You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
IraQ on BrinK Of CiviL WaR
- Thread starter ZZZzzzzzzz
- Start date
Shit? Cut and run? Hell no. Let's stand in the middle while Iraq has their civil war, the civil war that was predicted by the left wingers.....
Quote from riserburn:
And what about our troops? Pull them out first or are they expendable?
But Oh No!!! That would mean succumbing to "leftists" propaganda to abandon Iraq!!!
Such fine logic; pull the trigger first and then make excuses for your decision later when it turns to shit. Sound familiar?
Religiously fueled violence, failed democratic institutions and rampant corruption are commonplace in the developing world. The traditional solution is for a military government to seize power, apply large doses of discipline and let things cool for a while. Turkey is a prime example of an islamic country that found through bitter experience that democracy and islamic government were incompatible. The military acted as a check on the religious pressures and stood ready to intervene if democracy were threatened. Similarly, in Chile the military intervened when the marxist stooge Allende attempted to turn their democracy into another Cuba. We see the same thing happening in Venezuela today, but our feeble CIA, staffed by political meddlers like Valerie Plame, has no stomach or ability to protect democracies.
Now in Iraq we again see all the signs of an impending disaster brought on by a collision of democracy with a culture of corruption and a power grab by religious fanatics. The obvious solution is for the miltary to take control for a period of time. Unfortunately, there is no functioning military, other than various sectarian militias, which our occupation forces foolishly allowed to stay in operation. The US military is either unable or unwilling to act as a true occupation force in the McArthur model. Honestly, other than serving as mobile targets, I am not sure what our military is doing there.
The remedy is obvious if unpalatable. Install a supreme US military commander with plenary power to run things. No more Paul Bremers. Kick out all the reporters. Find a f*cking Gen. Patton or Douglas McArthur, a guy who is not afraid to take control. Give him the troops he needs. Tell the Iraqis, " Forget that democracy stuff, you proved you couldn;t handle it. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss. "
Most will understand and appreciate the security. Kill the ones who don't. Tell the Iranians and Syrians to back off or suffer the consequences.
Now in Iraq we again see all the signs of an impending disaster brought on by a collision of democracy with a culture of corruption and a power grab by religious fanatics. The obvious solution is for the miltary to take control for a period of time. Unfortunately, there is no functioning military, other than various sectarian militias, which our occupation forces foolishly allowed to stay in operation. The US military is either unable or unwilling to act as a true occupation force in the McArthur model. Honestly, other than serving as mobile targets, I am not sure what our military is doing there.
The remedy is obvious if unpalatable. Install a supreme US military commander with plenary power to run things. No more Paul Bremers. Kick out all the reporters. Find a f*cking Gen. Patton or Douglas McArthur, a guy who is not afraid to take control. Give him the troops he needs. Tell the Iraqis, " Forget that democracy stuff, you proved you couldn;t handle it. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss. "
Most will understand and appreciate the security. Kill the ones who don't. Tell the Iranians and Syrians to back off or suffer the consequences.
Oh, you mean get someone like Saddam to run the show.....
You are a classic AAA, truly classic.
You are a classic AAA, truly classic.
Quote from AAAintheBeltway:
Religiously fueled violence, failed democratic institutions and rampant corruption are commonplace in the developing world. The traditional solution is for a military government to seize power, apply large doses of discipline and let things cool for a while. Turkey is a prime example of an islamic country that found through bitter experience that democracy and islamic government were incompatible. The military acted as a check on the religious pressures and stood ready to intervene if democracy were threatened. Similarly, in Chile the military intervened when the marxist stooge Allende attempted to turn their democracy into another Cuba. We see the same thing happening in Venezuela today, but our feeble CIA, staffed by political meddlers like Valerie Plame, has no stomach or ability to protect democracies.
Now in Iraq we again see all the signs of an impending disaster brought on by a collision of democracy with a culture of corruption and a power grab by religious fanatics. The obvious solution is for the miltary to take control for a period of time. Unfortunately, there is no functioning military, other than various sectarian militias, which our occupation forces foolishly allowed to stay in operation. The US military is either unable or unwilling to act as a true occupation force in the McArthur model. Honestly, other than serving as mobile targets, I am not sure what our military is doing there.
The remedy is obvious if unpalatable. Install a supreme US military commander with plenary power to run things. No more Paul Bremers. Kick out all the reporters. Find a f*cking Gen. Patton or Douglas McArthur, a guy who is not afraid to take control. Give him the troops he needs. Tell the Iraqis, " Forget that democracy stuff, you proved you couldn;t handle it. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss. "
Most will understand and appreciate the security. Kill the ones who don't. Tell the Iranians and Syrians to back off or suffer the consequences.
This is absolutely the best solution.
Muslims are unable to be free, they need to be ruled by an iron fist. The rest of the world seems to be able to exist without a dictator but muslims just can't behave themselves when left alone.
To many brainwashed people.
Muslims are unable to be free, they need to be ruled by an iron fist. The rest of the world seems to be able to exist without a dictator but muslims just can't behave themselves when left alone.
To many brainwashed people.
Quote from FredBloggs:
this is why getting rid of saddam was a mistake.
he was the only dude who had the means and attitude to keep these rinky-dinks together.
when youve got 2-3 clans of people who just cant live with each other, you have no choice but to rule with an iron fist.
the liberals were crying for human rights abuses when saddam was in power, and they are still crying now the yanks/limeys are in power. so lets just face it - under saddam or bush, the life of your average iraqi is pretty shitty what ever end of the stick you get.
yet again, in their unfathomable stupidity and ignorance, the neo-cons assumed iraq would be better off eating mc-heart attacks and wearing nike, with noting for intellectual stimulation other than mtv.
the american dream is a nightmare in the rest of the world and just dont work.
i say release saddam, and put him in charge of palastine and israel, merged with the old iraq perhaps. that will sort those fuckers out! bush has had his war so hes happy - the iraqis live in fear/peace - they are happy, israel & palestine will HAVE to get along or they will all be dead - so they, AND THE REST OF THE WORLD will be both safer and happier.
FREE SADDAM FREE SADDAM!!
USA!! USA!! USA!!
Quote from ZZZzzzzzzz:
Oh, you mean get someone like Saddam to run the show.....
You are a classic AAA, truly classic.
I said a U. S. general, not someone like Saddam. However, our military has been so emasculated by years of political correctness and multiculturalist nonsense that we may not have anyone who could provide the necessary leadership. Probably our best bet at this point would be to put Ann Coulter in charge of it. She had the right plan all along.
You declare war on a country, defeat them, occupy them, WTf are you supposed to do? Only morons would spend $400 billion to rebuild the entire country,even as the inhabitants continued to blow up stuff and kill our soldiers.
This thing may be so far gone now that our options are severely limited. We are looking at a best case outcome being a failed state like Lebanon, Somalia or Afghanistan. Worst case could be a second Iran.
Hey ZZZ, let me pose a question for you liberals, oops sorry, I meant progressives.
If we had invaded Iraq, killed people at random, bombed out all their mosques, threw anyone who looked at us cross-eyed into prison and seized all their oil fields for ourselves, would they hate us any more than they do now? Would we be any worse off with the arab world or the worldwide muslim comunity?
If we had invaded Iraq, killed people at random, bombed out all their mosques, threw anyone who looked at us cross-eyed into prison and seized all their oil fields for ourselves, would they hate us any more than they do now? Would we be any worse off with the arab world or the worldwide muslim comunity?
Yes, we would be worse off.
It is one thing to fuck up the way we did, it is another to act like Atilla the Hun bent on conquest.
It is one thing to fuck up the way we did, it is another to act like Atilla the Hun bent on conquest.
Quote from AAAintheBeltway:
Hey ZZZ, let me pose a question for you liberals, oops sorry, I meant progressives.
If we had invaded Iraq, killed people at random, bombed out all their mosques, threw anyone who looked at us cross-eyed into prison and seized all their oil fields for ourselves, would they hate us any more than they do now? Would we be any worse off with the arab world or the worldwide muslim comunity?
But how could we justify such an action? We always claim to be morally superior than everyone else. Unless you are you suggesting we are just as barbaric as these rag-heads.
Quote from AAAintheBeltway:
Hey ZZZ, let me pose a question for you liberals, oops sorry, I meant progressives.
If we had invaded Iraq, killed people at random, bombed out all their mosques, threw anyone who looked at us cross-eyed into prison and seized all their oil fields for ourselves, would they hate us any more than they do now? Would we be any worse off with the arab world or the worldwide muslim comunity?
Quote from AAAintheBeltway:
Hey ZZZ, let me pose a question for you liberals, oops sorry, I meant progressives.
If we had invaded Iraq, killed people at random, bombed out all their mosques, threw anyone who looked at us cross-eyed into prison and seized all their oil fields for ourselves, would they hate us any more than they do now? Would we be any worse off with the arab world or the worldwide muslim comunity?