It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Do those of you who supported the war...

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 28 2006 @ 04:28 PM
link   
Do those of you who supported the war in Iraq believe that the coalition should reinforce existing troops in Iraq with further troops and expenditure in an effort to prevent civil war?

Do you think it would even make a difference?

I ask because I was wondering... even though I was(am) against the war for a number of reasons, I felt that once the suppressed multi ethnic/relgious tensions were released with the collapse of Saddam (one of my reasons against this meddling) , in order for any viable institutions to gain a foothold, there would have to be a presence there for a very long time... and I don't spite people for sake of argument... once the thing was done, if it is better to do the thing to the end rather than run out leaving chaos, better the devil you know... and maybe some good may comeof it all.

Having seen the degeneration of the situation in Iraq... probably (and ironically) as result of (or exacerbated at least by) the kind of Al-Qaida-esq action that the whole WoT is meant to tackle... can this be swung back?

Any ideas?

[I don't just ask those who supported the war explicitly, just that I want to avoid arguments against the whole war for the sake of them, as while I'd probably argee, it's not quite what I'm asking... I feel those who do/did support the war would have maybe given this question more thought themselves]

Q




posted on Feb, 28 2006 @ 04:39 PM
link   
It will not be any increase of troops unless is to take care of security risk for any of the US companies operating in Iraq.

Already our troops has been told to stay away from the civil unrest.

The sectarian fights will continue until they die down on their own, or when the Active Iraqi government take drastic measures to stop it.

But we all know that even they have problems with maintaining control and more to keep themselves alive.



posted on Feb, 28 2006 @ 04:59 PM
link   
the thing is though, this violence won't die down, as it is being fanned by outside influences, or in other instances fueled by years of pent up resentment...



posted on Feb, 28 2006 @ 05:20 PM
link   
I have noticed a distinct lessening of of fervor from those that once called people traitors if you didn't support the war in Iraq.

Qoelet, I too would like to hear the solutions to the apparent civil war from the war supporters.

I wonder if any of the war supporters will admit they just might have been wrong about Irag and the desenters just might have been right.

[edit on 28-2-2006 by whaaa]



posted on Feb, 28 2006 @ 05:37 PM
link   
Civil War can not be stopped by outside forces, but can be incited. As is the case here. It is up to the Iraqis to solve their own quarrels. This kind of violence can only burn itself out. Sooner or later someone will rise who can bring peace to this country from within, but I do not forsee anyone or any force from outside Iraq that can pacify the people. Its just not possible.



posted on Mar, 1 2006 @ 10:21 AM
link   
There were many informed, articulate and passionate war supporters on ATS at one time.

I for one would like to hear their take on the current situation unfolding now in the ME.

The question I would like the war supporters to answer; What next?

One thing I have noticed is that some of the onetime war supporters have tempered their criticisms of the "I told you so" people and may have even reviewed their stance.

[edit on 1-3-2006 by whaaa]



posted on Mar, 1 2006 @ 10:31 AM
link   
There is no way they could get enough reinforcements to have any real effect without a draft and even then they might not be enough to do anything.

By the time you drafted, trained and deployed enough people it could already be too late.

Besides nothing turns public opinion for the worse against a war like this then a draft

The smartest course of action would be trying to not get invloved and calm tensions as much as you can. The US cannot be seen as taking either side in civil war its a very touchy time.



posted on Mar, 1 2006 @ 10:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by whaaa
There were many informed, articulate and passionate war supporters on ATS at one time.

I for one would like to hear their take on the current situation unfolding now in the ME.

The question I would like the war supporters to answer; What next?

One thing I have noticed is that some of the onetime war supporters have tempered their criticisms of the "I told you so" people and may have even reviewed their stance.

[edit on 1-3-2006 by whaaa]


Next? Hmmm, I'm no fortune teller but I see the Iraq govt and security forces finally taking some initiative. I mean if they dont it will be the death of them. Politics cant solve this problem, as these militias dont seem to think along rational lines. As sad as it is the only language they speak is that of violent resolution to their problems. I'm sure there are those citizens of Iraq that want peace in their country, in fact I'm sure its a clear majority that do. The only question is, is where are they? Why doesnt anyone step up to the situation with some rational solutions for peace. This is why I believe that this situation will have to burn itself out, until someone finally does step up. Someone will inevitably have to sooner or later.



posted on Mar, 1 2006 @ 12:23 PM
link   


I have noticed a distinct lessening of of fervor from those that once called people traitors if you didn't support the war in Iraq.


Wel it's hard to argue that a majority of the population are "traitors".

It's becoming obvious to all but far right diehards that this war was a calamitous mistake. We've replaced a brutal but effectively contained regime with chaos and civil war. We've provided Iran with a major new ally. We've handed Al Quaeda all the political capital they could have hoped for. We've stretched our military nearly to the limit, and pushed our budget past it... none of which makes a case that Iraq has been in any sense a success.



posted on Mar, 4 2006 @ 09:52 AM
link   
Well aside from the few posts, it would seem that many so vocal on Iraq have become somewhat silent on the topic, unless it is to congratulate the arrest of some militant... and even they must be losing their sweetness...


Q



posted on Mar, 4 2006 @ 10:35 AM
link   
Q, I was just thinking the same thing
On the positive side of things; evidence
and logic may have carried the day.

I like to think that if the shoe were on the
other foot and the war had of had a decisive and
positive end, that I would have been man enough
to admit I was wrong, and could have taken the "Itold you so"
jabs with grace and style.



posted on Mar, 4 2006 @ 11:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by whaaa
I like to think that if the shoe were on the
other foot and the war had of had a decisive and
positive end, that I would have been man enough
to admit I was wrong, and could have taken the "Itold you so"
jabs with grace and style.


Even though I was vehemently against the whole thing, I would be happy to have been proved wrong... being cynical is nice and easy... but I don't think opposition tot he war could be simply cynicism. Too many devils in the detail with the Iraq situation.

I think the point is to remember why you feel passionately about the side of the arguement you are on...not the side itself. If you want the people to be living in peace and that happens... well top banana.

Q



posted on Mar, 4 2006 @ 11:43 AM
link   
The current unrest between factions in Iraq remind me of the situation in the Balkans after the fall of the USSR. There is probably nothing that can be done to stop it completely and it may be a necessary condition on the road to stability, but it cannot be allowed to persist. Iraq needs a stable democratic government and the world needs it, too. It's just going to take time.



posted on Mar, 4 2006 @ 11:48 AM
link   
The thing with the Balkans is that they split into various smaller nations...

If Iraq did the same (which lets face it would probably be the case should all out civil war break out) would this be a defeat of US/et al. objectives in Iraq?


Q



posted on Mar, 4 2006 @ 02:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Qoelet
If Iraq did the same (which lets face it would probably be the case should all out civil war break out) would this be a defeat of US/et al. objectives in Iraq?


I could be wrong about this but I think the current Iraq was formed by the British and French, pushing together various different groups into one country. In this context it might actually be a good thing for the country to fragment along more natural ethnic and religious lines. There would be violence in the short term but possibly three stable countries could emerge in the longer term.

With that in mind it could be considered a victory for the allies objectives, although not in the way they originally planned (or did they?
).



posted on Mar, 4 2006 @ 02:49 PM
link   
There might also emerge several religious or ethnic states under a secular federal authority.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join