Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   For The Record, Here's What They Said (Justification for Iraq War)
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 31 of 47 (179543)
01-22-2005 2:28 AM
Reply to: Message 21 by berberry
01-17-2005 3:27 PM


Re: Is the upcoming election the best hope?
berberry writes:
quote:
Much as I am opposed to this war, I can't help but feel that for the average Iraqi these elections present the best opportunity for a hopeful future.
How? They don't even know who they're voting for. The candidate list will not be released until the day of the election when you arrive at the polling place. Of course, somehow the insurgents keep figuring out who is on that list (and there are over 7,000 names on that list) because they keep killing people we later find out were going to be on the ballot.
The voting sites cannot be secured. The methodology is transparently open to fraud (marks on a chalkboard?) The "leader" of the country has publically stated that this "election" is a sham.
How can anyone claim that this is an "opportunity"? How can anyone claim there is any "hope" here? And do you seriously think that if the government that is elected were to tell the US to get the hell out, we would? Don't you think the Iraqis know that? So don't you think they might be of the opinion that the government that is "elected" will be plants that the US orchestrated to be "elected" specifically to keep us there?

Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by berberry, posted 01-17-2005 3:27 PM berberry has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 33 by berberry, posted 01-22-2005 2:48 AM Rrhain has replied

  
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 32 of 47 (179546)
01-22-2005 2:33 AM
Reply to: Message 29 by 1.61803
01-18-2005 12:07 PM


Re: ***Blink***
1.61803 writes:
quote:
**Does best Rrhain impersonation**
No, no, no. Hold your head like this, then go Waaah. Try it again.

Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by 1.61803, posted 01-18-2005 12:07 PM 1.61803 has not replied

  
berberry
Inactive Member


Message 33 of 47 (179547)
01-22-2005 2:48 AM
Reply to: Message 31 by Rrhain
01-22-2005 2:28 AM


Re: Is the upcoming election the best hope?
Rrhain writes me:
quote:
How can anyone claim that this is an "opportunity"? How can anyone claim there is any "hope" here?
Is there any other, more realistic "hope" or "opportunity" for them? We've created a mess there and you're right, this isn't going to fix it. If however, by some miracle, there's a sizable voter turnout in the vast bulk of voting precincts then I think there may be some hope for them after all. Not bloody likely, especially since I don't think there's going to be much if any international oversight of the balloting, but within the realm of possibility at least. I'm willing to wait and see before I pass final judgement.
If you want to know what I really think is going to happen, I think the election will be a farce and a puppet government will be "elected"/installed and will set about writing a US-friendly constitution. And at some point within the next year or so we will pull out and leave Iraq to civil war because more troops will be needed in our invasions of Iran and/or Syria.

Keep America Safe AND Free!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by Rrhain, posted 01-22-2005 2:28 AM Rrhain has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 34 by Rrhain, posted 01-22-2005 5:13 AM berberry has replied
 Message 41 by 1.61803, posted 01-13-2006 5:02 PM berberry has not replied

  
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 34 of 47 (179561)
01-22-2005 5:13 AM
Reply to: Message 33 by berberry
01-22-2005 2:48 AM


Re: Is the upcoming election the best hope?
berberry responds to me:
quote:
quote:
How can anyone claim that this is an "opportunity"? How can anyone claim there is any "hope" here?
Is there any other, more realistic "hope" or "opportunity" for them?
Yes. Understanding that you cannot force a timetable on governmental change would be a start. It was clear a long time ago that forcing the issue of having elections in January was a stupid idea that wouldn't actually help anything.
It took two years after the surrender of Japan for the creation of a new Constitution. And while we officially turned Japan back over to the Japanese in 1952 (seven years after the surrender), it didn't really become full until we returned Okinawa in 1972 (25 years after the surrender).
The situation in Germany was not that different.
Bush seems to think that the invasion, conversion, occupation of, and withdrawal from Iraq was something that could be carried out in a year, two tops. Since he ran into it completely blind with absolutely no plan, this is not surprising. He has no sense of history and refuses to learn from anybody who might have any experience who would dare contradict his "vision."
If we want to provide them hope and opportunity, then we need to get it into our thick skulls that we have to occupy the entire country and not just this piddly-ass shit that Bush came up with since he refused to listen to his military commanders telling him he needed to send more troops. And then we need to understand that we are going to be there for at least a decade if not longer. That's because despite what he insisted in his 2000 presidential campaign, we are involved in nation building and that is something that is generational in scope, not election cycle.
And we need to be honest with the Iraqi people about this.
quote:
We've created a mess there and you're right, this isn't going to fix it.
Not only is it going to fix it, it's going to make it worse.

Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by berberry, posted 01-22-2005 2:48 AM berberry has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 35 by Tal, posted 01-22-2005 9:13 AM Rrhain has not replied
 Message 39 by Syamsu, posted 01-22-2005 11:14 AM Rrhain has not replied
 Message 40 by berberry, posted 01-22-2005 1:16 PM Rrhain has not replied

  
Tal
Member (Idle past 5676 days)
Posts: 1140
From: Fort Bragg, NC
Joined: 12-29-2004


Message 35 of 47 (179597)
01-22-2005 9:13 AM
Reply to: Message 34 by Rrhain
01-22-2005 5:13 AM


Re: Is the upcoming election the best hope?
It took two years after the surrender of Japan for the creation of a new Constitution. And while we officially turned Japan back over to the Japanese in 1952 (seven years after the surrender), it didn't really become full until we returned Okinawa in 1972 (25 years after the surrender).
And look at Japan today.
Bush seems to think that the invasion, conversion, occupation of, and withdrawal from Iraq was something that could be carried out in a year, two tops. Since he ran into it completely blind with absolutely no plan, this is not surprising. He has no sense of history and refuses to learn from anybody who might have any experience who would dare contradict his "vision."
Yeah, we just rolled into the country with no plan. Who needs plans?
I've said it before and I'll say it again. There was a plan, but no plan survives first contact. I worked for the Deputy Chief of Staff, Strategy, Plans, and Assessment for 5 months. The Campaign Plan evolves from day to day, week to week, and month to month. To say there was no plan going into this is ignorant.
If we want to provide them hope and opportunity, then we need to get it into our thick skulls that we have to occupy the entire country and not just this piddly-ass shit that Bush came up with since he refused to listen to his military commanders telling him he needed to send more troops.
Ah, a strategist! Would you like to come to Iraq and present this to the CG? The best way to provide them with hope and opportunity is to train up their Army and National Guard so we can pull our forces out.
And then we need to understand that we are going to be there for at least a decade if not longer.
We'll have forces permanently deployed here, much like Germany and Japan, but we won't stay here with this strength for that long.
Not only is it going to fix it, it's going to make it worse.
Again, keep in mind they are electing the 500+ people who will write their constitution. They are not electing any officials. This is simply the first step in a long process.

Then I heard the voice of the Lord saying, "Whom shall I send? And who will go for us?" And I said, "Here am I. Send me!" Isaiah 6:8
No webpage found at provided URL: www.1st-vets.us

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by Rrhain, posted 01-22-2005 5:13 AM Rrhain has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 36 by Silent H, posted 01-22-2005 9:41 AM Tal has replied

  
Silent H
Member (Idle past 5819 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 36 of 47 (179606)
01-22-2005 9:41 AM
Reply to: Message 35 by Tal
01-22-2005 9:13 AM


Re: Is the upcoming election the best hope?
To say there was no plan going into this is ignorant.
This is true. The problem was that there were very bad plans going into this which did not take into account warnings from many sectors outside the Bush clique as well as some common sense needs for a postwar environment of a nation that has been oppressed by a dictatorship for decades and no set replacement entity.
The fact that the first organized contact we had with Iraqis was to help pull down statues and passively allow them to loot, says just about everything.
This message has been edited by holmes, 01-22-2005 09:44 AM

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)
"Don't believe I'm taken in by stories I have heard, I just read the Daily News and swear by every word.."(Steely Dan)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by Tal, posted 01-22-2005 9:13 AM Tal has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 37 by Tal, posted 01-22-2005 10:41 AM Silent H has replied

  
Tal
Member (Idle past 5676 days)
Posts: 1140
From: Fort Bragg, NC
Joined: 12-29-2004


Message 37 of 47 (179624)
01-22-2005 10:41 AM
Reply to: Message 36 by Silent H
01-22-2005 9:41 AM


Re: Is the upcoming election the best hope?
This is true. The problem was that there were very bad plans going into this which did not take into account warnings from many sectors outside the Bush clique as well as some common sense needs for a postwar environment of a nation that has been oppressed by a dictatorship for decades and no set replacement entity.
THE mistake was disbanding the Iraqi Army. I could see getting rid of a few key leaders, but getting rid of the whole thing just gave the Bathists leaders actual bodies. Once the foreigners came in they all hooked up, and we have what you see today.
Of course if you ask an Iraqi, they will tell you that all of the insurgents are foreigners, because Iraqis wouldn't kill Iraqis.

Then I heard the voice of the Lord saying, "Whom shall I send? And who will go for us?" And I said, "Here am I. Send me!" Isaiah 6:8
No webpage found at provided URL: www.1st-vets.us

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by Silent H, posted 01-22-2005 9:41 AM Silent H has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by Silent H, posted 01-22-2005 10:59 AM Tal has not replied

  
Silent H
Member (Idle past 5819 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 38 of 47 (179628)
01-22-2005 10:59 AM
Reply to: Message 37 by Tal
01-22-2005 10:41 AM


Re: Is the upcoming election the best hope?
THE mistake was disbanding the Iraqi Army.
Correction. One of the bigger mistakes was disbanding the army. There were plenty of others.
Of course if you ask an Iraqi, they will tell you that all of the insurgents are foreigners, because Iraqis wouldn't kill Iraqis.
I thought I told you I had. I have helped produce a documentary on Iraq by Iraqis. You seem less than straightforward on this topic. What they will tell you is there are a lot of foreign insurgents... that is not the same thing as all of the insurgents are foreigners.
It is not true even on its face. You just admitted that disbanding the army resulted in manpower to Baathist insurgent elements. That would make the Baathist leaders and many of the insurgents Iraqi. Right?
There are also criminal organizations and Iraqi borne fundamentalist elements vying for political power. Those would also be Iraqi, right?
The idea that Iraqis would not kill Iraqis is absurd. That was what Hussein and the Baathists did for quite a while. That is also what insurgent elements against Hussein did. Right?
I wonder what Iraqi security forces will do when they go to stop insurgents... kill Iraqis?
You are correct that Iraqis do not like the foreigners that have come to try and take over the country, killing Iraqis to do so. However we are among those foreigners who have come and killed Iraqis. Most Iraqis happen to like coalition foreigners more than the insurgents as we target innocents less and are more likely to leave at some point. Also, we did get rid of Hussein, and they did not.
I dislike your disengenuousness on this topic.

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)
"Don't believe I'm taken in by stories I have heard, I just read the Daily News and swear by every word.."(Steely Dan)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by Tal, posted 01-22-2005 10:41 AM Tal has not replied

  
Syamsu 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5589 days)
Posts: 1914
From: amsterdam
Joined: 05-19-2002


Message 39 of 47 (179634)
01-22-2005 11:14 AM
Reply to: Message 34 by Rrhain
01-22-2005 5:13 AM


Re: Is the upcoming election the best hope?
But the military is already overstretched, so you can't stay in Iraq for a long time, occupy the whole country, and make everything alright.
Bush was right all along, get out of there quick, so there is a credible military threat to Iran, Sudan, Syria, North Korea etc. in stead of staying in Iraq and have nothing much left over to threaten with.
Besides it is basicly the responsibility of the Iraqi's to make things right in their own country. I think a better solution, on leaving, may be to hand out arms very widely in Iraq, an armed peace, rather then to hand them to a very likely corrupt police and military force, which may well threaten genocides on defenseless civillians. The police and army are now such identifiable targets of insurgents and terrorists, as the only ones to have the right of force. What's an insurgent or terrorist going to do about an armed populace? I think I would certainly feel safer if I lived in Iraq, if I had a kalashnikov at home, and all my neighbours had one too.
regards,
Mohammad Nor Syamsu

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by Rrhain, posted 01-22-2005 5:13 AM Rrhain has not replied

  
berberry
Inactive Member


Message 40 of 47 (179662)
01-22-2005 1:16 PM
Reply to: Message 34 by Rrhain
01-22-2005 5:13 AM


Re: Is the upcoming election the best hope?
Rrhain writes me:
quote:
If we want to provide them hope and opportunity, then we need to get it into our thick skulls that we have to occupy the entire country and not just this piddly-ass shit that Bush came up with since he refused to listen to his military commanders telling him he needed to send more troops. And then we need to understand that we are going to be there for at least a decade if not longer. That's because despite what he insisted in his 2000 presidential campaign, we are involved in nation building and that is something that is generational in scope, not election cycle.
Absolutely, but I was talking about realistic hope. While the upcoming election only offers the slightest glimmer of hope (and thus I'm probably wrong to refer to it as in any way realistic), your scenario offers even less hope. There is no way our Iraq policy is going to change in any substantive way. We've just watched this administration purge itself of anyone who had half a clue of the dangers we now fact in Iraq while it has promoted those who've been the most wrong. I don't see any chance whatsoever for a change and in fact I see that country headed for civil war.

Keep America Safe AND Free!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by Rrhain, posted 01-22-2005 5:13 AM Rrhain has not replied

  
1.61803
Member (Idle past 1503 days)
Posts: 2928
From: Lone Star State USA
Joined: 02-19-2004


Message 41 of 47 (278746)
01-13-2006 5:02 PM
Reply to: Message 33 by berberry
01-22-2005 2:48 AM


Re: Is the upcoming election the best hope?
Berberry, how prophetic is that!!!!!!
I am disgusted with this administration and I voted for Bush.
I defended his stupidity and was offended when people lambasted him.
Falses reports of WMD...torture of prisoners....and now spying..
Why????Why????? why do you all have to be right on this one!!
I am a fool.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by berberry, posted 01-22-2005 2:48 AM berberry has not replied

  
Tal
Member (Idle past 5676 days)
Posts: 1140
From: Fort Bragg, NC
Joined: 12-29-2004


Message 42 of 47 (296282)
03-17-2006 2:15 PM


Update Evidence tying UBL/Al Qeada to Saddam/Iraq
As this information becomes unclassified I will be sure to update the good people of EVC. I had read this information when I was in Baghdad, but couldn't share it with you because it was classified SECRET.
But now..it is not.
March 16, 2006 ” Following are the ABC News Investigative Unit's summaries of four of the nine Iraqi documents from Saddam Hussein's government, which were released by the U.S. government Wednesday.
The documents discuss Osama bin Laden, weapons of mass destruction, al Qaeda and more.
The full documents can be found on the U.S. Army Foreign Military Studies Office Web site: http://fmso.leavenworth.army.mil/products-docex.htm.
Note: Document titles were added by ABC News.
"Osama bin Laden and the Taliban"
Document dated Sept. 15, 2001
An Iraqi intelligence service document saying that their Afghani informant, who's only identified by a number, told them that the Afghani Consul Ahmed Dahastani claimed the following in front of him:
That OBL and the Taliban are in contact with Iraq and that a group of Taliban and bin Laden group members visited Iraq.
That the U.S. has proof the Iraqi government and "bin Laden's group" agreed to cooperate to attack targets inside America.
That in case the Taliban and bin Laden's group turn out to be involved in "these destructive operations," the U.S. may strike Iraq and Afghanistan.
That the Afghani consul heard about the issue of Iraq's relationship with "bin Laden's group" while he was in Iran.
At the end, the writer recommends informing "the committee of intentions" about the above-mentioned items. The signature on the document is unclear.
(Editor's Note: The controversial claim that Osama bin Laden was cooperating with Saddam Hussein is an ongoing matter of intense debate. While the assertions contained in this document clearly support the claim, the sourcing is questionable ” i.e. an unnamed Afghan "informant" reporting on a conversation with another Afghan "consul." The date of the document ” four days after 9/11 ” is worth noting but without further corroboration, this document is of limited evidentiary value.)
Did Russian Ambassador Give Saddam the U.S. War Plan? - ABC News

People don't kill people
Cartoons kill people

Replies to this message:
 Message 43 by crashfrog, posted 03-17-2006 2:18 PM Tal has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1466 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 43 of 47 (296288)
03-17-2006 2:18 PM
Reply to: Message 42 by Tal
03-17-2006 2:15 PM


Re: Update Evidence tying UBL/Al Qeada to Saddam/Iraq
You didn't see that bit at the end? "Limited evidentiary value"?
How do we know these aren't government forgeries?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by Tal, posted 03-17-2006 2:15 PM Tal has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 44 by Tal, posted 03-17-2006 2:24 PM crashfrog has replied

  
Tal
Member (Idle past 5676 days)
Posts: 1140
From: Fort Bragg, NC
Joined: 12-29-2004


Message 44 of 47 (296296)
03-17-2006 2:24 PM
Reply to: Message 43 by crashfrog
03-17-2006 2:18 PM


Re: Update Evidence tying UBL/Al Qeada to Saddam/Iraq
You didn't see that bit at the end? "Limited evidentiary value"?
Why do you think I listed it in my post? Limited? Yes. But the fact is it does have value.
How do we know these aren't government forgeries?
ABC would know about forged documents wouldn't they? I would think they have learned their lesson by now.
This message has been edited by Tal, 03-17-2006 02:25 PM

People don't kill people
Cartoons kill people

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by crashfrog, posted 03-17-2006 2:18 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 45 by Silent H, posted 03-17-2006 3:34 PM Tal has not replied
 Message 46 by crashfrog, posted 03-17-2006 4:11 PM Tal has not replied
 Message 47 by nator, posted 03-18-2006 9:55 AM Tal has not replied

  
Silent H
Member (Idle past 5819 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 45 of 47 (296317)
03-17-2006 3:34 PM
Reply to: Message 44 by Tal
03-17-2006 2:24 PM


Re: Update Evidence tying UBL/Al Qeada to Saddam/Iraq
I had read this information when I was in Baghdad, but couldn't share it with you because it was classified SECRET.
Right. What language was it in and do you speak it? If you did not personally handle the documents or could not read it, how did you come to have this information, given that your stated position was Iraq security detail? Do you know the caveats the site has regarding these documents?
But the fact is it does have value.
Do you understand what value it actually has? Besides the issue of it being questionable intel, from hearsay given to an unknown source (look what curveball threw us), take a look at it again...
An Iraqi intelligence service document saying that their Afghani informant, who's only identified by a number, told them that the Afghani Consul Ahmed Dahastani claimed the following in front of him:
That OBL and the Taliban are in contact with Iraq and that a group of Taliban and bin Laden group members visited Iraq. That the U.S. has proof the Iraqi government and "bin Laden's group" agreed to cooperate to attack targets inside America. That in case the Taliban and bin Laden's group turn out to be involved in "these destructive operations," the U.S. may strike Iraq and Afghanistan. That the Afghani consul heard about the issue of Iraq's relationship with "bin Laden's group" while he was in Iran.
1) If Iraq actually had high level ties/working relationship with OBL, why would they need to be told by someone else that Iraq is working with them? And if they were involved in 911, why would they need to be told IF OBL is involved in such attacks?
More importantly though...
2) This is a description of what an afghani consul heard while in IRAN, regarding Iraq. Iran, if you don't remember, would be the enemy of Saddam's Iraq. Thus they would have no working knowledge of what Saddam was doing, and indeed have been implicated to some degree in playing the US for suckers by passing false intel to blow up issues and so remove their enemy for them.
3) This does not suggest that any of the information Iran held was accurate, only that this is what Iran and the US had and what the US would do given the info they had.
Congrats on jumping the gun again.

holmes
"What you need is sustained outrage...there's far too much unthinking respect given to authority." (M.Ivins)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by Tal, posted 03-17-2006 2:24 PM Tal has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024