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.

 

Can the U.S. survive the Iraq War?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 8 2006 @ 03:40 PM
link   
A few nights ago on Scarborough Country, Joe Scarborough brought up the issue of how Rosie O'Donnell and David Letterman were unable to answer the question of whether or not they wanted the U.S. to win the war in Iraq. One of the guests stated that that was the wrong question, and she was right.

I'm not sure the U.S. is really in any position to achieve any of its objectives any longer. What it comes down to now is, can the U.S. emerge from the Iraq War in at least the skin it went in with? Can we avoid economic, social, and institutional crisis and not start our long journey to collapse? At this point, absolutely nothing is up to us now, its really up to the gods, so to speak.

My feeling on the Iraq War have changed dramatically in the past year. I went from seeing some sort of victory in the future, but now I am very close to advocating a withdrawal within the next three to four years. It was not until that broadcast of Scarborough Country that I truly felt the urgency and the hopelessness of the situation. It was truly a scary moment.




posted on Dec, 8 2006 @ 03:47 PM
link   
Did the US come out of Vietnam with it's skin/identity intact?



Can we avoid economic, social, and institutional crisis and not start our long journey to collapse?


I hope you guys do as it will have global implications if you don't. This was one of the primary fears of those who were dead set against the war from the get go. Just look at Oil prices. If this conflict spreads, which it looks like is just a matter of time, the entire Oil Addicted World will feel the pinch. I truely hope it doesn't happen, and I don't say it with smug pride at having my earlier predictions come true either. I say it with dread and stark terror actually.

[edit on 8-12-2006 by sardion2000]



posted on Dec, 8 2006 @ 06:07 PM
link   
Whenever people complain about how America is scapegoated, I always say "That's the price of being the world's only superpower. Everything is truly OUR FAULT." And its the truth.

As for Vietnam, I don't know the answer to the question, maybe you could answer it for me. My thinking is, our standing in the world has already shot to hell. There's almost no way around that. But what about America's standing amongst Americans? That's certainly in our power. To me, its what the American people are feeling after its all over that's going to matter most. Are we going to put it behind us and do it right next time around? Instead of sulking and forgetting about the sacrifices our soldiers made, are we going to celebrate their lives and service? Are we going to learn that patriotism has nothing to do with shutting up and drinking in the official line?

When that last helicopter lifts off the roof of the multi-million dollar U.S. embassy, what is that last U.S. Marine going to see fading in the distance? Nearly a decade of pain, suffering, and demoralizing defeat? Or is he going to see a second chance at life, a second chance for a country to fulfill all that it was said it was going to do?

Philosophical, these questions can be.



posted on Dec, 8 2006 @ 09:24 PM
link   
If history can teach us anything, it is that foreign "occupants" (as viewed by THE PEOPLE) can never truly "defeat" the masses, and in our case - the insurgents.

Time is against us, and the insurgents know that. The longer we stay, the more demoralized we get, the more we add to our insane deficit, and the more our lawmakers feel pressured to withdraw.

I was all for taking out Saddam and turning Iraq into a democratic country, but no good can come of us staying there at this point... We've got to have a withdrawl plan - preferably 1 - 2 years. Whether or not it emboldens the insurgents is irrelevent... it's not worth having our entire nation collapse socially, politically, and economically.



posted on Dec, 8 2006 @ 09:29 PM
link   
The iraq war isn't going to cause america to collapse internally. Once the US leaves iraq, its going to forget all about it. The US survived Vietnam, where far more people were being killed, and far more people were rioting in the streets, and, at the same time, the civil rights movement was going on. The polarization that's occured over the Iraq War really doesn't amount to much.

BUT, the problem is, what happens when the US leaves, and jihadis take over in Iraq? Are they going to not attack the US? What if Iran gives them nukes, or nuke technology? Or what if they simply use their vast oil wealth to build nukes entirely on their own, its certainly not far fetched to think that radical muslims can do this, afterall, Iran is a radical islamic state and it has a nuke programme.

So the US certainly isn't going to be 'destroyed' or 'collapse' because of the dissent and difference of opinions over the Iraq War. BUT, it might very well suffer a terror attack that makes 911 look like the opening skirmish to a major, nuclear, world war.


k4rupt
If history can teach us anything, it is that foreign "occupants" (as viewed by THE PEOPLE) can never truly "defeat" the masses, and in our case - the insurgents.

Thats simply not true. Normally, invading imperial powers can and do stiffle and defeat guerilla armies.
There are two 'problems', depending on how you look at it, in the modern era. One is that the guerillas have incredible firepowre these days. Whereas in the past, if they wanted to 'hit' an advancing regular army column, they had to expose themselves physically and take some losses. Today, they can plant a bomb on the roadside, and knock over an apc. Thats not really too much of a problem, in a sense, because the US Army isn't being forced off the field by the insurgency. The vast majority of people targeted and killed by the insurgency are other iraqis, not US soldiers.
The real block to defeated insurgencies/guerillas/commandos is that, in the past, you'd use imperial and genocidal tactics. If men from a town revolted, you round up everyone in the town, kill every tenth man older than 12, and then ship off the women and children to slave farms. This is what 'decimation' literally means, 'systematically killing every tenth person'. We can't, for obvious reasons, 'decimate' entire iraqi towns. The best we can do is fire when fired upon, and at the position we're being fired at from.
Even harsh sounding, but not genocidal tactics, are unavailable to us. When the British were fighting the Boer kommandos, who were basically insurgents utterly devoted to forcing out the brits from their land, they couldn't do much in terms of killing the kommandos themselves. And these guys were so dedicated, that they were known as c.f. bitereinders, they're there until the end, even if its a hopeless situation. You don't defeated troops like that, like suicide bombers, by chasing them around and shooting at them. The brits rounded up everyone in any Boer town that the kommandos had passed through to get supplies, burned the town and its fields, slaughtered its livestock, and held the civilians in specially designed 'concentration camps' (not nazi era extermination camps, but rather camps where the population is 'concentrated', and then given food, medecine, etc, centrally). It pulled the rug out from under the kommandos, and they were utterly defeated, captured, and shipped off to prison camps for indefinite terms on the other side of the world.
But the US certainly can't, say, roll into Najaf, push everyone into trucks, and then unload them into a giant prison in the desert.

Even in the remote past in Iraq, the people that ran things would have to deal with insurgents. And they dealt with them by holding entire populations, and moving them to the other side of the country. So the babylonians take the jews when they conquered israel, burned down their cult center, and moved the troublemaking tribes into iraq, which was like the other side of the world for them. Hussein, btw, would do stuff like that. When the marsh arabs became a problem, he drained the swamps and relocated them. When he wanted to make sure that he had control of the oil in the north, he moved huge populations of sunni arabs into Kirkuk, where they still are today.

These kinds of tactics and strategies are simply unavailable to modern democracies like the US, and apparently they're the only way to defeat entrenched insurgencies. OTherwise, you just stand still while the public back home gets 'war weariness' and decides to leave 'because its hard'.

Its a fascinating situation, really, the entire basis of ultimate order in the world is essentially being turned upside down.

[edit on 8-12-2006 by Nygdan]



posted on Dec, 9 2006 @ 12:17 PM
link   


The iraq war isn't going to cause america to collapse internally. Once the US leaves iraq, its going to forget all about it. The US survived Vietnam, where far more people were being killed, and far more people were rioting in the streets, and, at the same time, the civil rights movement was going on. The polarization that's occured over the Iraq War really doesn't amount to much.

So the US certainly isn't going to be 'destroyed' or 'collapse' because of the dissent and difference of opinions over the Iraq War. BUT, it might very well suffer a terror attack that makes 911 look like the opening skirmish to a major, nuclear, world war.


Note that I NEVER stated the U.S. would collapse. I did say that if we don't survive this war, we can begin a road to a collapse. Two totally very different things. Acknowledge.

As for the genocidal tactics being the only way to defeat urgencies, my military history professor actually noted that yesterday and its definitely the truth. It only reaffirms the fact that the U.S. should never have went to war in Iraq in the first place. Also, if anybody in the political or military leadership studied the Peninsular War of 1808 - 1814, they'll see why the U.S. cannot win in Iraq and never could (unless it goes for a Final Solution). Even if we resort to a Final Solution, guess what, we fail all our other objectives immedietely and by default. Its a lose-lose situation.

What history is going to say about the Iraq War is that our glorious leadership failed on just about every level possible. We claim to learn from our mistakes and the mistakes of others, but it is so obvious we have only learned nothing, or the wrong lessons.



posted on Dec, 9 2006 @ 03:31 PM
link   
sure the USA will survive the present situation in Iraq...

You'll note that the Iraq Study Group is steadily presenting new strategies,
Rumsfeld resigned at Defense...all the old guard from the GB Sr Administration are being given charge of the Iraq situation.

the War phase will be diminished...the USA will not 'leave'
there are 14 mega-fortress military bases that a US standing army are prepared to maintain indefinitely, because Iraq ~whether they want it or not~ is now a protectorate (in deed if not by treaty) of the US/Anglo/Israeli empire.

the Baker IraqStudyGroup, will soon open the oil reserves to bids by private enterprises, even govt supported corps, from nations like Russia, China, Japan, France, Germany, & a bunch of NATO allies as suppliers to
these energy drilling-piping-refining-distribution that will soon operate in Iraq...under a 'loose' oversite by the Iraq Unity Govt.[a satrap govt for US/UK interests]

the shock&awe themes have been played out...
now its time for the elites to set up the economic corruption programme,
with many of the EU & NATO signees joining in stripping away the natural reserves in Iraq...and leaving it possible for enough of the 'crumbs'
to fall into the hands of the Iraq colony & the service industry personnel; the remaining indigenous population of Kurds/Sunni/Shia



posted on Dec, 9 2006 @ 08:57 PM
link   
I don't care what your political persuasion is, the US will not be able to cut and run in Iraq. The results would be disastrous. The US is under China shop rules and will not be allowed to leave Iraq in shambles. So, in order for the US to "win", which will we define as leaving Iraq stable a few things will have to happen. The US will have to make concessions to countries that we severely dislike like Iran or Syria, the US will have to make concessions to get *ALL* of Europe on board in a *MAJOR* way, and/or the US will have to institute a draft so it has the manpower to clean the mess up in Iraq. Even if the US does some or all of these things, it is not a guarantee that all hell will not break loose in the Middle East.



posted on Dec, 10 2006 @ 04:18 AM
link   
American cannot cut and run. your are correct.
America cannot stay, obviously.

What can america do?

Accept the fact, that any terrorist attack on you in the next decade will be JUSTIFIED!

Because you have not done anything to remove the ruthless government in charge, after the fact is known that IRaq was nothing but a rich mans quest... based on lies.


That, or prey to god you invent the time machine, and publically tell the world on sept10 that the government is about to allow a major terrorist attack to happen, simply to invade the middle east.


Hoepfully, that way the world will not ALLOW america to invade Iraq after they declare this attack a 'surprise'



posted on Dec, 10 2006 @ 06:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
that any terrorist attack on you in the next decade will be JUSTIFIED!


That's disgusting and wrong. It wasn't justified on 9/11. It wasn't justified in Bali. The terrorist train attacks in Spain and England were not justified. Neither were the embassy bombings. The planned terrorist attack for December 22nd against holiday shoppers wasn't justified. The planned bombing of 12 Airliners as they flew across the Pacific wasn't justified either. It wasn't justified then and it will not be justified in the future.

No radical islamic terrorist attack is justified. None. Nowhere and at no time.


[edit on 12/10/2006 by FlyersFan]



posted on Dec, 10 2006 @ 07:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
that any terrorist attack on you in the next decade will be JUSTIFIED!


That's disgusting and wrong. It wasn't justified on 9/11. It wasn't justified in Bali. The terrorist train attacks in Spain and England were not justified. Neither were the embassy bombings. The planned terrorist attack for December 22nd against holiday shoppers wasn't justified. The planned bombing of 12 Airliners as they flew across the Pacific wasn't justified either. It wasn't justified then and it will not be justified in the future.

No radical islamic terrorist attack is justified. None. Nowhere and at no time.


[edit on 12/10/2006 by FlyersFan]



Well, when americans feel it was justified to cause this much terror on IRAQ... i feel its justified if they haev some revenge.

Why is is justified for you to murder and mame innocent people and infrastructure?

Ahhhhhh, because its YOUR COUNTRY doing it.. right how did i miss that!

I hate innocent people dying, and yes.. I may be saying something i dont believe in,

bu you started this heap on Iraq.
Iraq wanted to talk and sort out the problems.. you went in and totally destroyed it.

and if they happen to retaliate ( as is what happens in a war )

your going to pull the gloves off.

DISGUSTING what your country, and its peolpe call justified!



posted on Dec, 10 2006 @ 03:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
Accept the fact, that any terrorist attack on you in the next decade will be JUSTIFIED!

The targeting and mass murder of civilians will be justified, becuase the US couldn't stop iraqis from murdering other iraqis.

That hardly seems correct.



posted on Dec, 10 2006 @ 07:23 PM
link   
Obviously, im takling about the US kiling people.


the US simply opened the door for IRAQI's to slaughter each other.

your the one who went in with shock and awe, and started bombing places from the skies above.

thats TERROR To ya know!



posted on Dec, 12 2006 @ 02:54 PM
link   
So, again, to be clear, american civilians deserve to be murdered en mass, because the american government invaded iraq and screwed up.



posted on Dec, 12 2006 @ 11:19 PM
link   
The american public do not deserve to be killed.

The Iraqi people DO NOT DESERVE to be killed.

but you cannot murder hundereds of thousnads of people,
totally destroy there country, there economy and their infrastructure..

then BLAME THEM WHEN THEY RETALIATE.

The governmnet deserves to be hung from there nads in townsquare...

but because they are so curropt, and willing to sacrifice you.. the innocent american....

your going to be the ones who bare the brunt of your governments illegial action.

You dont deserve it, neither did they.
BUt you were attacked, and you felt it was 'nessecary' and 'justified' to hit back at them..

so why isnt it justified for them to hit back and retalitate for your haneous crime?



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join