Can 20,000-40,000 More US Troops Save Iraq?

  • Wanna Join? New users you can now register lightning fast using your Facebook or Twitter accounts.
May 14, 2002
1,355
0
0
40
#41
Wow its hilarious how many of you dont see the big picture.
2-0-six
At your last question. increasing the number of troops for this "clear and hold" operation as they call it may work it may not the important thing is that it is designed to set up the iraqi forces and give them a fighting chance to stabalize thier own government. ALSO if you heard bush saying that if cannot meet our time table then they are basically on their own.
the plan is to wipe our hands clean of the whole deal either way it breaks down
From my experiences the iraqi people just want violence off their streets.Some of them want us out some of them want us there some of them MANY of them are just simply compliant to their clerks and religious leaders or whoever is going to win.
MANY of the insurgents are foriegn and use iraq for training, combat experience and a chance to take a shot at the "invaders"
I think that the revised plan I say revised because it is nothing new its only an add on which was an obvious over site for the troops conducting the missions but for some reason oblivious to those ordering them.
I think that the revised plan can work. But the complexity of the war in iraq is such that we as a western country cannot fully grasp the concepts and ideologys (sp) that are at play in the middle east and need to enlist further aide from middle eastern countrys to apply the correct tactics.
 
Mar 9, 2005
1,345
1
0
44
#44
Talus said:
Wow its hilarious how many of you dont see the big picture.
The big picture, or the end game? Have you allowed Bush to brainwash you into believing that he's in Iraq to help the Iraqi people? OK :dead:

Talus said:
enlist further aide from middle eastern countrys to apply the correct tactics.
Good luck! Besides, the 'correct' tactics are not the ones currently being used, and the US doesn't wish to apply the correct tactics because it's disadvantageous to their cause.
 

I AM

Some Random Asshole
Apr 25, 2002
21,002
86
48
#45
America wants to have their own sub gov't's set up in damn near every country...oh fuck wait, that's already fucking happening...and has been for...many, many years.

I feel bad for anyone who signs up for the Armed Forces, some of them are too stupid to realize what's going on, they've been lied to all their lives, and they don't know any better.

By the way, based on many of the statements made my Congress, several of those stupid fucks should be taken out of office, like that dumb broad that said Congress doesn't have the power to say "no" to more troops. If these people don't know what rights we have, HOW THE FUCK ARE THEY GOING TO DEFEND OUR RIGHTS?
 

I AM

Some Random Asshole
Apr 25, 2002
21,002
86
48
#47
Damn Jesse, you know he's the ONLY one that gets it, why you gotta hate on him? LOL...

He watches TV and eats the propaganda he's fed from other sources as well. It's obvious. Then again, what ISN'T propaganda?
 
May 14, 2002
1,355
0
0
40
#48
"40,000 more troops cannot save Iraq. The war in Iraq has already been lost by the US. Sure, withdrawing the troops does indeed show that they did lose the war (something that the US does NOT want to admit!), but keeping the current troops there and even sending more troops not only shows that they've lost the war, it also shows that they're bad losers|"
AT HUTCH
Im not backing what all has gone down or will go down. What im saying with the big picture is that leaving now and not trying to do anything would be a bigger defeat.

Also I wasnt saying that the US is going to take outside advice. I was saying it SHOULD.

"I know it aint, but its better than goin to Iraq to get slaughtered. Ill take the Coast Guard over war any day. Would you?"

AT Jesse rice "slaughterd" is an overstatement dont you think? But that aside, an alternative to ground fighting is a good idea...

INPUT your remarks are childish at best.
 
May 9, 2002
37,066
16,282
113
#50
Talus said:
"I know it aint, but its better than goin to Iraq to get slaughtered. Ill take the Coast Guard over war any day. Would you?"

AT Jesse rice "slaughterd" is an overstatement dont you think? But that aside, an alternative to ground fighting is a good idea...
No, I think slaughtered is the exact word to use. The death toll in Iraq is ridiculous and unessacary on BOTH sides. Some troops STILL have no idea WHY they are in Iraq. I'm not a troop, and I have no idea we are there. Sending troops there is everything short of a suicide mission.
 

I AM

Some Random Asshole
Apr 25, 2002
21,002
86
48
#51
It's also a good way to get a lot of countries pissed off at the U.S. But that's been happening since this country started...looks like nothing ever changes...something should be done about that.
 
May 2, 2002
1,131
6
0
52
#52
War? What war? This isn't a war.
We're fed bullshit to believe we're trying to help the Iraqi's create an army and police their own nation. We're the police of their nation and more importantly we're there protecting the corporate interests that are supposedly rebuilding Iraq. Rebuilding what? What the fuck are we really doing there? Does anyone really know? I honestly don't, someone please elaborate. Controlling the Oil there and poppy in Afghanistan is why our presence is there, i guess. Money talks!
 

Hemp

Sicc OG
Sep 5, 2005
1,248
2
0
#54
Talus said:
Im not backing what all has gone down or will go down. What im saying with the big picture is that leaving now and not trying to do anything would be a bigger defeat
no what is a bigger defeat? continuing to lose more american soldiers for a worthless war and enticing the enemy by staying for corporate interests.

war is not life, a defeat can mean a bigger win.
quit feeding into the propaganda
 

Hemp

Sicc OG
Sep 5, 2005
1,248
2
0
#56
Bush vows to 60 Minutes that 'no matter what Congress wants' surge is on

Raw Story | January 13, 2007

In an interview set to air on this Sunday's 60 Minutes, President George W. Bush vows to send an additional 21,500 troops to Iraq "no matter what" the Democratic-controlled Congress tries to do.

"Do you believe as Commander in Chief you have the authority to put the troops in there no matter what the Congress wants to do," 60 Minutes correspondent Scott Pelley asks Bush in the short clip uploaded to the CBS News web site Friday night.

"I think I've got, in this situation, I do, yeah," Bush said.

"Now I fully understand they will," Bush continued, "they could try to stop me from doing it, but, uh, I've made my decision and we're going forward."

In an address to the nation on Wednesday, Bush announced his new plan which calls for an increase in US troops to end ongoing violence in the country, which many believe is either at - or approaching "civil war," with Iraqi civilian deaths tripling at the end of 2006, according to one report.

The plan, nicknamed "surge" by the administration but referred to as an "escalation" to most Democrats has drawn fire from both parties, and Congressional members have threatened to cut funding - though not for the troops that are already there.

"Rep. John Murtha, a Pennsylvania Democrat who oversees military funding, said he will propose tying congressional approval of war funds to shutting the Guantanamo Bay military prison in Cuba," the Associated Press reports. "Other conditions he said he is considering include not extending troop deployments and giving soldiers and Marines more time to train between deployments."

-looks like its time for phase two
 
Mar 9, 2005
1,345
1
0
44
#57
Someone really needs to knock Bush off his high horse. Then again, they shouldn't have put him in the saddle in the first place...

The best we can hope for is that American voters sit back and actually realize that the decision they make on election day lasts for 4 years, and that if they choose the wrong man, a whole lot of bad shit can happen! I know it's hard - every candidate is a wolf in sheeps clothing until after the votes have been counted...
 

HERESY

THE HIDDEN HAND...
Apr 25, 2002
18,326
11,459
113
www.godscalamity.com
www.godscalamity.com
#58
Hutch said:
Someone really needs to knock Bush off his high horse. Then again, they shouldn't have put him in the saddle in the first place...

The best we can hope for is that American voters sit back and actually realize that the decision they make on election day lasts for 4 years, and that if they choose the wrong man, a whole lot of bad shit can happen! I know it's hard - every candidate is a wolf in sheeps clothing until after the votes have been counted...
Emphasis mine.

That is NOT how things work in america. Again, I ask the same question I have asked since I first came to this board. Do you HONESTLY believe RICH WHITE MEN are going to let the common man decide the LEADERSHIP and DIRECTION of THE RICHEST and most ADVANCED nation on the planet by poking a hole or filling in a bubble on a piece of card board?
 
Feb 8, 2006
3,435
6,143
113
#59
HERESY said:
Emphasis mine.

That is NOT how things work in america. Again, I ask the same question I have asked since I first came to this board. Do you HONESTLY believe RICH WHITE MEN are going to let the common man decide the LEADERSHIP and DIRECTION of THE RICHEST and most ADVANCED nation on the planet by poking a hole or filling in a bubble on a piece of card board?
Electoral vote = greater than population vote