Temat: US troops leaving Iraq

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/aug/31/iraq-us-fo...

US President Obama gave his address, 50'000 troops as advisors staying and eventually pulling out of the country in 2011.

What do you think? Is it good or bad? The right or wrong time?

Temat: US troops leaving Iraq

He didn't use the word 'victory' once (and rightly so!).

My interpretation is: too late.

Temat: US troops leaving Iraq

Kaboom.... Sunnite Shiite conflict!!! I hope not. This was what father Bush was afraid of when he stopped short of defeating Saddam and betrayed Shiite insurgents who wanted to support coalition and overthrow Saddam.

Hope for these people to sit down and agree.

If I were to withdraw,
I would make these two groups talk and leave
leave at the moment of some agreement.

The worst scenario is, territorial disintegration and annexation of Shiite predominant territories to Iran.

I do not expect so called terrorist and AlQuaida to be the problem.
At least it was not initially when it was claimed to be when this
poor country was invaded.Jacek K. edytował(a) ten post dnia 02.09.10 o godzinie 14:59

Temat: US troops leaving Iraq

I can smell Somalia case duplicated here... :(

Temat: US troops leaving Iraq

Piotr Obraniak:
I can smell Somalia case duplicated here... :(

Bush senior did not go for overthrowing Saddam, I understand, out of fear that the resulting Iraqi Shi'ite union with Iran would create a dangerous counterforce to Sunnite Saudi Arabia (and perhaps to Israel as well). A big Shi'ite Islamic Republic.

I am wondering why he attacked Saddam in the first place.
It is a mystery to me. I doubt it was for humanitarian reasons, for Kurds and Shiites oppressed by Sunni regime. Prior to the first War in the Gulf, it seems to me, that Saddam would do a lot to stay friends with US, that he listened US Ambassador about what he could do. Was he, Saddam, a scapegoat?

Is there a way to summarise this conflict? What is going on?

Perhaps by withdrawing, the United States are making friendly gestures to Iran? Shiite force against Sunnite. Divide et impera?Jacek K. edytował(a) ten post dnia 02.09.10 o godzinie 22:05

Temat: US troops leaving Iraq

Well, I'm definitely not a person deeply understanding the situation in the Middle East. I could just quote Gen. Garrison that "the situation is fragile" ;)

As far as I understand US foreign policy it never is based on "humanitarian" principles. And, to be honest, this is far from being an accusation. One of the many things I do like about the States is that it always puts the US interest first. So, I'd assume, there was a "clear and present" US interest that was somehow in question due to Saddam's action or lack of thereof.

Temat: US troops leaving Iraq

Stan K.:
To describe withdrawal of troops from Iraq with the word VICTORY would be political suicide.
Victory over Sunni? Over Al- quaida?

My point exactly.

Temat: US troops leaving Iraq

I would be so bold to say that it was NOT Saddam having weapons of mass-destruction that started the war but Bush wanting to use weapons of mass-destruction!

As Bill Hicks so aptly put it: Bush senior sold weapons to Saddam, the US industry produced new and better weapons, than you go and destroy the old, to keep the market in movement.
I assume it was a lobbyist war, an industry war solely.

Temat: US troops leaving Iraq

Piotr Obraniak:
One of the many things I do like about the States is that it always puts the US interest first. So, I'd assume, there was a "clear and present" US interest that was somehow in question due to Saddam's action or lack of thereof.

I am afraid US political system is suffering from autonomisation of interest of the particular circles of influence. There are particular influence groups that claim their interest equals US interest.

This is what president Eisenhower was afraid of, mentioning military-industrial complex. I quote from Wikipedia, magnificent service:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military%E2%80%93industri...
"Military-industrial complex (MIC) is an emergent process between politics and businesses that causes and is caused by wars, businesses who create military weapons, and propaganda funded by such politics and businesses to increase the demand for such wars and weapons so they can be paid to increase the supply."

Is this what is going on? A maladaptive behavior of superpower? A proces that serves well the particular groups of interest but is in fact detrimental to US power, economy, values?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nUXtyIQjubU&feature=rel...Jacek K. edytował(a) ten post dnia 03.09.10 o godzinie 23:12

Temat: US troops leaving Iraq

Bernd Schreckenberg:
US President Obama gave his address, 50'000 troops as advisors staying and eventually pulling out of the country in 2011.

US might leave a military base behind like the ones in the Arab peninsula.

What do you think? Is it good or bad? The right or wrong time?

It's definitely good, and the timing is OK.
These calculations are not done by rookies. It takes a lot of pondering to do such stuff. Going ahead and dropping bombs on a weak Muslim country is a rather easier decision than pulling out.

Iraqis are having tough days ahead, whether or not there are foreign troops in Iraq. Independence is not easy, and there's been some cases in which a country failed to have the minimum aspects of a democracy after a failed attempt of 'freeing from dictatorship'.

Jacek K., military-industrial complex IS US right now, and I see no reason to be the otherwise for a while. The balance of the World has to be changed in order to see a different system in US, I think. You can't keep the average American happy without the wealth... its citizens has to wake up, and it should be a MAJOR awakening - not like the one in 2008.İlter K. edytował(a) ten post dnia 13.09.10 o godzinie 22:05

Temat: US troops leaving Iraq

Bernd Schreckenberg:
I would be so bold to say that it was NOT Saddam having weapons of mass-destruction that started the war but Bush wanting to use weapons of mass-destruction!

I don't agree.
Saddam didn't have the WMD at the time, but that doesn't make the regime innocent. The country was and still is full of 'dirt'. All sorts of extremist groups of different fractions exist there, and they don't understand the meaning of the words 'please' or 'peace'.
It was a threat for everyone - don't think it was something only between the US and Iraq.

You (the westerners) don't know about it, but Iraq caused and still causes a lot of troubles to its neighbours.
It's not a joke.

The US presidency didn't exactly know what they were getting into, and they didn't go to the war just to free a poor country at the time, but some things has changed for them as well, I hope. Well, at least 7-8 years of troubles should teach you something.

The problem now is, will the new regime in Iraq be able to unite the different fractions in Iraq and put things on their own, peaceful pace.
We'll see.

As Bill Hicks so aptly put it: Bush senior sold weapons to Saddam, the US industry produced new and better weapons, than you go and destroy the old, to keep the market in movement.
I assume it was a lobbyist war, an industry war solely.

Well, I still think, that the weapons are used to keep the power at hand.
Maybe I'm too naive.
Maybe I'm not looking too deep.
Maybe I'm still thinking that the power of US comes from its hard working people which seems to be the thing of the past.
But you know... there's only one way to keep the power - and that's working hard. You go, even if you have shiny weapons at your disposal, no matter how much noise you make while going.

The weapons do not rule the World - the nations does.İlter K. edytował(a) ten post dnia 05.09.10 o godzinie 08:01

Temat: US troops leaving Iraq

İlter K.:

Saddam didn't have the WMD at the time, but that doesn't make the regime innocent.

Since I was talking about the motivation of the US imho, to mention this seemed unnecessary.

The country was and still is full of 'dirt'. All sorts of extremist groups of different fractions exist there, and they don't understand the meaning of the words 'please' or 'peace'.

Nonetheless no reason to invade it without proper political back-up.

It was a threat for everyone - don't think it was something only between the US and Iraq.

Sure. And I don't even think it was that wrong to start the war. But with the history of US helping Saddam, being friends, allies even, selling them weapons and then killing their people was not done smart.

You (the westerners) don't know about it, but Iraq caused and still causes a lot of troubles to its neighbours.
It's not a joke.

Yeah, they also don't like them Kurds.

The US presidency didn't exactly know what they were getting into, and they didn't go to the war just to free a poor country at the time, but some things has changed for them as well, I hope. Well, at least 7-8 years of troubles should teach you something.

We will see. The US have to stop bullying other countries. Pissing other countries off by our arrogance (for instance our approach towards the Americans and their rainforest destruction) will not serve us.

The problem now is, will the new regime in Iraq be able to unite the different fractions in Iraq and put things on their own, peaceful pace.
We'll see.

Indeed we will. :)

Maybe I'm still thinking that the power of US comes from its hard working people which seems to be the thing of the past.
But you know... there's only one way to keep the power - and that's working hard. You go, even if you have shiny weapons at your disposal, no matter how much noise you make while going.

Quite a mysterious point you're having here... Seems like you explain the rise and fall of influences and power of nations by their inhabitants working hard. Interesting :)

The weapons do not rule the World - the nations does.

Cold war, buddy. Paranoia. Weapons. Planet of apes. Etc. Right?
:P

Temat: US troops leaving Iraq

Bernd Schreckenberg:

İlter K.:
Saddam didn't have the WMD at the time, but that doesn't make the regime innocent.

Since I was talking about the motivation of the US imho, to mention this seemed unnecessary.

Well, the motivation to go for war:
The other country does not cooperate via talks, does what you DON'T want them to, you calculate the risks and gains, and say: go / no go.
Can you tell me another good reason/moivation than this?
This hasn't changed much since the beginning of civilizations, and I see no reason to see a different order. Only the countries who fight change.

The country was and still is full of 'dirt'. All sorts of extremist groups of different fractions exist there, and they don't understand the meaning of the words 'please' or 'peace'.

Nonetheless no reason to invade it without proper political back-up.

We are talking about an invasion or war.
That means the politics does NOT help you.
If you've meant "the political back up by UN", you are being too naive.
The wars has never been a collective issue (although the US wanted to give that impression with NATO) - the recovery from wars has.
The US has its own political reason, and that was enough.
The majority of US citizens has supported the idea at the beginning.

It was a threat for everyone - don't think it was something only between the US and Iraq.

Sure. And I don't even think it was that wrong to start the war. But with the history of US helping Saddam, being friends, allies even, selling them weapons and then killing their people was not done smart.

Please give me an example (of war) in which the US looked smart from start to finish. War itself, is the announcement of: "OK, I'm unable to solve it via brains".

You (the westerners) don't know about it, but Iraq caused and still causes a lot of troubles to its neighbours.
It's not a joke.

Yeah, they also don't like them Kurds.

Huh?
"Nevermind", right? :)

The US presidency didn't exactly know what they were getting into, and they didn't go to the war just to free a poor country at the time, but some things has changed for them as well, I hope. Well, at least 7-8 years of troubles should teach you something.

We will see. The US have to stop bullying other countries. Pissing other countries off by our arrogance (for instance our approach towards the Americans and their rainforest destruction) will not serve us.

How the US has had this role, and is it possible to 'achieve' this doing certain things while being... like 'helpful' or 'supportive'?

Maybe I'm still thinking that the power of US comes from its hard working people which seems to be the thing of the past.
But you know... there's only one way to keep the power - and that's working hard. You go, even if you have shiny weapons at your disposal, no matter how much noise you make while going.

Quite a mysterious point you're having here... Seems like you explain the rise and fall of influences and power of nations by their inhabitants working hard. Interesting :)

Do you think it is possible to be superior without working hard?
Or, were you kidding as always? :)

The weapons do not rule the World - the nations does.

Cold war, buddy. Paranoia. Weapons. Planet of apes. Etc. Right?
:P

:P
(I didn't get the joke, I'm sorry :)İlter K. edytował(a) ten post dnia 06.09.10 o godzinie 18:51

Temat: US troops leaving Iraq

Bernd Schreckenberg:

The weapons do not rule the World - the nations does.

Cold war, buddy. Paranoia. Weapons. Planet of apes. Etc. Right?
:P

Like David Bowie used to sing "I'm afraid of Americans, I am afraid of the world"

:P

Temat: US troops leaving Iraq

İlter K.:

Your post has some 'Darwinistic' sound to it: only the countries who fight change, to be superior by working hard.
I don't agree to the result, whereas I sadly have agree to your argumentation.
And let's not mince words: most wars are fought for lesser reasons. Not human rights, not freedom, no enlightened cause. It's mostly power, influence, money.

I was born and raised in peaceful times, I live in the longest stretch of peace so far Europe had had. I can't imagine how much strain a war is for a society, a war close to home.

Maybe I'm naive, but I think that the way we perceive war, the way it's announced, conducted, etc. has to change.

But I'm not ignorant. I know the US sold weapons to Iraq, so did the Brits. That's, well, unfortunate.

I know Germanys is one of the biggest weapons dealers in the world. I know they sell weapons to the Palistineans. And still our politicians run around and talk about a 'special obligation' Germany has for Isreal. Yep, you hear that? First we kill you, then we patronize you while selling weapons to your enemies. Sounds like what the US did to Iraq kinda, doesn't it?

Temat: US troops leaving Iraq

Bernd Schreckenberg:
Your post has some 'Darwinistic' sound to it: only the countries who fight change, to be superior by working hard.

Er, I don't know too much about terminologies.
Or maybe I know nothing about it.

What I wrote had nothing to do with the evolution.
That's how I perceive things after having lived in this life, at this point of time. I do not follow any deep literature about anything.
And I don't mind if you call me 'shallow' :)

Maybe I'm naive, but I think that the way we perceive war, the way it's announced, conducted, etc. has to change.

Agreed.
But I don't see it possible within this century.

But I'm not ignorant. I know the US sold weapons to Iraq, so did the Brits. That's, well, unfortunate.

Somebody has to sell weapons.
France sold some weapons to Ottoman Empire, then came down to invade.
Anything new?

... Sounds like what the US did to Iraq kinda, doesn't it?

Read above ;)

Temat: US troops leaving Iraq

İlter K.:
Jacek K., military-industrial complex IS US right now, and I see no reason to be the otherwise for a while. The balance of the World has to be changed in order to see a different system in US, I think. You can't keep the average American happy without the wealth... its citizens has to wake up, and it should be a MAJOR awakening - not like the one in 2008.

That is why I dream so much about the development of efficient thermo-nuclear power generation plants in my lifetime.
Good for nature, good for politics (no more oil related bickering) everyone happy. I think this MUST be the priority for humans.

I have read somewhere sometime ago about the phenomenon of microcavitation. Some scientist noticed emission of light from bubbles in water when it was subjected to ultrasound vibration. Many years later this light was closely inspected and it was discovered that in the bubbles there were tiny flashes of plasma resulting from cavitation, tiny volumes of very high pressure and temperature. Little sun's... I have a dream. A thermonuclear reactor in every house :-)))

Why not propose the Iranians that if they abandon Nuclear program, the first Thermo-Nuclear plant will be built in their territory. A multi-national non-political project. Like Sojuz-Apollo programme.Jacek K. edytował(a) ten post dnia 08.09.10 o godzinie 14:00

Temat: US troops leaving Iraq

That could be great, Jacek.
Oil is a big headache, you are right.
But I think, we, the humans is the real problem. I tend to believe we are great creatures when it comes to creating conflicts.
If the energy issue were out, we could find some other reason to fight.

I've read some articles about Tesla, and I believed he was stopped by concerns which financed his earlier researches and inventions.
Maybe we are still not ready for free energy?

Temat: US troops leaving Iraq

İlter K.:

>

Maybe we are still not ready for free energy?

We're animals. And as such we seek power&dominance. Hence the lobbying for influence and money, bribery, high offices etc.
Everything, every society, every group, political system, etc. pp. has a hierarchy. It will not work without, but we have to come up with a social strategy of rebuilding our societies in order to maintain the framework of a hierarchy while eliminating destructive cravings for power. I dare say :)