Let Iraq fall!!

I'm betting today that we'll head right back in to help if anything threatens their monetary system and the trading of oil in anything but dollars. We care about little in Iraq as long as our economic wants are upheld. Disgusting, but that's what I believe the situation to be. It was never about freeing people from a ruthless leader, otherwise N Korea would have found its ruler suffering the same demise as Saddam.

 

True, though to be fair a fight with little Kim would end badly for millions I Seoul alone and would ramp up tensions between us and China. Lil Kim has a bit of a lock where he is so long as he doesn't (*)(*)(*)(*) China off to the point that they intervene.

 

Great point. We haven't really been the most humanitarian when it comes to atrocities unless we gain in some other way as well.

 

Very true. We certainly help a lot of people and provide aid (even to North Korea) but the only example I can think of where we helped people who were in conflict is Somalia, and even then it was a UN mission. Not that I'm a fan of the "world police" bit.

 

Most Kurds are Sunni.

 

Interesting how the the same people who would wage a bloody civil war, down to the last man, to keep the US together if certain states and regions decided to separate, advocate for the splitting up of other countries.

 

don't derail the thread.

 

Just install a dictator already and leave Iraq! Really dumb to try to make it a democracy just like that. Democracy and prosperity takes time, and money. Were I the US I'd just install a puppet dictator and let him handle things there. Better to have iraqis kill iraqis than americans doing it. Then, slowly turn it into a democracy, south korea style. Although, it's hard to do such a thing now adays with the media condeming you all the time, but it's the best way to go still.

 

At this point all Americans should get the hell out of Iraq, and let the murdering fools kill each other.

 

You need to think first of the Democratic party. What we should do is continue our political refugee program to bring over as many of these murdering bastards as we can. Once stuff blows up in the streets just like Baghdad, and Boston, the Republicans will have no choice but to take away everyone's guns. Once the guns are gone, we can do whatever we want.

 

Well,l that's one vote to tear up the constitution.

Wow. just, wow.

 

The "tribes" in the middle east have been fighting for centuries and you'll never be able to stop it. I maintain that we never should have gotten involved over there in the first place; how many men and women died for the "cause"?? How many billions of dollars were spent for the "cause"?? I say pull all of our troops from the mid east and let them settle their differences without our help.

 

What amazes me is the small number of troops apparently used to conquer Mosul. I understand that it is a Sunni majority area, but it seems that the Shia dominated Iraqi government has no backbone at all. I wonder what will happen if Baghdad is attacked? Will the Iraqi Army stand and fight?

 

Actually, there is one sure way to stop the fighting in the middle east.

Pull an Anakin.

 

(*)(*)(*)(*) i agree with op.

Time to check myself into the crazy house.

- - - Updated - - -

Excellent observational skills.

 

Iraq and the middle east is important for our security. Iraq as a staging ground for those who hate us and want to attack us...just because we are a free society...is a bad scenero. Once it falls then the surround countries are vulnerable as well. We should at least save the 200 or so United States contractors trapped and fighting for their lives. But the military is washing their hands of it, willing to let these U.S citizens die, presumably at the order of our so sorry commander in chief.

If our commander in chief is washing his hands of the situation then yes...our soldiers need to get the hell out.

 

I agree but with differences of how to go about it. If 25,000 or so Iraq soldiers will tuck tail and run from 800 scum, then we should not sacrifice one more life of our own cuz just one of ours is worth more than 10K of theirs. Sorry to be so harsh but that is how I see things. They simply aren't worth it and those who face this growing threat (such as Europe) should do something about it BEFORE we do. We've done enough and should simply keep a huge track of land in the middle of nowhere in Iraq as a major airbase. That is too late but it could have, at least been used to get our civilians out and kept a good strong foot in the door to keep Iran "respectful".

I would hate to know that any of my loved ones had to serve under this failure in chief but, sadly, I do know several who had already enlisted before he was voted in by folks who should never again be allowed to vote. B.O. has proven to be the type of leader who will/HAS thrown anyone and everyone under the bus.

We must bring our troops home and place all of our might around our shores and borders and let Europe do the same or take action against this imminent threat that has been spreading for several years now.

In short......SAVE THYSELF.

 

The above seems a somewhat histrionic analysis of the situation to me. No people in the course of human history have been hated simply because they were free, and I have read no reports of US contractors fighting for their lives in desperate last-ditch battles with insurgents. They went there voluntarily to make money, not for humanitarian purposes, and if the environment has become less conducive to convenient commerce, it is up to them to get themselves out.

Rightly or wrongly, the most disliked nation on earth appears to be Israel, but I will admit that the USA runs it a close second in the number of people around the world who view it less than positively. The reasons for this are doubtless complex, often subjective, and sometimes unfair, but have nothing to do with the 'freedoms' which US citizens enjoy.

 

It's not about who is killed but how they are killed I guess.

- - - Updated - - -

So you don't think that radical Islamists are hostile towards more socially liberal cultures because of their liberality?

 

That is not precisely what I stated. I think extremists of all sorts, be they conservatives, socialists, Christians, or Moslems, are hostile towards anyone who does not subscribe to their particular ideology. It is not about the freedoms enjoyed by any individuals, it is about the threat seen to ideological values - look at the criticisms levelled by a number of conservative Americans at various aspects of European culture, (UHC and gun control, for example) to see how that works.

The thought process appears to be: if it is seen to work well in ostensibly similar societies; people might adopt it over here - that does not comply with our ideology, so we must attack any and every aspect of it, even if that means fabricating 'evidence'.

The USA is not adored throughout even more socially liberal cultures (such as western Europe) so your rationale is not supported in that instance. And, LOL, which of our nations is universally admired?

 

I didn't say anything about admiration. Anyway, I have news for you: there is no meaningful difference between what we call liberalism (or, I would say, western liberality) and what we call freedom. It's semantics to suggest otherwise. I guess this is all a strained attempt to change subjects from Islamists to America-bashing or to make yourself look smart but it's not workin.

 

Your comments are interesting, just to get back to Islamists for a sec - do you contend that these people hate we in the west not for our interferences but for the the various social freedoms we enjoy?

Or is it more that they reject our way of life and refuse to see it transported to their areas?

 

It's some of both. You guys want to simplify it into some kind of America-bashing dialogue but that's incorrect. These Jihadist groups are open about their desire to conquer more socially liberal societies and have them operate under their brands of Islamic law. It's not limited to Arab or Persian or African countries, it applies anywhere that there is militant Islam.

In other words, you want to push this "they just want to be left alone" dialogue but that's not what they want. Liberals are just too afraid of Islamists to confront them. This is why they bash Christians incessantly for being a really mild version of the Islamists but never say a thing about Muslims. They hate social conservatism in all its forms but will only go after the conservatives they don't feel threatened by.

It reaches a point where western liberals will stop just sort of saying that Jihadists are better than Christians. It's a ridiculous implication that they have no qualms suggesting, but if you look at this guy who is basically saying "Al Qaeda just wants to be left alone" while he tries to segway into America-bashing, you will see it plain as day.

 

It has been a wider conflict for some time now, and the death of the great Satan is nothing new.

 

That was exactly what I was already waiting for after the first phase of the Second Gulf War.

Why to keep together a country made by areas where the populations don't show the will to build something together?

Since Iraq has got confused internal "borderlines" this could mean a further war, anyway we [NATO] have already managed with a similar "division crisis": former Yugoslavia.

It's possible to lead such a process with a low level of involvement and obtaining an acceptable lasting equilibrium.

So ...