Iraqi's just need to get with the program

Don't you think if the Iraqi militants were smart they would stop blowing themselves and their supporters up and get in with the new government system? They could start sending their electable puppets into office just like the criminals do here in the US. Seriously, you would think if they wanted peace instead of US troops running around daily, getting bombed from above that they would be working their butts off to get them outta there. Proactive and NOT reactive? Why is the quickest and most simple solution not in play? I just don't get it.

Maybe they see our system as the corrupt POS it really is, and they want no part of it? Did you ever think of that?

If you were a Muslim living in the Middle East and unemployed what could be better than killing infidels for a salary. The average age for these religious and political soliders is probally less than twentyfive years of age.
These solider are being recurited from all over the Middle East and lets not forget the freedom fighters home grown in Iraq.
Wether they live or die they all becomes heros for the cause of liberation from the Crusaders.
The average Iraqi citizens feels insulted that his Nation has been occupied by the infidels and would perfere serfdum be restored to there country.

and the last Iraqi system was better? You ever look at all the protests they have now? ....They wernt allowed to do that before

flycatch,

The ransom for some of these militant leaders is in the millions of dollars! Thats one hell of a retirement plan if you ask me!

Do what Hitler did, use democracy to gain power then destroy it.

Originally posted by build319Seriously, you would think if they wanted peace instead of US troops running around daily, getting bombed from above that they would be working their butts off to get them outta there.

They are aware of the fact that American troops only leave when they lose a war not when they win.

They've seen that there are still troops in Japan, Germany, South Korea and other places after more than 50 years and are probably worried about a continued presence of US troops in Iraq and the influence that may have on the Middle East.

Originally posted by AceOfBase
They've seen that there are still troops in Japan, Germany, South Korea and other places after more than 50 years and are probably worried about a continued presence of US troops in Iraq and the influence that may have on the Middle East.

Excellent point but most of those countries could just ask us to leave and we would have to if they put enough pressure on us.

Originally posted by build319
Excellent point but most of those countries could just ask us to leave and we would have to if they put enough pressure on us.

Yeah right! Do you really think so? They don't have a choice, as far as the US is concerned.

Originally posted by build319
Excellent point but most of those countries could just ask us to leave and we would have to if they put enough pressure on us.

I don't think it's that easy.
It took a long time for a withdrawal from France.
The people of Okinawa have been protesting for years and they haven't pulled out of there yet.

Here's the most recent protest:
Massive protest in Okinawa over military bases.

Originally posted by build319
Excellent point but most of those countries could just ask us to leave and we would have to if they put enough pressure on us.

Why US not hold a referendum to see whether Iraqi people want US stay?

the Puppet government has not credibility and authority.

The middle east fighters or "terrorist" and "radicals Islamic" as US tag them, will never bend to the actions of US and as long as they breathe, they will fight to death.

This is a concept that most "Christian" Americans will never be able to understand. In order to seek their point of view you have to thinks like them, as long as US keep trying to bend them to its �democratic� views they will never surrender.

[edit on 16-9-2004 by marg6043]

Originally posted by zcheng
Why US not hold a referendum to see whether Iraqi people want US stay?

the Puppet government has not credibility and authority.

I think we have to wait until after the elections for that.
As much as I would like the war to end, it'll have to wait until after the Jauary elections at the earliest or it will really fall apart.

Originally posted by AceOfBase

I think we have to wait until after the elections for that.
As much as I would like the war to end, it'll have to wait until after the Jauary elections at the earliest or it will really fall apart.

US is just buying some more time and hope by then the Resistance will die down. It will be quite the opposite. As US building over 18 huge millitary bases in Iraq, I do not see how US will leave Iraq in the foreseeable future.

US will withdraw from Iraq, unless Iraqi Resistance defeated the invaders and occupiers. US will leave, not because it want to, but because it has to. I see the day coming soon. Peace upon those to die in Iraq. I have no sympathy for invaders.

The January elections will be very violent just because US is part of it. The citizens will never acept any candidate that win to be legit, just remeber that.

Im afraid the violence will escalate during that time.

www.nytimes.com...

Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said Friday that violence would intensify in Iraq as elections scheduled there for January approach and insurgents try to derail the country's nascent political process.

Why are they not getting with the program should be your question. Why do they feel the need to fight against occupying troops? Here's a few reasons for you.

nytimes.com...

A classified National Intelligence Estimate prepared for President Bush in late July spells out a dark assessment of prospects for Iraq, government officials said Wednesday.

According to this story, the war is not going well, and Joeseph Biden, a Senator from Delaware, ends the story saying, "The president has frequently described Iraq as, quote, 'the central front of the war on terror,' " Mr. Biden went on. "Well by that definition, success in Iraq is a key standard by which to measure the war on terror. And by that measure, I think the war on terror is in trouble."

nytimes.com...

According to this story, Maj. Gen. Peter Chiarelli, the commander of American forces in Iraq, recently tried to explain the deaths of Iraqi civilians by his men.

The answer, the general said, lay in the grim necessities of the fight, a duel between Iraqi insurgents who had crippled a Bradley armored vehicle and two American helicopters. Mixed in with the insurgents were a number of civilians. The helicopters loosed their rockets only after they had taken fire themselves, General Chiarelli said, from somewhere in the crowd.

"We wanted to explain, particularly to the Iraqi people, that we do everything we can to eliminate collateral damage."

Mistakes happen in war, and it is an unfortunate circumstance, but imagine if an unprovoked group of people came into this country and killed a bunch of civilians. Oh, right, that already happened.

Now, put your anger hats away, I am not equating America with terrorists. I am simply saying that Iraq never once threatened us or fired a shot our way, except for when we invaded them back in the early '90's. I guess you could also make the case that we did some provoking to the Taliban when Clinton sent all of those cruise missiles over there. Either way, when those planes hit the towers, I didn't feel like we had done anything to hurt al-Quaeda before that.

Another thing a lot of people don't realize is the current state of affairs in Iraq.

www.informationclearinghouse.info...

This story is about the recent killing of Iraqi police recruits.

"What happened here has really got nothing to do with Islam," said Rafid Ahmed, whose shop in Al-Karkh was destroyed.

"Why are these people targeting Iraqi police recruits? They just want to get a salary because they are unemployed," he said. "The people who did this are terrorists."

In the run-up to the January elections, Iraq's pro-US interim prime minister, Ayad Allawi, faces some stark choices. He and the US military can try to reoccupy the towns they have abandoned, or accept that there is little prospect of the polls taking place in much of Iraq's Sunni Muslim heartland.

www.guardian.co.uk...

An oil pipeline was destroyed in Iraq on Tuesday.

www.wqow.com...

An Eau Claire man working in Iraq says the presidential candidates are not taking the war in Iraq seriously and the media is letting that slide. Former Eau Claire City Council President Wallace Rogers says that's the impression he got while home on leave. Rogers is back in the Middle East. He says what is going on there is very different from the picture painted by the American media.

english.aljazeera.net...

Dr Khamis al-Saad, general director of Ramadi hospital, told Aljazeera that 11 people, including a woman and children, were killed and another 18 wounded under US fire on Monday.

Ambulances and medical teams were targeted by US snipers in different areas of Ramadi, particularly near hospitals for women and children, al-Saad said.

I could go on and on, but they have legitimate reasons for not liking us being there. What we need is a re-thinking of troop deployments, and we really, really need to extend a hand to the European countries, let them in on the oil contracts, and get their help in Iraq.

Originally posted by AceOfBase
They are aware of the fact that American troops only leave when they lose a war not when they win.

They've seen that there are still troops in Japan, Germany, South Korea and other places after more than 50 years and are probably worried about a continued presence of US troops in Iraq and the influence that may have on the Middle East.

All of those places WANT us to be there - it is a HUGE boost to their economy plus in the case of SK and to a lesser extent Japan, it provides security from a guy who goes by the name Kim.

Originally posted by American Mad Man
All of those places WANT us to be there - it is a HUGE boost to their economy plus in the case of SK and to a lesser extent Japan, it provides security from a guy who goes by the name Kim.

Why US still station so many troops in Germany?

Originally posted by American Mad Man
All of those places WANT us to be there - it is a HUGE boost to their economy plus in the case of SK and to a lesser extent Japan, it provides security from a guy who goes by the name Kim.

Read my thread on Okinawa, it shows that the government of Japan pays almost all of the expenses to support the US troops, leaving them out of pocket by more than $4 billion per year.

The only thing the US pays for are the salaries.

I'm not sure what the situations are like in Germany and South Korea as far as who pays for housing and other expenses.

As far as who wants you there and who doesn't, the South Koreans may inded want you there (although there are some there who don't) but I wouldn't say for sure that all of the other countries do.

As I said earlier, there have been numerous protests from the people of Okinawa.
There were also protests in Germany calling for the bases there to be closed, especially after the Iraq war.

[edit on 16-9-2004 by AceOfBase]

Originally posted by RockerDom
Either way, when those planes hit the towers, I didn't feel like we had done anything to hurt al-Quaeda before that.

While I agree with your analysis about the Iraqi's being enraged about the U.S. occupation, there is one point that needs to be examined a bit further. Al Qaeda, which has now moved into Iraq since our invasion, will support the insurgents and will never stop attacking the U.S. & western interests.

Their hatred of us is not something that started on 9/11 or because of Clinton's cruise missiles--if you remember, they attacked us before--the first WTC bombing was in 1993. Al Qaeda is defending what they feel is an attack on the Muslim world. They view western policies towards the Middle East, particularly the policy-making of the U.S.--as a direct act of of jihad against the Muslim religion. The goal of Al Qaeda has been clearly stated over the years--to put an end to western aid in Israel and eliminate the state of Israel completely; remove all Western military forces from the Middle East and all Muslim lands; end U.S. support for the oppression of Muslims by Russia, China, & India; the end of U.S. support of the "westernized" regimes in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Jordan, Egypt, and other Middle Eastern countries and a return to sharia law; and the ability to regulate Middle Eastern resources (ie: oil) and trade at fair (ie: higher) prices. Al Qaeda believes that all of these acts are abominations commited against Muslims by the west--supporting the Israelis over the Palestinians, funding countries that oppress the Muslim religion, supporting regimes that are amenable to cutting deals for oil. The United States has been fostering policies that are viewed as anti-Muslim since the late 80's, and these policies spawned the rise of Al Qaeda and continues to foster it's growth. It is highly unlikely that the U.S. will ever reverse it's stance on these issues, and Al Qaeda will never give up because they will never give up their religion. They believe that if they don't defend their religion against these attacks with jihad, they are commiting a mortal sin.

The fallacy of our policy in Iraq is that we expect them to throw flowers at are feet when we roll over their homes with tanks and torture them in prison camps. As we are seeing in Iraq, as more and more Muslims are subjected to the atrocities of our wars, more and more of them will progress from insurgents into terrorists and accept what we call a more radical interpretation of the Muslim religion. This is why Iraq will continue to remain unstable--and this is why we will eventually lose the war and continue to be attacked. Bringing democracy to these countries isn't the solution.