what would you do with the iraq situation?

The U.S. should humble itself to the U.N. and ask for guidance.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAH

Go back in time to the 18 hundreds and sew tothether the foundations of a peaceful arab coalition which understands the value of trade with the west, the value of suppressing fundamentalism, and the potential of the resources that they have for the future in comparison to personal gain for certain groups and families...

1. Have some Shiite arabs kill Muqtada Al-Sadr, or make it look like his own people killed him.
2. Offer one-time amnesty to all insurgents, given a time limit, after that simply kill them no questions asked.
3. Confiscate every single weapon in the country wholesale, anyone caught with ammunition or explosives should be thrown in jail immediately. If they want to fight let them fight with sticks and stones.

4. For every single American soldier killed, ten random Iraqi prisoners should be executed and broadcast on television immediately.

kabooom!

whats your suggestion?

never mind

what does that have to do with the current war? are you saying that if freedom and democracy were already prevelant in iraq, we would not be there?

People in iraq knows the best.

i agree, we put the government that we want in there, its eventually going to topple, they dont want us in there or our influence, right now there are bombs going off every day, killing our soldiers, this was not happening before we went in there

Remember the Germans and Adolf Hitler..?
Say what you want about the Nazis, but they sure knew how to occupy a country. None of this half-assed, "trying to teach monkeys democracy", bullshit.

One "coalition" soldier gets killed, you round up 20 local businessmen and shoot them if the insurgent does not come forward.

That is what works when you occupy a country.

Or just not occupy a country.

*shrug*

Seems the leader there before the US came in had it under control.

As a leader?

(a) I'd never be there in the first instance - especially based on the superb intelligence of the world's most pathetic intell agency (or the "excuse" of the world's most pathetic intelligence service).

(b) I'd ask the people who elected me to shoot me in the head - after I apologise for lying about all the excuses and deception used to engage in an invasion of Iraq, accepting full responsibilty for the killing of 1000's of innocent people and for asking US people to go to war - and profuse aplogies for fucking up the US economy and behaving like a total idiot.

(c) The Iraq scenario is going nowhere - irrespective of any action by the US. At no time has the US ever shown any command of negotiation or balance and it's clear the "management" are clueless on this. Welcome to the new era of the "war on terror" and new generations of Iraqi people who despise every high moral value the US purports to endorse. Instead, look forward to elements of those new generations of Iraqi's intent on blowing US targets to hell and back - along with those of any other nation who supported them.

Sympathy? Sure, got plenty of that, - especially for the 1000's of innocent people who have been killed in Iraq and their surviving families who will continue to suffer for decades long after the US packs up and goes home. Also got sympathy for US folks who had no part in the adventures of their stupid government and who will, at some time or other, be taking the flack of retaliation/revenge activity. None of these people ever deserved intervention of the ignorant smartasses in their lives.

Any mention of costs over Iraq is but a grain of sand - the US will pay a far higher price yet, both is lost lives and economically. Iraq will be much the same, but the effects will last many decades. Other nations will (they already are) adopting changed attitudes towards the US - tho these will vary - depending. No nation wants to be allied to losers, but little doubt if it came to crunch time, would be willing to assist to a controlled level. We all live on this planet together - some idiots on the block just need "managed" or executed - and Saddam is not alone on this.

"What would you do with the iraq situation?" - the US government created that situation - now it's time for them to find an excuse to get out if it. No other party is to blame.

I need to stop visiting these boards for awhile, it's starting to feel like a political forum.

Iraq will be peanuts compared to when the chinese will fuck the us economy after they feel ready to do so. Leave the city and go live somewhere 'safe', 2007 is gonna be a hell of a year.

Sure...until the rest of the world decides you're committing inexcusable atrocities, and sacrifices hundreds of thousands of their own kids to bomb the shit out of you and your civilian population.

When I came here first - never thought it would be a political forum - just a collection of webmasters with a common biz interest. But..... some nations are screwed by politics and can't see further than their noses and they are the most vocal in attempting to find excuses to justify themselves. Pretty sad shit

I edited your post with help of the cheesy movie Dogma to make it my own.
I apologize.

No need for apologies - folks need to do as they see fit

Unfortunately reality has little resemblance to movies, but hey, whatever floats your boat

Hmmm... so basically back to the way things were under sadam?

Iraq is in the middle of a Cival War. Whether we send more troops in or not, this cival war is inevitable. If we send more troops in or keep the troops we have in there, the bottom line is Cival War is coming and we cannot stop it. Based on this, I say full pull out in a years time - no if and or buts about it.

I am sick of hearing "if we leave, the terrorist will take over Iraq and the US will be done." If we leave, and this happens - why can't we go right back in? How about we spend the $2 million a minute that we are spending on Iraq on securing BOTH boarders, scanning ALL cargo that comes into the US for radiation, beefing up the TSA to make sure none of the terrorist can get into the USA ever again. If the terrorist can't get in, they can't blow up our building or hijack our planes.

it wasnt so bad under saddam, to where the people were planting roadside bombs everywhere, like it is now

i just have a hard time believing that we went in there to spread freedom and democracy, using the justification that he killed the kurds 20 years ago, sounds like a BS reason, first thing that comes to mind is that they wanted to go in there for a different reason, then pulled that out of our ass to use

sure there is a civil war, the thing is if we leave, then the side we dont want to take over, will, and our administration doesnt want that

If I was President coming into this mess my goal would be as close to full employment as possible and all services full restored. They still dont water and electric in some places and 70 percent unemployment. If they can hire some guy from idaho for 100 grand to drive a truck they can hire a iraqi. People that have jobs and nice things aren't as quick to blow things up or to support people that blow things up. I would also start the pull out of american troops and use them to find bin laden, my goal within my first 90 days as president to present the american people bin ladens head on a platter.

there is politics in everything, but watching how the government does it, you see how the experts do it, and you learn how to use it

Did I say it was bad? I am and always have be convinced that there is only one way to control a country like Iraq is the brutal way.


offcurse... if they cared one bit about human rights they would have taken sadams regime down 20 years ago instead of giving him the weapons.

we didn't kill enough iraqis. You don't pacify a people until you completely subjugate them.
if a city doesn't give up all of its arms and submit to US will, you give them 24 hours to leave the city, then you buldoze it. And so on and so on.

Valid point on that Civil War and agree - it's irrelevant how many US troops are dumped on Iraq, - they won't make any significant difference.

Slightly different, but related - no amount of "occupation" will change the Middle East - others attempted it and withdrew. That other nation, Afghanistan had it's "invasion" - but little has changed there either.

Iraq has it's own problems now - much bigger than Saddam. Both sides will kill each other (and anyone who stands in their way). Each has a habit of putting lead into brains and leaving bodies for collection. That is hardly the basis for any US style democracy and seriously doubt US management ever thought that possible. The US.. or prob any other country, is not equipped to handle the Middle East. No other nation should assume any rights to handle this region either - it's none of their business.

Only my but doubt anyone in Iraq gives a shit about the US or it's borders, - they have their own problems. Despite that, anyone attempting terrorist action on the US or any other nation as a result of messing in the Middle East, will have no problem, even with increased security. Nothing is infallible and bending a way of live to try and stop it is like giving in to potential terrorist pressure.

No nation on this planet has ever defeated "terrorism" thru centuries - what's different now? All "settlements" were done at a conference table - not by guns, but it takes decades of frustration to reach that conference table and the damage is still continuing. Obviously the longer the US remains in the Middle East, the "anti" will increase - not just in Iraq. This crap will last decades - it's not the same as walking away from Vietnam - and there is no easy get out.

Either we stay there forever to prevent this or it is inevitable.

Only other 2 options are:


1) NUKE the entire region - the entire middle east - then when the radiation level allows, go in and get the oil

2) Bring Saddam back from the grave and put him back in power. Sure he was evil but he sure knew how to keep his people in line. The shit that is happening now did not happen with him in power. The majority of the Iraqi people have only know living under a ruthless dictator. Without that, it is like somebody left the keys to the Candy Store open and all of the adults have left town, leaving the kids to do what they will.


It's a fuck up situation and there is no good choice left. If we stay, more of our troops will die for nothing. If we leave, the wrong people will get in power and the Middle East will be fucked as usual. Can't win. But if we stay, we will be in it for a VERY long time and at $2 million a day - we cannot afford it.

I forgot to mention, with that $2 million a minute that we would save by pulling out, come up with as many alternatives to oil that we can come up with and invest in that so we don't care what happens in the Middle East anymore (biofuels, coal to oil, electric cars, plug-in hybrids that get 160 MPG, solar, geothermal, algea into biofuels, etc). We could be energy independant in 5 years if we spend $2 million a minute getting to that point.

Got to agree Tony... tho it's prob past the time for that and it makes it much harder to implement now - but can have a very positive effect if it can be implemented.

[QUOTE=PMdave;11622761]Did I say it was bad? I am and always have be convinced that there is only one way to control a country like Iraq is the brutal way.

QUOTE]

naw, i feel kind of guilty admitting that, feels unpatriaotic

sure, if we wanted to try, but we couldnt stretch our justification that far, plus i dont see the reasoning behind why we would do that, much the less being there in the first place

let the UN handle it

The "wrong people" are already there (tho there may be some straight folks among them) - these are the people who hire private armies (of around 2000) to kill off their opponents. They are also corrupt to hell and back and no different from Saddam.

You think the international community has any interest in wasting it's time cleaning up US problems? Doubt it - tho they may help in other ways and obviously would like to see some form of settlement.

The US elected to create a fictional "coalition of the willing" list and included countries who objected to any messing in the Middle East. They then proceeded of their own free will to fuck up Iraq. The UN never agreed on any intervention by the US. Now you suggest the same international community resolve these problems?? That will take some persuading and even worse now that the US has little crediblity internationally.

i agree with you

unless you paid attention to the last 15ish yrs closely, you wouldn't see a reason.

you and i are on opposite sides of the spectrum on this, i draw the line on matters of war similar issues much differently than you

i would not want my brother, son, etc to be out there and possibly killed unless its for a damn good reason, like, i would be fine with it if we were being attacked or directly threatened, but for international matter such as iraq, israel/palestine conflict, etc, leave it to the UN, let the world as a whole decide what should happen, democratically

we cannot selectively decide what the un can do, cant do, unless we have bulletproof reasoning, otherwise, it smells bad

we definitely are on opposite sides.
when you put your security in the hands of someone else, you end up dead.
We'll never be so foolish as to put our security in the hands of people who want to see us brought low.