Iraqi Veterans Against the War

[saturneptune]

We are already seen as weak to our enemies because we did not conduct this war as a war - it has been conducted as nation building while trying to "win the hearts and minds" of the Iraqi people. Our military has had to fight with one hand tied behind their back because they might "offend" the people. When fighting a war to win, you don't worry about building hearts and minds while you are fighting it. We lost control of the situation only a few days after the statue fell and it has spiraled into more and more chaos ever since. If, we had gone in there with more troops (as was recommended by some of the generals), we could have had more of a presence to control looting, etc., in the neighborhoods. If our troops would have been allowed to fight without strange rules of engagement (like not going into mosques, blowing up mosques, etc.) we could have squashed the insurgency at the get go. Bush has arrogantly blundered all the way because he had no realistic post-Saddam plan, and in the process has cost over 3000 lives of American young men and women and what is the figure now, 40,000 wounded? :BangHead:

Lady Eagle,
You pretty well have this nailed down. Bush and Cheney are pathetic.

 

[carpro]

Daisy,

Thank you for your response and thank you for doing it with thoughtfulness rather than some of the personal attacks that some like to make against each other on this site.

I can only give you my perspective related to some of your comments:
What is the purpose of this conflict?

Haven't we already won? There are no WMDs, no nuclear programme, Saddam is overthrown, tried and hanged, his sons are dead and we brought democracy to Iraq (and we got the oil contracts in petrodollars, not petroeuros).

What is left to do? I don't think it is feasible to try to establish a permanent military base there any longer, do you? While it would've been nice to move troops out of Saudi Arabia and the Islamic holy lands and into Iraq that was never a stated goal, so perhaps we could forgo it.

The purpose of this conflict is not only to deny Al Queda a foothold in Iraq, but to destroy Al Queda whereever it might be found. If children can be raised without hate toward America... then we have a chance to succeed. We must give every effort to support our Iraqi brothers in this conflict. They have recieved much training from us, but we can't just leave them. It's as if they are a young tree with fresh roots, if we leave too soon, the wind will simply blow them away.

Even though Iraq was not involved in 9/11, we know that Al Queda did have contact with the Iraqi government. Not sure what the total extend was, but there was contact according to the 9/11 Commission Report. We know Al Queda is in Iraq now and active in the defeat of both the US and Iraq.

If we(US & Iraq) lose... Al Queda gets a new place to operate from. The war on terror has worked well in reducing the places they can go and also is making it more difficult to finance Al Queda.

Iraq is just one battleground in the War against terrorism. We have to be more patient than our enemies or we will lose this war. Americans have never been known for much patience.


Originally Posted by r
When our enemies smell fear and doubt... they see hope.

I haven't been there, but I suspect the smell of fear and doubt (and perhaps despair) is far, far stronger there than here.

I think you could be right about that and I think I know why. The last time we were in Iraq, back in 91, we made promises to some Iraqi's that we would back them up. Well... we left them and they faced Saddam and many of those people were killed. We cut and run.

Soon they will hear of a resolution from our congress basically saying... we are gonna cut and run. Put yourself in their place and maybe you would be hesitant to step up in a big fight if you knew that the person watching your back had backed out.

Quote:
Originally Posted by r
When our enemies see us more interested in attacking our president, than attacking our enemies... they see opportunity.

That's a bit strong - no one has attacked our president with cluster bombs, white phosphorous, sticks or stones. A few tough questions are not exactly the same as an attack.

Daisy, it's more than just questions. He's been called a liar, a murderer and much worse. It's personal, it's hateful. It's more than just disagreement on the part of many people.

The worse part is that it gives our enemies hope. Hope of succeeding. Hope of overcoming the US. Wasn't it Lincoln who said, a divided house cannot stand. That's where we are today.

I am afraid if the US is seen as weak to our enemies, it will embolden them to attack us some and repeatedly. Stepping out of Iraq just might make things even worse. I guess we will wait and pray and see.

I appreciate your heartfelt sentiments, but sad to say, you are wasting your well thought out post on liberals.

Thank you for your service. :applause: It is impossible for those who have never faced real danger in their entire lives to understand the bond of men in combat. They have never placed their lives entirely in the hands of others nor had others place their lives entirely in their hands.

 

[saturneptune]

I appreciate your heartfelt sentiments, but sad to say, you are wasting your well thought out post on liberals.

Thank you for your service. :applause: It is impossible for those who have never faced real danger in their entire lives to understand the bond of men in combat. They have never placed their lives entirely in the hands of others nor had others place their lives entirely in their hands.

The Vietnam card is getting old. Who wasnt in Vietnam around our age? John Kerry was in Vietnam. So what?

You seem to have this notion that all combat veterans should hold your political views. I can guarantee you they dont.

First you say the war in Iraq is a war to keep out of a war for survival, and claim it is like WW2. Now you are trying to compare a Vietnam War combat experience with what are troops are experiencing now. Which is it? Unless of course of think Vietnam was also like WW2. :BangHead:

 

[carpro]

The Vietnam card is getting old. Who wasnt in Vietnam around our age? John Kerry was in Vietnam. So what?

You seem to have this notion that all combat veterans should hold your political views. I can guarantee you they dont.

First you say the war in Iraq is a war to keep out of a war for survival, and claim it is like WW2. Now you are trying to compare a Vietnam War combat experience with what are troops are experiencing now. Which is it? Unless of course of think Vietnam was also like WW2. :BangHead:

You seem to have developed a personal grudge against me. Your attacks are uncalled for.

I suggest you get over it. It'll eat you up.

On the other hand, you have supported my post brilliantly and I thank you.:applause:

 

[saturneptune]

You seem to have developed a personal grudge against me. Your attacks are uncalled for.

I suggest you get over it. It'll eat you up.

On the other hand, you have supported my post brilliantly and I thank you.:applause:

Nothing I said supports your position. When you get over your glorification of the Bush/Cheney ineptness, then a civil converstion is possible. And yes, anyone who cannot see how their lack of leadership has cost unneeded American lives, that drives me nuts.

 

[carpro]

Nothing I said supports your position. When you get over your glorification of the Bush/Cheney ineptness, then a civil converstion is possible. And yes, anyone who cannot see how their lack of leadership has cost unneeded American lives, that drives me nuts.

That's a little better.

But you did support my post perfectly by being so resentful about your lack of experience in the military.

I do not share your hatred of all things related to Bush or Cheney. Sorry. Hate is something I really try to avoid. As I said, it eats you up and doesn't hurt the one you hate at all.

 

[saturneptune]

That's a little better.

But you did support my post perfectly by being so resentful about your lack of experience in the military.

I do not share your hatred of all things related to Bush or Cheney. Sorry. Hate is something I really try to avoid. As I said, it eats you up and doesn't hurt the one you hate at all.

I got news for you. My experience in the military I am going to guess is much greater than yours. Just because mine is not broadcast on every thread, does not mean a thing. It started right where you are always talking about, but did not stop after one term. Not out of anger, but you really need to let the past go.

 

[carpro]

I got news for you. My experience in the military I am going to guess is much greater than yours.

Good. Then you should understand the bond between troops in combat. You should also understand the phenomenal rates of re-enlistment among Iraq War veterans. You should also understand that unless one has been through what they have been through together, they can't really understand that bond.

If you don't understand all those things, then your experiences were not what you are implicating.

I agree it was a mistake to give out so much information about myself on an open forum. There will always be those who want to use it against you out of resentment or jealousy or some form of misguided animosity like yours.

But I'm not really into one upmanship concerning military service. Mine is what it is and if yours isn't what you say, well that's your problem. I also know what I know and if you can't handle it, that is also your problem.

 

[saturneptune]

Good. Then you should understand the bond between troops in combat. You should also understand the phenomenal rates of re-enlistment among Iraq War veterans. You should also understand that unless one has been through what they have been through together, they can't really understand that bond.

If you don't understand all those things, then your experiences were not what you are implicating.

I agree it was a mistake to give out so much information about myself on an open forum. There will always be those who want to use it against you out of resentment or jealousy or some form of misguided animosity like yours.

But I'm not really into one upmanship concerning military service. Mine is what it is and if yours isn't what you say, well that's your problem. I also know what I know and if you can't handle it, that is also your problem.

There is no jealousy or misguided animosity on my part. Your posts are very judgemental. You act like you are owed something because you served in the military. Again I ask, who our age didnt? If you would like to compare medals or awards or something like that from your time in service, just let me know. The statement "I know what I know" makes no sense. This is the United States of America. We as Americans are not bound to agree with your opinions.

 

[carpro]

If you would like to compare medals or awards or something like that from your time in service, just let me know.

I'm not into chest thumping. I'll leave that to you and John Kerry.

 

[saturneptune]

I'm not into chest thumping. I'll leave that to you and John Kerry.

Just following your lead buddy. Dont put me in the same category as John Kerry. But then again, that is no more destructive than blindly following George Bush.

 

[carpro]

Just following your lead buddy. Dont put me in the same category as John Kerry. But then again, that is no more destructive than blindly following George Bush.

You're not following my lead. I've never offered to compare medals with anyone. You sound more like Kerry than me.

 

[LadyEagle]

C'mon fellas, please get back on topic. If the military is a brotherhood, you are acting like siblings, for sure....:tonofbricks:

 

[El_Guero]

LE

In every era there are those that run . . . They tend to cause a lot of trouble for the rest of their lives.

And the one thing that really makes them mad? courage . . .

C'mon fellas, please get back on topic. If the military is a brotherhood, you are acting like siblings, for sure....:tonofbricks:

 

[saturneptune]

LE

In every era there are those that run . . . They tend to cause a lot of trouble for the rest of their lives.

And the one thing that really makes them mad? courage . . .

LE, will get back on topic, sorry. El Guero, who are you saying ran? The last thing I need is two guys from Texas validating my courage.

 

[Daisy]

Daisy,

Thank you for your response and thank you for doing it with thoughtfulness rather than some of the personal attacks that some like to make against each other on this site.

It's pleasant to have a discussion without sniping.

The purpose of this conflict is not only to deny Al Queda a foothold in Iraq, but to destroy Al Queda whereever it might be found.

The ironic thing is that before the invasion, al Qaeda didn't have even a toehold in Iraq, but now they are there full force. We opened Iraq's border to them.

If children can be raised without hate toward America... then we have a chance to succeed.

Unfortunately, our unprovoked invasion of a sovereign country is probably going to be used against us by the hate-mongers.

We must give every effort to support our Iraqi brothers in this conflict. They have recieved much training from us, but we can't just leave them. It's as if they are a young tree with fresh roots, if we leave too soon, the wind will simply blow them away.

I whole heartedly agree with you on that.

Even though Iraq was not involved in 9/11, we know that Al Queda did have contact with the Iraqi government.

True, but limited, less than what we had. The Ba'athists were largely secular - the former Prime Minister, Tariq Aziz, is Christian - while the Taliban are the worst kind of fundamentalist who would practice the worst kind of shariia. Iraq had declared women to be equal - they had sufferage and careers. The men were shaven and wore Western style suits and blue jeans. Al Qaeda and the Ba'athists didn't mix well culturally.

Not sure what the total extend was, but there was contact according to the 9/11 Commission Report.

Extremely limited. Saddam threw one of the guys involved in the previous WTC attack in prison.

I had read that bin Laden thought Saddam Hussein too unstable to be trusted, but I don't know how reliable that report was.

We know Al Queda is in Iraq now and active in the defeat of both the US and Iraq.

Yep.

If we(US & Iraq) lose... Al Queda gets a new place to operate from. The war on terror has worked well in reducing the places they can go and also is making it more difficult to finance Al Queda.

I'm not so sure that the war on terror has worked well as far as territory goes - they are less of a presence in Afghanistan, but they are still there and they are in Iraq where they were not before.

Iraq is just one battleground in the War against terrorism. We have to be more patient than our enemies or we will lose this war.

Yeah, but I still think a pre-emptive attack that destablilizes the region is the wrong approach.

Americans have never been known for much patience.

Instant gratification.

I think you could be right about that and I think I know why. The last time we were in Iraq, back in 91, we made promises to some Iraqi's that we would back them up. Well... we left them and they faced Saddam and many of those people were killed. We cut and run.

We didn't run; we walked away victorious. We destroyed Saddam's nuclear programme and their weapons systems. We pulled the tiger's teeth.

But, yes, we did betray the Shiites we had made promises to.

Soon they will hear of a resolution from our congress basically saying... we are gonna cut and run. Put yourself in their place and maybe you would be hesitant to step up in a big fight if you knew that the person watching your back had backed out.

It's a difficult and complex situation. I'm not convinced that pulling out is the right thing to do, but I'm not sure it isn't.

Daisy, it's more than just questions. He's been called a liar, a murderer and much worse. It's personal, it's hateful. It's more than just disagreement on the part of many people.

It's politics.

The worse part is that it gives our enemies hope. Hope of succeeding. Hope of overcoming the US. Wasn't it Lincoln who said, a divided house cannot stand. That's where we are today.

Bush is not without blame in pushing the divide.

I am afraid if the US is seen as weak to our enemies, it will embolden them to attack us some and repeatedly. Stepping out of Iraq just might make things even worse. I guess we will wait and pray and see.

We're the world's only Superpower. Exactly how weak can we be compared to everyone else?

 

[carpro]

C'mon fellas, please get back on topic. If the military is a brotherhood, you are acting like siblings, for sure....:tonofbricks:

Political differences cause problems even amongst veterans, LE. Some take it personal.

 

[Dragoon68]

Veterans don't always see things the same way! We are of the people we served. We have different political opinions and religious convictions. We are the saved and unsaved. We are Christians and non-Christians. We are Republicans and Democrats and others. We're just not all alike.

Veterans didn't all experience the same things! We all played a part - all parts are needed - but our roles were varied. Every veterans has their own six inch view of their experiences. Some have a view from a bit higher up than others. We don't all have the same basis from which to all reach the same conclusions.

Veterans are, in my observations, generally proud of having served, proud of the service, branch, and units in which they served, and humble with respect to their own contributions relative to that of others and the whole. They're supportive of the causes for which they were sent to fight albeit not always without question of the political motives and directions behind them. They're honest about the confusion, chaos, and mistakes of war. Some - few in my own contacts - are bitter about it and despise those they perceive responsible for it. Others just avoid the subject all together. Some veterans are students of history - often of the wars in which they served - wanting to better understand what really happened and others just put it all behind them.

Veterans - especially veterans of combat - are more likely than non-veterans to understand the brutality and unfairness of war, the depth of fear and the spontaneous nature of courage, the meaning and consequences of sacrifice, and the difficulty of victory and the ease of defeat. They hate war and love peace all the more because of it and yet they know that, on this earth, war is a given. They know it must be done and they know what it takes to do it. They are still warriors even when no longer in uniform. We can be very intense about it!

I find it impossible to muster any respect for organizations such as Vietnam Veterans Against the War as well as the same of the present war. The VVAW group, for example, was riddled with activists, fakes, wannabes, and a host of other weird permutations of confused and misguided souls. Among them I'm certain were some genuine veterans who, for whatever reason, felt being a part of an anti-war group was the right thing to do. I suspect the same is true today. We'll know more as the ugly head of the Iraqi veterans against the war shows itself more clearly. I can still respect the service of those genuine veterans among them but, never the less, despise their actions after the fact. None of this shakes my own convictions any more than in previous wars.

 

[saturneptune]

The DAV is who I am involved with. I basically agree with your points above, and anyone is entitled to any political or other view they feel is correct. However, there should be no tolerance from the American people for ineptness in leadership costing American lives. This has nothing to do with democrat, liberal, conservative or anything else. It has to do with common sense. If a leader and his side kick do not know how to run a war, resign and let someone who does know take over. And yes, I will be the first to admit, I have real problems with people who condone such leadership at the cost of American lives. There is NO connection between having served in the military several decades ago and being obligated to bow down to present incompetence.

 

[Daisy]

Veterans don't always see things the same way! We are of the people we served. We have different political opinions and religious convictions. We are the saved and unsaved. We are Christians and non-Christians. We are Republicans and Democrats and others. We're just not all alike.

Veterans didn't all experience the same things! We all played a part - all parts are needed - but our roles were varied. Every veterans has their own six inch view of their experiences. Some have a view from a bit higher up than others. We don't all have the same basis from which to all reach the same conclusions.

Well stated.

We'll know more as the ugly head of the Iraqi veterans against the war shows itself more clearly. I can still respect the service of those genuine veterans among them but, never the less, despise their actions after the fact. None of this shakes my own convictions any more than in previous wars.

Why call their head ugly and why do you despise them and their actions? Which actions? I'm not particularly familiar with them as you seem to be.

The DAV is who I am involved with.

What is the DAV?

I basically agree with your points above, and anyone is entitled to any political or other view they feel is correct. However, there should be no tolerance from the American people for ineptness in leadership costing American lives. This has nothing to do with democrat, liberal, conservative or anything else. It has to do with common sense. If a leader and his side kick do not know how to run a war, resign and let someone who does know take over. And yes, I will be the first to admit, I have real problems with people who condone such leadership at the cost of American lives. There is NO connection between having served in the military several decades ago and being obligated to bow down to present incompetence.

Also well stated.