President announced the end to the war in Iraq. YES we still have troops there n yes it is still as violent today as it was yesterday, but w the start of moving troops out and the declaration of its conclusion, what does it mean to u?
Printable View
President announced the end to the war in Iraq. YES we still have troops there n yes it is still as violent today as it was yesterday, but w the start of moving troops out and the declaration of its conclusion, what does it mean to u?
Guess when a war is over thats a good thing right?
I imagine that (no matter what side u r on) when its over its good.
There is way too much going on behind closed doors that anybody knows about. I would of thought that the war would of been over once Saddam was thrown from power. The continuation further increases the amount of people who believe its an oil war.
Afghanistan is the only war that has ever made sense to me. But will that war end when OSB-L is captured?
The US and ALLIED FORCES are trying to create peace in a country that isn't theirs.
It's such a huge topic that provokes so many arguments and discussions.
All the Republicans I talk to support the war. But they sure as hell won't join the forces.
It means, alot of my family memebers will be comeing home, alot of good men and women that Ive trained CQC will be home and safe, but as awesome as that is, there will be issues to pop up along this step in history, that will effect us , regardless of what country we are in, for a long time. Im flying to Israel in a few weeks, that ought to be a blast in the airports. More now than yesterday...The retraction of US troops will mean high tensions in Middle Eastern Airports. But I sure am glad our soldiers are comeing home.....and as a Conservative Republican, I would gladly go back any where my country needed me to go.
Ive been to Iraq and Afghanistan and even when its over, its not truly over. Do you believe this is a "re-election" thing or do you really believe Iraq is done?
Call me a cynic but I don't believe the US presence in Iraq is going to be gone any time soon. Declaring that the "war" is over and bringing some troops home is all well and good but it's going to take a long time to fully withdraw from the middle east, or even just from Iraq. An up side though is that the more troops that come home, the more training partners we have at our respective gyms! Troops love MMA :)
[QUOTE=JiuClaw;5301]Call me a cynic but I don't believe the US presence in Iraq is going to be gone any time soon. Declaring that the "war" is over and bringing some troops home is all well and good but it's going to take a long time to fully withdraw from the middle east, or even just from Iraq. QUOTE]
Good point....the declaration of "The war is over" doesnt really change things until we are out of Iraq, but we (in my opinion) will never be out of Iraq. We will always have a presence. Does this declaration really just make what happens in Iraq (now that the war is "over") less televised and visible to the public?
Get ready for the war on Iran.
Well, if we can have a political/social discussion with good reason and intelligence, then here's my take: 1.) I am a Patriot. I love my country and I believe in the IDEAL and American DREAM. Having said that, I have been thoroughly disgusted with "politicians" for a number of years. The politicians don't fight the wars, don't go overseas, don't lose their lives. Yet they act as if they do, they vote for their own pay raises, and take vacations of extravagance while the common man (us) have to worry whether or not we can pay our mortgage or send our kids to school.
2.) War is RARELY about what the politicians would lead us to believe. War is never pretty, it is never anything good. The only reason I supported any war effort was because I believed in our men and women of the armed forces and wanted them to be supported during a difficult time. The last time we participated in a war of ANY real meaning was WW II. While the war in Afghanistan has more merit than Iraq, I still feel it's largely a propaganda war. The timing of this was just a political move by our current "leader" with November elections coming up. He wanted to look like the one to end the war where his predecessor didn't.
3.) The people that really sacrificed and lost anything are the ones like Kevin who were actually there. Doing what they thought was right to protect their country, their families, and what they thought was right.
In the world stage, we have a long way to go. Yes, the U.S. does more and spends more in the areas of relief efforts and support for impovershed countries, but yet we are hated as a government and a people. Our culture is popular around the world-our fashion, our music, our entertainment. Yet, in many countries we are despised as a people. We have a long way to go. I do believe we needed to focus more on Afghanistan and that Iraq was a war of ego-the son succeeding where the father failed, but war of any kind is never pretty. I would really like to see these politicians do something of note that REALLY matters-healthcare, care for our elderly, education for our children (where we are REALLY lacking and the rest of the world is surpassing us), our international trade and goods, our overall economy. There are many things we need to focus on, but the politicians focus on the big, headline grabbing ideas. Our current president is more interested in PR and soundbites than doing any good.
So, let's applaud and support our troops and our veterans. They deserve everything we can give them as they return home, but we can't be blinded by the rhetoric of our "leaders". Remember: our government should fear US, not the other way around.
So you believe this was a way to free up troops to engage Iran? What about this being tied to his re-election? What are your thoughts on the fact that the plan he opposed and the Bush implemented worked in the end?Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason Mallory
Thanks for the shout out John...Quote:
Originally Posted by John Roderick
So, you dont believe that there was a correlation between OIF and OEF?
I agree with most of what you are saying, my only contention is that (speaking from inside the war) understanding the tacical and strategic mission, believe that the war (on both fronts) was warranted and perverted by the politicians and the media. The public perception has always been a huge part of victory in any war, distressing to me is the lack of knowledge and media coverage on what the mission and goals really are/were as opposed to what they covered as "important".
Ive served in Iraq and Afghanistan and ive still got alot of friends overseas i think honestly its a an election thing and that once back in office they will find some reason to deploy more troops to a different location or find some other terror threat somewhere, they need a War to boost this crappy economy
Very good point....I dont think we will ever see a Disney or Six Flags over Iraq, but the focus will for sure shift to another location and I dont doubt that the timing has something to do with re-electionQuote:
Originally Posted by Dennis Martinez
TTT great Topic...
Thanks..Quote:
Originally Posted by Coringao
Being a Soldier who was in both theaters multiple times, you wonder what people really think about this sort of thing. All you really get is the medias perception. Even more interesting is to see what people who have a similar thing in common (combat sports / jiu jitsu) think about this topic and if their views are consitent.
I support soldiers and veterans. The where and the why and the who is not relevant. Every last one of them is brave and necessary and has my respect.
The people that send them places, not so much.
If the objective was to deal with the people who were pissed off at you, increasing the number of people pissed off at you might not have been the best way to go about it. I read an estimate that the Iraqi civilian dead may be as high as 1 million, based on a survey of people who had lost relatives which was expanded to the population as a whole. The worst areas were too dangerous to survey. The fact no one really knows how many is scary enough. Those people had mothers, brothers, sisters, fathers.
I think internationally, to a lot of people, the war on terror makes little sense. Afghanistan made sense. Iraq, no sense. Even suggesting Iran is lunacy.
Kevin-Good points on the media and public perception being EXTREMELY important in any war effort. Any student of history will note and agree with that. That's why Vietnam is referred to as a "failure". This is totally a political move on 0bama's part. As soon as the elections are over, there will be a move to either focus more on Afghanistan, or perhaps deploy around Iran in a move to intimidate their leader. The actions were certainly warranted, but I don't think they were carried out as well as they could have been. The difference being popular support and a definitive plan and execution. Parallels or differences with WW II abound. The Politicians always have more of/different information than the public. Just look at all the "leaks" that manage to find their way to the media.
Agree - watch the continued push in OEF.. Its a guaranteeQuote:
Originally Posted by John Roderick
I served in joint operations with Brits, Kiwis and the Australians...and I gotta say, that joint unit was highly effective :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim Elliott
As far as not being a connection between Iraq and Afghanistan...I disagree, but the point makes it certain that the misgivings of the media and the lask of attention to those connections for the public crosses all boarders.
The US is leveraged to participate in the forefront....the reason (I believe) has nothing to do with the lack of ability by our coalition partners...I believe it has to do with the ability of our bank roll and the perception that we are the worlds "police force". That being said, coalition forces (to include those who are less fortunate with funding but just as powerful with capability and knowledge) is essential in the war on terror. The much larger question is:
How do we beat "Terror", or can we beat terror? One side is to attack and be pro-active, the other side is to do nothing and play defense and hope we are not victims again. Is there a middle ground??
Funnily enough, the only friend I have had there recently was Norwegian.
The problem with the war on Terror is its an emotion. The news media are the worlds greatest terrorists. Al Qaeda are amateurs by comparison. If they didnt spend all day over dramatising stuff and trying to get mileage people would not be terrified.
Heres something you might want to think about. I spend a lot of time at the University of Otago in New Zealand. My girlfriend is one of the international student hosts so she (and subsequently I) have lived with American students the last couple of years. I have studied with and later taught many more.
Now I like America. It gave me the the Amax, UFC, Jenna Jameson and 10th Planet, and some of my best friends are excellent American geologists. However, as a country, you are not popular internationally. In the time of Bush, I saw American students verbally abused and harassed on a generally very friendly campus. Iv seen flats trashed because people thought Americans lived there. Since Obama was elected, I have seen very little of this. It impressed people.
Its comparable in a way. Restore peoples faith in a country and make them like you, and they will stop throwing eggs/grenades at you.
Sorry about the Australians.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Green
I am not debating that we are not always liked internationaly. I am not saying that we are not the most popular at times. I am not saying I am a Bush fan at all....what I am saying (and this is food for thought) Many people who have no real combat experience nor understand the point of war in its entirety have opinions about it (and that is what freedom is all about). Many of the Soldiers (US and others) arent too concerned about popularity nor do the protests help them do their jobs day to day - but do you think the outcome of the war would have been better without US involvement? Do you think the link between Iraq and Afghanistan is not legit so you support Afghanistan but not Iraq?Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim Elliott
As a combat vet, Ive been applauded and Ive been ridiculed - at the end of the day (like you stated earlier) wether you agree with the war or not you cant deny the Soldiers and their families all deserve support. I also agree with the things you said the US has given you, but I hope thats not the only thing you see us as providing.. :)
Everyone gets pulled out of Iraq and sent to Afghanistan and Iraq will break out in a civil war in a few years. History repeats it-self troops pulling out of Iraq is good though.
I suppose Iraq just stank of false pretences. Im not anti war at all. You will get no protests from me. Theres a mess now, and I guess it must be cleaned up.
From a non military perspective, the list of interference in the middle east is a long one, and repeatedly ends in tears.
Slightly unrelated, but maybe not.
Immediately after 9/11, the French President Jaques Chirac stood up and said that France had never had anything to do with Terrorism etc etc. This was viewed dimly by those New Zealanders who remembered that the French Intelligence blew up a ship In Auckland Harbour, New Zealand in 1985 killing a photographer. The two agents were caught immediately.
New Zealand just had to lump it. What were we going to do? No one else seemed to care either. We are just a small country after all.
There is a definitive correlation between Iraq and Afghanistan as far as terrroism goes. There is a link for training and funding. The problem is in the media description, the Bush administration objectives, and the public perception. Often, there were conflicting ideas of what we wanted to get out of an Iraq offensive, and more often than not, no mention of, or pursuance of, our objectives in Afghanistan. I've never served in the armed forces, but as a student of history,and a sincere effort to become more educated to the process, thinking, and methods of the military, I feel I have a good understanding of what occurs. I certainly defer to vets like Kevin who have a distinct advantage in knowledge first-hand, of course.
The offensive in the middle east was necessary. It was a deterrent to any further offensives against us on the scale we saw on September 11 for certain. However, the biggest problems are a culture, society, and doctrine that is over 2000 years old in the near and middle east. We can't expect cultural norms and beliefs to be changed in a decade, or even two decades. Without education, an exposure and participation to the rest of the world, and a significant political and cultural shift in the near and middle east, the zealots and extremists will continue to thrive and be determined to destroy all those, not just Americans, that they believe don't belong in their world view. The sad thing is, it's not Muslims that are at issue. True Muslims are no different than anyone else. It's the petty zealots and extremists in power and have influence and who strive to keep their citizens uneducated, uniformed and down-trodden. Only with a change at the top over time, further education, a strong infrastructure, and a stable economy can we expect any true change in the near and middle east.
These countries have been modern educated societies. Iran was a democracy until the United States helped place the Shah in power. Extremism arose as a result of the suffering the people experienced under his rule.Quote:
Originally Posted by John Roderick
Iran endured further horrors during the Iran/Iraq war. A war in which Saddam Hussein had the support of the US, even while Saddam was using chemical weapons.
The damage is done and it is not lost on them who did it. Everyone in Iran knows whos fault it was they lost their democracy and had it replaced with a dictator who messed up their country. All the people that live there have ever known is dictatorship, horrific was and sanctions. That ill feeling spreads.
This is probably the most dangerous misconception of all. We have no bank roll left. We are thoroughly in debt and we will never be able to repay it. Continuation of these wars on the level they are now surely means defaulting on our national debts. We aren't just continuing, we are escalating. We are pushing into Pakistan more and more. Watching Fox and CNN lets me know that we'll be in Iran at some point (probably before the 2012 presidential elections). Not to mention the Iranian scientist that was apparently kidnapped by the CIA... The supposed "draw down" in Iraq is complete bullshit. It is not happening and will not happen. People will be relabeled and the ones that are actually removed (if there are any) will be exchanged with civilian contractors.Quote:
I believe it has to do with the ability of our bank roll
As a "troop" I like the sentiment of "supporting the troops." I also hate it. We are ultimately responsible for our choices. Following orders is not an excuse for prosecuting an unjust war, if a soldier (sailor, airmen or marine) determines that it is unjust. At that point, they should start preparing their resume for when their contract is up. Also, the "support the troops" logic is what allows us to be so well funded and funding the war is essentially voting for it. So if you tell your politicians that you want them to support the troops, you are basically telling them to vote for the war. You may want to express your thoughts more succinctly than with a yellow ribbon magnet... not trying to be a dick. We do appreciate the thoughts. We also appreciate discounts (that's all I'm saying :o ).
The other thing is that many people think something along these lines: "they hate us because of our culture and our freedom." That is absurd... that is not the motivation for any terrorist attacks/attacks in general against US forces/civilians. In nearly every case, some group claims responsibility for the attack and gives their motivation. I suggest you hear their words. Not one of them is out there saying, "Brittney Spears is a ho and we just can't take your debauchery any more so we're going to blow your shit up." Usually, it goes a little like "quit interfering in Muslim lands" or "your sanctions are killing us."
So we should just all question, do we need to have armed forces all over the world? Don't just think about Iraq/Afghanistan. Think about Germany, Italy, S. Korea and Japan. Think about South/Central America. Wouldn't we be much safer if we didn't go out causing problems and instead had the most technologically advanced military possible sitting right within our borders. How much safer would we be if we could afford our expenditures and were not careening down the path to hyperinflation.
Good point. I can see this happening as well...I think Iraq will kick back off very quickly if we pull out totallyQuote:
Originally Posted by Travis Reichert
So Tim, what are your thoughts about Iran and their nuclear weapons program? Masked for 20 plus years as a program to look for "alternative fuel sources". Granted, in the past (not recent past) the did not produce enough to arm a weapon, but you have to admit, very slick as a way to educate yourself and learn the process to inevitably (as we see today) use that training to create larger quantities.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim Elliott
I deal with GOV contracts and money everyday....we have the bank roll...trust me. As far as national debt goes....what happens if its not paid off, they gonna cut off our power and evict us? :) But I see your point, we do spend money we dont have....and we spend (on average) 7 times more omoney on our Military then any other countryQuote:
Originally Posted by Ryan Cook
This is ever so interesting because the right has propagated it as common knowledge, when in fact it is a myth.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dennis Martinez
It's worse than the elephant in the room that people won't talk about; it's indicates the power of political propaganda (which is vastly a right wing strategy, that renders folks who rely on first contact information to not question the simple ABCs of a proposition). It is the elephant in the room that we don't even notice.
The answer here is too simple, but the scary part is we live in a society that when it comes to politics, we don't stop and say, "wait a fucking second!?". The idea that war stimulates the economy started with WWII, because at that time, it did. Since then however, it has done nothing but increase the debt and the deficit, as the Iraq war will testify. Debt and deficit, as some would argue, are not good for any economy.
Well, (despite the anti-US sentiment from those you spoke about earlier) I care. I served with lots of good folks from all over and coalition is coalition...but please dont get me started on the French :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim Elliott
No, but the greenback will lose its value against other currencies, as it has since 2004/5, and the US will see other emerging economic powers decend like a tidal wave, like China.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Green
I have to say for one, I am pleasingly suprised at the intellectual conversation of this thread... :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Ian "ifreez" Freemantle
I also agree with you.. The day of the "military Industrial Complex" have come to an end and do not boost the economy as they did in the past. The "Prison Industrial Complex" however is alive and well. Politicians use the threat of "crime: and the solution of "more prisons" and "more and stricter law and sentencing" of non-violent offenders as the"solution". Sorry about all the qutes :)
That being said, the "war on drugs" and the "three strikes your out" rule are perfect examples. Again our fears or spun by the 1% of America that owns the media and political agenda.
But I disgress...Im interested now to see what you all feel about the Mosque being proposed for construction near the 911 site in NY. Anyone?
Which will bolster their ability to become a "super power" and increase their Military spending and turn them into the "worlds police", no? Problem with that is, we (US) consume and make like 80% of the worlds garbage. We are a hot bed for other countries to export, sell, sell....Our control over import tax has more power then one would like to acknowledge. China (or any country for that matter) can not chance the loss of the revenue the US creates for them. Its a catch 22...Quote:
Originally Posted by Ian "ifreez" Freemantle
It stimulated Americas, but it didnt do the economy of the British Empire any good!Quote:
Originally Posted by Ian "ifreez" Freemantle
Also if the rest of the world is pissed at you, they dont buy your stuff.
We dont buy our own stuff :) My car is from japan, my computer and phone are from China and my luch was from Korea :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim Elliott
The issue with Nuclear Weapons is not about people having them. Its about motivating them not to use them.
America might need to learn to say sorry.
How about lifting all the sanctions and working on opening lines of trade? Nothing dampens religious ferver and rampant extremism like soft living and consumerism. People are less inclined to make a habbit of plotting when they are fucking round on an Iphone or discussing deep international issues on a Jiu Jitsu forum at 2:58 in the morning.