Iraq War

[Vapymid]

You don't need very much brutality in dealing with these terrorists.

 

As much as you would need would be too much for us, I can assure you.

 

Large force that is trained in locating and stopping the terrorists wherever they are.

 

Such force would be the first in the world if it existed. They will have to use magic or some kind of Minority Report pre-cognition powers to do that because, normally, (depending on one's opinion) either the "terrorists" don't look like terrorists or everyone else looks like a terrorist in such circumstances.

 

Security checkpoints and body search programs will slow things down in Iraq.

 

That is exactly the kind of things that recruits terrorists (aka freedom fighters). The more you do that the more they will come at you. I'm sure you played Half-Life 2 - when you see more Combine on the streets, does it make you have peaceful, lay-down-your-arms, peace-and-love-peace-and-love kind of feelings?

 

Coalition troops in Iraq (in my opinion) would have postponed Civil War.

 

But the civil war happened precisely when the Coalition forces already were in Iraq. And it actually started because the invasion destroyed the elements of state power that were keeping the civil war from starting.

 

Regards

[ThePest179]

You don't need very much brutality in dealing with these terrorists.

 

As much as you would need would be too much for us, I can assure you.

 

Large force that is trained in locating and stopping the terrorists wherever they are.

 

Such force would be the first in the world if it existed. They will have to use magic or some kind of Minority Report pre-cognition powers to do that because, normally, (depending on one's opinion) either the "terrorists" don't look like terrorists or everyone else looks like a terrorist in such circumstances.

 

Security checkpoints and body search programs will slow things down in Iraq.

 

That is exactly the kind of things that recruits terrorists (aka freedom fighters). The more you do that the more they will come at you. I'm sure you played Half-Life 2 - when you see more Combine on the streets, does it make you have peaceful, lay-down-your-arms, peace-and-love-peace-and-love kind of feelings?

 

Coalition troops in Iraq (in my opinion) would have postponed Civil War.

 

But the civil war happened precisely when the Coalition forces already were in Iraq. And it actually started because the invasion destroyed the elements of state power that were keeping the civil war from starting.

 

Regards

 

So what you're saying is that simple security measures desighned to keep terrorts from killing people is going to make Iraqis resist in violent ways that ruins their country worse then it already is? The Combine rule through force and fear. In what ways have the Coalition mistreated Iraqis so badly that the majority would violently resist? I admit that the army I described above is unrealistic, but as I had previosly stated, an occupation of Iraq longer term would cause many terrorists to be either dead or detained. Unfortunatly we did not have the funds to continue our mission to rebuild Iraq, otherwise we should have stayed. A firm (or competant) Coalition would have stopped the civil war before it started. The main reason I belive the Coalition would have stopped a second civil war is because the Shiite and Sunni populations would be so caught up in killing each other that there would be little hope for them once the Coalition attacked both. Lastly, how would you know how much brutality would be needed to repress the terrorists?

[Vapymid]

So what you're saying is that simple security measures desighned to keep terrorts from killing people is going to make Iraqis resist in violent ways that ruins their country worse then it already is?

 

Yes, precisely. I can assure you that if Her Majesty's Government in the UK will try to introduce road blocks and searches, curfews and other stuff to "fight terrorism", they will have a major rebellion on their hands in no time at all. I am also sure the same will happen in the US before the White House can say the word "curfew".

 

In what ways have the Coalition mistreated Iraqis so badly that the majority would violently resist?

 

That is in people's nature, that's why we live in separate countries. Our country may be in a right mess but when an outsider comes he has no business telling us how to live. This comes from the instincts developed long before Homo Sapience even appeared as a species. You can see it at many levels in society - families, football club supporters, street gangs, corporations...

 

Regards

[ThePest179]

So what you're saying is that simple security measures desighned to keep terrorts from killing people is going to make Iraqis resist in violent ways that ruins their country worse then it already is?

 

Yes, precisely. I can assure you that if Her Majesty's Government in the UK will try to introduce road blocks and searches, curfews and other stuff to "fight terrorism", they will have a major rebellion on their hands in no time at all. I am also sure the same will happen in the US before the White House can say the word "curfew".

 

So then according to you, riots should break out at every airport. Additionally, the US and UK Don't NEED road blocks and strip searches any more then Black Mesa needs a giant crate smashishing room because the US and UK are 1st world countries that don't have to worry about terrorism on their own countries 24/7. The money for those checkpoints and strip searches in the US and UK (where terrorism is as often as a solar eclipse) is better spent on maintaining security in Iraq. The Iraqis might need it just to keep alive. Your argument with BTGBullseye on civillian deaths are proof of that.

 

In what ways have the Coalition mistreated Iraqis so badly that the majority would violently resist?

 

That is in people's nature, that's why we live in separate countries. Our country may be in a right mess but when an outsider comes he has no business telling us how to live. This comes from the instincts developed long before Homo Sapience even appeared as a species. You can see it at many levels in society - families, football club supporters, street gangs, corporations...

 

Since when has the Coalition specifically told the Iraqis "do this or die"? I think its worth noting you did not answer the question directly.

Edited April 1, 2013 by Guest (see edit history)

[Vapymid]

Firstly, I was not saying whether or not US and UK need "anti-terrorist" road blocks etc., although, as a matter of fact, I agree with you that we don't (albeit with a slightly different alternative than that proposed by you). What I was saying was that similar measures, if introduced, can cause unrest even in our respective countries.

 

I don't need to look hard for an example - remember the London riots in 2011, which were triggered by a police shooting of 1 person?

 

Secondly, I did answer your other question. I can clarify it further if you tell me which part of it you didn't understand. Because your formulation of the initial question was quite presumptuous, you have to expect a broader answer that deals with the underlying subject, unless you are posting in Forum Games, maybe.

 

Regards

[ThePest179]

Firstly, I was not saying whether or not US and UK need "anti-terrorist" road blocks etc., although, as a matter of fact, I agree with you that we don't (albeit with a slightly different alternative than that proposed by you). What I was saying was that similar measures, if introduced, can cause unrest even in our respective countries.

 

I don't need to look hard for an example - remember the London riots in 2011, which were triggered by a police shooting of 1 person?

 

Secondly, I did answer your other question. I can clarify it further if you tell me which part of it you didn't understand. Because your formulation of the initial question was quite presumptuous, you have to expect a broader answer that deals with the underlying subject, unless you are posting in Forum Games, maybe.

 

Regards

 

That was it?!!?!? That's all you had to say? Did you read the rest of my post? Anyway, the point was that Iraqis need lots more security than most. That was the point. I honestly don't see how security desighned to keep people safe can cause unrest. It should make Iraqis feel safe, not feel angry and hopeless.

[ThePest179]

Today marks the ten year aniversery of the Iraq War.

[ThePest179]

Alright, a question that I have had on my mind for awhile: What would have happened if the US just nuked Bagdad instead of invading Iraq?

[Pinkie Pie]

Alright, a question that I have had on my mind for awhile: What would have happened if the US just nuked Bagdad instead of invading Iraq?

 

Um, nothing would have changed except for a lot more dead Baghdadians(???) and maybe less dead American troops.

 

Also Bush would've won 1st place for Miss. Texas.

[ThePest179]

Alright, a question that I have had on my mind for awhile: What would have happened if the US just nuked Bagdad instead of invading Iraq?

 

Um, nothing would have changed except for a lot more dead Baghdadians(???) and maybe less dead American troops.

 

Also Bush would've won 1st place for Miss. Texas.

 

Well then it is a good thing we didn't nuke Bagdad. For the Iraqis sake not ours.

[ThePest179]

Another question on my mind: how come the American public treated the war in Iraq like the one in Vietnam? I understand Vietnam (long war + over 50,000 dead) but there should be no excuses with Iraq.

[Doom Shepherd]

You mean "no similarities?" Well, there were a few similarities. For one, a hostile media/left who, because they were kids then, think EVERY war is Vietnam, and can't resist comparisons, no matter how loose. (Also, the modern media exists not to tell the truth, but to get ratings and therefore lucrative ad revenue. Accuracy and due diligence went out the window a LONG time ago. The media isn't biased, it's lazy and corporatized and sensationalist.)

 

We also had a similar dilemma in that there was no "exit strategy" for Iraq. There had been, but Rumsfeld pretty much discarded it, and that's part of what screwed everything up. This is what happens when political and military goals collide - everything goes FUBAR.

[ThePest179]

The US caused so many problems in Iraq, but the most prominent one was the ethnic violence that persists in Iraq which might turn the country into another Yugoslavia situation (Yugoslavia was fractured by an ethnic civil war that the government could not control). To have kept troops there (and keeping a firm presence there) would have (or should have) stopped the country from crumbling (as long as the loss of life can be disregarded). Alternatively, the US should have stopped any ethnic violence with extreme prejudice (or declare Iraq to be under a state of emergency and for each ethnic killing, take some of both groups and publicly execute them).

[BTGBullseye]

The US didn't cause the violence, it was there all along. Nobody televised the violence until the US got there.

 

Stop blaming all the problems in Iraq on the US.

[ThePest179]

The US didn't cause the violence, it was there all along. Nobody televised the violence until the US got there.

 

Stop blaming all the problems in Iraq on the US.

 

They helped the ethnic violence grow. How can I not blame all the problems there on the US, when they are the main cause it happened?

[BTGBullseye]

How did they cause it to grow? Last I heard, they caused a massive drop in ethnic violence...

[ThePest179]

How did they cause it to grow? Last I heard, they caused a massive drop in ethnic violence...

 

They caused it to grow by intervening in Iraq to begin with, and then not even bothering to clean it up.

[ThePest179]

Firstly, I was not saying whether or not US and UK need "anti-terrorist" road blocks etc., although, as a matter of fact, I agree with you that we don't (albeit with a slightly different alternative than that proposed by you).

 

According to Fox News, we now need anti-terrorist measures.

[BTGBullseye]

How did they cause it to grow? Last I heard, they caused a massive drop in ethnic violence...

 

They caused it to grow by intervening in Iraq to begin with, and then not even bothering to clean it up.

And where is your proof?

[ThePest179]

How did they cause it to grow? Last I heard, they caused a massive drop in ethnic violence...

 

They caused it to grow by intervening in Iraq to begin with, and then not even bothering to clean it up.

And where is your proof?

 

What do you mean "proof"? Have you not heard about all the violence there? Maybe these should help: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_war_in_iraq http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_War http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraqi_insurgency_(post-U.S._withdrawal)