U.S. Soldiers Tortured & Slaughtered

The Iraqis fighting us are not the majority. They are, for the most part, those who live in pro-Saddam areas who would like to get Saddam back, and then there are those who have been either positively or negatively influenced by foreign jihadists such as is Al-Qaeda.
It is precisely because of the sectarian conflicts that we need to be there.
If we leave, there will be a vacuum which will suck in more violence.
Whether the war is right or wrong is no longer the issue.
The issue is that we have started a fire that has a potential to be fanned into a bigger one, it will be irresponsible to cut and run.
I think the majority of the Iraqi people wants the US to help them out and are grateful for their newfound freedoms which the troublemakers want to destroy.

 

Amen, LE, Amen!

 

http://apnews.excite.com/article/20060619/D8IB2KN00.html

 

Pinoy, I understand and respect that position, even though I disagree with some of what you said. However, this "cut and run" junk is just Bushspeak to cover the fact that there is no plan, no execution plan, no exit plan. It is sensible to rethink and refine strategy as conditions change. We did the dirty work of getting rid of Saddam, now the Iraqi's need to figure the rest out in their own way. That is not "cut and run".

 

I hardly call a US military presence in Iraq of over 3 years "cut and run." Three years is not cutting and running. It is more Bush koolaid jargon which probably originated from Karl Rove.

 

Yep. How long do we have to stay until the neocons think it isn't cutting and running? 5 years? 20? 50?

LE, I am truly scared! We are agreeing on things! :laugh::thumbs::wavey:

 

There will be a larger civil war (I believe they are already in a civil war) no matter when the US / coalition leaves. The "dangerous" Sunni triangle as dubbed by Bush et al infers that all the Sunni population lives there. They don't. Fact of the matter is, we never hear about the Shiite militant groups who are wreaking havoc in other parts of Iraq. The Shiites have been suppressed and tortured for decades under Saddam. It is their time for revenge. Sunni's control the majority of the oil and they aren't about to give that up, either. Kurds have been thriving for the past 12 years or so and don't consider themselves to even be a part of Iraq. In fact, even some Iranian Shiites are seeking refuge in Kurdistan.

The Iraqi people are not united in seeking a united Iraq as proven by their own actions/inaction. There is such a large population of Shiites, they could have ousted Saddam a long time ago if they wanted to be free.

I have always predicted and continue to predict there will be civil war on a larger scale, even if we pull out next month or 10 years from now. The region is full of demons which have had roots from the beginning of humanity and have thrived over the centuries since islam took over the country.

Christians, who for the most part, were left alone during Saddam, are now leaving Iraq in droves, seeking assylum in other countries - that is, the ones who haven't been tortured, blown up, or killed up to now. A few Christians remain steadfast and seek to spread the Gospel of Jesus Christ. To think, this is a country which once had the Gospel, which once knew the forgiveness and redemption of Almighty God in ancient Ninevah, and during the Early Church had a large Christian congregation in Babylon.

The root cause of unrest is the demonic power of islam. Peace, democracy, and security cannot be won by military might or inserted into hearts and minds of those who believe all non-muslims are infidels.

 

There is no truth to the false notion that there is no plan.

Not setting exact time and dates does not constitute a lack of a plan.

However, getting the Iraqi soldiers and police force trained and on their own feet before leaving is an appropriate goal. Waiting for the Iraqi government to say "Hey we got it!" is a good plan. Leaving them high and dry and in danger is irresponsible.

Its easy to sit in the cheap seats and critisize. Hanging out at the alter of dissent again I see.:thumbs:

 

Callous, you think I am callous?

Why should we be taking the word of an Iraqi over the word of our own people? They are facing ideals like the one above everyday.

Who says these civilians were innocent? You prove that they were and then we can decide whether or not our Marines were wrong. So long as one Iraqi in that house believed like the guy above, they were all guilty, if only by association.

Won't cooperate? Makes him an enemy in my book!

 

Callous? Yes, your statements continue to show it.

No one has to prove innocence. The Marines are also innocent until the evidence shows guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. BUT, if found guilty, they should face justice. Again, you equate different people. The guy in the quote above is not the one who was killed. You paint all Iraqis with a broad brush. That is a major logical fallacy.

Edited to add: Besides, if all Iraqis are evil people, why do we care if they have democracy or not?

 

OK, RevM...what's the plan?

It takes GIs 6-8 weeks to train. Isn't 3 years long enough, even for the Iraqis? Vietnamization of the war didn't work in the 70s, and this is just a rerun of that failed strategy.

 

Enoch, I'm sorry for the confusion. I think carpro is the one who questioned MP whether he felt the torturers were justified in their treatment of Americans but IIRC correctly you questioned whether MP could support the troops if he didn't support the mission. I obviously wasn't very clear in where I was directing my responses.

Thanks, MP. I try to find the truth or an area of agreement in even opposing posts and believe that such a common ground makes it easier to clarify the disagreements as does knowing the philosophical basis of your opponent. It helps to sharpen the lines while softening the edges.

What?!! I can't have that! Wait, stop a minute, what do we agree on, maybe I need to re-examine my position! :smilewinkgrin:

Don't give me too much credit. While I do try to keep open ears to the other side, I must confess I'm not often very open minded, believing that I'm right on issues I've decided on, but I do believe it important to both search out and explore the disagreements and to find common ground. It helps to, as George Bush 41 described my hero Ronald Reagan, prevent turning adversaries into enemies.

 

Well I have the knowledge to understand that there are different groups in Iraq. They all have one thing in common: each group thinks that it is the best. Oh wait, one more thing: they all hate anyone unlike themselves especially if that person happens to not be Muslim.

This country needs to wake up and face the fact that to the Muslim society this is a holy war! They do not care if the blow up busses of school children or old ladies in the nursing home. They will not stop the atrocities until someone forcibly stops them. Why? Because they truly believe that they have God on thier side. They will simply keep on and on in their pursuit of religious glory. Anyone who disagrees with them deserves to die the way these soldiers died. They believe this just as surely as you and I believe that Christ is our Savior.

I'm not callous. I can simply see reality. The reality is: kill or be killed. Muslims are not going to allow it to be more peaceful. They do not want to make peace unless that peace is on their conditions.

In Iraq in particular, if Iraqi's wanted democracy and wanted the end of Sharia law (sp) they would be in the streets in droves, protesting and developing militias to ensure their own freedom. They don't want democracy!

This leaves the US with three choices: get out, continue like we are until our countries patience runs out like it did in Vietnam, or use the force and means necessary to ensure the developement of democracy. (we don't have the "callousness" for this option)

 

If I am wrong please enlighten me, but I doubt you have any, and I mean any understanding, education, or inclination of war strategies, Military build up, or logistics. And if this is the case then your thoughts on this issue have no real insight.

The only simularities between Iraq and Vietnam in the viscious rhetoric and attacks from the arrogant left who have the freedom to do so, but speak out without having any real understanding. Outside of that, the two are Apples and Oranges.

But then again this is the same attacks and rhetoric that has been spued at every war in history. Nothing said is new. And history always shows this to be on the wrong side of the issue.

 

No, you are absolutely wrong.

Here is a tip: don't EVER simply assume someone believes something unless they actually state it. That is wildly irresponsible - shame on you.

Torture is wrong. It is wrong when we do it, and it is wrong when they do it.

BiR

 

That was in response to the entire wet, weepy, attitude toward this war, falsly stating that there is no clear and present danger, and should in no way be construed to be an agreement that I agree with your faulty interpretation that our troops are in harm's way without a clear and present danger.

There were small handfuls of people before (and after) we entered WWII who spouted this same nonsense. "We don't belong there! It doesn't affect us!"

In my denying what you say, somehow you have twisted it into an agreement with you.

For example, take your following quote:

I could very easily have stated that I'm glad that people didn't have this attitude in WWII about this statement, without the Saddam bit. That in no way means that I agree that we're not wanted there, nor that we are invaders, etc. It means that I'm glad that there weren't many who had this attitude, just as I'm glad there aren't many who would rather surrender to the forces of evil now.

 

But, BiR, I think that even if what Americans have done there can be considered torture, there is a huge and very real difference of degree. As I said earlier, there is no comparison between the viciously barbaric acts that "they" (whether they are insurgents or whoever) have done and do as a matter of course and what Americans have even been accused of. What was done to these Americans (and I can only hazard a guess as I've not seen specifics, not sure I want to) was ghastly.

Take care, my friend. It's great to hear from you.

 

Yep.

Setting an exit date is the same thing as setting an appointment with disaster. You stay until the job's finished, then you leave. We still have a military presence in Japan nearly 60 years later.

 

I don't know where you get your information, but you're wrong. It takes longer than that just for boot camp. (I was in the Navy and it was 12 weeks.) Then, there are schools. Mine was 6 months for the first school (8 hours per day, plus extra stuff), then 2 months for the next school, then 2 months for the next one. That's before I ever stepped foot on a ship. And that's into an existing position in an existing military, not trying to build one from scratch.

Now, it's true that not everyone goes to specialized schools, nor are many even qualified for it, but you have to have them in position as well, and there's not someone there to set a precedent for them.