved thousands of Iraqi lives by removing their own persecutor...Hussein and his henchmen. It is funny how "liberals" are so quick to condemn the war in Iraq and demand our withdrawal when to do so prematurely would only invite another dictator into power and persecution of his own people. I thought liberals were for freedom (to the point of licence), or is it only their definition of freedom (do as I say and you won't get in trouble...oh, by the way, we've passed a few dozen more laws to curtail your freedom but we, the elite left, don't have to obey those laws).
8) Continue the mission. We are winning freedom for Iraq and therefore for America, Israel and the free world. Our troops are sacrificing for not only our freedom and liberty but the freedom and liberty of millions of others.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: War in Iraq - 7/2/2008 5:45:07 AM
|
|
|
rlj
Posts: 1960
Joined: 4/14/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
2) The liberation of Iraq from tyranny will also allow the flourishing of Christianity
The removal of Saddam has done more harm for Iraqi christians than our doing nothing would have done.
quote:
3) Iraq under Saddam Hussein did indeed possess WMD, namely chemical weapons. He used them to kill tens of thousands of his own people. He had them. What he did with them we don't, as the general public, know at this time.
Please show where he killed 10s of thousands of Iraqis by chemical weapons. He did use chemical weapons against the Iranians where possibly this number would be accurate.
quote:
7) We have already saved thousands of Iraqi lives by removing their own persecutor...Hussein and his henchmen. It is funny how "liberals" are so quick to condemn the war in Iraq and demand our withdrawal when to do so prematurely would only invite another dictator into power and persecution of his own people. I thought liberals were for freedom (to the point of licence), or is it only their definition of freedom (do as I say and you won't get in trouble...oh, by the way, we've passed a few dozen more laws to curtail your freedom but we, the elite left, don't have to obey those laws).
Saddam neither killed nor displaced the number of Iraqis as have been killed and displaced since this war started.
quote:
8) Continue the mission. We are winning freedom for Iraq and therefore for America, Israel and the free world. Our troops are sacrificing for not only our freedom and liberty but the freedom and liberty of millions of others.
Is it freedom when US contractors kill Iraqi civilians over and over with no due process since they have full immunity? I believe that is how it was under Saddam.
_____________________________
-Roger
This is who I'm voting for. He is from the same party I voted for last time. This is consistent with my belief in the failure of the two party system and my disgust with it.
http://www.baldwin08.com/#
|
|
|
|
|
RE: War in Iraq - 7/2/2008 4:28:04 PM
|
|
|
rcjames
Posts: 5240
Joined: 7/15/2005
From: Oklahoma
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: rlj
Is it freedom when US contractors kill Iraqi civilians over and over with no due process since they have full immunity? I believe that is how it was under Saddam.
I thought that a person could only be killed once, but I guess in your liberal mind the over and over part helps to inflate numbers above reality.
Thsnks
RC
_____________________________
Just a country Preacher's humble opinion
Read the first chapter of my latest book here;
http://www.deliveranceofsara.com
|
|
|
|
|
RE: War in Iraq - 7/2/2008 8:02:26 PM
|
|
|
rlj
Posts: 1960
Joined: 4/14/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
I thought that a person could only be killed once, but I guess in your liberal mind the over and over part helps to inflate numbers above reality.
Blackwater I believe has a total of 7 instances of deaths to civilians 2 of those instances that anyone liberal or conservative should want to see brought to trial except there will be no trial because they are US contractors. I concentrate on them because our puppet satellite government in Baghdad tried to get uppity and say they wanted them kicked out. ; )
_____________________________
-Roger
This is who I'm voting for. He is from the same party I voted for last time. This is consistent with my belief in the failure of the two party system and my disgust with it.
http://www.baldwin08.com/#
|
|
|
|
|
RE: War in Iraq - 7/3/2008 6:01:46 PM
|
|
|
TaoPoohBear
Posts: 392
Joined: 1/18/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: rcjames
quote:
ORIGINAL: rlj
Is it freedom when US contractors kill Iraqi civilians over and over with no due process since they have full immunity? I believe that is how it was under Saddam.
I thought that a person could only be killed once, but I guess in your liberal mind the over and over part helps to inflate numbers above reality.
Thsnks
RC
The corollary would be - Conservatives always underestimate the deaths they cause to close their mind off from reality.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: War in Iraq - 7/4/2008 10:17:14 AM
|
|
|
rlj
Posts: 1960
Joined: 4/14/2005
Status: offline
|
Ah, just Halabja. Well a few things that are wrong from your sources:
quote:
Saddam Hussein is the first world leader in modern times to have brutally used chemical weapons against his own people. His goals were to systematically terrorize and exterminate the Kurdish population in northern Iraq, to silence his critics, and to test the effectiveness of his chemical and biological weapons. Hussein launched chemical attacks against 40 Kurdish villages and thousands of innocent civilians in 1987-88, using them as testing grounds. The worst of these attacks devastated the city of Halabja on March 16, 1988.
First of all during the Iran Iraq war the Kurdistan region was rebelling so it wasn't a case of "systematically" for the sake of doing it. Next thing the article is wrong about is he was "testing" them. Saddam used chemical weapons in the Iran war as early as 1983 and it was a regular part of their arsenal. They were gauging their effectiveness I agree but they were all in use previously except maybe the sarin. Lastly the CIA for a decade claimed that hydrogen cyanide was the main chemical that caused the deaths which wasn't produced by Iraq but by Iran. Oh coincidentally the CIA changed its tune in the late '90s when we started trumpeting the cause for war with Iraq. So let's see what is out there on this:
quote:
And the story gets murkier: immediately after the battle the United States Defense Intelligence Agency investigated and produced a classified report, which it circulated within the intelligence community on a need-to-know basis. That study asserted that it was Iranian gas that killed the Kurds, not Iraqi gas.
The agency did find that each side used gas against the other in the battle around Halabja. The condition of the dead Kurds' bodies, however, indicated they had been killed with a blood agent -- that is, a cyanide-based gas -- which Iran was known to use. The Iraqis, who are thought to have used mustard gas in the battle, are not known to have possessed blood agents at the time.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9902E7DD1638F932A05752C0A9659C8B63
You can find more about this directly from the report here I believe it is page 100 of the report which might be the 2nd page of the pdf:
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/ops/war/docs/3203/appb.pdf
The link to the entire report is here:
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/ops/war/docs/3203/
Lastly Saddam was never tried for Halabja even though it was by far the worst of his alleged chemical killings of the Kurds. While they had many other things why not try him for what in the western world should have been considered a "slam dunk" unless it wasn't?
In conclusion I have seen from the link 2,500 to 5,000 deaths that were attributed to this attack yet challenged by US intelligence at the time. That is hardly "tens of thousands". He also didn't kill every Kurd by "gas". It is ironic however that this report was crucial and used by allied forces in 1990 because it explains in detail how the Iraqi military and command function and how they used chemical weapons so that we could plan accordingly how to deal with them. Only when it was politically convenient did it get "edited" and debunked.
Also I have no problem with Saddam's sentence at all. What he was actually convicted of was the massacre of 158 or so Kurds which he probably did do and he got his punishment for it. I do have a problem with the history revision from 1988 through 2003 concerning him.
_____________________________
-Roger
This is who I'm voting for. He is from the same party I voted for last time. This is consistent with my belief in the failure of the two party system and my disgust with it.
http://www.baldwin08.com/#
|
|
|
|
|
RE: War in Iraq - 7/4/2008 10:51:28 AM
|
|
|
Sophie11
Posts: 750
Joined: 1/24/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: rlj
Ah, just Halabja. Well a few things that are wrong from your sources:
"just" Halabja?
quote:
First of all during the Iran Iraq war the Kurdistan region was rebelling so it wasn't a case of "systematically" for the sake of doing it. Next thing the article is wrong about is he was "testing" them. Saddam used chemical weapons in the Iran war as early as 1983 and it was a regular part of their arsenal. They were gauging their effectiveness I agree but they were all in use previously except maybe the sarin. Lastly the CIA for a decade claimed that hydrogen cyanide was the main chemical that caused the deaths which wasn't produced by Iraq but by Iran. Oh coincidentally the CIA changed its tune in the late '90s when we started trumpeting the cause for war with Iraq.
You need to look up the Al-Anfal campaign that Saddam launched.
And if the Kurds were rebelling against Saddam, why would Iran kill them? Wouldn't they be an asset to Iran?
quote:
The agency did find that each side used gas against the other in the battle around Halabja. The condition of the dead Kurds' bodies, however, indicated they had been killed with a blood agent -- that is, a cyanide-based gas -- which Iran was known to use. The Iraqis, who are thought to have used mustard gas in the battle, are not known to have possessed blood agents at the time.
Based on most studies I can find on the matter the main chemicals found were mustard gas, tubin and sarin. These chemicals have been found in survivors and in the soil in Halabja. Whether hydrogen cyanide was a part of it also is hard to conclude, but either way definitly does not point to Iran alone.
quote:
Lastly Saddam was never tried for Halabja even though it was by far the worst of his alleged chemical killings of the Kurds. While they had many other things why not try him for what in the western world should have been considered a "slam dunk" unless it wasn't?
In my mind this does not disprove Saddam's guilt in the matter. There are many or could be many reasons why this could not or did not occur.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: War in Iraq - 7/4/2008 1:33:05 PM
|
|
|
rlj
Posts: 1960
Joined: 4/14/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
You need to look up the Al-Anfal campaign that Saddam launched.
And if the Kurds were rebelling against Saddam, why would Iran kill them? Wouldn't they be an asset to Iran?
It was a battlefield also. The PKK also operates in Iran. I'm familiar with the Al-Anfal campaign because it was important that the Iraqi's suppress that rebellion to prevent an Iranian victory. I followed the war as it happened. I do remember hearing of the rebellion but don't remember the exact name at the time.
quote:
In my mind this does not disprove Saddam's guilt in the matter. There are many or could be many reasons why this could not or did not occur.
No it doesn't I concur with that. I am surprised they used the incident that they did.
quote:
Based on most studies I can find on the matter the main chemicals found were mustard gas, tubin and sarin. These chemicals have been found in survivors and in the soil in Halabja. Whether hydrogen cyanide was a part of it also is hard to conclude, but either way definitly does not point to Iran alone.
Mustard gas doesn't kill in the way that people seem to think. It is used more to incapacitate then kill. Yes the sarin and tabun could have killed though the Iraqis didn't do a good job manufacturing the latter two since they were forced to destroy most of them after the war. The agents that the Iranians used were gasses which would not leave the types of contamination that the Iraqi chemicals left. I have never heard for example of contamination caused by the Zyklon B the Nazis used in the concentration camps. It wouldn't be unheard of for an army to shell a position that was retreated and for an opposing army to shell a position that it thought was occupied but wasn't.
Remember to when talking of Iran and Kurds we supported Iraq and Iran at different points during the war but more consistently sided with the Iraqis. The paper mentions but doesn't go into details of a Turkish campaign against the Kurds.
_____________________________
-Roger
This is who I'm voting for. He is from the same party I voted for last time. This is consistent with my belief in the failure of the two party system and my disgust with it.
http://www.baldwin08.com/#
|
|
|
|
|
RE: War in Iraq - 7/5/2008 11:40:56 AM
|
|
|
Sophie11
Posts: 750
Joined: 1/24/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: rlj
It was a battlefield also. The PKK also operates in Iran. I'm familiar with the Al-Anfal campaign because it was important that the Iraqi's suppress that rebellion to prevent an Iranian victory. I followed the war as it happened. I do remember hearing of the rebellion but don't remember the exact name at the time.
Well, all I'm saying is that based on what Saddam and Al-Majid approved to do to the Kurds, it is not out of the realm of logic that they were the ones responsible for their deaths. In a war such as that there are always going to be the "what ifs" but for the most part all evidence does seem to point to Saddam, at least IMO.
|
|
|
|
|
Army men memorial - 7/9/2008 7:48:49 PM
|
|
|
rlj
Posts: 1960
Joined: 4/14/2005
Status: offline
|
I read about this memorial just today and wish I knew more about it. Here is what little there I could find on it:
quote:
Mrs. Graves' World History class at Flagler Palm Coast High School is working on a memorial project. They are collecting one little green plastic army man figure for each of the fallen troops in the Iraqi War. It was a lesson started after reading about a class doing something similar for holocaust survivors in Tennessee. This was designed to give the students a better concept of the numbers lost in the war. Also, a way to memorialize them. Each student was allowed to donate one figure, and then they had to get donations of the rest as a way of getting community involvement.
http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-43951
I really like this from the brief I have read.
_____________________________
-Roger
This is who I'm voting for. He is from the same party I voted for last time. This is consistent with my belief in the failure of the two party system and my disgust with it.
http://www.baldwin08.com/#
|
|
|
|
|
RE: War in Iraq - 7/10/2008 4:27:14 PM
|
|
|
RichLP
Posts: 1633
Joined: 5/4/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: rcjames
quote:
ORIGINAL: rlj
Is it freedom when US contractors kill Iraqi civilians over and over with no due process since they have full immunity? I believe that is how it was under Saddam.
I thought that a person could only be killed once, but I guess in your liberal mind the over and over part helps to inflate numbers above reality.
Thsnks
RC
Some estimates say 1 million Iraqis have died since we invaded. even if it's only a 10th of that number, it's 100,000 dead people. Do you think the fact they all died ONCE - I mean, they are all deceased now - is a positive consequence of this war?
_____________________________
"We have removed an ally of Al Qaeda" - G.W. Bush lies to America and to the world, 5/1/2003
|
|
|
|
|
I have a new respect for Maliki - 7/13/2008 11:40:43 PM
|
|
|
rlj
Posts: 1960
Joined: 4/14/2005
Status: offline
|
This says it all:
quote:
A senior Iraqi government official said this weekend the enclave should revert to Iraqi control by the end of the year. “We think that by the end of 2008 all the zones in Baghdad should be integrated into the city,” said Ali Dabbagh, the government’s spokesman.
“The American soldiers should be based in agreed camps outside the cities and population areas.
“By the end of the year, there will be no green zone,” he added. “The separation by huge walls makes people feel angry.” Dabbagh acknowledged that getting rid of the green zone would be a huge undertaking, given the thousands of American soldiers, private contractors and foreign workers who live inside. He said the concrete walls that divide it from the rest of the city would be taken down slowly, “depending on the threat and circumstances”.
I'm pretty impressed. I had absolutely no idea that Iraq wanted to be a sovereign nation. I always just thought they wanted to be a colony or state or satellite of the US because we're so superior to everyone else in the world. So much for Manifest Destiny in Iraq. : (
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/iraq/article4322520.ece
_____________________________
-Roger
This is who I'm voting for. He is from the same party I voted for last time. This is consistent with my belief in the failure of the two party system and my disgust with it.
http://www.baldwin08.com/#
|
|
|
|
|
RE: I have a new respect for Maliki - 7/14/2008 9:54:33 AM
|
|
|
RichLP
Posts: 1633
Joined: 5/4/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: rlj
This says it all:
quote:
A senior Iraqi government official said this weekend the enclave should revert to Iraqi control by the end of the year. “We think that by the end of 2008 all the zones in Baghdad should be integrated into the city,” said Ali Dabbagh, the government’s spokesman.
“The American soldiers should be based in agreed camps outside the cities and population areas.
“By the end of the year, there will be no green zone,” he added. “The separation by huge walls makes people feel angry.” Dabbagh acknowledged that getting rid of the green zone would be a huge undertaking, given the thousands of American soldiers, private contractors and foreign workers who live inside. He said the concrete walls that divide it from the rest of the city would be taken down slowly, “depending on the threat and circumstances”.
I'm pretty impressed. I had absolutely no idea that Iraq wanted to be a sovereign nation. I always just thought they wanted to be a colony or state or satellite of the US because we're so superior to everyone else in the world. So much for Manifest Destiny in Iraq. : (
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/iraq/article4322520.ece
Baghdad has undergone ethnic cleansing. It is now a majorly Shiite city. And the huge blast walls are eerily reminiscent of the barriers erected by the Israelis. And this irony isn't lost in Iraqis, who are... Arabs.
The removal of these blast walls in Baghdad would be guaranteed to bring back more violence. It is, therefore, a largely artificial improvement in security.
_____________________________
"We have removed an ally of Al Qaeda" - G.W. Bush lies to America and to the world, 5/1/2003
|
|
|
|
|
RE: War in Iraq - 7/17/2008 11:12:57 AM
|
|
|
yustme
Posts: 399
Joined: 5/2/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Goodwill
Thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak my mind. I lost my job this past year. When Clinton was president I was secure and prosperous, but in the last year we had to close our operations. I was forced out of the place where I had worked for 34 years.
Not a single government program was there to help me.
Just so you know I lost both my sons fighting for their country. I lost them in Iraq and for what? So that Bush's oil buddies can get rich? My pain is indescribable.
I simply have nothing left. How can Bush call himself a Christian when he neglects people like me? I am a senior citizen with various medical problems. I'm not in a position where I can begin a new career, all because of President Bush.
Mr. Bush, I dare you to look me in the face and tell me you are a compassionate man!! I dare you to look me in the face and tell me you are a Christian. If I had any money left, I would donate it all to the Democratic Party.
If Al Gore had been elected in 2000 I would still have a job, a home and most importantly, a family.
Regards,
Saddam Huessein
My heart goes out to you and I'm so sorry for your loss.
When Clinton was in ,our business was so bad we had to pay many of our bills on credit card.We're struggling to get them paid off.
I support Bush 100%.Do I agree with everything he does?NO! But at least they always know they can find him at all times.When he's in our oval office at least he's not "intertaining" another woman.
And BTW,our business is doing better than it did the whole time Clinton was in.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: War in Iraq - 7/20/2008 3:56:32 PM
|
|
|
jkdjr25
Posts: 759
Joined: 2/19/2008
From: Michigan
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: rlj
I read this very sobering story about the impact of multiple deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan and it's imact on military families:
quote:
FORT CAMPBELL, Ky. - Far from the combat zones, the strains and separations of no-end-in-sight wars are taking an ever-growing toll on military families despite the armed services' earnest efforts to help.
Divorce lawyers see it in the breakup of youthful marriages as long, multiple deployments in Iraq and Afghanistan fuel alienation and mistrust. Domestic violence experts see it in the scuffles that often precede a soldier's departure or sour a briefly joyous h | | |
Forum Tools
Printable Version
), Reagan, Papa Bush & Clinton were naive?! 
