How about this? Iraq vs. Iran/Syria

[Zhukov]

What is there to stop us from transferring authority to the Iraqis, signing a mutual defense treaty with their new government, and then encourage them to declare the complicit allowance of terrorists to enter Iraq and commit murderous acts by Iran and Syria acts of war against Iraq?

Using our superior air power, and the numerous amounts of unemployed Iraqis and Iraqi soldiers, we will deal a death blow to two terrorist supporting regimes, allow these nations to be occupied by fellow moslems (which theoretically they might be more positively receptive too), and restore the pride and honor to the Iraqi people that having to be liberated by a foreign non-moslem power stripped them of.

This might work better against the Syrians than the Libyans, but slightly different strategies could be employed in each case, using what we have learned from our conquest and occupation of Iraq.

I know this is diabolically machiavellian, but any thoughts?

 

[freeandfun1]

Not at all a bad idea frankly. I am SERIOUSLY concerned that Israel might attack Syria before too long if Syria keeps trying to get missile/nuke technology from North Korea. A serious link between the two countries exist and something needs to be done.

The only problem I see with your idea is that the Iraqi's will, most likely, resist attacking Syria. Iran - no problem but Syria - I doubt it. Syrians and Iraqi's are too tied at the hip with each other. And frankly, the Shia in the south of Iraq might resist too since they are so close to the Iranians.

It does sound like something we would do though!

 

[Aquarian]

it may be what's happening/planned, it may be what's required to fight terroism tho I would prefer a method that restricted casualties to the terrorists specifically. not overly machiavellian, machiavelli would make syria or iran attack iraq so we could come from the side of the defender rather than the attacker, much better staging. perhaps make it look like iran attempted to take advantage of iraq's weakened state with syria as Iran's ally.

 

[Zhukov]

Ah, but they are attacking Iraq. If Iranian or Syrian nationalists are funded by their governments and allowed, even aided, into traveling into Iraq only to detonate a bomb that kills nothing but Iraqis, isn't that a state sponsored attack?

By invading and occupying Iraq, we have made the terrorists (and their sponsors) attack Iraq.

And in the vein of your statements Free, we don't want Israel attacking anyone because then we have to sit out.

We can have sunni Iraqi's help the sunnis in Iran who dislike their government oust the theocrats. And with shites occupying shite Syria, there isn't much chance of infightning.

The point is, there wouldn't be much fight at all. We would annhilate any military resistance from the air and the Iraqis would drive in and assume responsibility for security.

 

[Annie]

I really like that proposal. I mean I really like it. For awhile now I've thought Israel may attempt to take out Iran's nuclear plants. I wonder if they have located them all now?

 

[Merlin1047]

Originally posted by Zhukov
What is there to stop us from transferring authority to the Iraqis, signing a mutual defense treaty with their new government, and then encourage them to declare the complicit allowance of terrorists to enter Iraq and commit murderous acts by Iran and Syria acts of war against Iraq?

Whooohooo! You certainly merit high marks in the creativity department.

One big problem - have you ever seen these guys fight? They advance until they meet resistance, then they withdraw to a safe distance and start bowing to the east. No, I'm not making this up. If you watched any of the accounts of moslem "combat" in Afghanistan, that is exactly what happened time after time.

Then consider the war between Iraq and Iran. A battle of incompetents. The reason that moslem armies got such a fierce reputation was thanks to this war and thanks to that coward Jimmy Carter who was too spineless to deal with the Iranians when they took the embassy hostages. Finally, Carter gets around to mounting a half-assed rescue mission that was doomed from the start. That only served to strenghten the illusion of moslems as warriors.

Fact is that the average moslem is ill-trained, poorly paid, under-fed and unmotivated. Witness the fact that our troops went through them like a hot knife through butter not once, but twice.

But then again, they're not too bright. If you could get them to hating each other sufficiently, they might just keep at it long enough to do some damage. Hmmmm - think I've about talked myself out of my own objection.

 

[Zhukov]

Again, the beauty of the plan is the Iraqis don't have to do much fighting, if any at all. What they will do is round up the prisoners, occupy the cities, be the 'boots on the ground', keep the peace, conduct the police action.

It doesn't even need to be too thorough. We just need those regimes gone, their weapons confiscated, and their weapons programs stopped. The Iraqis and the U.N. can help set up governments after the fact.

Our persistent physical prescene will be limited to moderately sized out of the way garrisons/air bases and intelligence operatives to help round up suspected terrorists. Which means fewer American targets and less negative political fall-out.

 

[Lefty Wilbury]

i posted this on another board undre another name. it's about what might happen after we leave iraq:

it's funny that people are COMPLAINING about an iraq civil war after we leave. everyone should WANT one. what better way to occupy the world's terrorist then giving them a playgroud to kick the shit out of each other on. here i'll break it down: if it's shiites vs sunnis here's what will happen

iran and their respective terror orgs: hezbullah and islamic jihad will jump in on the shiite's side

syria,saudi arabia,jordan,egypt,pakistan and their terror allies,al queda egyptian islamic jihad, will join the sunni's side since their all sunni dominated countires.

you would have all the countires joining in and arming their respective side. all the nuts from the terror groups will have a field day going after each other. one of obls stated goals is to make the sunni brach of islam the dominate one. if you don't think this will happen and the muslums won't turn on each other look at pakistan. shiiites and sunnis attack and kill each other with great regularity. they BOMB each others mosques.

now how will this benifit us. what better way to get terrorists off our backs then turning them on each other which they will do. they work together now because they hate us but if you give them a place to play off they'll go. iran will have hezbullah and it's quos force stream into iraq. they'll pull them off the golan heights and out of the west back and send them to iraq solving that problem. al queda will go there too. every radical cleric will be calling for all the nuts to go to iraq to defend their branch of islam. all the countries that send money abroad to attack us will send it to iraq. it will also benifit us because as the nuts go off to play and leave places like iran the pro democracy voices will be able to speak out since all the people that keep them in line like hebullah would have sent their people to iraq. after all is said and done the people will then relize they need a change.

 

[Zhukov]

Well...the advantage of my plan is tens of millions of people won't have to die.