Iraq - Bring soldiers back ... ?

[LadyKiKi]

Don't know if you seen the news lately, but Iraq is slowly heading towards Civil War (I know it's been like that, but just between now and last week, where a place of worship somewhere in one of the cities (I forget) has been attacked, resulting in a lot of hate and anger and more violence). There are many many US soldiers and UK soldiers (not AS many as the US, but still a fair amount. That is the "main" force there, but also to count many other but much smaller countries helping out, Japan, France, China, Germany etc).

Of course, there's been many times by the public and more importantly the families of the soldiers involved in Iraq, to bring them back. But seeing the images and videos on TV of how much of a hell hole Iraq has dug itself into just so recently, as it seems to be getting so much worst, would it make sense to pull everyone out and let people in Iraq run wild until a "dominant" "side" is settled, or bring even more troops in to (try and) control the situation, resulting in more deaths due to hatred by the Iraqis. :-?

 

[Elemmire]

how's japan helping out I thought they weren't allowed to have an army of any kind after WWII (just curious... I don't remember exactly what their military status became after WWII I just thought it was down to zero ).

Anyways.. I'm torn upon it... I'd like them back safe and sound being american citizens and all and it's not nice to see people getting hurt or killed no matter the nationality.. but there has to be some order in the country and right now there really isn't a set Iraqy (sp?) police force of really any kind. It might be worse if they aren't there.

 

[Sneakypants]

I'm so sick of the Mid-East at this point.
I'd go with the pull-out method...Let them kill each other for what they each believe in. If they earn democracy, it'll be worth more to them. Unlike when I see some immigrants here in America that are totally unappreciative of the gift of freedom, coming to expect that things will fall in their laps and that loopholes will safely guide them through life.

Get our troops back.
Let others fight their own battles.
If someone starts shit with us, finish it...And don't be pussy about it.

 

[Rones]

Many innocent people will die in the crossfire if we abandon Iraq. That is not an option I think anyone can make in good conscience. Not all of Iraq are dirty terrorists to be thrown to their deaths. There are many people there just like us, just like your parents, your family. Unless you would feel fine abandoning your family in an Iraq civil war, then that is not an option.

Abandoning and going back in is about the worst thing we could do. It would be the equivalent of starting from scratch and a waste of all the work and progress that has been made up to this point.

Just for perspective 56,000,000 (yes, million) people died 60 years ago in WW2 because the world tried to play isolationist and ignore the problems of others. Our losses in Iraq have been beyond extremely light by comparison.

 

[Sneakypants]

True. That figure also includes genocides and major cities nuked, however. Two things that contributed to massive losses. Add inferior military tactics, and medical care, and you lose many more by the masses.

If either of those things happened today, the person (or people) involved would be shut down much quicker, rather than ignored for years on end.

 

[Elemmire]

I thought the atomic bombs (atleast in the second city) weren't that great in the casualty list.. or maybe I was just misinformed

 

[Rones]

I thought the atomic bombs (atleast in the second city) weren't that great in the casualty list.. or maybe I was just misinformed

Correct. Japan only suffered 700,000 civilian casulaties in the entire war (that includes deaths from the two bombs). Compare that to China's 6,000,000 civilian deaths. Pretty good breakdown here.

That figure also includes genocides and major cities nuked, however

The genocide and nukes actually make up a very small percentage of the deaths. Most estimates put genocide deaths in Germany around 600,000. However, the genocide in China could be much larger. It is very hard to tell what to contribute the Chinese civilian deaths to as there are so many. Estimates of Chinese deaths (military and civilian) range from 10million to 37million.

 

[Zhaoyun]

Nagasaki had at least 200,000 deaths.

 

[Sneakypants]

700k? Meh no biggie. lol
My point? We freaked about 3k on 9/11.
Like I said, less needs to happen before action is taken. Backs would not be turned.

Also, I said genocides, not just specifying one form in China or Germany.

 

[Sculli]

I'd go with the pull-out method...Let them kill each other for what they each believe in. If they earn democracy, it'll be worth more to them.

Amen to that.
I have a few friends who are serving over there right now. Couple are Chinook pilots, one is a medic, and one is with the Stryker Brigade.

They are all fine, but the medic one has had a tough time. He was shot at by a "sniper" a few months back. I put the sniper in quotes because it wasn't a sniper like we know out of the movies, it was just some dude with an 80 year old rifle on some rooftop while they were on foot partol. Sniper missed the medic and hit a kid that was running around the soldiers with other kids to grab some chololate they were handing out.

Long story short, medic saves kid, kids family thinks medic is god. Every day, and I am not making this shit up, every day since then the mother of the kid comes to the base gate and leaves fresh baked bread for the medic. Kid actually speaks some English by now. The whole thing is pretty cool.

Medic out on patrol last Friday, roadside bomb went off, knocked them silly, no casualties, they had their humvee fortified as if it was a Russian tank. The thing only goes like 30mph anymore because it is so heavy, but it saved their lives. Medic was due to leave Iraq on last Sunday for a two week stay here at home. Other dudes said: No way, we need to keep you here for observation. He's got a concussion, was calling here at 4am local time the day after thinking it is 11am, so he isn't fine per se, but they say it will wear off and he will be fine again.

Striker Brigade has lost like 30 people in Iraq since they were deployed, most of them to roadside bombs or RPG ambushes. My friend who is serving with that unit saw his buddies die worst than in Black Hawk Down. His wife here at home is throwing up as soon as she eats something because she is scared shitless that he will be blown up next.

Yeah, sure, they did sign up for that kind of stuff, volunteered. Did they also volunteer to forfeit compat pay when Dubya declared in 2003 that the war is over? I am all for sending people out to open a can of whoop-ass on someone, but ffs, equip them right. The unit the medic is with didn't have bullet proof vests that have collars for about a year into the deployment. They were wearing scarfs in 100 degree weather just to make it appear as if they vest has a collar from afar, so that they won't be shot in the neck. Their original humvee offered about as much protection as a coke can. Now it looks like something out of Mad Max though.

Anyway, bring the boys home and let those other dudes kill themselves for however long they like. Incidentally, not a single member of the White House, the Senate, or Congress has any family member who is serving in Iraq. So much for leading by example.

 

[Sculli]

Just for perspective 56,000,000 (yes, million) people died 60 years ago in WW2 because the world tried to play isolationist and ignore the problems of others. Our losses in Iraq have been beyond extremely light by comparison.

Come on Rones, you know better than to compare WW2 to Iraq, or any modern war for that matter.

 

[Zylia]

We'll be at war for many years to come. It's sadly inevitable. The whole Bush declaration of a War on Terrorism doesn't stop in Iraq or in the middle east even. If it's actually upheld in the future.

I found a good map that illustrates this point. When Bush states that we're at war against terrorists and any nation who harbors them, that is a BROAD statement. Most people now associate terrorism with the islamic fundamentalists of the Middle East.

Image is very large, and therefore im not stretching the forum to show it.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/90/International_terrorist_incidents.gif

This image was of 2000. Not the post 9/11 world. Prior to 9/11 terrorism happened in all of the regions indicated on the map. Columbia particularly had many incidents. Much more than Iraq. Why are we not fighting against terrorism in Columbia? or India? What about the Sudan People’s Liberation Army (SPLA), a terrorist group within Sudan? This is one of the most compelling arguments I find against the whole ideal of a War entirely on Terrorism. By declaring a war on terrorism, in essence we've dedicated ourself to decades of warfare if what's happening in Iraq is repeated elsewhere.

How can we say that we stand for spreading freedom and democracy, when our only focus is on the Middle East? Spreading democracy to the middle east is obviously in our best interests. It is also a known fact that no industrialized democracy has ever gone to war against one another. By democratizing the middle east, we've rid ourselves of a large militaristic problem, while also establishing an everlasting trading partner.

It'll be interesting in 2008 when G.W.B. is gone. Neither a Democrat or a Republican will pull troops out though. As much as we want it at home, it wont happen. It can't.

The most we can do is blame the administration for the problems incurred in Iraq, and not our troops. The troops need our support. They hate hearing that we want them out of this war because many of them fully believe that they are serving their country and fulfilling their duties. They are working with the Iraqi people now and they are actually making life better for them... even if the reason for being there is somewhat misguided.

 

[Sneakypants]

Considering that 60 years ago, things were vastly different. Undisputable fact, period. And that stories like Sculli's post are pretty much what you see across the board from military and their families, I reiterate that I think it would be best to leave now. ...Or perhaps just leave a very, very light force that could very, very quickly leave if need be.

It's not our country or our place to guide them towards their future.
My father gave me plenty of advice, but I am the one that lives my life through successes and learnings. It would irritate me if he held my hand when I walked these days. All a person needs are the tools and ideas, and then the freedom to execute their plans. They have the tools and ideas. If the rest of the country doesn't want that, then the majority will have spoken, and freedom and democracy will not prevail.

This statement, "There are many people there just like us, just like your parents, your family." I agree with less and less as I sit and think about it.

I don't see many that are just like me, you or anyone I know. I see a very different people. I admit that many may be peaceful and that many may not want the situation they face. Civil war is, um, war. Many of them are NOT like people I know and love. Many are barbaric. Many embrace, in the literal sense, and eye for an eye. Many will kill themselves for what they believe in...With our soldiers there, they do that. What do we need our soldiers there for? It's hardly preventing anything. And they have been given the chance at freedom and democracy. Now it is up to them to make that sink or swim. Will we be there forever, holding their hands?
After our own civil war, our own people came to conclusions about the future of the country. Iraq needs to do the same if they cannot handle it peacefully. We have nothing to do with that, nor should we.

 

[Elemmire]

700k? Meh no biggie. lol
My point? We freaked about 3k on 9/11.
Like I said, less needs to happen before action is taken. Backs would not be turned.

Also, I said genocides, not just specifying one form in China or Germany.

well that's cause they were american lives and for everyone one american life it's easily equal to 50 other nationality lives D: /sarcasm

anyways.. I still think there could be some very bad reprecussions if we just up and left iraq.

 

[Marajade]

anyways.. I still think there could be some very bad reprecussions if we just up and left iraq.

Then you're stuck there forever. The situation there will never be "stable," not while you're forcing democracy on them. And even if you do magicly make them all happy and stop shooting people, all it'll take is some dictator to come into power again through diplomatic means, and revert it right back.

 

[Sneakypants]

well that's cause they were american lives and for everyone one american life it's easily equal to 50 other nationality lives D: /sarcasm

anyways.. I still think there could be some very bad reprecussions if we just up and left iraq.

I agree with you on leaving. EDIT: misread that. I disagree with you, dammit! lol

I know you are being sarcastic with the first statement, but just to toss out the counterpoint and simultaneous lack of similarity of today versus 60 years ago....Normandy.
The fact that we treasure our citizens lives is a grand thing. It should mean all the more when they are practically lining themselves up for the slaughter to defeat a facist regime seeking world domination, sustaining massive losses, but achieving victory.

That was 60 years ago. All heart and determination, those soldiers won the battle at unspeakable costs. Today, some suits would sit in a board room and assess the situation for 6 months before taking any action. It's good because it saves lives. It's bad because we are too soft when it comes to policy and integrity.

The US needs to do what it says and say what it does more. And cut out the BS in between. We did what we had to in Iraq. They have tools to move forward. It's up to them, collectively. The "people like us" and the captain insanos. They are the ones that need to live under one roof now.

 

[Elemmire]

Then you're stuck there forever. The situation there will never be "stable," not while you're forcing democracy on them. And even if you do magicly make them all happy and stop shooting people, all it'll take is some dictator to come into power again through diplomatic means, and revert it right back.

that could happen anywhere, in theory, Mara. Could even happen here D:

 

[Marajade]

that could happen anywhere, in theory, Mara. Could even happen here D:

I thought it did <,<
*Political cheepshot 4tw!*

 

[Sneakypants]

that could happen anywhere, in theory, Mara. Could even happen here D:

True, but we're not bombing the Girl Scouts just yet.

 

[Rones]

Come on Rones, you know better than to compare WW2 to Iraq, or any modern war for that matter.

Oh yeah, your right. It's more than a year old, no one can remember that far back. :wacko:

I am all for sending people out to open a can of whoop-ass on someone, but ffs, equip them right.

By that argument, the war was very good. Those advancements were not going to come or very slowly if not for the war. Nothing stimulates development like instant demand.

I don't see many that are just like me, you or anyone I know. I see a very different people.

Thank our media for that. They never show the little children going to school, the busness men going to work, the people living normal lives. All we see are fanatics at rallies and the rubble left by terrorist attacks. Believe it or not, there are people there. Are they exactly like us? Of course not, but they are still human and should be valued so.

All those lives lost up until now will be for nothing if we leave now. All the progress and development will be torn apart by a civil war. And worst of all...the innocent people we have protected will be exposed to the horrors of religious genocidal warfare as they are slaughtered. Just look at what happened in China during the communist revolution.