Soldiers say Iraq pullout would be devastating

[KrazyHorse]

Nah, that sounds more like what South Africa did.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
Yeah, we were obligated to get 60,000 of our troops killed and 300,000 wounded to prop up some corrupt generals and their sham "democracy" (elect the general of your choice from the ones we choose for you) because we got ourselves tangled up in the sloppy seconds of French foreign and colonial policy. Real obligations there.

Maybe we should consider a more fundamental obligation: Not to **** around in foreign countries half-way around the world when we don't have a clue what we're doing or what we can realistically accomplish by doing so.

Then I suppose we shouldn't sign peace treaties knowing our intent is to let those we promise to support go down the tubes. Why even bother?

I mean realistically its not like there is any need to honor a nations word is there?

[Elok]

would set Iraq on a path to civil war, give new life to the insurgency and create the possibility of a failed state after nearly four years of fighting to implant democracy.

I'm familiar with this kind of thinking; it's what makes scams so profitable for con artists. It's what keeps people in cults long after they begin to suspect they've been tricked. Once you've invested enough time, money, and mental or physical energy into an idea or process, you tend to continue to support that idea or process come hell or high water, because to admit you were wrong and you've wasted all that time/money/energy would be devastating to you. And since each new investment just increases the amount you're "in debt," you wind up with a positive feedback loop. You just become more and more terrified of admitting defeat in the process of running from it, even as you make defeat that much more certain.

[Verto]

Re: Soldiers say Iraq pullout would be devastating

Originally posted by SlowwHand
I give more weight to what they say, than someone sitting at their pc blasting their efforts.

Only when what they say supports your own sit-at-home belief, as you made quite clear when you belittled the opinions of soldiers calling for a withdrawal from Iraq.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe


Then I suppose we shouldn't sign peace treaties knowing our intent is to let those we promise to support go down the tubes. Why even bother?

I mean realistically its not like there is any need to honor a nations word is there?

No, there isn't. Nations "honor their word" when it is convenient to their intended policies to do so. Smart nations do not honor their word when it is detrimental to their policies to do so. Read your Macchiavelli.

If you want to be a squeaky liberal do-gooder about things, then perhaps it's best to consider not giving your national word unless there is a real need to doing so.

If you tell someone it's ok to stay in your house while you're on vacation, but you hear from your neighbor that they're ****ting on the living room carpet, sawing your furniture apart for firewood, and redecorating by removing a few interior walls, do you "keep your word?" and let them stay?

A lot of corrupt, dictatorial third-world lowlifes figured they could take the US for a ride by continuing to plunder and **** over their countries while hiding behind the "threat of communism" to get the US to serve their agendas. You can lump Thieu and Ky in among those.

[Pekka]

I would agree with that, leaving too early will result into .. the same crap that went on before, then you really have to ask yourself, was it worth the effort? Was it worth all the lives and injuries? If nothing changed?

But.. easier said than done. How long one would have to be, what would one have to do to begin with to leave behind a developing place, nation building that is happening in the boundaries of what can be called safe and controlled environment.

This I have no answer to but I think when the power vacuum is left there unattended, there will be hell to pay and the strongest one or the most violent one will fill that void.

[SlowwHand]

Re: Re: Soldiers say Iraq pullout would be devastating

Originally posted by Verto


Only when what they say supports your own sit-at-home belief, as you made quite clear when you belittled the opinions of soldiers calling for a withdrawal from Iraq.

I remembered when this started, and so many National Guardsmen were shocked that they actually were being called to serve. Not all, many.

You mean like them? No, I don't find their opinion relevant either.

[Proteus_MST]

I absolutely agree that pulling out would be the worst thing you could do.

You went there first place and now you have to stay until there is no danger that your pullout leads to civil war or the insurgents getting control of the state.

[Pekka]

I do agree to some extent, while I think it's pretty obvious, soldiers do fighting, they leave some of their friends there, they don't want to leave until everything is done.

However, there's been some disgusting shots made at Oerdin, and I don't mean you Sloww because I don't remember you doing that but some other posters have done it and I think it's pretty weak. Because he actually went there, also provided us with stories, risked his life and kept being true to himself all the time and coming back.

So while that opinion might differ from most, I do think that taking cheap shots and undermining that effort is no short of idiotism and disrespectful, after all he isn't one fo the keyboard warriors.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat


No, there isn't. Nations "honor their word" when it is convenient to their intended policies to do so. Smart nations do not honor their word when it is detrimental to their policies to do so. Read your Macchiavelli.

Given that we don't honor our word we havethelikes of Afghanistan and Sadaam massacres of Shiite and Kurds to thank. Add that to the millions dead in SE asia due the fall of Vietnam and our inability to react according to peace treaty and hell yeah good for us. Our boyz didn't get killed instead a bunch of rice eaters and brown skinned did but wtf? It served our purposes just fine. Save for the fact that no country in the world thinks us worthy of dealing with because at teh 11th hour we might decide it might not be in our best interests to honor those agreements. But I suppose as long as we got cash people will talk to us but never ever trust us. But hey thats just fine aint it?

If you want to be a squeaky liberal do-gooder about things, then perhaps it's best to consider not giving your national word unless there is a real need to doing so.

And that was my point no?

If you tell someone it's ok to stay in your house while you're on vacation, but you hear from your neighbor that they're ****ting on the living room carpet, sawing your furniture apart for firewood, and redecorating by removing a few interior walls, do you "keep your word?" and let them stay?

So you are sasying Vietnam was our living room ehh? Since when was it our property to begin with?

A lot of corrupt, dictatorial third-world lowlifes figured they could take the US for a ride by continuing to plunder and **** over their countries while hiding behind the "threat of communism" to get the US to serve their agendas. You can lump Thieu and Ky in among those.

And surprisingly enough as soon as they were allowed to fall apart the North Vietnamese regular army invaded with nary a fly over air support mission or even medical aid offered. Kudos to you Teddy Kennedy for denying even medical aid.

But I suppose the communist threat wasn't real at all?

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Originally posted by Pekka
However, there's been some disgusting shots made at Oerdin, and I don't mean you Sloww because I don't remember you doing that but some other posters have done it and I think it's pretty weak. Because he actually went there, also provided us with stories, risked his life and kept being true to himself all the time and coming back.

Agreed. Much as I like tweaking Oerdin, I respect him.

[Pekka]

Of course it doesn't mean or shouldn't mean that you can't argue with him or take him out if you see bad arguments or what ever. He might be the war veteran in real life but the fact is, he will never reach the level of my superiority. Just as an example..

[Verto]

Re: Re: Re: Soldiers say Iraq pullout would be devastating

Originally posted by SlowwHand


I remembered when this started, and so many National Guardsmen were shocked that they actually were being called to serve. Not all, many.

You mean like them? No, I don't find their opinion relevant either.

No, I mean like the 500+ soldiers that Che made a thread about LAST NIGHT.

Since then, the effort has quietly swelled to nearly 500 troops, and continues to grow. Organizers, including 22-year-old Marine Sgt. Liam Madden, say they are currently working to validate the identities of several hundred more troops who have signed on, and will send the validated collection of letters to the soldiers' respective congressional representatives in January.

The group already includes 76 officers, four of whom are colonels.

65 soldiers or 500, or a thousand, it is clear you don't give a rat's ass about anything that goes against this wannabe macho persona you have.

[Chemical Ollie]

It was wrong to go in, but it would be even worse to leave now. This will be a healthy lesson for all chicken-hawks out there.

[Elok]

Idunno. Is our presence there doing something constructive, or is it holding things down long enough for progress to be made by the people in charge? If not, we're basically just delaying the inevitable...but then, I don't know. I can only judge based on news reports, which seem to indicate a massive inter-ethnic bloodbath starting up right under our nose. Can we point to positive changes taking place? And the opinion that matters most: have we tried a scientific poll of the Iraqis determining whether they want us to stay or not?