|
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 85 responses total. |
rcurl
|
|
response 50 of 85:
| 
Jul 7 16:12 UTC 2003 |
They also voted 99% for Saddam in their last elections.
|
tod
|
|
response 51 of 85:
|
Jul 7 16:49 UTC 2003 |
This response has been erased.
|
klg
|
|
response 52 of 85:
|
Jul 7 16:53 UTC 2003 |
Wrong, again, Mr. rcurl. BBC headline: Wednesday, 16 October, 2002,
11:41 GMT 12:41 UK "Saddam 'wins 100% of vote'"
|
gull
|
|
response 53 of 85:
|
Jul 7 18:26 UTC 2003 |
Re #49: They've also been shooting our troops at the rate of several a
week for quite a while now. I think we've now suffered more fatalities
in the "peace" than we did in the war.
Of course, our administration there has been doing some stuff I find
pretty inexplicable, too. The two decisions that have really amazed me
lately are the decision to print more currency with Saddam's face on it,
and the decision to start censoring Iraqi newspapers.
Re #51: I personally never said "Iraq will be another Vietnam", but it
does seem to be heading that direction now. Every day it looks more
like a guerilla war.
|
janc
|
|
response 54 of 85:
|
Jul 7 18:43 UTC 2003 |
Why would such an apology be owed to the troops? Do you think "Iraq will be
another Vietnam" is a criticism of our troops? The only way I could see that
making sense would be if you thought Vietnam became the kind of situation it
did because our troops there weren't up to doing the job right. Maybe you're
the one who owes some military folks an apology.
Though I'm no expert, I'm prepared to believe the the US has the best military
on the planet, not only in technological sophistication, but in training and
dedication, and the quality of their military commanders. I wouldn't trade
the US military for any force that has ever existed in the history of the
universe.
I don't, however, think that they are so angelic that any mission they might
be sent on would automatically become blessed with goodness by the mere fact
of their presence. I don't hold that against them though.
|
tod
|
|
response 55 of 85:
|
Jul 7 19:24 UTC 2003 |
This response has been erased.
|
scott
|
|
response 56 of 85:
|
Jul 7 19:32 UTC 2003 |
I see Vietnam as a good example of political and military over-optimism. We
had great technology, well-trained troops, etc. But basically there isn't
any really cool technological way to prevent little harrassing attacks during
an occupation - especially if the enemy has less to lose than you.
|
slynne
|
|
response 57 of 85:
|
Jul 7 19:35 UTC 2003 |
Iraq is only like Vietnam in that it is a military operation this
country never should have engaged in. That is my opinion. While it isnt
my intention to degrade or demotivate our military, if protesting the
war does that to them, it isnt my fault. I have nothing against
soldiers. Sometimes they get sent to fight and die in wars this country
shouldnt fight. I would have no problem explaining my views to a vet.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 58 of 85:
|
Jul 7 19:36 UTC 2003 |
Re #51: tod is confusing badly "protesting against the war" and "speaking
badly against our military". The protests were (and are) AGAINST THE WAR, NOT
THE MILITARY. The war should not have been declared - oh, sorry, yes I know
it wasn't declared: the war should not have been fought. However our military
fought the military war brilliantly (except for the nonsense of "shock and
awe" - but that was the promoters of the war, not the military).
Unfortunately, our military seems incapable of "nation building", but then,
that should not be their assignment, since they are only trained to fight
wars.
|
tod
|
|
response 59 of 85:
|
Jul 7 19:43 UTC 2003 |
This response has been erased.
|
tod
|
|
response 60 of 85:
|
Jul 7 19:47 UTC 2003 |
This response has been erased.
|
klg
|
|
response 61 of 85:
|
Jul 7 20:03 UTC 2003 |
re: "#53 (gull): Re #49: They've also been shooting our troops at the
rate of several a week for quite a while now. I think we've now
suffered more fatalities in the "peace" than we did in the war."
Mr. gull,
Your's is the first declaration of peace that I seem to recall having
seen. Additionally, upon what authority do you have it that those who
have been killing our troops are solely Iraqi nationals?
Regards,
klg
re: #58 (rcurl): ... The protests were (and are) AGAINST THE WAR, NOT
THE MILITARY...."
Mr. rcurl,
Based upon knowledge of the groups and individuals which organized and
sponsored the protests, we find your assertion to be patently false.
Regards,
klg
|
rcurl
|
|
response 62 of 85:
|
Jul 7 20:22 UTC 2003 |
You certainly have a short and inaccurate memory.
"Military readiness" was hardly cited by anyone as a main argument against
the war. The main argument is that we had no business initiating an unprovoked
pre-emptory war in violation of the UN charter and in the face of UN
opposition.
|
tod
|
|
response 63 of 85:
|
Jul 7 21:27 UTC 2003 |
This response has been erased.
|
russ
|
|
response 64 of 85:
|
Jul 8 01:32 UTC 2003 |
Re #51: So, Tod, how's the development and democratization going in
Afghanistan? People got increasing faith in the central government?
No chance of the warlords getting out of hand again and popular
discontent leading to another takeover by the likes of Taliban?
A lot of people opposed the war because they figured that we'd win
the war but lose the peace and come out worse. So far they seem to
have been calling it pretty well.
If I were running Iraq right now, the first thing I would do is
conduct a census. The second thing I would do is to put all of
the national industries under corporate ownership, and distribute
shares to the entire Iraqi population. Third, I'd start the oil
industry (for one) paying dividends from its revenues. If there
was any way to convince the whole nation that they don't want
anyone like Saddam ever again, that would probably do it.
|
jep
|
|
response 65 of 85:
|
Jul 8 02:58 UTC 2003 |
re resp:64: Some optimism for Afghanistan:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2003-07-07-afghanistan-usat_x.htm
It isn't a cheery picture, but it may be an improving picture.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 66 of 85:
|
Jul 8 05:33 UTC 2003 |
It's not a pretty picture.
|
pvn
|
|
response 67 of 85:
|
Jul 8 06:09 UTC 2003 |
re#45: Nope, the sewers of baghdad and basra, and most other places
connected directly to the rivers. Water treatments plants are
relatively modern in the US as well, the reversal of the chicago river
was a modern marvel - instead of shipping the untreated sewage out into
the lake, they reversed the flow of the river and shipped it what was
now downstream (Some bright soul decided flushing the toilets into the
water faucets wasn's such a good idea...).
|
sj2
|
|
response 68 of 85:
|
Jul 8 09:28 UTC 2003 |
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3049300.stm
"Power cuts are the Americans' greatest failure," the driver told me
at the end of the seven-hour long journey through the desert from the
Kuwaiti border.
"Electricity, electricity is so important. If they only fixed that,"
he said with a look of frustration rapidly going over into a resigned
expression.
=================================================================
http://rediff.com/us/2003/jul/07iraq1.htm
Time magazine cites US officials, Iraqi Airways staff and other
airport workers in its story of US troops stealing duty-free items,
needlessly shooting up the airport, and trashing five serviceable
Boeing airplanes.
=============================================================
|
gull
|
|
response 69 of 85:
|
Jul 8 13:50 UTC 2003 |
Re #59: I don't really see the parallel. We resolved the Cuban Missile
Crisis through diplomacy, and there was a very real, very obvious threat
there. Iraq's threat to us was considerably more nebulous.
Re #61: You don't remember Bush's speech on the aircraft carrier?
"Bush didn't actually declare outright victory because to do so would
have triggered obligations, returning prisoners of war and not hunting
down enemy commanders among them, that the administration is not ready
to meet.
"But his statement--that "major combat operations have ended. In the
battle of Iraq, the United States and its allies have prevailed"--had
the same effect. No one ever expected to see the victor and the
vanquished sitting across a table negotiating peace in this war."
(Chicago Tribune)
|
klg
|
|
response 70 of 85:
|
Jul 8 16:10 UTC 2003 |
re: "#69 (gull): ... We resolved the Cuban Missile Crisis through
diplomacy ..."
We seem to recall that a naval blockade was involved in that situation.
|
tod
|
|
response 71 of 85:
|
Jul 8 18:00 UTC 2003 |
This response has been erased.
|
gelinas
|
|
response 72 of 85:
|
Jul 8 19:48 UTC 2003 |
"War is diplomacy by other means," I think the man said.
|
tod
|
|
response 73 of 85:
|
Jul 8 19:54 UTC 2003 |
This response has been erased.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 74 of 85:
|
Jul 8 20:02 UTC 2003 |
It isn't the preferred option, however (except to "hawks").
|