Are we losing the war in Iraq?

Discussion in 'Politics & Current Events' started by superdave, Nov 8, 2003.

  1. superdave

    superdave Member+

    Jul 14, 1999
    VB, VA
    Club:
    DC United
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Thoughts?
     
  2. afgrijselijkheid

    Dec 29, 2002
    mokum
    Club:
    AFC Ajax
    where's the choice for "no, but we will never bring forth a stable nation"?
     
  3. oman

    oman Member

    Jan 7, 2000
    South of Frisconsin
    No. The boys are expendable.
     
  4. CrewDust

    CrewDust Member

    May 6, 1999
    Columbus, Ohio
    Club:
    Columbus Crew
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    We won the war in Iraq, we may be losing the peace.
     
  5. Ludahai

    Ludahai New Member

    Jun 22, 2001
    Taichung, Taiwan
    I don't know if I am getting a completely different picture of this from the Taiwanese press that y'all are getting from the American side of the Pacific. Here, there has been quite a lot of reporting of the positive accomplishments both in the north, and to a lesser extent in the south. From what I am seeing, there are a lot of of successes to brag about.

    It is rather unfortunate, even criminal, that the Saddam loyalists and terrorists (are they one and the same - perhaps so) are doing everything they can to hinder the development of the infrastructure and an indegenous democracy. These attacks only further justify the continued occupation of the country by coalition forces. However, it is pretty obvious that it isn't the welfare of the Iraqi people that these terrorists are looking out for. I think it is safe to say that the coalition soldiers on the ground have FAR MORE concern for the welfare of the Iraqi people than the terrorists.
     
  6. argentine soccer fan

    Staff Member

    Jan 18, 2001
    San Francisco Bay Area
    Club:
    CA Boca Juniors
    Nat'l Team:
    Argentina
    The only way we lose in Iraq is if the American people are unwilling to pay the price. There will be some inevitable casualties, due to the hit and run guerrilla tactics of the enemy. But I cannot imagine the US losing, because I think we are fighting a small minority of Baathist loyalists and terrorists.

    However if we cannot accept the casualties and we make it politically untenable to continue the effort, then we will lose. That is what the terrorists and reactionaries in Iraq are hoping for. Time will tell if they are right or wrong.
     
  7. afgrijselijkheid

    Dec 29, 2002
    mokum
    Club:
    AFC Ajax

    would you get a new song already?
     
  8. oman

    oman Member

    Jan 7, 2000
    South of Frisconsin
    The terrorists are hoping we disagree with argentinian soccer hack.

    Then we have lost.
     
  9. Scotty

    Scotty Member+

    Dec 15, 1999
    Campania
    If we are losing it is France's fault.
     
  10. JimmieLivealot

    JimmieLivealot New Member

    Oct 22, 2002
    Austin, TX
    My first choice was going to be check back in two months, but its going to take years to know if Iraq will develop into a stable state. The Kurds want their own country, or some kind of semi-autonomous thing, at least a substantial minority of Shiites will want to retain the privileges they enjoyed previously and I doubt the Sunnis are organized enough to have an agenda at all right now.

    There can be no doubt that what the US does will influence how Iraq ends up. However,the people of Iraq will have more to do with have the peace turns out than Administration policy.
     
  11. Mel Brennan

    Mel Brennan PLANITARCHIS' BANE

    Paris Saint Germain
    United States
    Apr 8, 2002
    Baltimore
    Club:
    Paris Saint Germain FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    What is a "stable nation?" Is it possible that we could leave Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld's definition of a stable nation in place, and still, in the view of many, leave Iraq a failed state?

    Absolutely. Indeed, most likely.
     
  12. Ferris

    Ferris New Member

    Mar 31, 2003
    Self-righteous garbage. The "many" would probably be the same people who would want to belittle the accomplishments of the Bush Administration, regardless of what they are. Iraq is already a "failed state", a disaster in human rights. The successful implementation of a democratic state in Iraq would automatically make it a stable nation in comparison (as any dictatorship is in reality completely unstable), and this goal would be the aim of any modern (post-Cold war) American administration regardless of party affiliation. The mistakes of past administrations in supporting right wing regimes and counter-revolutionaries is well documented. Both parties were responsible for this method of dealing with communism, and the U.S. is reaping the fruits of this labor in Afghanistan as well as in other parts of the world. We cannot change what has happened but it is in our dealings with Afghanistan and Iraq now that the resentment the U.S. has engendered will be mollified somewhat.
    What do you think the Bush Administation would do in Iraq that would qualify it as a success in their eyes and a failure in yours? Do you think they would go too far, or not far enough? Would they give too much power to the shiites and not the sunni or visa versa? Would they create a mini kurdish state and piss off the Turks, or ignore the plight of the kurds and create unrest in the north of Iraq? Or is democracy just a bad idea in general because it will inspire paranoia in neighboring muslim states?
    This is a bad analogy in some ways, but if the U.S. is as successful withIraq as with Japan after WWII, the re-construction will be viewed as a striking success. Many more Japanese civilians died as a result of U.S. bombing than Iraqis, and the infrastructure damage was comparable. If anything the Japanese had much more reason to hate us than the Iraqis, yet they were able to adapt to the changes and soon became one of the most powerful, affluent and free nations on earth. Obviously Japan and Iraq are very different (in both culture and circumstance), but ultimately it will be up to the Iraqis (as JimmyLivealot stated before) to decide how successful the new Iraqi state will be, not the Bush Administration.
     
  13. Dan Loney

    Dan Loney BigSoccer Supporter

    Mar 10, 2000
    Cincilluminati
    Club:
    Los Angeles Sol
    Nat'l Team:
    Philippines
    Or whether they exist.

    EDIT - just to make sure I'm clear. The administration takes us into hostile territory through a whole series of transparent lies, the commanders in the field consistently - one might say invariably - underestimate the potential resistance potential of a nation like Iraq, our diplomacy would be dignified by the term "gunboat," but it's up to me whether we win or not? Well, I vote we do win, how about that?

    Seriously, what is it about the right wing? It's as if the Columbus Crew blamed the fans for wanting them to fail, just so they would have a stick to beat Greg Andrulis with. That isn't how it works. I'm not rooting for George Bush to fail. I'm saying he's already failed. That makes me a good American, not a bad one. Resetting Van Halen's "only time will tell if we stand the test of time" won't help. Because, as Spinal Tap reminds us, "the more it stays the same, the less it changes."
     
  14. Ferris

    Ferris New Member

    Mar 31, 2003
    The administration has already accomplished much...whether these accomplishments are good or not is a matter of debate.
     
  15. Northcal19

    Northcal19 New Member

    Feb 18, 2000
    Celtic Tavern LODO (
    More like; "regardless of whether or not they exist."

    What accomplishments? Huge deficit spending? His tax cut? The protection of America; You know the worst homeland terrorist act in history happened on Dubya's watch. (I know, it was Bill Clinton's fault.) The successful international coalition he has built? The aggressive pursuit of corporate criminals? I mean they got Martha, even if "Kenny boy" is still dining at the Palm.

    Bush honestly thought that the war in Iraq was over when he pulled on his jump suit and had a pilot fly him onto that aircraft carrier with the "Mission Accomplished" banner.

    This country is less safe, has fewer civil liberties, has a much poorer international reputation, is economically in much worse circumstances since Bush took office. I don't think "belittleing" his accomplishments is the issue. It's more like: What are they?
     
  16. superdave

    superdave Member+

    Jul 14, 1999
    VB, VA
    Club:
    DC United
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Um, that's not what "failed state" means.
     
  17. Soccernova78

    Soccernova78 Member

    Mar 16, 2003
    Beyond The Infinite
    I chose the not sure option. Though I think it will take longer than 2 months to judge whether or not we are successful in the new main justification the administration has given for the war. If success is judged by the #1 reason we were given before the war (to protect us from Saddams WMD) then the action in Iraq has been almost meaningless since those WMD have been mostly non-existent. So the Bushies have pulled a bait and switch now stressing the transformation of the Iraqi government as the main rationale for our endeavor.

    As a result the formation of a functioning, stable, pro-American democracy will now be the standard by which U.S. achievement is measured. And if this is the case the early returns are not at all comforting. What's most disturbing is that it's becoming painfully clear that this administration has no idea what it's doing and seems to be making it up as they go along. What's especially tragic about this development is the fact that American soldiers are dying almost daily because of their incompetence and ineffective post war planning.

    Creating a democracy in Iraq was always a tall order and a reach IMO. And the way things have been handled thus far in Iraq doesn't exactly inspire confidence that we will be able to provide enough security to ensure that a flourishing democracy will take root there. So to sum up, it's a little early to tell but I'm not holding my breath.
     
  18. verybdog

    verybdog New Member

    Jun 29, 2001
    Houyhnhnms
    If USA is a country of dictatorship, I think there might be a hope to conquer Iraq.

    Given the fact that US' four year a term presidency and the fickleness of US voters, it's tough.
     
  19. superdave

    superdave Member+

    Jul 14, 1999
    VB, VA
    Club:
    DC United
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A14024-2003Nov7.html
     
  20. ElJefe

    ElJefe Moderator
    Staff Member

    Feb 16, 1999
    Colorful Colorado
    Club:
    FC Dallas
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    What about the people who hated Saddam, but now want to get the foreign occupiers out of their country?
     
  21. superdave

    superdave Member+

    Jul 14, 1999
    VB, VA
    Club:
    DC United
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Operation Iron Hammer, the emergency meetings with the Bremer, and the new plan for Iraq pretty much answer this question. At the time it was asked, we were losing the war. Hopefully, that's changed now.
     

Share This Page