Iraqisation of the conflict ?

[padisha emperor]

Do you think that it is a good idea ?
In Vietnam the USA did that, a vietnamisation of the war. At least, the communist tanks entered in Saigon.....so failure.

Now, Bush want to do the same thing. Some say that it is fro Iraq : Iraq is an independant country, and soon iraq could resolve the crisis itself. We make no interference.
The interference has already been comited.
And I find this solution really easy and quite onsable : USA came, did war, killed killed killed, devasted all, transform the cities in deserts, and when the situation is in a deepshit, liek now, the US withdraw......like : How, shit ! ...euh, iraq, good continuation, I have to do something now....".

Esay, isn't it ? When a country bring death and destruction, at less it help to the reconstruction, but doesn't leave before the end.

Kerry want that the the international community and the NATO help USA. It can be good.

 

[insein]

Since you lack both a firm grasp of the English language as well as the situation, i'll spare you the standard response since you simply wouldn't understand it anyway both from a linguistic standpoint as well as an ideological standpoint.

 

[padisha emperor]

speak in french, i'll laugh.
Not easy for me to speak of politic, religion, war, and several other subject in a foreign language....

It was just a question....

Only to know if USA will leave Iraq.
sure, it wil save US lives. But it is not fair, from a contry who bring chaos.

 

[insein]

speak in french, i'll laugh.
Not easy for me to speak of politic, religion, war, and several other subject in a foreign language....

It was just a question....

Only to know if USA will leave Iraq.
sure, it wil save US lives. But it is not fair, from a contry who bring chaos.

sigh. I spoke mostly of your lack of understanding to the situation. The US obviously will leave Iraq when the IRaqi forces are capable of defending their country autonomously. I spoke of your ignorance when you say things like...

USA came, did war, killed killed killed, devasted all, transform the cities in deserts, and when the situation is in a deepshit, liek now, the US withdraw......like : How, shit ! ...euh, iraq, good continuation, I have to do something now....".

USA came did war, we killed, killed killed Saddam's forces and the many terrorists that came from neighboring countries savoring a shot to kill an American.

Devasting all i think not. More like Liberating 30 million people who otherwise would have lived a life of oppression fearing any opposition to their former regime would result in torture for themselves, their family and all those that knew them.

The cities were not transformed to deserts when the entire nation IS in fact a desert.

The situation is not in deepshit when we have performed one of the most successful military operations in WORLD history. Less than 2 years after invasion, we have disposed the old regime and setup an interim government in its place. Elections will be held for the first time in a truely democratic fashion a mere 2 years after we came into Iraq. Post WW2 Germany and Japan took 10+ years before they held democratic elections and we still have troops in both nations. So i would say your statement above is ridiculous.

As for the rest, perhaps one of our local liberals can translate into better english the normal liberal gibberish.

 

[padisha emperor]

The situation is not in deepshit when we have performed one of the most successful military operations in WORLD history

And after you dare to tell me that French are arrogant....
Alexander, Caesar, August, Trojan, Charlemagne, William the Conqueror, Philippe II Auguste, Charles VII, Charles Quint, Louis XIII, XIV, Nelson, Napoleon, Bismarck, Foch, Joffre, Eisenhower, Montgomery, Nimitz....you are right, the US invasion of Iraq have to be put on the side of these men....it is the same thing...

Less than 2 years after invasion, we have disposed the old regime and setup an interim government in its place. Elections will be held for the first time in a truely democratic fashion a mere 2 years after we came into Iraq. Post WW2 Germany and Japan took 10+ years before they held democratic elections and we still have troops in both nations. So i would say your statement above is ridiculous.

No, you're ridiculous : think one second : maybe it took 10 years for Germany and Japan : but after this time, the 2 countries belong to the heavy weight of the world economy.
In 1957, only 12 years afetr the war who totally destruct Germany, France and Germany grounded the EU. Before, the both countries alreadu have trade arrangements.

It took 1 yaers, but HERE you did a really good job.
The countries were peacful, in good haelth...

Iraq is at war against USA, not officialy, but every days bombs falling in the green corner where the US and iraqi government are.
The fact is that the situation is not under the control of the US army. 2 days ago, US tanks have been attacked.

The government has no power, the democracy is for the moment a real utopy, it's only the rule of the terror.
the contry is already a desert, but the fight did that the next year, the iraqi desert wuld have grow up....If you see what i mean.

So, well, great job, you can be proud of you.
How can you compare the Germany/Japan situation with the Iraqi : Germany was destruct, in ashes : the Ruhr : bombs all days and all nights during several years. Dresde, Hambourg, Berlin, all the German cities...Japan : 2 atmoic bombs and a strong feeling of shame.
10 years later : magic, they are new and ready for the world.

Iraq is not.

Maybe in 10 years, but for the moment.....not really. Even really not.

 

[insein]

And after you dare to tell me that French are arrogant....
Alexander, Caesar, August, Trojan, Charlemagne, William the Conqueror, Philippe II Auguste, Charles VII, Charles Quint, Louis XIII, XIV, Nelson, Napoleon, Bismarck, Foch, Joffre, Eisenhower, Montgomery, Nimitz....you are right, the US invasion of Iraq have to be put on the side of these men....it is the same thing...




No, you're ridiculous : think one second : maybe it took 10 years for Germany and Japan : but after this time, the 2 countries belong to the heavy weight of the world economy.
In 1957, only 12 years afetr the war who totally destruct Germany, France and Germany grounded the EU. Before, the both countries alreadu have trade arrangements.

It took 1 yaers, but HERE you did a really good job.
The countries were peacful, in good haelth...

Iraq is at war against USA, not officialy, but every days bombs falling in the green corner where the US and iraqi government are.
The fact is that the situation is not under the control of the US army. 2 days ago, US tanks have been attacked.

The government has no power, the democracy is for the moment a real utopy, it's only the rule of the terror.
the contry is already a desert, but the fight did that the next year, the iraqi desert wuld have grow up....If you see what i mean.

So, well, great job, you can be proud of you.
How can you compare the Germany/Japan situation with the Iraqi : Germany was destruct, in ashes : the Ruhr : bombs all days and all nights during several years. Dresde, Hambourg, Berlin, all the German cities...Japan : 2 atmoic bombs and a strong feeling of shame.
10 years later : magic, they are new and ready for the world.

Iraq is not.

Maybe in 10 years, but for the moment.....not really. Even really not.

You prove my point well. You obviously don't have a grasp of the situation so we will leave it at that.

 

[drac]

The situation is not in deepshit when we have performed one of the most successful military operations in WORLD history

And after you dare to tell me that French are arrogant....
Alexander, Caesar, August, Trojan, Charlemagne, William the Conqueror, Philippe II Auguste, Charles VII, Charles Quint, Louis XIII, XIV, Nelson, Napoleon, Bismarck, Foch, Joffre, Eisenhower, Montgomery, Nimitz....you are right, the US invasion of Iraq have to be put on the side of these men....it is the same thing...

Padisha, i think you missing a point. In term of military action, this was one of the best military operation in the world. Imho Insein is right on the money. We removed saddam and his regime with minimal amount of deaths both military and civilian and damage done to the country. As you said youself, germany was totally devastated after ww2. In iraq, we were able to start producing electricity in very short amount of time.
Granted, after the major militiary operations were over, we were not prepared as we should be, imho. But again, perhapse if at that time europe would realized that saddam is over and we are not backing down and join us, instead of .......

How can you compare the Germany/Japan situation with the Iraqi : Germany was destruct, in ashes : the Ruhr : bombs all days and all nights during several years. Dresde, Hambourg, Berlin, all the German cities...Japan : 2 atmoic bombs and a strong feeling of shame.
10 years later : magic, they are new and ready for the world

vs

devasted all, transform the cities in deserts

Do not you contradict yourself here? Is iraq desert and totally destroyed by coalition forces or not? If yes,why not compare it to Germany?

Iraq is at war against USA, not officialy, but every days bombs falling in the green corner where the US and iraqi government are.
The fact is that the situation is not under the control of the US army. 2 days ago, US tanks have been attacked. The government has no power, the democracy is for the moment a real utopy, it's only the rule of the terror.
the contry is already a desert, but the fight did that the next year, the iraqi desert wuld have grow up....If you see what i mean.

No one said it will be done in 1 or 2 years. Perhapse 10, it is hard to help others to build a civil and democratic society, especially than country has very little or non of democratic history. So why not join?

As for your original point of iraqinisation of conflict. Was not France one of the first who said that power needs to be transfered to iraqis right away during the UN meeting, when we went there to ask for help? Even although iraqis themself were not ready. As you pointed out yourself they are not ready even now to totally control they country.
Both bush and kerry wants international help. the difference is that we will give up. Bush wants military/security control to be with us. Kerry will give up most of it to international organization (correct me, i could be wrong on this simple expaination of the differences). Looking on the action of international community and its ability to act fast, i would stick with bush version (well... my understanding of it at least). What would you choose? (Keep Daufor, Kosovo in mind)

 

[nbdysfu]

If Kerry is elected, it is a significant probability that he will pull out, leaving Poland, the UK, and the rest of the coalition by themselves.

Bush and the Republicans will likely carry through with the promise to stay until the iraqis can defend and manage themselves and their political system. Moral responsibilities aside, it is also politically imperative to the Republican platform that the Iraq reconstrution is a success.

 

[drac]

If Kerry is elected, it is a significant probability that he will pull out, leaving Poland, the UK, and the rest of the coalition by themselves.

You really think so? Last i heard he was talking about pulling out in 4 years... i assume it is based on the international community and iraqis (hopefully) taking over.
I do not think poland, uk and the rest will stay if we will pull out. I bet they will be moving out on "the same boat as we are" if it comes to it.

 

[insein]

You really think so? Last i heard he was talking about pulling out in 4 years... i assume it is based on the international community and iraqis (hopefully) taking over.
I do not think poland, uk and the rest will stay if we will pull out. I bet they will be moving out on "the same boat as we are" if it comes to it.

Who the hell knows. He said pull out in 6 months. then he said he'd stay for 4 years. then he said he'd stay as long as neccessary. Then he said we did the right thing and would have gone to war with all we know now.

Do we wait for him to make up his mind as to what he would do as president or do we not let him get that chance?

 

[JIHADTHIS]

Who the hell knows. He said pull out in 6 months. then he said he'd stay for 4 years. then he said he'd stay as long as neccessary. Then he said we did the right thing and would have gone to war with all we know now.

Do we wait for him to make up his mind as to what he would do as president or do we not let him get that chance?

I'll take door #2, Monty..........

 

[nbdysfu]

Who the hell knows. He said pull out in 6 months. then he said he'd stay for 4 years. then he said he'd stay as long as neccessary. Then he said we did the right thing and would have gone to war with all we know now.

Really? I could have sworn I just heard him say the Iraq war was the wrong war for the wrong reasons! I guess it all depends on local wind directions, while he's on the campaign trail. Just wait for Florida!

You really think so? Last i heard he was talking about pulling out in 4 years... i assume it is based on the international community and iraqis (hopefully) taking over.

At any rate, he has more motivation to pull out than bush. He has already disrespected the coalition, by supporting the "no international support" meme, so why stop? The international community, meaning the UN, and France?

 

[drac]

ok i stand corrected.
i guess if kerry wins, padisha, you will get the scenario you are talking about with usa out of iraq

 

[NightTrain]

And after you dare to tell me that French are arrogant....
Alexander, Caesar, August, Trojan, Charlemagne, William the Conqueror, Philippe II Auguste, Charles VII, Charles Quint, Louis XIII, XIV, Nelson, Napoleon, Bismarck, Foch, Joffre, Eisenhower, Montgomery, Nimitz....you are right, the US invasion of Iraq have to be put on the side of these men....it is the same thing...

You missed a tremendous number of American heroes, in the hundreds of thousands, that gave their lives to liberate your country after your people surrendered to a neighbor that you should have dealt with years earlier and instead tried to appease.

Never forget General George S. Patton in your little shortlist. He kicked much German ass and you personally owe him and his troops much in spilled blood. Just the threat of Patton and a fictional American army enabled the successful invasion and liberation of France and Europe. After the invasion began, he sliced through German armies. He was Hell On Wheels.

No, you're ridiculous : think one second : maybe it took 10 years for Germany and Japan : but after this time, the 2 countries belong to the heavy weight of the world economy.

Germany and Japan stand on their own now. Just look at what Germany did with stabbing us in the back over Iraq because of your pissant Chirac's meddling? They do not belong to us, you're a fool to think so.

In 1957, only 12 years afetr the war who totally destruct Germany, France and Germany grounded the EU. Before, the both countries alreadu have trade arrangements.

Do you want me to clap for you? More importantly, do you think that's because America poured staggering amounts of money into Europe? Where else do you think the money came from? Brazil? Ethiopia?

It took 1 yaers, but HERE you did a really good job.

Yeah, no shit. Send Bush a postcard.

Iraq is at war against USA, not officialy, but every days bombs falling in the green corner where the US and iraqi government are.
The fact is that the situation is not under the control of the US army. 2 days ago, US tanks have been attacked.

Iraq has a shitload of terrorists there that are fighting against the USA. The deathknell of terrorism is a democratic Iraq, and everyone knows it. Except, apparently, you. When Iraq is free & and prospering as it should, the middle east will sit up and notice - and the surrounding tyrants will fall by popular revolution. Domino. Translate Domino into French and speak of this to your fellow frogs and get back to me.

The government has no power, the democracy is for the moment a real utopy, it's only the rule of the terror.
the contry is already a desert, but the fight did that the next year, the iraqi desert wuld have grow up....If you see what i mean.

No, sorry, after several minutes of mental gymnastics, I still can't see what you mean. But it is indeed a desert. One point.

So, well, great job, you can be proud of you.

Thank you. I am proud of I.

How can you compare the Germany/Japan situation with the Iraqi : Germany was destruct, in ashes : the Ruhr : bombs all days and all nights during several years. Dresde, Hambourg, Berlin, all the German cities...Japan : 2 atmoic bombs and a strong feeling of shame.
10 years later : magic, they are new and ready for the world.

Iraq is not.

Maybe in 10 years, but for the moment.....not really. Even really not.

Have patience, my impatient little liberal. Modern countries aren't born overnight. And this project is one America (and truthfully, the rest of the modern world) can't afford to fail at. If it takes trillions of dollars, it's worth it to avoid Denver or Chicago or New Orleans getting attacked by muslim fanatics.

America has saved the world before, and we are doing so again. What pisses us off is that this time the very people we rescued before are behaving like ill-tempered poodles and nipping us on the ankles as we go about our work, making the world safe for modern civilization.

If it were up to me, we'd drop kick the little mongrels yapping and biting our ankles. With friends like the French, who needs enemies?

 

[Annie]

NightTrain, it's good to see you here and right on target! This poor French guy, doesn't understand that what happened to Germany, in the sense of 'destruction' was the result of the real use of 'carpetbombing' since there was no such thing as 'precision bombing.'

Japan of course, was a different case altogether, the harbinger of what 'could have become' the face of the next modern war. Luckily, the Cold War became more or less just that, afterwards. 9/11 was the wake up call, in order to avoid worse, a new direction had to be taken.

The 'worse' could be seen as another attack OR it could be seen as the coalition not preempting, but destroying any country affiliated with the terrorists. What IF the US chose just to 'destroy' Afghanistan? Could have easily. But chose a less destructive path, for that we're criticised. Now Iraq, there was no doubt that IF the UN had given into the French and others demands for removal of sanctions-which the UN WAS moving towards, Saddam would have been back to his old tricks. The Iraq was 'prevented' this sort of problem from coming to pass-something that I'm not sure would have been an option for US prior to 9/11.

 

[dilloduck]

And after you dare to tell me that French are arrogant....
Alexander, Caesar, August, Trojan, Charlemagne, William the Conqueror, Philippe II Auguste, Charles VII, Charles Quint, Louis XIII, XIV, Nelson, Napoleon, Bismarck, Foch, Joffre, Eisenhower, Montgomery, Nimitz....you are right, the US invasion of Iraq have to be put on the side of these men....it is the same thing...




No, you're ridiculous : think one second : maybe it took 10 years for Germany and Japan : but after this time, the 2 countries belong to the heavy weight of the world economy.
In 1957, only 12 years afetr the war who totally destruct Germany, France and Germany grounded the EU. Before, the both countries alreadu have trade arrangements.

It took 1 yaers, but HERE you did a really good job.
The countries were peacful, in good haelth...

Iraq is at war against USA, not officialy, but every days bombs falling in the green corner where the US and iraqi government are.
The fact is that the situation is not under the control of the US army. 2 days ago, US tanks have been attacked.

The government has no power, the democracy is for the moment a real utopy, it's only the rule of the terror.
the contry is already a desert, but the fight did that the next year, the iraqi desert wuld have grow up....If you see what i mean.

So, well, great job, you can be proud of you.
How can you compare the Germany/Japan situation with the Iraqi : Germany was destruct, in ashes : the Ruhr : bombs all days and all nights during several years. Dresde, Hambourg, Berlin, all the German cities...Japan : 2 atmoic bombs and a strong feeling of shame.
10 years later : magic, they are new and ready for the world.

Iraq is not.

Maybe in 10 years, but for the moment.....not really. Even really not.

Dear Padisha,

Apparently you have not gotten the message. President Bush attempted to obtain world approval to begin an all out miltary conflict against those who would use terrorism or support terrorism in order to show the world that the United States WILL NOT tolerate it. The UN and many other countries(including France) refused to take this courageous step, often to protect their financial interests and to cover up the fact that these same countries and individuals were profiting by secretly defying UN "sanctions".
Instead of submitting to the weakness of the opponents of war, the US gathered what allies it could and went to war against Iraq to prove that WE MEAN WHAT WE SAY. Don't ever doubt us again if you do not like the outcome. The US does not need France or the UN to sanction the US defending itself and exposing the real goal of the Islamo-Facists. Stand by and watch what a country with a president who is courageous can do. You stand by and watch everything else ( Sudan, N Korea, Iran etc.)
When your country wakes up and sees itself going backwards, will you be too proud to join those who have the bravery to sacrifice for the stablity of the world ? Guess what?---WE DON"T CARE!

 

[padisha emperor]

Quote:
It took 1 yaers, but HERE you did a really good job.


Yeah, no shit. Send Bush a postcard

.

Ooops....I mean 10 years, I was speaking of Japan and Germany.

Quote:
How can you compare the Germany/Japan situation with the Iraqi : Germany was destruct, in ashes : the Ruhr : bombs all days and all nights during several years. Dresde, Hambourg, Berlin, all the German cities...Japan : 2 atmoic bombs and a strong feeling of shame.
10 years later : magic, they are new and ready for the world


vs

Quote:
devasted all, transform the cities in deserts


Do not you contradict yourself here? Is iraq desert and totally destroyed by coalition forces or not? If yes,why not compare it to Germany?

I meant : you can compare the situations because : the 3 countries were destruct, but after, Germany and Japan were in really good economicalo health.

Because Insein meant that the situation were the same for Iraq and Germany/Japan :

The situation is not in deepshit when we have performed one of the most successful military operations in WORLD history. Less than 2 years after invasion, we have disposed the old regime and setup an interim government in its place. Elections will be held for the first time in a truely democratic fashion a mere 2 years after we came into Iraq. Post WW2 Germany and Japan took 10+ years before they held democratic elections and we still have troops in both nations. So i would say your statement above is ridiculous

the situation can not be compared.

And, dear Insein, US still have troopsin Germany and Japan, but it is not to protect these countries, I think that now they are ready for doing it theirselves.
Us troops are in Germany in the case of a NATO presence, not to defend Germany. The german "Abwehr" is ready.

This bombardment of answers after my answer to Insein is MAYBE unles, or at least not in the good point : I just meant that the Insein 's comparaison was not well-chosen.

For the list of the great men, I forget Patton, yes. I forget also Leonidas, Themistocle, Miltiade, Turennes, Condé, Vauban - great man - , Bailli de Suffren, La Fayette, Rochambeau, De Grasse, Dumouriez, Hoche, Jourdan, Murat, Davout, Lannes, Augereau, Soult, Ney, Blücher, Sherman, Lee, Jackson, JEB Stuart, Grant, Longstreet, Farragut, Mc Arthur, Halsey, Spruance. You see, the great men of military History are really a lot.

Padisha, i think you missing a point. In term of military action, this was one of the best military operation in the world. Imho Insein is right on the money. We removed saddam and his regime with minimal amount of deaths both military and civilian and damage done to the country. As you said youself, germany was totally devastated after ww2. In iraq, we were able to start producing electricity in very short amount of time.

Maybe it was realy well thinking and well done, but....is it not too much to copmare it with the other great military events ?

I mean that the Iraqi army was not an ennemy who can defeat the US troops, above all in a conventional fight. US are too much superior.

If you say : "it was a really good military operation, well done, well prepare". I will agree.
But the ennemy was not a real real danger for the WHOLE US army and the US invasion.

This war was not like Salamine (-480) , Leuctres(-371), Gaugameles (-331), Cannes (-216), Alesia (-52), Castillon (1453), Trafalgar (1805), Austerlitz (1805), Iena (1806), Wagram (1809), Overlord (1944).

These battles, and I forget lots of other, were really great military events and really great great battles : really well prepared, perfectly executed.

For me, the Insein sentence mean that he compares Iraq 2003 with Austerlitz 1805 or Overlord 1944, which are maybe the 2 most perfect illustrations of the military genius.

 

[dilloduck]

.

Ooops....I mean 10 years, I was speaking of Japan and Germany.




I meant : you can compare the situations because : the 3 countries were destruct, but after, Germany and Japan were in really good economicalo health.

Because Insein meant that the situation were the same for Iraq and Germany/Japan :


the situation can not be compared.

And, dear Insein, US still have troopsin Germany and Japan, but it is not to protect these countries, I think that now they are ready for doing it theirselves.
Us troops are in Germany in the case of a NATO presence, not to defend Germany. The german "Abwehr" is ready.

This bombardment of answers after my answer to Insein is MAYBE unles, or at least not in the good point : I just meant that the Insein 's comparaison was not well-chosen.

For the list of the great men, I forget Patton, yes. I forget also Leonidas, Themistocle, Miltiade, Turennes, Condé, Vauban - great man - , Bailli de Suffren, La Fayette, Rochambeau, De Grasse, Dumouriez, Hoche, Jourdan, Murat, Davout, Lannes, Augereau, Soult, Ney, Blücher, Sherman, Lee, Jackson, JEB Stuart, Grant, Longstreet, Farragut, Mc Arthur, Halsey, Spruance. You see, the great men of military History are really a lot.




Maybe it was realy well thinking and well done, but....is it not too much to copmare it with the other great military events ?

I mean that the Iraqi army was not an ennemy who can defeat the US troops, almost in a conventional fight. US are too much superior.

If you say : "it was a really good military operation, well done, well prepare". I will agree.
But the ennemy was not a real real danger for the WHOLE US army and the US invasion.

This war was not like Salamine (-480) , Leuctres(-371), Gaugameles (-331), Cannes (-216), Alesia (-52), Castillon (1453), Trafalgar (1805), Austerlitz (1805), Iena (1806), Wagram (1809), Overlord (1944).

These battles, and I forget lots of other, were really great military events and really great great battles : really well prepared, perfectly executed.

For me, the Insein sentence mean that he compares Iraq 2003 with Austerlitz 1805 or Overlord 1944, which are maybe the 2 most perfect illustrations of the military genius.

As a great people are you will to tell your leaders that it is time NOW to act instead of talk? Wouldn't it feel nice to be helpful?

 

[padisha emperor]

Sure, it would be nice to be helpful.

But did USA ask for France's help when they went to Iraq ? ( it is a real question, I ask you). I don't remember.

 

[dilloduck]

Sure, it would be nice to be helpful.

But did USA ask for France's help when they went to Iraq ? ( it is a real question, I ask you). I don't remember.

OUI !