RE: Define victory in Iraq (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid



Message

Aneirin -> RE: Define victory in Iraq (10/10/2008 7:10:17 PM)

Define Victory in Iraq? Is that possible? To me, victory should be, things as they were prior to the bombing, but without the regime that the allies were trying to rid.

Or it could be looked at in a different way I suppose, depending on your point of view, victory might be the west coming away with thousands, perhaps millions of barrels of oil and the surety that there is more to come for years to come as they have the control of it as they sought.

If the latter was the true reason, it could be asked, what is life worth, how many barrels of oil are worth one person, or maybe the other way around, how many people to a barrel of oil, life is it seems expendable in the quest for the waealth of others.



Lorr47 -> RE: Define victory in Iraq (10/10/2008 8:57:59 PM)

There never was a chance of "victory" in Iraq since Bush never bothered to understand the dynamics of the country.  When the US invaded, an Iraqi acquaintance opined, "You will be sorry. Americans cannot understand my countrymen.  Saddam Hussein is a necessary evil and without Saddam my countrymen will simply kill each other until another strongman takes over, executes a 100,000 persons or so until everyone obeys him out of fear."  Now the acqaintance is saying  "I told you so.  If the US gets out next week there will be a slaughter of thousands until a strongman re establishes himself.  If the US gets out in 5 years, there will be a slaughter of thousands until a strongman tryrant takes over.  If the US pulls out in 50 years, the same bloodshed will occur."  The acquaintance shakes his head and laughs at the US leadership.  "When will your leaders realize that it makes no difference whether you get out next week, next decade or next century.  The same thing is going to occur.  The only difference is going to be the number of American dead and the amount of money you Americans waste trying to delude yourselves that thousands of years of history can be re written.  You have accomplished just one thing;  you have removed Saddam Hussein from power, a dictator that the US initially backed.  Now, back another and get out.  Let nature take its course.  You  lost when you invaded Iraq.  A cheaper way of accomplishing the same thing you have thus far achieved would have been to assasinate Hussein by a single bullet in 2002.  The same internal bloodbath would have occurred but compare the cost of a single bullet to what you have spent trying to avoid the inevitiable. "  P.S. The acquaintance considers McCain a fool on a fool's errand.



slvemike4u -> RE: Define victory in Iraq (10/10/2008 9:45:17 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: corysub

This question of "how do you define victory in Iraq has taken over from "why is the sky blue mommy"....I guess the answer depends on who is be asked the question.  Pelosi and Reid wanted to leave a year ago...along with Jack Murtha (whatever happened to him?).  I guess they would say that defeat was a victory.  Obama was in their camp but has since backpeddled to a  more orderly retreat strategy.

Biden wanted to break up Iraq into three countries...another answer to what is victory in Iraq from a guy who hasn't been to clever over his decades in the Senate.

Sarah Palin can see Iraq from her porch....or was that Russia...

I kinda go along with Bush on this one...stabilizing the country, leaving it with a government able to take charge and a military able to handle internal problems.  MacArthur wrote the book on this in how he managed Japan...Obviously, Iraq is not the homogenous religious group that Japan was ...but some of the basic tenants should and are working...led by the surge strategy earlier this year.
Cory lets be honest here ,you and me we are never going to agree on any political question....but do you really think you should hit the ok button for any post that includes the line "I kinda go along with Bush on this one...".Seriously how bad do things have to get before you jump ship?



NorthernGent -> RE: Define victory in Iraq (10/11/2008 2:48:41 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: stef

As soon as the allied forces leave Iraq there will be a lovely but short period of calm before the Sunni/Shiite/Kurd civil war engulfs Iraq.  Aside from eternal occupation, there isn't anything the allies can do to stop this.  There will be no 'victory' in Iraq, not for anyone.

~stef



Perhaps not by your definition of 'victory', but I'd hazard a guess that you don't think like those with decision making authority.

What were the objectives of those authorising the invasion, and those behind the scenes?

I'm fairly confident that business interests were involved and on obliteration of the place, oil and construction contracts were handed out to American and British companies, with a few handed out to appease the likes of the Russians. I reckon the CEOs of Bechtel are quite content with their $2.3bn dollar 'victory'. Yet I'd estimate this was a secondary objective of the invasion.

There is strong evidence to suggest that Tony Blair was on a Christian mission to enlighten the savages. Letters sent to Isaiah Berlin regarding Positive Liberty and Negative Liberty, and speeches along the lines of "these people are our cause, too" suggest he may have believed that we have a duty to help them, or perhaps it was an experiment intended to determine whether or not there could be a compromise between Positive Liberty and Negative Liberty. Combine this with the long-held US government view that the best means of protecting their interests, is to spread Western ideals, and I'd estimate that there certainly was a clash-of-cultures idea underpinning this invasion. Now, they can not possible hope to wipe out thousands of years of history at a stroke; they failed in Russia in 1991, so why they think it's possible in Iraq is anyone's guess (perhaps it was a case of the lesser of two evils: better to try and fail than not to try at all).

It would be useful were you to outline that which you believe to be the objectives of the invasion, before discussing 'victory'.



meatcleaver -> RE: Define victory in Iraq (10/11/2008 3:08:13 AM)

Not wanting to divert this thread too much, the link below gives a very good and understandable explanation of the difference between positive and negative freedom.  The irony, is that the American ideology is one of negative freedom but their ideological need to invade another country because they can, is one of positive freedom. The Iraqi resistance to that invasion, even though they might have hated the Saddam regime, is also one of positive freedom. Without writing an thesis, I think humans are more prone towards positive freedom and once out of their stupor, will look for causes to fight and barrriers to destroy. Why else would we be fascinated by the exploration space, to finish with a positive spin.

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/liberty-positive-negative/



NorthernGent -> RE: Define victory in Iraq (10/11/2008 3:17:46 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver

is that the American ideology is one of negative freedom



It's an English philosopshy, too; borne of a relatively peaceful and stable existence. It's the reason why the US government tends to look to the British government as the closest there is to a natural ally, and the feeling is mutual. Yet Tony Blair and the British government chronically underestimated the ruthlessness of the US government and associates.



bipolarber -> RE: Define victory in Iraq (10/11/2008 7:15:42 AM)

I like the idea of a political haunted house... we could have people dressed up in those latex masks of McCain, Palin, Hillary, Biden and Obama... it would be sort of an election version of those detestable "Hell Houses" that the fundies put on every year.

"Whooooooo (my friends) Whooooooo!"

But, they still haven't come out with the scariest: I want a James Carville mask! I'm a democrat, and even I think that guy is scarier looking than Angus Scrimm in "Phantasam." Oh, sure, you can pick up a Gollum mask over in the LOTR section... paint it a little paler, and it does kinda look like Carville... but it just isn't the same... [>:]



Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3]

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.03125