- #1
Un-defined
Just want ot see the majority opinions
Un-defined said:Just want ot see the majority opinions
russ_watters said:Posts in GD and P&WA are not counted in your post count.
Un-defined said:Just want ot see the majority opinions
JasonRox said:I know, but I find it odd that someone signed up and went right to the politics section to ask such a question.
Sounds like a lurker or something just going around the internet looking for quick statistics. But in reality, you need to know more about the members here to understand where the statistics are coming from.
Math Is Hard said:seems suspicious to me, too.
Ki Man said:^^another person who has no posts?^^
this war is only getting worse but we don't have enough options right now
That's a pretty strong statement considering the magnitude of the Soviet losses: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_war_in_AfghanistanIntegral said:The Iraq war will be notable in history as the biggest military blunder by the US, may even eclipse the USSRs invasion of Afghanistan for the biggest military blunder in recorded history.
russ_watters said:That's a pretty strong statement considering the magnitude of the Soviet losses: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_war_in_Afghanistan
Perhaps if the Iraq war continues for another 40 years...
Hey, I'm not saying it is a great situation, but certainly starting a war that gets you killed has to be worse.EL said:It depends on what you count as a "blunder". If you define it by the number of dead soldiers there are worse candidates. But in my eyes a "blunder" is a mistake, and what can beat going to war for the completely false reason (or really without reason), and then end up trapped in a loose-loose situation?
minase said:First of all I don't agree with the reason put for going to Iraq..If there were no nucs. I still have no idea why are we there. Both Sunis and ****tes want us out of there. majority says get out why are we still there. I don't think the politicians care.
I don't really care about the war either way, but I'm curious how you'd support that statement.Integral said:There may be no repair, a significantly possible outcome may be the end of the US era of supremacy and possibly even the end of civilization as we know it.
russ_watters said:Hey, I'm not saying it is a great situation, but certainly starting a war that gets you killed has to be worse.
drankin said:End of US involvement. Get out, sit back, and be available where needed.
That is a rather simplistic assessment.drankin said:Would anyone be on board with me on this:
We went into Iraq on the premise of WMDs but we really went into kick Sadam down for breaking rules he was told to follow. Now, from the git-go I knew the WMD deal was a farce, but, I did believe we needed to go in and take care of Sadam. Now, we did that. We should of pulled out. Undoubtedly, a civil war and consequently another dictator would have sprouted up. So what. There are many dictators in the world. We were simply enforcing world-wide agreed upon policies that Sadam contiunually rsisted.
End of US involvement. Get out, sit back, and be available where needed.
In May 2004, Specialist Justin J. Lillis got drunk on what he called “hajji juice,” a clear Iraqi moonshine smuggled onto an Army base in Balad, Iraq, by civilian contractors, and began taking potshots with his M-16 service rifle.
“He shot up some contractor’s rental car,” said Phil Cave, a lawyer for Specialist Lillis, 24. “He hopped in a Humvee, drove around and shot up some more things. He shot into a housing area” and at soldiers guarding the base entrance.
Six months later, at an Army base near Baghdad, after a night of drinking an illegal stash of whiskey and gin, Specialist Chris Rolan of the Third Brigade, Third Infantry Division, pulled his 9mm service pistol on another soldier and shot him dead.
And in March 2006, in perhaps the most gruesome crime committed by American troops in Iraq, a group of 101st Airborne Division soldiers stationed in Mahmudiya raped a 14-year-old Iraqi girl and killed her and her family after drinking several cans of locally made whiskey supplied by Iraqi Army soldiers, military prosecutors said.
Alcohol, strictly forbidden by the American military in Iraq and Afghanistan, is involved in a growing number of crimes committed by troops deployed to those countries. Alcohol- and drug-related charges were involved in more than a third of all Army criminal prosecutions of soldiers in the two war zones — 240 of the 665 cases resulting in convictions, according to records obtained by The New York Times through a Freedom of Information Act request.
Seventy-three of those 240 cases involve some of the most serious crimes committed, including murder, rape, armed robbery and assault. Sex crimes accounted for 12 of the convictions.
The 240 cases involved a roughly equal number of drug and alcohol offenses, although alcohol-related crimes have increased each year since 2004.
Despite the military’s ban on all alcoholic beverages — and strict Islamic prohibitions against drinking and drug use — liquor is cheap and ever easier to find for soldiers looking to self-medicate the effects of combat stress, depression or the frustrations of extended deployments, said military defense lawyers, commanders and doctors who treat soldiers’ emotional problems.
“It’s clear that we’ve got a lot of significant alcohol problems that are pervasive across the military,” said Dr. Thomas R. Kosten, a psychiatrist at the Veterans Affairs Medical Center in Houston. He traces their drinking and drug use to the stress of working in a war zone. “The treatment that they take for it is the same treatment that they took after Vietnam,” Dr. Kosten said. “They turn to alcohol and drugs.”
. . . . <continued>
drankin said:Would anyone be on board with me on this:
We went into Iraq on the premise of WMDs but we really went into kick Sadam down for breaking rules he was told to follow. Now, from the git-go I knew the WMD deal was a farce, but, I did believe we needed to go in and take care of Sadam. Now, we did that. We should of pulled out. Undoubtedly, a civil war and consequently another dictator would have sprouted up. So what. There are many dictators in the world. We were simply enforcing world-wide agreed upon policies that Sadam contiunually rsisted.
End of US involvement. Get out, sit back, and be available where needed.
drankin said:Would anyone be on board with me on this:
We went into Iraq on the premise of WMDs but we really went into kick Sadam down for breaking rules he was told to follow. Now, from the git-go I knew the WMD deal was a farce, but, I did believe we needed to go in and take care of Sadam. Now, we did that. We should of pulled out. Undoubtedly, a civil war and consequently another dictator would have sprouted up. So what. There are many dictators in the world. We were simply enforcing world-wide agreed upon policies that Sadam contiunually rsisted.
End of US involvement. Get out, sit back, and be available where needed.
Moridin said:As the nation stabilizes its democratic ruling and start enforcing the law harder by themselves, insurgency will most likely drop. If the US deprives the Iraqi government of this aid, there is no question about it - Iraq will be destroyed and another dictator will take Saddam's place.
Just look at Afghanistan; the US have been there longer and it is calmer there than it is in Iraq.
drankin said:It just seems that we are damned if we do something and damned if we don't. No matter how we go about it a large percentage of people are going to say we did it the wrong way. I'm even wondering if we shouldn't move towards becoming an isolationist country. Mind our own borders. Let the rest of the world fight out their own problems. Simplistic, I know, but often the simple answer is the best one.
drankin said:It just seems that we are damned if we do something and damned if we don't. No matter how we go about it a large percentage of people are going to say we did it the wrong way. I'm even wondering if we shouldn't move towards becoming an isolationist country. Mind our own borders. Let the rest of the world fight out their own problems. Simplistic, I know, but often the simple answer is the best one.