quote:

ORIGINAL: caitlyn

...but, the moment someone starts saying it's a failure, they are venturing into the unknown. Unless you are the almighty and know the future, you have no idea how things will turn out. 

Yep, and what do you want to bet that if things do turn out well in Iraq, no amount of torture would make some of these critics admit to it? Bitch until proven wrong, or presented with something that they can't argue against, and they move on. 

So, what is left, that is intelligent? Solutions ... point blank.

One solution I think is that more troops are needed to get out faster, and with a chance of a lasting peace. I can't hardly turn the tv on without seeing someone from our military saying this, seemingly to no avail.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sinergy

Hello A/all,

This sounds like a lovely idea, however...  One of the things this administration is renowned for doing is classifying anything remotely embarrassing.

So I am somebody who is not a Neo-Con trying to come up with a plan to get out of the Iraq debacle.

1)  I discover that an accurate account of the number of soldiers in country is classified.

2)  I discover that most of the strategies for what to do there are classified.

3)  I discover that the imprisonment of "enemy combatants" and what goes on is classified.

4)  I discover that an accurate listing of the costs of mainting our forces in country is classified or buried in so many add-ons to bills that the real number is not accessible.

5)  I am refused access to real intel because anybody I speak to about the situation tends to be embedded; this means they are only shown what those running the show want them to see.

So I ask to speak to the people in charge to do my own investigation and am told that my services are not needed.

Exactly how do you suggest I formulate an intelligent alternative to the suck-fest we are currently involved in?

Just me, could be wrong, but there you go.

Sinergy

quote:

ORIGINAL: philosophy

"Drop really big bombs all over trhe Middle East and wipe them all out. Gone. All the followers of Islam. Then they can be 'martyred' and our troops can come home.   That's the only solution that there is."
 
So......the middle east is where every single muslim lives is it? What you're proposing isn't a solution...its a war crime.

quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver

If you were in charge of the Third Reich, we'd all be speaking German now!

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyEllen

OK - given my own apocalyptic scenario, and that whatever is done, its gonna be a dirty business, how about this?

1) we stage a "border incident" between Iran and Iraq which would indicate to the insurgents in the Iraqi forces that the "day of liberation" is at hand. The insurgents come out in open rebellion - and we can deal with them accordingly. This will also test the mettle of the Iraqi government - with whom and for what they stand, making the job of dealing with insurgent elements there much easier too. Of course, we need to position our forces in the right places beforehand so that when the time comes, we can plough in and deal with problem elements effectively. Iraq mess solved in a week or two of vicious dirty fighting.
2) if the border incident proves the Iraqi forces and government to be loyal to the west, they will have to declare war on Iran for violating their sovereign territory, and another Iran-Iraq war will erupt. This will also make the Iranians show their hand on the nuclear weapon front - they would undoubtedly use it in such a war, if they had it, after what they suffered in the last such war. On the other hand, if they dont have it, then they will be revealed by their anxious enquiries for the technology much more easily as being interested in it rather than a domestic power system. In the first case, that they use the weapon, much of the world is justified in retaliating, since it will also kill many of their civilian contractors and their troops based in Iraq. In the other case, that they do not have the weapon, we join the war against Iran from Iraq, Afghanistan, Kyrgyzstan and Pakistan. Either way, Iran will be defeated militarily and removed as a threat to the region and the world (and we get their oil, but thats for another thread)
3) And if in case (1) the Iranians feel they need to get involved, this will show what their true intentions were all the time. Then see (2).
4) This scenario would also put the Pakistanis to the test. Given their alliance with the west, they would have to take part in an invasion of Iran from the southeast. Failure to do so would show where their true intentions might lie.

They dont call me Mrs Hitler for nothing.

E

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyEllen

trannysub - I seriously cannot imagine the suffering you felt at losing 3 friends on 9/11. It was an awful day.

However, the Islamists didnt start all this as I think you suggested. We produced the circumstances which led to these guys doing what they did, and we continue to produce more reasons for more of them to do more of the same.

We started this, so if there is any side to blame, then ultimately its ours. In the end though, without recourse to some higher power to arbitrate and in the absence of either side being willing to back down or be defeated, the question of who is to blame is purely a moral one.

In the real world, the only practical solution is defeat of one side or the other now. And it wont be us that is defeated if we allow those with the expertise, rather than presidential backing, to get on with the job. The converse being true throughout.

E