Sleuth Home - Message Boards - The Gumshoe Lounge

Jun-6-2006 19:55

Post your opinion her about the ongoing war in Iraq. And remember folks, everybody is entitled to an opinion so don't flame eachother for having opposite thoughts.

Constructive debating can be a nice way to overcome differences and not just widen the gap.

Jun-7-2006 12:47

Apart from the reasons why the war in Iraq got started, I must say I'm pretty stunned about the way the Pentagon is handling matters right now.

The troops of the alliance were well-prepared for a conventional war but don't seem to be trained to deal with guerilla and other forms of urban combat. It's amazing to see how the military (and political) leadership failed to predict the outcome of those events. In Vietnam the excuse was that most of the troops were draftsmen, but here we're dealing with an army of professionals.

Another thing the leadership failed to see is the fragmentation of the political landscape in Iraq after Saddam's regime was overthrown. Apart from defending themselves, the troops have to deal with the massive task of maintaining law & order while several factions are in a vigorous dispute of filling in the power gap.

The deployment of 130,000 is a mass operation and costs the American taxpayer buckloads of money. And yet, from a logistic point of view this number is barely adequate to endorse peace in a country the size of Iraq that also happens to be overwhelmed with weaponry.

All in all it gives an impression of an indecisive leadership that knew how to start this but sure as hell don't know how to end it.

Jun-8-2006 12:14

I am strongly in favor of the war. I know there have been problems and mishandlings over there (and here, too) but I still think we're on the right track.

Jun-8-2006 13:11

"The troops of the alliance were well-prepared for a conventional war but don't seem to be trained to deal with guerilla and other forms of urban combat. It's amazing to see how the military (and political) leadership failed to predict the outcome of those events. In Vietnam the excuse was that most of the troops were draftsmen, but here we're dealing with an army of professionals. "

Actually, Badass, our troops are well trained to fight urban warfare. It's fighting against terrorists which pose the problem. To paraphrase Winston Churchill, the problem does not lie in our troops having lack of courage or ability, but it lies in their virtue and restraint when engaged in this type of warfare. The current problem where those Marines who allegedly massacred some villagers after a roadside bombing is an example. 2000 years ago the ancient Romans would have annihilated the entire village and no one would have blinked an eye. It would have been expected. But now, it's shocking and unacceptable due to the West's Judeo Christian values.

Terrorists are not constrained by the laws of the Geneva Convention. We are. This puts us at a terrible disadvantage. Imagine engaged in a boxing match with someone who refuses to fight according to the rules of the Marquess of Queensberry. While you punch above the waist, this person repeatedly hits below the belt, hits after the bell rings, and even kicks you in the groin.

I supported this war for several reasons:

1. Saddam Hussein was a menace to the world and to the Middle East. He DID have WMDs, but the UN's ditherings gave him plenty of time to dispose of them. For those who don't think he ever had WMD's, what about the use of poison gas on the Kurds? What of all the gear they found which are for protection against WMDs? Why the sanctions? Not to mention the fact that he was also a murderous tyrant to his own people. He committed unspeakable atrocities and his people lived in third world conditions.

Jun-8-2006 13:24

2. An extreme response was necessary to 9/11. Creating a locus where one can engage in war not on our soil is necessary.

3. I hoped for democracy to take a foothold in the Middle East (besides Israel).

I agree that there have been many mistakes and oversights in the conduct of this war. But is any war fought perfectly? As another posted above, this is not a perfect world, and anyone who knows what combat is like can tell you that once the war starts, chaos reigns.

Also, someone else stated that no good has been done in Iraq. I profoundly disagree. Getting rid of Saddam Hussein was a good thing. Capturing him and bringing him to justice is another good thing.

You will NEVER hear positive news about Iraq from the media. They failed to report the following:

96% of Iraqi children under the age of 5 have received the first 2 series of polio vaccinations.

4.3 million Iraqi children were enrolled in primary school by mid October.

There are 1,192,000 cell phone subscribers in Iraq and phone use has gone up 158%.

Iraq has an independent media that consists of 75 radio stations, 180 newspapers and 10 television stations.

47 countries have reestablished their embassies in Iraq.

The Iraqi government currently employs 1.2 million Iraqi people.

3100 schools have been renovated, 364 schools are under rehabilitation, 263 schools are now under construction and 38 new schools have been built in Iraq.

Iraq's higher educational structure consists of 20 Universities, 46 Institutes or colleges and 4 research centers, all currently operating.

The Baghdad Stock Exchange opened in June of 2004.

2 candidates in the Iraqi presidential election had a televised debate recently.

Anyone hear about all this? Of course not. The media is doing all it can to undermine the war effort and only report negative news. Anyone who believes everything they say is a fool and is manipulated by them. I mistrust the media more than I mistrust the President.

Jun-8-2006 13:31

I posted on this already, then asked the Mods to delete it. It's an ugly war and I felt a post like this adds to the ugliness.
I feel physically sick reading comments posted here.
The biggest nation of WMD is the USA. They are the ONLY nation to ever use their weapons of mass destruction in slaughtering millions of innocent people.
Many documents and research that has allowed to be printed since the end of WWII showed that Harry Truman was aware of and did have other options in stopping the Japanese.
No one has made mention of the fact that these American troops CHOSE to join the military. The citizens of Iraq did NOT CHOOSE to be invaded.
And this statement: The current problem where those Marines who allegedly massacred some villagers after a roadside bombing is an example. 2000 years ago the ancient Romans would have annihilated the entire village and no one would have blinked an eye. It would have been expected. But now, it's shocking and unacceptable due to the West's Judeo Christian values.
CHRIST. There is a reason we chose to be bound to these "Judeo Christian values".
The Romans threw people to the lions and watched for entertainment.
Much like the US Death Penalty, one of the reasons the US won't ratify the World Court. One of the reason China thinks the USA is a hypocritical Western power.
I am not in anyway sticking up for the previous regime in Iraq, at least under Saddam Hussien terorism was virtually non-exsistant.
And as for the Kurds, the USA had every chance to help them out after the first Gulf War. Not to mention that the USA supports Turkey's regimes which is also very anti-krurdish.
The war in Iraq has created a breeding ground of hatred and intolerance for the USA.
And remember, the USA INVADED Iraq. The people are just fighting back as you might if your country was invaded.

Jun-8-2006 13:32

I always thought it was tragic that American's asked "Why does everyone hate us?"
Now I realise there is something more tragic. Hearing American's (including Military) uttering "I can understand why everyone hates us."

Jun-8-2006 13:36

An extreme response was necessary to 9/11. Creating a locus where one can engage in war not on our soil is necessary.
Right, so lets target people who had NOTHING to do with it.
By that logic, FDR, when Pearl Habour happened should have bombed the hell out of Australia.

3. I hoped for democracy to take a foothold in the Middle East (besides Israel).
Democracy???? INVADE a country and FORCE it on the people with a puppet government?
Fabulous, worked in Vietman, oh no, wait. It didn't.


96% of Iraqi children under the age of 5 have received the first 2 series of polio vaccinations.

4.3 million Iraqi children were enrolled in primary school by mid October.

There are 1,192,000 cell phone subscribers in Iraq and phone use has gone up 158%.

A lot of this has to do with sanctions that were imposed on Iraq by the USA! Countries could not give Iraq needed vaccines and the like.

Jun-8-2006 13:54

"Many documents and research that has allowed to be printed since the end of WWII showed that Harry Truman was aware of and did have other options in stopping the Japanese."

Please elucidate for us.

The sanctions were imposed by the UN, not just the US.

"at least under Saddam Hussien terorism was virtually non-exsistant. " (spelling errors are the author's)

It was??? How so? Again, please give some examples, this statement is not very clear.

Jun-8-2006 13:55

I agree with Atheling on #1! Saddam Hussein was caught because of the USA and because of the USA, them people were freed of his monstrous behavior! God Bless the USA!

Jun-8-2006 14:49

Just a simple question...

If liberating the Iraqi people from a tyrant such as Saddam Hussain was one of the main objectives, how come people in North Korea are still suffering from the dictatorship of Kim Yong-Il?

If the alleged possession of WDM's was one of the main issues to invade Iraq, how come the international community is now playing diplomatic tactic games with the Iranian regime that IMHO holds a far more dangerous and fanatic leader. Even though he was democratically elected...

What I'm trying to say is, by what standards did "they" judge to invade Iraq while there are a great deal of countries that could be invaded for the same reasons? I know, you can't be everywhere...but why Iraq?

And another thing...if the troops were well-prepared for a guerilla war, how come they completely "lost" it and created another My Lai? And let's not forget what happened in Abu Ghraib as well...

There's no such thing as a clean war but those last incidents are to be deeply regretted and undermine the legitimacy of this war. The recent killing of Al-Zarqawi could be hailed as a decisive turnpoint in the war on terrorism. I just wonder....if there was no war in Iraq, would there have been an Al-Zarqawi as well?