Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
New Strategy for Iraq
#1
This is a discussion on the plan itself and if it is best to defeat the terrorists. I frankly don't care what those who want us to lose say. Those people have to answer to God and he is all knowing and he is the true source or true justice. God himself will deal with those so I don't care about them. I care about our troops, their mission and the Iraqi people who prayed to God to liberate them from Saddam and now pray to save their country and their children, I have faith God has not abandoned us. This war will succeed and will end within the framework of God's divine purpose. Now lets look at the strategy put forward by the commander and chief and the military.

Baghdad is the capital of Iraq. 25% of Iraqis live in Baghdad and 80% of Iraq's violence is taking place in Baghdad. If we can get order in Baghdad, end the sectarian violence here, it sets the tone for the rest of Iraq. Iraqis will be confident the violence can end in the rest of the country if it was ended in the most difficult place. In order to do that I saw 18 divisions of Iraq forces will be send to Baghdad along with like 8 divisions of Americans soldiers. Have to recheck the numbers.

They will work side by side, they are to take the fight to armed groups of all religious sects, sunni, shiittes, Al Qaeda, Saddam Baathist and the shiites militias. Iraqi Prime Minister Maliki said all sectarian terrorists or militias will be the target. Rather than play whack a mole as John McCain calls it, they will hold the ground and use more money for reconstruction of Baghdad and to create jobs.

With all the sectarian stressors removed and with jobs and security this could end the large amounts of violence. People no longer would need to support militias and terrorists for security and society will function. By the way to know how serious they are about ending the shiitte militias, they are entering the Sadr City portion of Iraq where they've never been before to go clean out the militias.

4,000 US troops are to be sent to Anbar Province to join
132,000 US troops where they have had fierce battles with sunni Al Qaeda coming from Syria. Beating the sunni foreign fighters there and keeping them away from Baghdad would stop them from increasing sectarian violence in Baghdad. There's a new strategy in Baghdad to end the sectarian violence their, if we beat them there in both portions of Iraq the small levels of violence in the rest of Iraq, more of sprinkles here and there would go down to the level Iraqis can deal with them on their own.

This is a strategy for victory in Iraq. It gives the Iraqis the last chance to go after the militias and for Iraqis to join their military and go after all the enemies of Iraq, suni terrorists and shiitte militias. Our duty, all of us who want democracy and peace in Iraq, christians, jews, muslims, is to pray to that God in Heaven to guide the forces of liberty. To pray to that God who is all knowing and all powerful to kick the evil spriritual forces out of Iraq, and send them where they can do no harm. There is the year 2007, 07, we christians believe this is God's number. I heard from someone who knowledge of the subject that muslims believe this too, correct me if I'm wrong on this Kamil, Seif. This is God's years, lets pray so we can see his glory. Iraq will be free. God Bless America, God bless Iraq, God bless the freedom fighters.

The military guys, John, anyone else. Analyze our strategy.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,242920,00.html
Reply
#2
Quote:The military guys, John, anyone else. Analyze our strategy.

You saying: first let the military guys comment, then John, then anyone else? OK. Wink1
Government is necessary because people left unchecked will do evil.

The government is composed of people left unchecked


Reply
#3
I purposefully did not bother to listen to the speech. In fact, I am tired of the constant Yackity Yak, from both sides. But I will say this: unless the pipeline leading from Syria AND Iran is plugged, no amount of troops will make the difference.

Also, as I have repeatedly stated over the entire time of this forum's life, I believe that Iraq should be divided into at least three, or more, seperate countries. It's going to eventually happen anyway. This is where Bush made his initial mistake, by not recognizing the inevitable. The Kurds WILL have their own country, and no amount of trying to keep it from happening is going to make a difference.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
All men are frauds. The only difference between them is that some admit it. I myself deny it.
H. L. Mencken
Reply
#4
Anyone who wants to win. Military or not, I'm really interested in the military guys but go ahead I want all opinions of those who want us to win.
Reply
#5
Sectarian violence is fed by the suppression of Sunni's after the invasion and the hopelessness they find in the situation. I am pessimistic about Bagdad since it is a mixed city. But the Sunni's as well as the Christians are laving more and more. Since 2003, more than half of the Christian minority has left Iraq.

Better maybe to divide Iraq today and give the majority (including Bagdad and Basra) to Iran. Let the 100% Sunni areas in the west comprise a shrinked Iraqi state with close ties to Syria.

I see no solution of sectarian violence without a strong leader (like Saddam) if you will keep on to mixed Sunni/Shia areas. It won't work simply. Adding of more US troops will only lead to more US soldiers being killed.

Of course we should have avoided this situation in Iraq but that is too late now.

/track_snake
Reply
#6
track_snake Wrote:Better maybe to divide Iraq today and give the majority (including Bagdad and Basra) to Iran. Let the 100% Sunni areas in the west comprise a shrinked Iraqi state with close ties to Syria.



/track_snake

As Scotty would proclaim, "Are Ye Draft"?
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
All men are frauds. The only difference between them is that some admit it. I myself deny it.
H. L. Mencken
Reply
#7
track_snake Wrote:Better maybe to divide Iraq today and give the majority (including Bagdad and Basra) to Iran. Let the 100% Sunni areas in the west comprise a shrinked Iraqi state with close ties to Syria.

Here are the good news: we don't have to do this part. Iran and Syria can manage without our help.

Quote:I see no solution of sectarian violence without a strong leader (like Saddam)

Well, can we ask Saddam to run the show again? ... I guess not....
Government is necessary because people left unchecked will do evil.

The government is composed of people left unchecked


Reply
#8
Maliki has to be an even handed strong man. This is what most Iraqis want and what is needed. He's given the green light to go after militias, I think its worth supporting. By the way I agree John with stopping the pipeline. Assassinating Asad would do that since that would divide the insurgency from an ally, divide Iran from an ally and the situation in Syria would take up Iranian resources as we squeeze them with sanctions.

This is a good strategy and I believe it'll work but my previous idea still stands as truth, Bashir Asad, he's gotta go. Al Sadr, he's gotta go. Amadinijad if we don't kill him we have to over whelm him with this strategy and have the Iranians bug him like the democrats in this country are undermining Bush. John if you were my neighbor, I'd bet you a whole cow that Iraq won't be split up. Nevermind a steak, a whole cow.

There are intersect marriages in Iraq. In their culture often they make peace by marrying off their kids to one another. I know for a fact this is being done in Iraq. You need cultural ties to bond Iraqis and they had this pre Saddam Hussein. Sure we might have federalism with 3 big states under one nation but long term Iraq will remain one country.

If I'm wrong I'll deliver Rosie O'Donald with some nice herbs and spices to your front door. S2
Reply
#9
A USA pulled without an Iraqi Government that can control the violence would be a disaster for the whole region.
However, breaking up Iraq into 3 parts in my opinion is not an option for the following reasons:

Oil Map of Iraq
[Image: war_oilmap.gif]
-------------------------------
From CIA Fact Book:

Population: 26.8 Million

Ethnic groups: Arab 75%-80%, Kurdish 15%-20%, Turkoman, Assyrian or other 5%
Religions: Muslim 97% (Shi'a 60%-65%, Sunni 32%-37%), Christian or other 3%
----------------------------------

If Iraq is divided into 3 countries, 5 million people (Kurds) will have 60% of the oil wealth, 7 million people (Sunnis) will have 0.0% of the oil wealth, and another 16 million people (Shiites) will have 40% of the oil wealth.

Arabs will react to this breakup no different than they have been reacting to the establishment of Israel, resulting in conflicts and wars that might last for a few centuries.
Reply
#10
Not in the military (yet). As long as part of the strategy is changing the ROE this troop increase should be fine (although, maybe, unnecessary). Was talking to a SF buddy of mine. He said a friend of his was on sniper patrol in Baghdad, had someone in his crosshairs planting an IED, he COULD NOT shoot because of restrictions. I was like WTF?? Also, when speaking with regular troops stationed in or around Baghdad, a lot of them say they just stood around doing nothing the whole time they were there (even with all the car bombs, etc going off around them). I really don't know who's to blame for this. Is it our government or military leaders or is it the Iraqi government? Maybe it's the Iraqis and this is what Bush meant last night when he says for them to get on board and work with us. Could be partially even the Left's fault for whining about every military victory and saying it was a war crime (Fallujah is a good example) and threatening military and government officials with war crime charges. IMO, it's time for the Left to shut up and let the military do it's job of eliminating terrorists and insurgents.
"Some of the best weapons do not shoot.”
U.S. Army Counterinsurgency Field Manual FM 3-24 December, 2006
BE PREPARED - http://www.gunsandall.com/

http://www.westerncivforum.com/index.php
Reply
#11
Don't you send an additional 20,000 troops to Iraq and spend a couple of billions more? Super, adding insult to injury. Bush gave a speech, but I didn't see it at the news. What did he say? "Do you want the total war?" :lol:
"You know, Paul, Reagan proved that deficits don't matter." Dick Cheney
Reply
#12
Kamil Wrote:If Iraq is divided into 3 countries, 5 million people (Kurds) will have 60% of the oil wealth, 7 million people (Sunnis) will have 0.0% of the oil wealth, and another 16 million people (Shiites) will have 40% of the oil wealth.

Arabs will react to this breakup no different than they have been reacting to the establishment of Israel, resulting in conflicts and wars that might last for a few centuries.

Hey, it's going to happen eventually. I'm TELLING YOU, it is going to happen, whether you like it or not. Wouldn't you rather it be peaceful? Futher, the oil reserves can be worked out, AND there are HUGE deposits that have not been formally announced yet. All sides would benefit.

You are thinking like a reactionary Turk.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
All men are frauds. The only difference between them is that some admit it. I myself deny it.
H. L. Mencken
Reply
#13
Kamil Wrote:A USA pulled without an Iraqi Government that can control the violence would be a disaster for the whole region.
However, breaking up Iraq into 3 parts in my opinion is not an option for the following reasons:

Oil Map of Iraq
[Image: war_oilmap.gif]
-------------------------------
From CIA Fact Book:

Population: 26.8 Million

Ethnic groups: Arab 75%-80%, Kurdish 15%-20%, Turkoman, Assyrian or other 5%
Religions: Muslim 97% (Shi'a 60%-65%, Sunni 32%-37%), Christian or other 3%
----------------------------------

If Iraq is divided into 3 countries, 5 million people (Kurds) will have 60% of the oil wealth, 7 million people (Sunnis) will have 0.0% of the oil wealth, and another 16 million people (Shiites) will have 40% of the oil wealth.

Arabs will react to this breakup no different than they have been reacting to the establishment of Israel, resulting in conflicts and wars that might last for a few centuries.

Kamil, I understand your argument but who said life was fair? Is it fair that Saudi Arabia has so much oil and Jordan has none? No, but it is a fact of life.

If the Sunnis of Iraq had participated in the establishment of a new government rather than sitting back and saying "we don't want to play since we were historically in charge so we should stay in charge" then they would probably have more say in it. Instead they elected to sit aside and let their extremists do everything they could to prevent the establishment of a stable and fair central government. They took the cucumber so let them sleep with it (sorry, a local saying here in this part of the Middle East) :lol:
Reply
#14
You people just don't GET IT, do you?
Amazing!
America has LOST the war in Iraq. That is a done deal.
What immoral bush is doing now is just a very obvious BLAME GAME.
It is so obvious. He is pegging all the responsibility on Maliki and there is no way in helll Maliki is going to deliver.
So then it all falls apart (two weeks after President Rodham is elected) and Bush can feel in his deluded black dry alky heart that histororians will actually believe he thought he could win (at this point) and buy his it was Maliki's fault BS.
The fact is Iraq was ten times better off under Hussein.
The initial invasion was a total folly, and the followup is the biggest foreign policy disaster in American history.
Shameful. Would you send your child now to die for bush's ego?

BTW, I found this article right after I wrote this. Seems I am not the only smart person who can see through bush's dirty lies:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cg...NGP3E1.DTL
Quote:"To me, it's Bush building a way out in the end, where he says, 'From the beginning it was the Iraqis that were leading this effort; they're not doing it, we cannot do it for them,' " said Marina Ottaway, director of the Middle East program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington, D.C. "He's really preparing himself to be in a position to blame the Iraqis when things don't work out."
Reply
#15
I'm sure he is doing just that, but not in toto. And it is true that Maliki has been a terrible letdown. And there comes a time when he will have to step up to the plate.

As my former mother-in-law used to say, "either Sh-t or get off the Pot". Hey, she was from New Jersey, Somerville. They talk like that there. S6
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
All men are frauds. The only difference between them is that some admit it. I myself deny it.
H. L. Mencken
Reply
#16
John L Wrote:
Kamil Wrote:If Iraq is divided into 3 countries, 5 million people (Kurds) will have 60% of the oil wealth, 7 million people (Sunnis) will have 0.0% of the oil wealth, and another 16 million people (Shiites) will have 40% of the oil wealth.

Arabs will react to this breakup no different than they have been reacting to the establishment of Israel, resulting in conflicts and wars that might last for a few centuries.

Hey, it's going to happen eventually. I'm TELLING YOU, it is going to happen, whether you like it or not. Wouldn't you rather it be peaceful? Futher, the oil reserves can be worked out, AND there are HUGE deposits that have not been formally announced yet. All sides would benefit.

You are thinking like a reactionary Turk.
---------------------------------------------------------
Yes, I am afraid too that it is going to happen as seen from the present circumstances.

/track_snake
Reply
#17
mv Wrote:
track_snake Wrote:Better maybe to divide Iraq today and give the majority (including Bagdad and Basra) to Iran. Let the 100% Sunni areas in the west comprise a shrinked Iraqi state with close ties to Syria.

Here are the good news: we don't have to do this part. Iran and Syria can manage without our help.

Quote:I see no solution of sectarian violence without a strong leader (like Saddam)

Well, can we ask Saddam to run the show again? ... I guess not....
----------------------------------------
Well.... Maybe you can ask some of the Saddam lookalikes that surfaced during the years....

/track_snake
Reply
#18
They are never going to here the end of it when we win. Hillary Clinton came out against the plan. Now if the new strategy leads to the tide turning she won't look like Presidential material. I hope conservatives have all these libs like ted kennedy, kerry, gore and others on video saying the war was lost, is a failure, the troops can't win etc. When we do win, these people's comments will be played voer and over again by the RNC and they will discredit the democrat party, and eventually bury it.

Democrats took the cucumber so let them sit on it. It's a little saying in San Francisco, or so I've heard. :roll: :lol:

By the way Iran and Syria side with the democrats. They are against the new strategy. This tells me the enemy is concerned about the new strategy. Well the little socialist Ferrit needs to go, not you thai, Bashir Asad. Overwhelming Iran is the best regional strategy.

Have them lose their Syrian ally and get in a fight with sunnis in Syria not wanting a powerful shiite middle east. Tell me Seif, Kamil, do you think the sunnies in Syria will come out against the Iranians. I believe they will and believe this will deliver a serious blow to Iran. They will fight sunnis in Syria and drain resources there. Also a palestinian civil war between Fatah and Hamas will have them drained if they back their Hamas allies. Then there's the upcoming civil war in Lebanon, Iran would need to aid Hezbollah.

I say take out Bashir Asad, instigate Fatah and Hamas, instigate sunni, druze and christians in Lebanon against Hezbollah, Iran's resources will begin to drain and their support fr our enemy in Iraq will lessen. Then we can play around with their currency, sabotage their oil, encourage civil war in Iran. This will overwhelm Iran, allowing us to defeat the militias and terrorists in Iraq.
Reply
#19
Thaiquila Wrote:The fact is Iraq was ten times better off under Hussein.

Not having lived there under either circumstance you obviously have no foundation to claim either way.

Thaiquila Wrote:...Seems I am not the only smart person who can see through...

Now there is a real problem... thinking that you are a "smart person".
Reply
#20
Um, excuse me? Everyone? We HAVE won. It's the Leftist media who has fooled the fools into thinking we haven't. I'm so sick of hearing we lost or are losing. Get a clue The infrastructure of Iraq is like it's never been before (talk to ANY Civil Affairs troop who has been there and they'll tell you just that). The way of life for 80% of the Iraqis (those outside Baghdad) is better than they have ever experienced before.
The media is force feeding "we lost" every day and all day. The media is wrong and panders to what the terrorists (including our own) want you to hear. The good news is there. It's buried, but it's there. Do some research. Go the ACOE web site. Google 'Civil Affairs soldier' and see what you come up with. Electricity, water, sanitation, roads, schools, etc. All this is far better than it ever has been. And those who say it's because the US Military blew it all up are completely wrong. All these things, outside of Baghdad and Saddam's palace region never had these things or they were neglected over the past 30 years.
Talk to the Soldiers, folks. Do not rely on polls or any media (that includes FOX) for your information.
Ditto for Afghanistan too.
There is a reason it's called Operation Iraqi FREEDOM!!

Sorry for this rant, but it just pisses me off and I'm fed up withall the negativity about something that is very positive.

Talk to the troops who've been there and are involved in rebuilding Iraq.
"Some of the best weapons do not shoot.”
U.S. Army Counterinsurgency Field Manual FM 3-24 December, 2006
BE PREPARED - http://www.gunsandall.com/

http://www.westerncivforum.com/index.php
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  CTC: Iran's Strategy in Iraq Jedburgh 0 898 10-18-2008, 08:42 AM
Last Post: Jedburgh

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)