there are a lot of foxes in here ...


anyway, I agree with a lot on here. defensive force, not world police or humanitarian force. Imagine how secure our borders would be if our million world wide troops came home and stopped illegal immigration and played catch and release with the current illegals in the country (with some discretion).


Bring the troops home to their families, let them do their job on U.S. soil like it was suppose to be. If there is a world war type conflict, then, we evaluate both sides and what led to it and pick who is just in the conflict.


No reason for our citizens to be dieing in another country just because they wear a spiffy uniform. Especially for a war that was unconstitutional ... shouldn't they be resisting by saying their utmost duty is to protect and uphold the constitution, so, violating that is a bigger offense than violating an order from a law-breaking commander-in-chief?

Anyone who thinks "we are winning" is a fool.

After 5 years of fighting, the military/political situation is still the same as May 2003:
* The Iraqi forces continue to be useless, they cannot operate on their own or control that country, they can't even hold the capital city-Baghdad.
* The Iraqi government which hides in the fortified "greenzone" (they can't venture outside of it for long or they'll be dead) does not control these security forces-which are corrupt and infiltrated by milities and insurgents.
* The US is holed up in the "green zone" which is the only part of the country that you don't have to worry about a roadside bomb or ambush, it is rocketed and mortared daily.
* The US has recently had to increase it's force level by 30,000; they will now have to reduce back down having accomplished basically nothing.


The one thing RR is fooled into believing is progress is actually a sham:

Tribes and insurgent groups are making alliences with the US Military to fight Alqueda: Although there has been some cooperation, all these insurgent groups continue to attack the US forces AND they have used their cooperation with the US to conduct sectarian violence. The US is actually cooperating with groups that attack them and aresworn to overthrow the government in Bagdad that the US installed! The shiite militias have been annoyed by US cooperation with groups like 1920's and have increased attacks.

This war will continue w/o end; harming Americas middle class and costing billions in debt until it breaks both America's military and it's economic success..it must end in the next few years; it cannot go on like this for 5 more years when 65% of Americans and pretty much all Iraqi's want the US out!

Originally posted by RRconservative
How's this for the newest anti-war motto....

We are winning...so let's quit!

If you want the troops to come home, let them finish their job! Otherwise the situation will worsen, and we will have to go back.

[edit on 12-10-2007 by pkspeaker]

Originally posted by FreeThinkerIdealist
Imagine how secure our borders would be if our million world wide troops came home and stopped illegal immigration and played catch and release with the current illegals in the country (with some discretion).

That's a cop/border guard job, not a job for the US military.

Originally posted by FreeThinkerIdealist
Bring the troops home to their families, let them do their job on U.S. soil like it was suppose to be.

I like to think of Iraq as a big terrorist bug zapper, and I'd rather be fighting them there, and not in downtown Lubbock, TX.


I agree that many mistakes were made in Iraq. Tommy Franks went there with a very lean force. They kicked major ass, but they weren't big enough to handle the occupation of the country afterwards.

I think we only paid lipservice to the transition after the war and the power vaccum that was created and that Sadr stepped into, we screwed up by disbanding the Iraqi Army, the 4ID (and others) were using some heavy handed, conventional Army mindset and tactics that weren't needed, and some other things.

There are good things being done in Iraq. Unfortunately, the MSM would rather concentrate on US deaths (not mentioning how many bad guys we stuffed into bags that day) or civilians that are killed (and the US doesn't intentionally go about killing civilians, regardless about what you might read here and on other forums. Bad guys use them to create an illiusion of normality for anyone observing them, and a shield to protect them when the fighting starts). Anything good is simply put down as "US/Bush propaganda", which is a discredit to the troops there.

It doesn't matter at this time what brought us to Iraq. Did they have WMDs? Maybe. I saw a boat load of traffic crossing the border between Iraq and Syria. I'm sure that it wasn't Mom and Dad Iraqi taking a weekend trip. Something was being moved.

Saddam and his sons were #birds. They deserved what they had coming to them. They tortured and murdered their own people like it was going out of style. I'm glad they're dead, but we need to stay there and make sure that the new government can run itself and country.

It really all boils down to one main point:

We broke Iraq. We need to stay and fix it. Victory or Death. Simple as that.

Originally posted by jerico65
Victory or Death. Simple as that.

And we see why your logic is not at all applicable to a republic or any sort of people that wishes to be prosperous.

Of cource the thing about a bug zapper is the bugs never stop coming..but the war in Iraq does much more damage to the US military and the long term American economy (helloe-houseing market crash, inflation, steeper rents!) than it does to this endless army of insurgents that blow up american vehicles and shell their bases everyday, in fact the US military can't really do any damage to it, considering it's individules packed with weapons strapped on their backs, and add to that the fact that they have these safe havens in Iran and Syria where they can always regroup and send another battalion thru to launch attacks..

And here we see this other ridiculous falacy often heard from conservative pundits-this notion that you fight them there and so you won't have to fight in downtown Lubbock..obviously these 'terrorists' that would attack the US will not be insurgents fireing AK-47s, rocket propelled granades..it would be a single bomb or 9/11 type attack, the Iraq war only increases the chances of this as the American war on that country murders 700,000 of their people and expells 2,000,000 .. that supports the logic of the terrorist that would come to America with a suitcase nuke or hijack a plane or whatever..there is no conceivable way the Iraq war reduces the risk of such things.

Why is securing our border a 'cop' job?

If we are worried about terrorists sneaking in and carrying devices with them, then, would it not be national security and part of the 'war' on terror to close our borders and patrol them with troops? Of course, allowing legal traffic through.

Border guards should be at border crossings ...

that is, unless you want to call of the war on terror altogether, then that is fine. No war, no terrorists, no need to stop terrorists that don't exist anymore from crossing the border.


I see things being picked and chosen for impact and agendas ... just listen, don't think ... the media and servants of the public are playing an excellent game of chess with the public ... words plays, positioning of pawns ... it is all quite beautiful in a demented way.


But, think what you want, for you are free to do so. I am not sitting here fretting about it, I live my life in happiness, I feel for the troops risking their lives and the innocents that are dieing by 'mistake' ... I have sent letters and such, so I have done what I can ... I will let you do what you feel is right.

Originally posted by Johnmike
And we see why your logic is not at all applicable to a republic or any sort of people that wishes to be prosperous.

I have the logic of someone that's been in the fight since October 2001. I believe in total victory against the enemy. I believe in fighting a war until it's won, not trying to appease the people that are trying to kill us.

Freethinkeridealist: It's always been a "cop job" to secure the border. I have no problem militarizing the border, but I'm sure a bunch of people would have a fit if we did.

And I agree with you 100%; things are being cherry picked by the media. "5 US troops killed today" is always plastered on the newspaper, but not that Civil Affairs opened a school, or that Special Forces stood up a trained unit. Or that when those 5 troops were killed, they killed 20 of the enemy and wiped out a terrorist cell in the process.

pkspeaker: Of course they have safe havens in Syria and Iran. Of course, if the military has a press conference about that, everyone freaks and geeks and screams, "Bush wants to expand the war to Iran!!!!"

Originally posted by jerico65

And I agree with you 100%; things are being cherry picked by the media. "5 US troops killed today" is always plastered on the newspaper.

Good, and let them b*stards in the US Republican Party, and the British Labour Party that started this mess die a death of one thousand cuts.

Originally posted by jerico65
I have the logic of someone that's been in the fight since October 2001. I believe in total victory against the enemy. I believe in fighting a war until it's won, not trying to appease the people that are trying to kill us.

excuse me, but the people of iraq trying to kill american soldiers aren't trying to kill US. they're only trying to kill the people invading their country that blew everything in it to hell.

if they left and apologized for the wanton destruction, things would probably cool off towards americans.

And I agree with you 100%; things are being cherry picked by the media. "5 US troops killed today" is always plastered on the newspaper, but not that Civil Affairs opened a school, or that Special Forces stood up a trained unit. Or that when those 5 troops were killed, they killed 20 of the enemy and wiped out a terrorist cell in the process.

and nobody speaks of the 30 civilians killed in the same attack...
that's also cherry-picked by the media
nobody points out that when we attacked a hospital in fallujah, we committed a direct war crime that resulted in the deaths of civilians... which would lead to a punishment by death to the president under the US war crimes act.
nobody brings that up at all
nobody mentions how the iraqis level of nutrition has been going down
or how many are starving

we just hear about what we care about, how many of our people are dying

well, screw OUR people, i want to know how many people died total. our people are important, but they aren't more important than any other people

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul

excuse me, but the people of iraq trying to kill american soldiers aren't trying to kill US. they're only trying to kill the people invading their country that blew everything in it to hell.

if they left and apologized for the wanton destruction, things would probably cool off towards americans.

Sure. And the Iranians and Syrians, who are there stirring up trouble, will just apologize and head back home, too. Right??

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
and nobody speaks of the 30 civilians killed in the same attack...
that's also cherry-picked by the media
nobody points out that when we attacked a hospital in fallujah, we committed a direct war crime that resulted in the deaths of civilians... which would lead to a punishment by death to the president under the US war crimes act.
nobody brings that up at all
nobody mentions how the iraqis level of nutrition has been going down
or how many are starving

we just hear about what we care about, how many of our people are dying

well, screw OUR people, i want to know how many people died total. our people are important, but they aren't more important than any other people

Civilian casualities are always reported by the media. What isn't reported is that the insurgents use civilians as shields. Since day one of this war, US forces had to contend with the enemy firing on troops while wearing civilian clothes, firing from hospitals, mosques, etc. That hospital in Fallujah was suspected of having spotters on the roof.

The press doesn't report US casualities because they care. They do it because they love to show how bad things are and how "futile" it is to fight in Iraq. If they cared about the troops, on the front page of the papers would be the story of Lt Michael P. Murphy, SFC Paul Smith, or Corporal Jason Dunham.

The real reason Bush doesn't expand the war to Iran is that the US is militarily contained in Iraq, if they try to attack these 'safe-havens' in Iran, Iran will unleash devastating missile attacks which would break the US military in Iraq..the only thing stopping Bush from attacking Iran is Bush and his military advisors, just like how the US could not attack China or Russia during the Vietnam war.. since the end of WWII there is no 'total victory' against the enemy and it's just a matter of time before Iraq has to be lost.

Originally posted by jerico65

Originally posted by Johnmike
And we see why your logic is not at all applicable to a republic or any sort of people that wishes to be prosperous.

I have the logic of someone that's been in the fight since October 2001. I believe in total victory against the enemy. I believe in fighting a war until it's won, not trying to appease the people that are trying to kill us.

pkspeaker: Of course they have safe havens in Syria and Iran. Of course, if the military has a press conference about that, everyone freaks and geeks and screams, "Bush wants to expand the war to Iran!!!!"

Originally posted by pkspeaker
The real reason Bush doesn't expand the war to Iran is that the US is militarily contained in Iraq, if they try to attack these 'safe-havens' in Iran, Iran will unleash devastating missile attacks which would break the US military in Iraq..the only thing stopping Bush from attacking Iran is Bush and his military advisors, just like how the US could not attack China or Russia during the Vietnam war.. since the end of WWII there is no 'total victory' against the enemy and it's just a matter of time before Iraq has to be lost.

Sorry, wars don't have to be lost. They can be won, like this one can.

Iran will launch a devastating missile attack which would break the US military? Hmmmm....don't think so. Iran isn't that stupid. Would it hurt the troops in Iraq? Yep, sure would. Then we would hand Iran their butt in a hubcap. Then things would really escalate out of control.

People fail to realize that the US military, or any military for that matter, aren't looking for a war to fight. We usually get pitched into it by the politicians.

From my perspective... A military should ONLY be used defensively and to protect ones own soil, or maybe to assist your allies in a major crisis.

Lets face it, Iraq was NOT a threat to America. The troops there are being used for some one else's profits, not to defend the country.