Why we "lost" Iraq ...

ViRedd

New Member
Why we 'lost' Iraq

[SIZE=-1]Posted: July 16, 2007[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]1:00 a.m. Eastern[/SIZE]



[FONT=Palatino,]By Joseph Farah[/FONT]

[FONT=Palatino,][SIZE=-1]© 2007 [/SIZE][/FONT]



[FONT=Palatino,]I take a backseat to no one in believing victory in Iraq is essential to America's national security. [/FONT]

[FONT=Palatino,]I would love to see Iraqis all get along. I would love to see Iraq become a free and independent state or states. I would love to see it become a model for self-government in the Muslim Middle East. [/FONT]

[FONT=Palatino,]But more important to Americans is the utter defeat of al-Qaida and Iranian proxies there. That's what constitutes victory for the U.S. [/FONT]

[FONT=Palatino,]However, that's not the way President Bush defines victory. In fact, he's never defined it – which is one of the reasons we can't achieve it. [/FONT]

[FONT=Palatino,]I believe I can point to the turning point in the Iraq war – the moment, the day, the hour it all started to go downhill for our mission. It is important for Americans to understand and acknowledge this turning point, or we will never learn from our mistake of historic proportions. [/FONT]

[FONT=Palatino,]It happened in November 2004. [/FONT]

[FONT=Palatino,]Prior to that time, there was little question America was accomplishing its mission in Iraq. It was on the way to victory. It was destroying the enemy and transforming the country into a U.S. ally in the Middle East – one that would not likely tolerate al-Qaida activity or efforts at Iranian hegemony. [/FONT]

[FONT=Palatino,]But what happened in November 2004 changed all that. It wasn't a victory on the battlefield by al-Qaida. It wasn't new tactics by Iranian-sponsored terrorists. It wasn't a spontaneous uprising by America's enemies. It wasn't an outbreak of religious hostilities between Sunnis and Shiites. And it wasn't any failure by U.S. troops. [/FONT]

[FONT=Palatino,]It was, first, a public-relations disaster called Abu Ghraib. [/FONT]


[FONT=Palatino,]Photos of prisoners being mocked and abused released to the world represented a major turning point in the war. It put the U.S. on the defensive. It compromised America's high moral ground in the conflict. It suggested we weren't "fighting fair." [/FONT]

[FONT=Palatino,]But the political response to this tempest in a teapot within the U.S. caused an even bigger setback for U.S. military forces. [/FONT]

[FONT=Palatino,]That media coup for the enemy set off a chain of events that ultimately led the politicians in Washington to handcuff our troops – ensuring the quagmire that followed. [/FONT]

[FONT=Palatino,]Abu Ghraib spelled the end of coercive interrogations. You can thank Sen. John McCain, now a presidential candidate, for that. He equated what we saw in those Abu Ghraib photos with "torture." He kept saying it over and over again. He prevailed on Congress and the president to change U.S. military procedures on interrogations that had been in place for decades. [/FONT]

[FONT=Palatino,]The result? Now enemy captives know they don't have to talk. They know exactly what U.S. interrogators will and won't do to get information. They have no fear. And there was absolutely no longer any reason to provide information about the next enemy attack. There was absolutely no reason to reveal where the roadside bombs were. There was absolutely no reason to disclose who the traitors were within the Iraqi government, military and police forces. [/FONT]

[FONT=Palatino,]What followed next is plain for anyone to see: U.S. and Iraqi casualties skyrocketed. No longer could we see the attacks that were coming. U.S. military forces were operating in the blind, without any valuable intelligence. And nothing has changed since. [/FONT]

[FONT=Palatino,]When we stopped performing coercive interrogations, we no longer had the ability to prevent attacks before they happened. We no longer had the human intelligence we had prior to November 2004. What we get from prisoners now is nothing, nada, zilch, zip … bupkiss. [/FONT]

[FONT=Palatino,]They all know they can hold out. U.S. interrogators cannot even speak harshly to these enemy combatants. The rules about interrogations were released publicly, debated in Congress and revealed to the enemy through the international news media. [/FONT]

[FONT=Palatino,]Would you give up information under those circumstances? [/FONT]
[FONT=Palatino,]Is this any way to fight a war? [/FONT]

[FONT=Palatino,]Is this a plan for victory or a recipe for defeat? [/FONT]

[FONT=Palatino,]There are other factors involved in turning Iraq into a quagmire. We have turned on our own men – prosecuting them for war crimes that were never committed. We have limited our tactical and strategic objectives. We have ruled out the kind of full-scale assaults on enemy strongholds we used at the start of the war. [/FONT]

[FONT=Palatino,]At the same time, President Bush sold out security at home by refusing to enforce the laws of the land with regard to border security and immigration policy. This undercut his authority and credibility as a strong leader for national security. [/FONT]

[FONT=Palatino,]Is it too late to reverse course? [/FONT]

[FONT=Palatino,]Can victory still be achieved? [/FONT]

[FONT=Palatino,]Or is the war truly "lost" as Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has proclaimed? [/FONT]

[FONT=Palatino,]I know one thing for certain: Only when we acknowledge the mistakes of the past will we have an opportunity to correct them. [/FONT]

[FONT=Palatino,]I pray Americans wake up to these realities before it is too late. [/FONT]
 

medicineman

New Member
We lost Iraq the day the first ship pulled out of port taking arms and soldiers to the field. The Arabs have never been defeated on their home turf in modern times. Glad to see you coming around, VI, you've been saying how we are winning for some time now,~LOL~.
 

Gygax1974

Just some idiot
We lost Iraq the day the first ship pulled out of port taking arms and soldiers to the field. The Arabs have never been defeated on their home turf in modern times. Glad to see you coming around, VI, you've been saying how we are winning for some time now,~LOL~.
What about the seven day war?
 

Dankdude

Well-Known Member
We won in Iraq, we archived the goals we set out to do.
We bombed the shit out of them. Check
We Deposed Saddam. Check
We made sure that Saddam was executed. Check

In doing so we Violated International law.
It is against International law to do preemptive strikes and violate the sovereignty of a Nation with out the permission of the United Nations.
It is against International law to Depose a leader of a country through an act of war. (we also violated international law Panama)
It is against International Law to Execute a leader of a Nation.

Now we are Occupiers and they want us to leave, But we will not leave until we get their oil at a greatly reduced price. (which how they went about it is against the law... ( refer to the link)

https://www.rollitup.org/politics/18992-iraqi-oil-workers-union-founder.html
 

ViRedd

New Member
Dank ...

Fuck international law. Fuck the U.N. Fuck Saddam and his sons. Fuck the terrorists who declared war on us on 9-11. IMO, 9-11 cancelled all that international hug-a-thon crap.

Vi
 

Gygax1974

Just some idiot
Apples and oranges.
i know i was not comparing the two i was just pointing out the seven day war. I know they came from the same tribes, we all came from the same tribe originally. I guess I didn't even think about the first war. We should have finished the job then. I just wish we would get out of there, it will be a good day. Yes we are a world power and we need to handle things "correctly" in the future and the sooner we get out the better. We should be "brothers" with a lot of those middle eastern countries...they hate terrorism in some areas worse than they hate the western world, and it would be nice to band together to fight this terrorism. We need to find a way to see eye to eye if that is possible, and I feel that war is not the way,sorry just ranting....i took the pot again. Have a good night guys
 

Token

Well-Known Member
Dank ...

Fuck international law. Fuck the U.N. Fuck Saddam and his sons. Fuck the terrorists who declared war on us on 9-11. IMO, 9-11 cancelled all that international hug-a-thon crap.

Vi[/q

so the terrorists declared war on us on 9-11 what about the 1980's attack, and you think this makes it right to take control of another country and invade it just because the president doesn't like the leader and thinks hey where close by why not. We have no right to do any of the thing we have done. and why we lost Iraq is they don't want us there, and more of them are joining groups and starting there own and attack but then ratting out where another are. The only thing we could have done was ask the UN to act in other country and arrest them, and beef up the security at the airports.
 

ViRedd

New Member
Dank ...

Fuck international law. Fuck the U.N. Fuck Saddam and his sons. Fuck the terrorists who declared war on us on 9-11. IMO, 9-11 cancelled all that international hug-a-thon crap.

Vi[/q

so the terrorists declared war on us on 9-11 what about the 1980's attack, and you think this makes it right to take control of another country and invade it just because the president doesn't like the leader and thinks hey where close by why not. We have no right to do any of the thing we have done. and why we lost Iraq is they don't want us there, and more of them are joining groups and starting there own and attack but then ratting out where another are. The only thing we could have done was ask the UN to act in other country and arrest them, and beef up the security at the airports.
Well, in all honesty, I was gonna include all of the other IslamoFascist attacks on U.S. propety over the years, but I didn't want to confuse those few who are posting in this forum who are devoid of a historical perspective. Your correct, of course ... 9-11 was not the first declaration of war the Islamofascists made on the U.S. Their biggest mistake is, they attacked us on Bush's watch. And yes ... there isn't much of a link between Saddam and 9-11, but like Willie Sutton the bank robber said when asked: "Willie, why do you rob banks?" His response was: "Because that's where the money is." So, I would imagine that Bush would say something similar about our troops being in Iraq .... "Because that's where the terrorists are." Now if you don't believe that, then answer this question: Who's blowing up their fellow Muslims ... and why?

Vi
 

hempie

New Member
where is the U.N HQ located? in New York. why? because the U.N is our show.who put saddam into power? we did.but he was naughty so we removed him. he had plenty chances to behave but made the choice not to because he never thought we would actually remove him. the were no direct ties between saddam and al queda but there was to a few in his regime. lets for the leftist sake say that nothing was broken over there before we invaded.well, there is now so we must fix it. iraq is our responsibility now .
 

Ethnobotanist

Well-Known Member
Are not the Jews just fancy Arabs, you know, Cain and Abel, the tribes split and the Jews are the blessed ones from Abels' side.
Um, Isaac and Ishmael, but close enough. :-) According to Genesis, God loves 'em both, and they're both blessed. But yes, the Israelites are the ones with the special covenant though.

~Ethno.
 

420worshipper

Well-Known Member
Are not the Jews just fancy Arabs, you know, Cain and Abel, the tribes split and the Jews are the blessed ones from Abels' side.

Actually the Arabs come from Ishmael and the Jewish people come from Isaac. Who in fact both come from Abraham. Not Cain and Able as you put up. Besides Able was killed before he had kids.
 

420worshipper

Well-Known Member
We won in Iraq, we archived the goals we set out to do.
We bombed the shit out of them. Check
We Deposed Saddam. Check
We made sure that Saddam was executed. Check

In doing so we Violated International law.
It is against International law to do preemptive strikes and violate the sovereignty of a Nation with out the permission of the United Nations.
It is against International law to Depose a leader of a country through an act of war. (we also violated international law Panama)
It is against International Law to Execute a leader of a Nation.

Now we are Occupiers and they want us to leave, But we will not leave until we get their oil at a greatly reduced price. (which how they went about it is against the law... ( refer to the link)
https://www.rollitup.org/politics/18992-iraqi-oil-workers-union-founder.html

Actually the United Nations did give the US the right in a vote to go into Iraq this time. And when we went into Panama it was with a Federal Drug warrant to arrest him. Now the fact that it took him out of office as well when he went to prison doesn't violate the letter of the law. And we never executed Sadaam. His own people tried, convicted and executed him. And trust me, my wife is Iraqi and she would have pulled the trigger on that execution herself.
 

closet.cult

New Member
we lost Iraq, IMO, because we went under false pretences. W had a goal; to get Sadom. Once he achieved it, he didn't know how to proceed. Because the rest of the fight isn't in him.

If you have a true, faithful reason, worth going to war over, you're heart and soul will be in the winning of it, to accomplish your goal. You would be 110% immersed in finding the quickest solutions. Adrinaline, the victory closing kick for truth and justice. That's why the underdogs win fights. Because their fighting for right.

This 'bring democracy to an oppressed people' was absolute bullshit. It was Sadom he was after. Now it's done, and he hasn't the mental capacity to find a solution to a false pretense anymore. The motivation to fight a losing war has gotten the better of him.

Sadly, to pull himself out of this mire, I can easily see some last extream methods employed. I hope he doen't kill more Americans in the effort.
 

medicineman

New Member
we lost Iraq, IMO, because we went under false pretences. W had a goal; to get Sadom. Once he achieved it, he didn't know how to proceed. Because the rest of the fight isn't in him.

If you have a true, faithful reason, worth going to war over, you're heart and soul will be in the winning of it, to accomplish your goal. You would be 110% immersed in finding the quickest solutions. Adrinaline, the victory closing kick for truth and justice. That's why the underdogs win fights. Because their fighting for right.

This 'bring democracy to an oppressed people' was absolute bullshit. It was Sadom he was after. Now it's done, and he hasn't the mental capacity to find a solution to a false pretense anymore. The motivation to fight a losing war has gotten the better of him.

Sadly, to pull himself out of this mire, I can easily see some last extream methods employed. I hope he doen't kill more Americans in the effort.
It's about the OIL, silly.
 

closet.cult

New Member
please. what oil? how have we benifited from there being oil in iraq? the oil is a bonus, one day. the u.s. will get the oil when they fiqure out what cards they hold. right now, W has to maintain that he is there to 'free the iraqies'. but anyone would hate an occupior. so there are no relations to build on. one day, when they request aid, the u.s. will get their hands on the goods.

W went there on a personal agenda to kill Sadom. He as much as said so if you read between the lines. the oil was a secondary motive.

but what the fuck do I know.
 

medicineman

New Member
please. what oil? how have we benifited from there being oil in iraq? the oil is a bonus, one day. the u.s. will get the oil when they fiqure out what cards they hold. right now, W has to maintain that he is there to 'free the iraqies'. but anyone would hate an occupior. so there are no relations to build on. one day, when they request aid, the u.s. will get their hands on the goods.

W went there on a personal agenda to kill Sadom. He as much as said so if you read between the lines. the oil was a secondary motive.

but what the fuck do I know.
Not to be disrepectful, but it is certainly about the oil. Check out the embassy and the huge US bases being built there. It's about the oil and Haliburton you silly thing, and all the war profiteering now in progress. they were planning this invasion from day one. Have you ever heard of the Military-Industrial complex, well It's working full time now. Cheney privatized the majority of Military support under Bush I and had to start a war to collect on it. Read up on Cheney-Bush I and Haliburton. He sent them huge military contracts under Bush I then went out of office to work for them then came back to start a war for them. It's pretty simple logic, Blood for oil I calls it.
 
Top