The Battle of Baghdad

[MrBaggins]

because they'll funnel the 'charity' towards personal gain and/or terroristic use.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Barley
Why not invest the $billions youll spend on saving lives by building heathcare infrastructure in the Middle East or Africa?

Because you'd lose the elections

[Harovan]

Originally posted by MrBaggins
When push comes to shove... and victory is won... the ney-sayers will be noticably silent.

Nobody doubts, that the US will win this war. This doesn't make it justified. And the "nay sayers" won't be silent, because the warmonger in the White house will push for the next war very soon.

[TheStinger]

Originally posted by Spiffor
Stinger :
The problem is that many anti-US leaders want the Arab population to think it is about religion or clash of cultures. Each tiem the US will wage war to a muslim (and even more to an Arabic) country, the hate against the US will progress, whether the objective reasons have to do with religion or not.

I agree, but you shouldn't change your policy because other people say it is somethin it isn't.

If Iraq is invaded and a democratic government is set up that will prove them wrong

[Harovan]

Originally posted by TheStinger
If Iraq is invaded and a democratic government is set up that will prove them wrong

Like that in Afghanistan?

[lord of the mark]

silly lance - we already had a thread on this topic see "standoff at Bagdad" - no wonder its turning into another political thread instead of the military strategy thread he wanted.


Quick responses - US knows war is ugly - if we didnt we would have taken out Saddam years ago - oil and hegemony are no more important to us now than they were in the '90s.

The battle of Bagdad will probably be ugly - but its the job of the military leaders and planners to make it less ugly - how to do that is, I think, what some here were trying to discuss.

The goals in the battle of Bagdad must not be only to minimize US/coalition casualties, but also to minimize civilian casualties and damage to civilian infrastructure - if we are to make this a victory in our long term war on terror/war with islamic radicalism.

In liught of this i dont think carpet bombing will be an option, except in places where we know the civilians have all fled (expect a major psyops campaign to get civilians to flee Bagdad) We will face more like the Israeli problem in Jenin - going door to door - in a larger city - but iwht advantages the Israelis didnt have - a much less motivated enemy, and less hostile civilian population (which will be more willing to flle the city) and of course much greater resources. And the beneifts of learning from the Israeli experience.

[MrBaggins]

The nay-sayers will be silent *ABOUT IRAQ* though... and its a little to early to judge if they'll be another war closely following this one.

[SlowwHand]

The U.S. wants nothing to do with the area, afterwards.
When last we tossed Hussein out of Kuwait, did we ask for oil? Occupy?
No.

[Spiffor]

Sloww : didn't you predict W. would go to Iran right next ?

[SlowwHand]

I didn't predict anything about Iran.
Bush said in his State of The Union he wants to see a Democratic process in Iran.

What I predicted was encounters involving China and Japan.

[Ecthy]

good luck in any Beijing "encounter"

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Sir Ralph
Like that in Afghanistan?

Iraq isn't as poor as Afghanistan nor does it have the same tradition of warlordism.

[SlowwHand]

Where have you been ?!?!?

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Sir Ralph


Like that in Afghanistan?

You mean if the majority of the population clearly thinks the govt the US puts in place is better than the one we toss out, but the one we put in place is able to directly rule only abotu 25% of the country and has limited authority in the rest of the 75%, like in afghanistan??? it will probably convince a few of the nay sayers but not most. Thats life.

If we were to have situation much better than in afganistan that would convince many more naysayers, but by no means all. The hardcore nay sayers arent concerned with either democracy or stability in Iraq - theyre worried about US global hegemony - we could turn Iraq into paradise, if iraq becomes an ally to US power thats a bad thing if youre worrried about US hegemony.

[Willem]

Originally posted by Spiffor
Aren't Vietnam veterans opposed to the upcoming slaughter btw ?)

Alot of them are yes. Even "Storming Norman", who led the charge in Desert Storm is against it. CNN just had an interview with him and he flat out said there was no justification at this time.