Second Chances

[yesman065]

Gee, I'll bite - US the U.S

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

How do you suppose these would be bygones, though? I do not suppose our foes would do so, and can't imagine why you'd suppose it. Getting this war expeditiously lost would mean what, ten years down the road, or twenty? World War One set up World War Two, you know. These wars have been posited as a continent-wide European civil war in two phases, at bottom.

Then it was posited wrongly. WW I & WW II in Europe were both wars between fascist states for the control of the rest of the world.

We're after stability enough to permit economic development there, in a place kept from economic development by states unconcerned with it, and in especial Iraq. We don't get that, we're in big and chronic trouble.

Why? Why would we be in big trouble there? The only reason to be in big trouble there is to be there, uninvited.

So why do something to set up a greater and more ruinous war later on? Isn't it just plain stupid to seek a substitute for victory? Successful American foreign policy, especially dealing with countries so little connected with the wealth-producing powers of the global economy as the ones we're currently engaged in, calls for victory, particularly in the making of future grand alliances. If we don't get the victory now, we'll have to get one later -- and for those wringing their hands over the cost, what is the cost later?

Only if you're so blind as to think we must conquer the whole world. That's neither a necessity not a reasonable goal. Do you really think the Arabs will ever be organized enough to be a threat to the west? Terrorists, maybe, but an organized threat? No way. And as we've seen, democracy does not guarantee no terrorists... we have plenty of them here, in Japan, England and everywhere else in the world. terrorists are just a half assed excuse for pushing your style of fascism.

I'm unimpressed with the "patriotism" of the dissent also. It is almost entirely based on the gut feeling that "America must lose, especially to non-democracies, because we're democratic and America. Whatever we do, we mustn't ever try and win a fight with a dictatorship, a band of thugs, or really anybody." As you know, I regard this sort of thinking as idiotic in a democrat, and superbly in one's overall interest if one is a fascist.

Of course your unimpressed, your military style blinders prevent you from seeing anything but, my country, right or wrong, my orders, right or wrong, my opinion, right or wrong. That fer me or agin me attitude, won't permit you to see any path except forcing everyone to fall in step. That's the exact same way Hitler, Stalin, Castro and Mao, felt. What we must not do is not, "not lose fights with dictators", but not start fights with dictators. If they start it, by all means destroy them, but no wars based on bullshit preemptive excuses.

I also don't buy the idea that one can only use an identical ideology to defeat an ideology, nor that one is in danger of adopting a similar ideology to the one being fought against. Cases in point: the Cold War, World War Two, and the American Civil War, as well as the American Revolution, where George III's Britain failed to see it was engaged in an ideological struggle (not having fought one since about 1649) and never caught up.

Now that's just silly. If the ideologies are the same, why fight?

How come nobody here but me is spelling "delusional" correctly? It has no connection etymologically with illusions.

Maybe it's because you're the only delusional one here... but that said, show me where I've spelled it wrong.

[piercehawkeye45]

If we want to win the war in Iraq there is only one way I can see it happening. First, we do what xoxoxoBruce has suggested and start working with the insurgent nationalists to get rid of Al Qaeda. The second we defeat Al Qaeda, we get the fuck out because those nationalists will turn against us (watch the end of the first video). If we are not going to work with the nationalists or not give full effort, we might as well leave because are doing nothing but hurting the Iraqis.

[Griff]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

...so who'll be blamed if there's utter carnage after we're gone?

Too bad you guys learned that lesson so recently, we could've avoided the whole engagement.

[Undertoad]

Nobody gets away, my friend, least of all the disengagers; if we don't sign Kyoto who will be blamed?

People with a brain?

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by piercehawkeye45

First, we do what xoxoxoBruce has suggested and start working with the insurgent nationalists to get rid of Al Qaeda.

Let me clarify, this is not my suggestion. I am merely passing along what Michael Yon tells me started in April, with excellent results.

I suggest we LEAVE!
Without stealing any oil or natural gas, of course.

[piercehawkeye45]

I have been leaving for a while but the 1920 Revolution Brigade is really the only good news I've heard in a while. Too bad the little boy has already cried wolf a few times already....

We will still have to stay for a while so we might as well see how it goes. If that goes well then we should keep on that track, if it fails, gets our asses out of there. I would really like to see good Iraqi-US relations after this conflict but unfortunately with the guys in charge, I don't have high hopes.

[yesman065]

Originally Posted by piercehawkeye45

I would really like to see good Iraqi-US relations after this conflict but unfortunately with the guys in charge, I don't have high hopes.

Not to worry - if we withdraw anytime soon - they'll all be dead anyway.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by piercehawkeye45

I have been leaving for a while but the 1920 Revolution Brigade is really the only good news I've heard in a while. Too bad the little boy has already cried wolf a few times already....

We will still have to stay for a while so we might as well see how it goes. If that goes well then we should keep on that track, if it fails, gets our asses out of there. I would really like to see good Iraqi-US relations after this conflict but unfortunately with the guys in charge, I don't have high hopes.

I think the last four years proves we can't do it. That said, I think if the 1920s can rally the support of the majority, they can do it fairly quickly. Not put an end to all dissension, but make the Iraqi government strong enough to handle it on their own. I've got my fingers crossed.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

So let's play a few chess moves ahead for once.

Madeline Albright took responsibility for the death of 500,000 Iraqi children under sanctions...

...and most Americans blame Bush, most non-Americans blame all the US for the deaths during the whole current fiasco...

...so who'll be blamed if there's utter carnage after we're gone?

But she still has not taken responsibility for the 800,000 killed in 4 months in Rawanda. They ignored it.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

I think the last four years proves we can't do it. That said, I think if the 1920s can rally the support of the majority, they can do it fairly quickly. Not put an end to all dissension, but make the Iraqi government strong enough to handle it on their own. I've got my fingers crossed.

They don't have many chances left to do it. The pressure is really on. Iran is rubbing their hands and enjoying the show as they throw their own healthy dose of fuel on the fire. The next 6 months will be very interesting.

[piercehawkeye45]

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/16/wo...ewanted=1&_r=1

He listed the insurgent groups he knows, including the 1920s Revolutionary Brigade, the Islamic Army and Ansar al-Sunna, a faction known for gruesome beheadings.

“All of them I am in touch with,” he said. “They are waiting to see if my experience will succeed. If it succeeds, they will adopt it. But if it doesn’t, it will cause confrontation.”

Yes, the pressure is on and it is a real hit or miss.

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

Iran is rubbing their hands and enjoying the show as they throw their own healthy dose of fuel on the fire.

Iran doesn't have as much influence as you think. Most of the violence comes from Saudi Arabia.

The next 6 months will be very interesting.

Yes, very.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Our best hope is the word has/will spread among the Iraqis that the areas where al Qaeda has been in control, even for a short period, has been very unpleasant for the people. Even the ones that haven't been killed or maimed.