What Is Happening In Iraq

[Bonnie]

LOL - 95%

Try more like 15% - those who have gained power rather than lost it.

Don't you watch anything bug Fox News? The great majority of the Iraqi people are glad that Saddam is out of power but now that he is they want the USA out of their country now.

Wade.

Yes and that's great, but what exactly would they do if overnight we were to pull out and chaos ensues.......The Iraqi military and police forces are not yet trained enough to deal with the insurgency. I can't imagine most Iraqi's want that either.

Oh yeah I should watch CNN becasue we all know they have no poiltical Liberal agenda :rotflmao: :rotflmao:

 

[theim]

Let me ask you, who do you think we are helping in Iraq?

The Iraqis.

Would it be contradictory to ask also who we have killed and maimed in Iraq?

We have killed/maimed thousands of terrorists and their enablers, as well as several unfortunate civilians.

Are we in Iraq for financial/corporate reasons?

No.

If not why are so many companies flocking over there when receiving lucrative "re-building" contracts.

Because who else is? Is Mr. Jamal Abu Mohammed and his poker buddy gonna rebuild the infrastrucure? Besides there IS some money to be made in a new Iraq without economic sanctions.

I would like to know from people with different points of view from myself, to define a terrorist in Iraq, and how this differs from Iraqis who hate us and attack us?

A terrorist is one who uses, primarily, fear and terror to push his objectives. It really does not differ from the Iraqis who hate and attack us. And allow me to preempt you. I predict you will claim that America uses fear to push its objectives in the region. America does not go bombing some guys house because we want to scare people into supporting us. When someone voices an anti-american opinion, they are not gunned down. I suggest you look up the definitions of the phrases "primary damage" and "collateral damage"

Define what a successful outcome in Iraq would be,

A freely elected democracy of one Iraq, not three Kurdish, Suuni, and Shiite theocratic dictatorships. This is fun!

and lastly define a democracy, and why/why not the current "Democratic" system set up by the United States truely is a democracy.

A Democracy is technically defined as a state in which everybody votes on everything. The people choose their rulers and their laws. When either of these no longer meets the peoples satisfaction they are changed. Since it is impratical to vote on EVERYTHING, however, the US and other democratic nations have set up parliamentary representative governments. The people elect representatives who (in theory) will vote the way they want. Thus the people have strong influence in government without an excessive amount of time wasted in their lives by voting on everything personally. So I suppose America is more a Federal Republic than a technical Democracy.

 

[wade]

Actually I watch all the news channels on the 400 or so channels I get. In particular I watch FOX, CNN, MSNBC, CBS, DTIME, BBC and PBS the most, IN THAT ORDER - which are programmed to loop on one of my remote buttons.

Most watched political shows: Bill O'Riley and Crossfire (in that order).

Oh.. You wanted sources:

The National Intelligence Estimate prepared for President Bush lays out three possible scenarios for the future of Iraq, a US intelligence official confirmed to the <Boston> Globe yesterday: The best case is that the war-torn nation maintains a fragile political stability; a second scenario envisions political fragmentation that prevents the creation of a stable democracy; the worst-case scenario is that civil war erupts in Iraq.
http://occupationwatch.org/article.php?id=6856

Look through the links on the right hand side of the page, which will take you to articles from the BBC, NY Times, Boston Globe, and other newspapers from around the world.

While hard %'s are not given, it is clear that Iraq is a nation that we are having to force democracy upon - something that never works!

Wade.

 

[Bonnie]

Actually I watch all the news channels on the 400 or so channels I get. In particular I watch FOX, CNN, MSNBC, CBS, DTIME, BBC and PBS the most, IN THAT ORDER - which are programmed to loop on one of my remote buttons.

Most watched political shows: Bill O'Riley and Crossfire (in that order).

Oh.. You wanted sources:



Look through the links on the right hand side of the page, which will take you to articles from the BBC, NY Times, Boston Globe, and other newspapers from around the world.

While hard %'s are not given, it is clear that Iraq is a nation that we are having to force democracy upon - something that never works!

Wade.

And so you are saying Democracy and freedom bad, Hussein and tyranny good ?

 

[wade]

And so you are saying Democracy and freedom bad, Hussein and tyranny good ?

No, what I am saying is that I do not believe democracy will work in Iraq.

Personally, I think if we are going to try "nation building" in Iraq and want it to have any chance of success, the country must be divided in to at least 3 sub-states. These states might or might not be part of a larger whole, but probably even if they are that would not last.

The structure of those three sub-states might have democratic aspects, but it must also be sufficiently religiously based to satisfy the moslims that it is in keeping with the teachings of the Qu'ran. We would then have to hope these did not degenerate into fundimentalist governments.

Under the current plan I think the most likely outcome of this whole thing is a very bloody civil war - probably by spring 2005.

Wade.

 

[wade]

Looked through them, not too biased! Perhaps BBC would be something of a reputable source but NY Times? Boston Globe? And the site itself, "exposing the military operation in Iraq????

Hmmm... so just what sources meet Sir Evil's approval? Other than Fox News?

Wade.

 

[wade]

Wise ass Wade - any news source is acceptable! Iraq occupation watch???

Pure Propoganda site!!

I'd not have referenced it except it in turn refrences "reputable" newpapers.

You are trying to invalidate those newspapers because of the site that hosts their articles (or links to such)? This is obviously just a tactic you are trying to use because you don't like the content of those articles.

Wade.

 

[Bonnie]

No, what I am saying is that I do not believe democracy will work in Iraq.

Personally, I think if we are going to try "nation building" in Iraq and want it to have any chance of success, the country must be divided in to at least 3 sub-states. These states might or might not be part of a larger whole, but probably even if they are that would not last.

The structure of those three sub-states might have democratic aspects, but it must also be sufficiently religiously based to satisfy the moslims that it is in keeping with the teachings of the Qu'ran. We would then have to hope these did not degenerate into fundimentalist governments.

Under the current plan I think the most likely outcome of this whole thing is a very bloody civil war - probably by spring 2005.

Wade.

And so these three sub -states would have their own tribal representation that would answer to the central government?

I guess I just give the Iraqis credit for being more sophisticated, at least for the most part, (smaller poorer areas not withstanding) and wanting a free and prospersous country, so this would be their incentive to make it work. I certainly don't think it will be easy or quick, no one in their right mind would, your dealing with so many complex circumstances, but in the end I do think it will work

 

[wade]

And so these three sub -states would have their own tribal representation that would answer to the central government?

I guess I just give the Iraqis credit for being more sophisticated, at least for the most part, (smaller poorer areas not withstanding) and wanting a free and prospersous country, so this would be their incentive to make it work. I certainly don't think it will be easy or quick, no one in their right mind would, your dealing with so many complex circumstances, but in the end I do think it will work

If you look at the demographics, Iraq is culturally/religously broken into 3 regions. By having majority rule, effectively the Kurds will be at the mercy of the Shites and Suni. These other two moslim sects can band together on issues which benifit both of them at the expense of the Kurds. The Kurds of course know this, so they are leary of democracy. Likewise, the Suni's are leary of democracy because the Shites and the Kurds might gang up against thier interests. And the Baath's are likewise concerned about everybody...

These elections are going to be forced through in January, and once this has happened the game is betting on Iraq accepting the legitimacy of the electorate - but they won't because its "not going to be a perfect election". So then any group that is not happy with the outcome will claim the election is illigitimate and this leads to a mess.

I think we will spend at least 4 more years in Iraq, spend half a trillion dollars on this fiasco, and then in the end it will still fall apart.

You think it will work, I do not. We shall see.

Wade.

 

[wade]

Negative! if facts or facts I have nothing to say! anyone can referece a paper article and make it sound favorable to their cause, especially a site that is obviously ant - conservative!

Umm... the articles were not "referenced", they were presented in their entirety.

Wade.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

If you look at the demographics, Iraq is culturally/religously broken into 3 regions. By having majority rule, effectively the Kurds will be at the mercy of the Shites and Suni. These other two moslim sects can band together on issues which benifit both of them at the expense of the Kurds. The Kurds of course know this, so they are leary of democracy. Likewise, the Suni's are leary of democracy because the Shites and the Kurds might gang up against thier interests. And the Baath's are likewise concerned about everybody...

These elections are going to be forced through in January, and once this has happened the game is betting on Iraq accepting the legitimacy of the electorate - but they won't because its "not going to be a perfect election". So then any group that is not happy with the outcome will claim the election is illigitimate and this leads to a mess.

I think we will spend at least 4 more years in Iraq, spend half a trillion dollars on this fiasco, and then in the end it will still fall apart.

You think it will work, I do not. We shall see.

Wade.

That's why there needs to be a bill of rights to protect the rights of all individuals, even individuals of ethnic minority.

More gloom and doom from wade.

 

[redminnow]

What is happening in Iraq at the moment is that the Pres is deciding that it isn't going to work to wait until after the election to apply more efforts to
whittle down some of the insurgents and terrorists.
It should be interesting to see what happens when the pressure goes up.
Personally, I am in the Zxenith camp as to being there at all. It seems like a sudden side step away from the Saudi - Osama Bin Laden. What are the other secrets we don't know about the Saudi's? We sure pulled troops out of there fast.
I am stricken with an ability to look at the whole picture, not a narrow side view. I do not think that President Bush has the brain power to be in charge,
nor do I think that Vice President Cheney has any of the assets needed to run this country. Every since he insinuated that if he and Bush are not reelected that we would probably be attacked by terrorists. Does this mean
that we were attacked on 9-11 because Bush got elected? hummmmmmmm

 

[Annie]

What is happening in Iraq at the moment is that the Pres is deciding that it isn't going to work to wait until after the election to apply more efforts to
whittle down some of the insurgents and terrorists.
It should be interesting to see what happens when the pressure goes up.
Personally, I am in the Zxenith camp as to being there at all. It seems like a sudden side step away from the Saudi - Osama Bin Laden. What are the other secrets we don't know about the Saudi's? We sure pulled troops out of there fast.
I am stricken with an ability to look at the whole picture, not a narrow side view. I do not think that President Bush has the brain power to be in charge,
nor do I think that Vice President Cheney has any of the assets needed to run this country. Every since he insinuated that if he and Bush are not reelected that we would probably be attacked by terrorists. Does this mean
that we were attacked on 9-11 because Bush got elected? hummmmmmmm

How do you account for:
USS Cole??
African Embassies??
WTC first attack??
Beirut??
Iran??
Somolia??

 

[Zxenith]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zxenith
We are not in Iraq because of terrorism, we are in there because George W. Bush became president, and he wants to finish where his dad left off. Bush just used the fear that Americans had for terrorism as a ploy to get us involved.

That is a petty dumb statement! any proof to back up that statement?

Well, why do I believe this? Let me see. Back when Bush was governer of Texas, and running for president, he was asked if he was going to try to start a war in Iraq, and he was dodging the question. Now, I either became a pyschic, or it was not hard to read his intentions inf Iraq. Bush has had an agenda there, and I can not believe you didn't see this one coming. Noone is that naive. You may not want to admit it because it would hurt your view of Bush. Again, I just do not understand why smart people become naive when dealing with something Bush does. The guy is not all that bright, and most likely his cabinet are most likely pulling the strings Ohhh, did I say that!

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Yes. The agenda is fighting world terrorism. Saddam already violated umpteen resolutions. What more of an excuse do you need? You're ridiculous.

Bush/Cheney '04. More of the same is what we need.

 

[Faux Pas]

Let me ask you, who do you think we are helping in Iraq? Would it be contradictory to ask also who we have killed and maimed in Iraq? Are we in Iraq for financial/corporate reasons? If not why are so many companies flocking over there when receiving lucrative "re-building" contracts.

I would like to know from people with different points of view from myself, to define a terrorist in Iraq, and how this differs from Iraqis who hate us and attack us? Define what a successful outcome in Iraq would be, and lastly define a democracy, and why/why not the current "Democratic" system set up by the United States truely is a democracy.

"The American soldier is trying to protect me from the terrorists and the American president saved me from Saddam's regime. If this is an occupation then I show my deepest respect to it and if such suicide attacks are called resistance then let the resistance go to hell." - Hoshyar Zakhoi-Duhok/Iraq

 

[dumphauler]

Well, why do I believe this? Let me see. Back when Bush was governer of Texas, and running for president, he was asked if he was going to try to start a war in Iraq, and he was dodging the question. Now, I either became a pyschic, or it was not hard to read his intentions inf Iraq. Bush has had an agenda there, and I can not believe you didn't see this one coming. Noone is that naive. You may not want to admit it because it would hurt your view of Bush. Again, I just do not understand why smart people become naive when dealing with something Bush does. The guy is not all that bright, and most likely his cabinet are most likely pulling the strings Ohhh, did I say that!

People Don't like to be wrong, and don't like to question where our military is involved, I wish they were more willing to treat our action's with more objectivity, and call white white and having the ability to call black black.
I'm not a bush hater I voted for him but I know what i saw in the runup to the Iraq war, I'm not happy about it but there's no doubt In my mind it was made up. That smoke screen "We better stick behind him because they know more than we do " yeah rite!

 

[Annie]

People Don't like to be wrong, and don't like to question where our military is involved, I wish they were more willing to treat our action's with more objectivity, and call white white and having the ability to call black black.
I'm not a bush hater I voted for him but I know what i saw in the runup to the Iraq war, I'm not happy about it but there's no doubt In my mind it was made up. That smoke screen "We better stick behind him because they know more than we do " yeah rite!

yeah, right to all you said.