John1234

Yes that I agree with.
We've been screwing with these people for decades.
Its about time we deal with them in a fair and humane manner and leave our war toys, our threats, and our demands at home.

But until we accept that we have no right to control them and approach the table as a country that wants peace, we will continue to be unable to deal with the problem.
Electing big business puppets like Bush or war mongers like McCain will just continue to postpone dealing with the real problems.

GySgt

I would have stated that people who don't understand what is going on over there has the same right as anyone to an opinion, but it means nothing because it can do nothing but harm efforts. How many people hold the opinion that stem cell research is wrong, but really don't know the issues involved? Yet these opinions have gone a long way to stagnate this research hasn't it? How many people hold an opinion that Africa doesn't matter, but have never even stepped foot into these cultures and are ignorant of any potential? Yet, ignoring Africa has been the status quo by these ignorant arm chair opinions hasn't it?

My point is that anyone can read Shakespear, but this does not give the reader wisdom into relationships. The same is true for the Middle East. For some reason any opinion offerred by true experts are always trumped by people who have never stepped foot in the sand, have no idea about what this culture is, or understands any of the historical significance of what is happening. This includes Rumsfeld and Micheal Moore.

Usually, the opinions of protestors surround "Bush lied" as a way to exhonerate themselves from actually learning about the region. An entire civiliazation is supposed to suffer, because people absolutely have to ground their opinions to "Bush lied."

__________________

GySgt
Semper Fidelis
USMC

Awesome!

[quote=John1234;1057573665]Yes that I agree with.
We've been screwing with these people for decades.
Its about time we deal with them in a fair and humane manner and leave our war toys, our threats, and our demands at home.

But until we accept that we have no right to control them and approach the table as a country that wants peace, we will continue to be unable to deal with the problem.
Electing big business puppets like Bush or war mongers like McCain will just continue to postpone dealing with the real problems.[/QU

Someday my friend we can all light candles and sing kum bi ya and maybe throw in some tie dye shirts...

but the reality is that countries have fought for those resources in the ME for years now and we probably would of lost to German aggression in both wars if we didn't secure those resources. You could assume that our relationship with China and Russia our old enemies could become cold again too etc. etc.

It's not that we are trying to control the people there, it's that they need to get with the program and become more democratic. It's happened before, look at Japan and Germany. Imagine if the all that hate and idealist mentality could be put to productive use in the ME right?

Lerxst

I absolutely respect your opinions here Gunny, but I do take exception to the last part of your statement. The bottom line is that Bush did lie to drum up support for this war. Regardless of what he thought America's response would be, we deserved the truth...and nothing but. Not all of those who believed Bush lied hang their hat on only that, focus only on that.

History is proving that our skepticism was well founded. It smelled very fishy, and as it turned out...it was. People talk about utilizing war to protect our interests and I understand that. But invading a nation on false pretenses is not protecting our interests. Explaining the case for war in clear, truthful language should be enough. If it's not enough to persuade Congress, then this nation does not go to war.

Thank you for your thoughtful insights.

__________________
I was so right. And you? Well you were so wrong. You lost. Ha. Ha.

Ethereal

I usually tend to stay away from Iraq debates and the like (I find them far too partisan for my tastes), but I will convey my opinion on the war - being that I'm a vet.

In order to appropriately analyze the conflict in question one must adress it from multiple perspectives. Each perspective warrants its own specific analysis and subsequent summation. Based upon each respective analysis the Iraq war can be viewed as a whole and it's impact can be adequately measured.

First, the decision to invade, was it wise? In my opinion, no, it was not. The justification for the war did not satisfy my litmus test for a pre-emptive invasion. Iraq did not pose an immediate threat to the national security of the United States in any conceivable way.

Second, has the war been conducted competently and effeciently? Once again, the answer is no. Improper supervision and inadequate equipping of troops, misallocation of equipment, lack of budgetary oversight, a misguided stategum, and a lack of understanding and respect for our host nation (just to name a few) has lead to a protracted and bloody quagmire.

Third, was the decision to remain in Iraq the correct one? Given the administration's understanding of the situation I believe it is. Despite the initially bad decision to invade I felt that once we had displaced the Iraqi government and dessimated their infrastructure we had an obligation to remain until we had adequately secured their nation.

However, the administration's understanding of the situation is limited by the information they recieve, and the people they get their information from is their military commanders, who, I feel, do not posses the know-how to win this war.

The saying in the military is that the **** rolls down hill, but the roses rise to the top. A negative situation on the ground will be viewed through rosy-colored spectacles by the time it reaches a General, because nobody wants to be the one who has to give bad news to his commander. This is a symptom of military careerists, which I feel inhibits our military's ability to effectively communicate, but I digress.

Given all of this, I will attempt to sum up my opinion of the war. It was wrong to invade, the war has been conducted with terrible incompetance although things are being done (very slowly) to rectify this, ideally we should stay in Iraq until we win, but given the fact that I don't think we're capable of winning I think it would be best to cut our losses and leave.

*Braces self for shrill partisan onslaught*

GySgt

Then protest the lies. Protest the politicians. Hell, protest the ignorant media that seeks only sensationalism. But don't protest the effort that goes well beyond simple WMD justifications and revenge. Here is this vets views. One who has been inside the cultures of Somalis, Egyptians, Saudis, Kuwaitis, Iraqis, Jordanians,.....

I have always found it absurd how our liberal base in America is supposed to be our voices of conscience when it comes to free speech, civil rights, freedom, and democracy, but ground their entire outlook of the oppressed and brutalized Middle East to whether or not Bush lied about WMDs. Ever consider that Bush was also up against an establishment of corporation, strengthened apathetic government bureaucracy, and status quo men who see nothing but revenge as the only motivation worthy of our blood and treasure and still maintain a focus of immediate gains over long term security (an idea that has never been a policy)?

We deserve the truth? Sure. It's all in the open and in the books. Read from the experts...not the politicians who feel that they have to lie to get Americans to do the right thing. Shouldn't it say something about the true face of a nation when a President feels that he has to seek "revenge" as a justification to get inside a self destructive culture? How in hell is obeying UN rules, which simply wind up preserving the dictators, supposed to be morally right? What was our values supposed to be based on again? Often enough it's those people who are complaining about the truth that are waiting for another politician or reporter to give them clarity. It's these people who merely invite further blinding. It's frustrating as hell to hear people whine about how they want their pre-Iraq America back when we were "credible" and "stood by our values," but these same people don't want to acknowledge the lengths that we went to twist our values into unrecognizable shapes throughout the Cold War. Our values was always based on apathy and fantasy. As long as the dictator kept the peace against the other dictator, we called it "peace." As long as the oil flowed...we showed no concern to those oppressed and brutalized. Now, it is true that we were engaged in a far more dangerous venture at the time and the little people were considered collateral damage, but this doesn't change the facts of what occurred and it certainly doesn't capture what little man's perspective throughout the whole affair.

But lift a finger to help another Muslim and we get shouts of "No War For Oil" with complete disregard that we had destroyed those values they preached about just to secure the oil for decades in the first place. Even the Gulf War saw a large element that preferred Kuwait suffer the Iraqi population's plight rather than help. Their cries were "No War For Oil." You see, apathy and back room deals with devils not only kept the oil flowing freely, but encouraged the fantasy of America's values. Text book philosophers on campus are the worst of this lot.

Look at it from the average Muslim's perspective in the Middle East. There is a resentment and hatred that underlies the mainstream of Islam. People like to pretend it's as simple as what Bin Ladden tells us. But this is the extremists views who needs an ingrown toenail to justify mass murder. Much of the hate and resentment from the average Muslim comes from what he sees. America has a proud history. While it is true that our enemies hate us for our freedoms (there's much more to this than simpleton Presidential slogans), it is not true for the majority of Muslims. They respect us for our freedoms. They respect that a man in America can pray to Allah out in the open and then pass a Catholic Church, say good morning, and pick his sons and daughters up at school. They respect that ours is a civiliaztion that has the ability to express opinions to the highest levels in any manner without resorting to guns, bombs, and terror. But what they do not respect is our sense of "values" upon the international community. I don't know if you are interested, but because I do so enjoy putting words to paper I will briefly explain....

1) We have saved Europeans and Asians from brutality and oppression. How are the economies and social environments of Japan and Germany? How about the many soocieties they tried to destroy? We have left these regions better than when we got there and left behind embassies to ensure protection from further invasion from enemies. Our efforts in the Middle East have always been to make deals with the monsters. Our idea of leaving it better than before was always to seek that monster who pledged allegiance to us...and damn the people.

2) We are given almost no credit for saving Muslims in Kuwait. Why? Because not only do our own people dismiss the Muslim lives involved in order to favor a pure oil outlook as to the reason they even mattered, but because we merely escorted the dictator back home to continue to oppress and brutalize Muslims under the incapable supervision of the United Nations of which we are are viewed as their supervisor. We didn't simply push Hitler back to his European border and call it victory. Why was Saddam Hussein someone to celebrate?

3) We are given almost no credit for organizing the Mujahadeen against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan. Why? Because we merely aided in kicking out an oppressive invader and left the people in the capable hands of the oppressive and brutal Tali-Ban. Where was our global influence and gudance here? We could protest publicly about the Chinese government's treatment of its people, but no drop of sweat is saved for Afghanis?

4) We are given no credit for saving Muslims in Bosnia. Why? Because this was just one more example of our expedience to help Europeans. In the mean time the Muslim country of Sudan, where countless tens to hundreds of thousands of Muslims and non-Muslims were slaughtered, didn't matter.

Now, these are the type things that you won't here or see in a Bin Ladden letter to the ignorant, because they don't exactly mesh with his extremist views on why we are hated. Always its because we "assault" their culture and never that we simply turn away. But the average Muslim is not of the Bin Ladden camp...yet they still hold similar resentment and hatred. Now, I will be the first to call out their own culture and tribal instinctive allegiances as extremley large factors here. Sudan hardly matters to them and neither does the brutality and oppression of their fellow Muslims across any border. And certainly religious indoctrination has had a very large impact on their views about us. But this does not excuse our behavior and apathy. The average Muslim knows that according to history, if you aren't European or Asian, you simply don't matter. The most powerful and influential nation in history....the 700 pound guerilla in the room....has no concern for Middle Eastern Muslims. People argue that we shouldn't have to care, because not everything is our business. But these would be the same people who preach and publicly protest against the most minimum and insignificant of civil right infractions in our own country while applauding any apathy that preserves the dictator for a false sense of "peace." We live in an era where the entire world feels it when we yawn or when we stretch our legs. If Oprah Winfrey has merely to mention a book on her show for it to shoot to the top of the buyer's list, what exactly do you think America's opinions and actions do to the world? We simply have an obligation. Our history has led us to this point in time.

A few days after arriving in Baghdad, I was leading a patrol and discovered an arms cache. I called it in and guarded it. While we were waiting for EOD to arrive, an Iraqi (Sunni) man drove up and told me that his private business was looted and that he can't feed his family. I radiod back and had some humanitarian MREs driven to our pos. He drove his vehicle into the compound we were guarding so that he wouldn't be embarrassed for excepting our help. While we were assisting him, he asked my why we have "soldiers" guarding the ministry buildings, but none of the civil servant stations. He pointed to where their "DMV" was and I saw the complete looting of records and license plates. He said, "America is supposed to help." That stayed with me and has a lot to do with my opinion of what we are supposed to be, which is in sharp contrast to what protestors think America used to be. It's this kind of garbage that strengthens their ideas that they really don't matter. All I could do was "lie" to him and tell him that plans are in motion and that I was just a "soldier." He, of course, understood and later in the hotter part of the day he brought us some bottled water for our help with the MREs.

The truth is that history suggets that we do help. But it also suggests that Muslims are to receive none of it. How can they when everything we do brings criticism from our own institutions that it is all for oil? They aren't exactly helping our efforts. But, here we have this opportunity to charter a new path to make Middle Eastern Muslims see differently and the greatest obstacle to this effort are the people who profess to stand for freedom and human decency and continue to only see oil as motives and to focus on "lies." You think any of the abused Iraqi Sunni and Shia or Kuwaitis cared that there wasn't warehouses of nuclear bombs in Baghdad?

"No War For Oil" only means to continue the apathy for it. "Bush lied" is a cop out for people who merely wish to exhonerate their own twisted morality and a longing to return to the days when apathy was the flavor of choice.

GySgt

It was the military that had the living plan to take Saddam Hussein out and to install a democracy. It was Rumsfeld's deputy who called it "stale and old" and threw it out for favor of what followed.

It was the military that argued for more troops before kick off, and the refusal of what was asked for encouraged the country to fall into anarchy without a "beat cop" on every corner to secure it. Once again...civilan leadership did this.

It was Patreus that called for the surge and Iraq has turned a 180 as a result. Sunni fighters that were once allied to Al-Queda now stand beside us and fight in their provinces. This was the Military's plan...not civilian leadership.

The know how to win this war was turned away from the very beginning. The plan to win the war against Saddam was won with record accomplishments by making the Rumsfeld incompetent plan look good. It was post Baghdad that fell apart and this was not planned for. However, the CENTCOM plan called for a plan to win "peace" after. Thrown out.

The "know-how to win the war" has always been sitting in Iraq in the dirt....not in the leather chairs in Washington who deem themselves worthy to conduct military affairs.

John1234

I just wanted to compliment you on your post.
While i still do not agree with your basic position, I will say that you presented the pro Iraq invasion stance in the best light that I have ever before seen it.
I can actually respect your reasons for wanting us to be there and understand them.

Navy Pride

I second that......Thank you for your service and God Bless.......Welcome to the forum......

__________________
http://www.swiftvets.com/

vetsforfreedom.org

Navy Pride

I have and do all the time..........Almost to a man they want to win it.........