8 dead marines in Iraq monday.

[dumpster56]

Why are we still there?

What is the purpose?

Oil? Look until we divide the place up the Kurds up north the Shia down south and the sunnis near bahgdad nothing will change. It will look like this for 50 years, Ie the gaza and west bank!!!!

Take out the box of crayons and make 3 new countries all with oil under their feet and give them a mandate, lets see what country looks the best in 10 years!

 

[cube_rat]

And good morning to you too!!

As much as I hate this war, I fully support our men and women who serve this country in both a military and civil fashion. My Army Ranger son has been to Iraq and Afganistan several times and as much as I worry about the obvious, he fully understands the deadly risks involved in serving his country. He is willing to lay down his life for our freedom.

Sorry, didn't mean to get off on a support our military tangent (even though we ALL should).

Note: Not only do I not partake in flamey threads, I also don't participate in discussions about religion, wars or politics, so please don't bait me with opposing view points about supporting our military.

 

[Dawg52]

Note: Not only do I not partake in flamey threads, I also don't participate in discussions about religion, wars or politics

Same here. They are no win threads.

 

[REWahoo]

Note: Not only do I not partake in flamey threads, I also don't participate in discussions about religion, wars or politics...

Same here. They are no win threads.

Well I don't even partake in discussions of not partaking in discussions....except when I get sucked into doing it. Willpower man, willpower!!!

 

[Shredder]

And good morning to you too!!

As much as I hate this war, I fully support our men and women who serve this country in both a military and civil fashion. My Army Ranger son has been to Iraq and Afganistan several times and as much as I worry about the obvious, he fully understands the deadly risks involved in serving his country. He is willing to lay down his life for our freedom.

Sorry, didn't mean to get off on a support our military tangent (even though we ALL should).

Note: Not only do I not partake in flamey threads, I also don't participate in discussions about religion, wars or politics, so please don't bait me with opposing view points about supporting our military.

Fully understand where you are coming from.
Our son served in Iraq also. We separate supporting our troops, and not supporting the Iraq war. These kids are dying for nothing, they deserve better out of our leaders.........Shredder

 

[Cool Dood]

Woah.. I think the War on Terror is George W. Bush's gift to mankind, and yet I like newguy's idea of dividing the country in three and seeing which one is best in 10 years (Kurds)... twilight zone moment.

N.B. This was my hazy pre-coffee post.

 

[dumpster56]

And good morning to you too!!

As much as I hate this war, I fully support our men and women who serve this country in both a military and civil fashion. My Army Ranger son has been to Iraq and Afganistan several times and as much as I worry about the obvious, he fully understands the deadly risks involved in serving his country. He is willing to lay down his life for our freedom.

Sorry, didn't mean to get off on a support our military tangent (even though we ALL should).

Note: Not only do I not partake in flamey threads, I also don't participate in discussions about religion, wars or politics, so please don't bait me with opposing view points about supporting our military.

Cube, Hey we have the power and we now own the place, why not separate the waring groups and do as I have stated. Funny how I have said this approach since day one and now the dems are talking that way.

 

[dumpster56]

By the way, I thought when you went to war against a country the idea was to destroy it all take no prisoners and then rebuild. We let people go home to fight another day. Rumsfeld, is an old man who is past retirement age. sorry. he might still be mentally on at near 80 years of age but I know my father and father in law and they are his age and boy I sure would not want them leading much of anything these days except giving some worthy elder advice at the kitchen table over a cup of coffee and a sandwich.

 

[yakers]

Just my 2 cents, we probably do need a national and maybe local discussion of the topic but this thread doesn't strike me as the right approach. More like "what would have to happen" for us to withdraw "successfully" (or unsuccessfully). I am not a Bush fan and have a brother who has been called up twice (but stayed stateside). It looks like a lot of mistakes were made but these need to be addressed and then an appropriatw way to proceed developed. IMHO the current administration will not admit some fundemental errors and no one else has stepped forth with a better way to proceed.

 

[dumpster56]

Just my 2 cents, we probably do need a national and maybe local discussion of the topic but this thread doesn't strike me as the right approach. More like "what would have to happen" for us to withdraw "successfully" (or unsuccessfully). I am not a Bush fan and have a brother who has been called up twice (but stayed stateside). It looks like a lot of mistakes were made but these need to be addressed and then an appropriatw way to proceed developed. IMHO the current administration will not admit some fundemental errors and no one else has stepped forth with a better way to proceed.

Agree totally.

 

[Nords]

What is the purpose?

Apparently no one remembers the 12 years of OPERATION SOUTHERN WATCH and the numerous air/cruise missile strikes between Gulf War I and II. That era was the nastiest optempo the Navy's seen since Vietnam.

This is no fun, but no one wants to return to the status quo ante either.

 

[Craig]

Woah.. I think the War on Terror is George W. Bush's gift to mankind ...

I don't understand why "War on Terror" (a term also used regularly by the DNC and their party stalwarts) now seems to be used regularly as a synonym for the war in Iraq.

 

[lets-retire]

Apparently no one remembers the 12 years of OPERATION SOUTHERN WATCH and the numerous air/cruise missile strikes between Gulf War I and II. That era was the nastiest optempo the Navy's seen since Vietnam.

This is no fun, but no one wants to return to the status quo ante either.

The British and our Air Force also dropped a lot of bombs during that time. Mostly with little effect on the Iraqi regime, they kept doing what they were doing. It was a waste of time and money if you ask me.

 

[benny]

Well it was this crazy idea that Iraq had WMD's. Since proven false.

That somehow Saddam was linked with Al Quaeda. Great idea for a Hollywood movie but also totally absurd.

The Yanks and Brits are stuck in Iraq and more will die. All this thanks to those eminent statesmen, Bush and Blair. Thankfully both will be gone in the not so distant future. Maybe sanity will then prevail? One can only hope!

Meawhile I have to feel sorry for all those useless deaths. One would have thought Vietman was a lesson. How soon we forget. Or could it be the Yanks never learn?

 

[greg]

I'm as disgusted with this mess as much as most others. There's one thing we could do:

Get a bumper sticker that says "Support our troops--fire Rumsfeld"

It seems to me, we need to actively support the administration by letting them know that they're NOT doing enough, that we need more troops on the ground to do the job right. I'm disgusted with our current straddle position--not enough troops to improve the situation but just enough so that corruption flourishes and lesser Iraqis rise to power in government. I can't imagine a worse situation (unless it was going over there in the first place). Tell W to "S*** or get off the pot." It appears to me we are just waiting for some outside event beyond our control to determine our next movement. From this point, do it right or don't do it at all.

 

[REWahoo]

It seems to me, we need to actively support the administration by letting them know that they're NOT doing enough, that we need more troops on the ground to do the job right.... From this point, do it right or don't do it at all.

Greg, I don't care what Martha says. You're OK in my book...

 

[greg]

Greg, I don't care what Martha says. You're OK in my book...

And you didn't roll your eyes when you said it.

 

[brewer12345]

It seems to me, we need to actively support the administration by letting them know that they're NOT doing enough, that we need more troops on the ground to do the job right.

You really, honestly think that more troops would accomplish anything other than more Merkin deaths, more Iraqi deaths, and the creation of more ill will toward us? I find that astonishing.

 

[dumpster56]

You really, honestly think that more troops would accomplish anything other than more Merkin deaths, more Iraqi deaths, and the creation of more ill will toward us? I find that astonishing.

Someone has to buy into the bush administration BS. Look I want to know why Bin Laden and Al zwahiri are stilll alive and an old fart like rumsfeld is still running the pentagon.

 

[brewer12345]

Look I want to know why Bin Laden and Al zwahiri are stilll alive and an old fart like rumsfeld is still running the pentagon.

Why do you hate America?

It's all Clinton's fault.

 

[greg]

You really, honestly think that more troops would accomplish anything other than more Merkin deaths, more Iraqi deaths, and the creation of more ill will toward us? I find that astonishing.

Under our current leadership, not very likely. But the proper thing for us to do at this time (if we had an Executuve branch capable) would be to do the right thing for the good Iraqi people. I just don't think our current leaders has the backbone to escalate troop numbers to clean up the mess. Politics, those who live by the polls, die by the polls, especially near election time. What we currently have is the worst possible choice of three alternatives. Did you expect something different? But I can hope, can't I?

 

[brewer12345]

I really don't think more troops is the answer. Didn't work out so well in VN, and I suspect it would be even worse in Iraq, where US soldier = target.

 

[greg]

Brewer:

You may be right. I read a WSJ article a couple of days ago (editorial page) where a young officer just back said that the biggest problem as he saw things was the lack of troops to get anything accomplished. Enough soldiers were provided to each location where he was stationed to secure the barracks and the supply line. Nothing more. His question to the administration was in summary 'how can one accomplish anything with that level of support; how does one provide safety in a community of 100,000 with 500 troops?' I think his observations and conclusion was very good.

Whether the we got into the war for the correct reason is ALMOST irrelevant at this point, we still need to try to do the correct thing--to my mind. I suspect that any other alternative will lead to worse problems at some future date.

It's different this time! Communism was waning in the '70s; terrorism MAY now be waxing. I think we need to get in there and do it right, bringing some stability and hope to those people who want a decent, productive life. Otherwise, every terrorist we shoot now turns into 10 future terrorists. We made the mess; we clean the mess.

 

[Elderdude]

I had a chemistry set as a child. While I remember that, following written instructions closely, some mixtures would turn pink or blue in the test tube, however adding chemicals at random always produced a black, sludgy mess eventually. And nothing I added after that would change the situation. We have a black, sludgy mess in Iraq. There is nothing we can do to fix it. It is time to go home and heal, and let the Iraqi people do the same.

While we weren't looking our own treasury has been raided, our constitution assailed and our basic liberties infringed upon. We have our own stupid mess to clean up. We have been given a lesson. It is time to grow up and finally learn from our mistakes. We must change the current reckless, thoughtless course. We are running out of time.

 

[Nords]

You may be right. I read a WSJ article a couple of days ago (editorial page) where a young officer just back said that the biggest problem as he saw things was the lack of troops to get anything accomplished. Enough soldiers were provided to each location where he was stationed to secure the barracks and the supply line. Nothing more. His question to the administration was in summary 'how can one accomplish anything with that level of support; how does one provide safety in a community of 100,000 with 500 troops?' I think his observations and conclusion was very good.

One of my more senior bosses used to say: "The problem with junior officers is that at moments of extreme stress they have an unfortunate tendency to blurt out the truth."

It'd be interesting to see how many billets were assigned to his platoon, how many bodies were actually assigned to those billets, and how many of those bodies had been sent "temporarily" on other duties at the direction of senior authority.

But what did we expect this JO to say-- "There are so many U.S. soldiers and well-trained Iraqi army & police troops that we kept tripping over each other!"?