Why the pessimism?

[Imran Siddiqui]

the military was claiming all was going well, and we were on the cusp of victory.

Highlighted, because this is different from what you said. 'cusp of victory' and saying we have already won are two totally different things. Especially considering both circumstances, of not gaining much land in North Vietnam in the 60s and conquering all of Iraq in the 00's.

[chequita guevara]

No one the U.S. is afraid of getting into a war with is supplying the insurgants or jihadists.

[debeest]

Oerdin, I want to bump my question. What do you see as a reasonably likely positive outcome in Iraq?

[GePap]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

the military was claiming all was going well, and we were on the cusp of victory.

Highlighted, because this is different from what you said. 'cusp of victory' and saying we have already won are two totally different things. Especially considering both circumstances, of not gaining much land in North Vietnam in the 60s and conquering all of Iraq in the 00's.

We HAVEN'T WON in Iraq, unless it is you who live in some far away lalaland.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by East Street Trader
Maybe a political leader is in process of emerging who commands the trust and respect of the Sunni tribal chiefs, the Shi'ite tribal chiefs, the leaders of the Kurds, the clerics, those with oil interests, the US, the Turks and the neighbouring states.

And maybe he or she (although I guess not a she in that part of the world ) will prove to be incorruptible, hard working and long lived.

As even Ghandi could not prevent the breaking up of India and Pakistan (amidst dreadful bloodshed) when India achieved independance, this leader will need to be lucky as well as wise and charismatic.

But such a thing is not wholly unknown. Despite even even more unpromising circumstances Lawrence of Arabia united the arabs once before. Although only their ability to fight together was tested in the end, not the rather harder task of living together without fighting.

Nevertheless if the coalition forces stay put for a while such a leader may conceivably come forward.

God, or Allah, knows how he will be recognised.

I would say that the emergence of democracy in former british colonies has been hampered by the emergence of charismatic leaders, not helped, EG Kenyatta, Kaunda,Nkrumah, Mugabe, etc. Im NOT sure that is what Iraq needs.

Indian partition was a complex event, conditioned by decades of history under the Raj. I dont see Iraq going the same way - are you thinking of the Sunni arabs or the Kurds in the role of the Muslim League?

[Imran Siddiqui]

We HAVEN'T WON in Iraq

Of course we have! We are simply doing mop up / occupation stuff. This is a characteristic in any conquest. So you don't think the US took over the Phillipines until around 1930 instead of when we actually did around 1900 because of the revolt?

[GePap]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

We HAVEN'T WON in Iraq

Of course we have! We are simply doing mop up / occupation stuff. This is a characteristic in any conquest. So you don't think the US took over the Phillipines until around 1930 instead of when we actually did around 1900 because of the revolt?

Victory is based on objectives. IF our objective was removing the WMD threat and liberating Iraq, then yes, we are done-so why are we there still?

This is an excercise in NATION BUILDING. As everyone and their uncle was saying, the Occupation, or day +1 was what mattered. We have not won until we accomplished that goal- so NO, we have not won.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


Doing 95% ourselves and 4% one partner and 1% 29 other partners is working through allies? Come on, this Coalition of the Willing is BS and you know it. 90% of them are names on a peice of paper contributing nothing substantial.

And in Afghanistan were the percentages significantly different? They were not and you know it. Yet everyone says that Afghanistan WAS multilateral, and Iraq was not. They are using multilateral as a euphemism for "approved by a certain organization located at 1st Avenue and 43rd Street in Manhattan"

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by GePap


Iraqis have yet to vote on any issue yet-those are the tests of what the future will be.

I agree with you that elections, and the political alignments resulting therefrom, will be KEY milestones. Much more important than arbitrarily looking at a one year anniversary. But I do not agree that we havent learned anything in the last year.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Victory is based on objectives. IF our objective was removing the WMD threat and liberating Iraq, then yes, we are done-so why are we there still?

This is an excercise in NATION BUILDING. As everyone and their uncle was saying, the Occupation, or day +1 was what mattered. We have not won until we accomplished that goal- so NO, we have not won.

This may be an exercise in national building, but to say we haven't 'won' is silly. Did we lose in Afghanistan because the nation building there hasn't been totally successful? Of course not! When the Taliban fell we won in Afghanistan and then the nation building began. Same in Iraq with Saddam.

[GePap]

And in Afghanistan were the percentages significantly different? They were not and you know it. Yet everyone says that Afghanistan WAS multilateral, and Iraq was not. They are using multilateral as a euphemism for "approved by a certain organization located at 1st Avenue and 43rd Street in Manhattan"

http://www.state.gov/p/eur/rls/fs/14627.htm

If you look at the NATO contributions, compared to the the total forces, specially since the US has about only 1/10th the forces in Afghanistan as in Iraq, the percentages appear to be significantly higher.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui


This may be an exercise in national building, but to say we haven't 'won' is silly. Did we lose in Afghanistan because the nation building there hasn't been totally successful? Of course not! When the Taliban fell we won in Afghanistan and then the nation building began. Same in Iraq with Saddam.

We didn't go into Afghanistan for nation building-we went to hunt down AQ, and in that sense, we have certainly not won there yet either, also given the resurgence of the Taliban in various areas.

You don;t win a war and continue to conduct military operations against the same enemy 2 years after.

We have not won in either place-which is why Bush no longer event mentions his little plane escapade.

[Imran Siddiqui]

You don;t win a war and continue to conduct military operations against the same enemy 2 years after.

We aren't. I don't think the Iraqi army is blowing up buildings, do you?

And yes, we've won in both places. We are now dealing with the AFTERMATH of the wars.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui


We aren't. I don't think the Iraqi army is blowing up buildings, do you?

Ahem... Afghanistan? I remember Plato's thread about a new spring offensive....

And yes, we've won in both places. We are now dealing with the AFTERMATH of the wars.

You don;t hold "spring offensives" in the aftermath period, that for afghanistan.

For Iraq, given that twice as many soldiers have died in the 'Aftermath' than in the toppling of the regime, even if you accept us having won the war against the Baath regime, we have not won against the insurgency. Maybe you have forgotten, but fi you look at any hisotry book, the Philipinno revolt is seen as distinct conflict from the Spanish-American war.

[Imran Siddiqui]

You don;t hold "spring offensives" in the aftermath period, that for afghanistan.

Of course you can... to deal with with the rebels.

For Iraq, given that twice as many soldiers have died in the 'Aftermath' than in the toppling of the regime, even if you accept us having won the war against the Baath regime, we have not won against the insurgency.

Is Israel currently in a war against Hamas?

fi you look at any hisotry book, the Philipinno revolt is seen as distinct conflict from the Spanish-American war.

Exactly... it was the aftermath of the war and became a seperate conflict entirely. If this erupts into full fledged warfare, it'll be another conflict, not Gulf War II.