****-ed every which way

[Da Skinna]

Is the US not ****ed every which way in Iraq right now?

If they leave, they lose the war, Iraq is not stable, is made an actual breeding ground for terrorism and Al-Qaeda, and the American people are disillusioned with the Republican party.

If they stay, the American people become disillusioned with the Republican party, more soldiers die, more Iraqis die, and more and more people blame America as time goes by.

It seems the one thing that can solve the problem of Iraq is the one that is most distasteful, the one thing that we say America is the worst for, and that one thing is placing a strongman in charge.

We need a Saddam, a Diem, a Batista, etc. Someone who we can give all the power to, and at the same time, shift accountability to. Someone we know is heartless enough to get the job, so we can actually leave Iraq and say, this all wasn't for nothing...

This person would be ruthless, forcing all factions into submission. They would undoubtedly use the police as an extension of their power, the army goes without saying, and the CIA and American special non-combative forces, there as advisors. There will be many more deaths, but with a strongman, they'd be Iraqis (read: we'd care less) but with the right amount of pressures, from the top down, a few drill holes here and there, Iraq would once again be stable.

Now the kicker would be is if America picks a Sunni...

[Gelgoog]

or we could take a pointer from vietname and soviet afghan war. set a date for withdrawl but dont tell anyone, and bomb the crap outta the place, maybe invade cambodia...i mean iran, to stop those supplies from coming in country. you know withdrawl with our head high.

[Kythras]

or we could take a pointer from vietname and soviet afghan war. set a date for withdrawl but dont tell anyone, and bomb the crap outta the place, maybe invade cambodia...i mean iran, to stop those supplies from coming in country. you know withdrawl with our head high.

Jesus Christ I hope you are never, ever in any position to say how any part of the world is run...

Yes, lets put ANOTHER dictator in charge of iraq. Youll just end up with an Iraq War II 20 years later.

I think you meanthe Iraq War III - remember Papa Bush?

[Gelgoog]

Jesus Christ I hope you are never, ever in any position to say how any part of the world is run...

you actually thought i was being serious? wow so gullible

[Lunar4]

Yes, lets put ANOTHER dictator in charge of iraq. Youll just end up with an Iraq War II 20 years later.

[Da Skinna]

Yes, lets put ANOTHER dictator in charge of iraq. Youll just end up with an Iraq War II 20 years later.

Oh. Sorry. Let's put in democracy instead.

[RusskiSoldat]

Yes, lets put ANOTHER dictator in charge of iraq. Youll just end up with an Iraq War II 20 years later.

Remember how the US went to war with every dictator in the world?
Me neither.
If Saddam had been smart enough to not invade Kuwait, he'd still be receiving crates of money and weapons from the US.

[jankren]

Remember how the US went to war with every dictator in the world?
Me neither.
If Saddam had been smart enough to not invade Kuwait, he'd still be receiving crates of money and weapons from the US.

Well, I heard Saddam Hussein already asked his master in the White House for permission to pick on Kuwait before he decided to invade the country.

[Thanatos]

Shhhhhh! You speak heresy! You truth-telling kinds will not be tolerated!

[Da Skinna]

Back on topic, please, is what I say not along the lines of being the only effective solution right now?

[Thanatos]

Iraq needs another dictator. If you input democracy, you'll still get a dictator. Democracy is, after all, complete majority/mob rule.

[Irishmafia2020]

Make Iraq into three seperate countries, Kurds, Arabs, and Shiites, and then put a dictator in each one. That way they would never be powerful enough to invade Kuwait, Iran or Turkey. Really guys, a three state solution is the only way to go at this point, the genocidal civil war has already begun, this country isn't gonna be put back together anyway...
@skinna wouldn't three dictators of weaker countries be more manageable? just think even if one of them hated the US, we would only lose a third of the country...!

[Roman Rapper]

@Da Skinna


I think that if we are looking at ways in which the situation can be improved, the last thing we should be contemplating is setting any kind of deadline for withdrawl.

I find it intresting to compare the situation in Iraq now with the U.S occupation with the situation in India under British rule.
Britian managed to maintain a high level of order in India for decades with a military presence of only around ten thousand troops.
Compare this to the problem that the U.S is having in iraq with more than 100 thousand troops.

The main difference is that when Britian came to rule India the british came with the attitude: "We are now here to rule you, and we are not going to go away." As a result, there was more incentive for the people to cooperate with the British.
However, right now the avarage Iraqi citizen has no incentive to cooperate with the Americans (or the British), since we have made it clear to them that we are not planning to stay for the long haul.
If they did cooperate, they would become known to the insurgents as traitors, and then as soon as the American and British troops leave the insurgents would return in force and punish them.

[Da Skinna]

Make Iraq into three seperate countries, Kurds, Arabs, and Shiites, and then put a dictator in each one. That way they would never be powerful enough to invade Kuwait, Iran or Turkey. Really guys, a three state solution is the only way to go at this point, the genocidal civil war has already begun, this country isn't gonna be put back together anyway...
@skinna wouldn't three dictators of weaker countries be more manageable? just think even if one of them hated the US, we would only lose a third of the country...!

Partition is something I completely forgot about making this thread... hmm. But would not three separate countries increase the risk of any of these countries being breeding grounds for terrorism? A Kurdish state might not, but the Sunni and Shia definitely would unless there is a real tough guy in charge. One country would have equal segmentation in all its departments and administrations and thus giving the strongman much more resources to keep the country stable.

I find it intresting to compare the situation in Iraq now with the U.S occupation with the situation in India under British rule.
Britian managed to maintain a high level of order in India for decades with a military presence of only around ten thousand troops.
Compare this to the problem that the U.S is having in iraq with more than 100 thousand troops.

The main difference is that when Britian came to rule India the british came with the attitude: "We are now here to rule you, and we are not going to go away." As a result, there was more incentive for the people to cooperate with the British.
However, right now the avarage Iraqi citizen has no incentive to cooperate with the Americans (or the British), since we have made it clear to them that we are not planning to stay for the long haul.
If they did cooperate, they would become known to the insurgents as traitors, and then as soon as the American and British troops leave the insurgents would return in force and punish them.

I never mentioned anything about deadlines but either way, do not the Muslims feel we are stepping into their business, like the whole Sunni-Shia rift business? I'm not sure how different the situation is concerning occupation according to Muslims in Iraq then occupation according to those religions in India, but we are not in Iraq for the long haul, and that is not something the American people will stand for, so we can't really say that.

I miss the fact how the US can be physically removed other than attacking our heart strings. From a military standpoint, they can not physically remove us, especially given that so few americans have died, comparatively speaking.

If anything the weakness is the bleeding heart, the loser college kid/ teenager with the new found ability to vote and "change the world"

Terribly true.

Gentlemen, please. The answer is obvious. We must kill all of the Iraqis and the Iranians, and then settle the countries with Mexicans. Duh. How hard is this to understand? We kill three birds with one stone.

Lol. Too bad this is not feasible... or politically correct.

Seriously, there is no answer, except maybe that we should learn from this retardation. Hey, I've got an idea. Let's stop engaging in bs-imperialistic behavior and be a real citizen-run Republic again. Let's make it illegal for any individual or group worth more than...say, $1 million...to give money to any political campaign. And let's make it illegal for reporters and media personalities to attend functions that mix them with business and political leaders. Then, we make it a capital crime for a President to deploy U.S. troops to any region without first getting a declaration of war by the U.S. Congress.

Are we ****ed in Iraq? The real question is, are we ****ed at home?

Agreed, agreed, and more agreed. But being ****ed at home is still a hundred times better than being ****ed in some place we've never been before...

[Odenat]

Make Iraq into three seperate countries, Kurds, Arabs, and Shiites, and then put a dictator in each one. That way they would never be powerful enough to invade Kuwait, Iran or Turkey. Really guys, a three state solution is the only way to go at this point, the genocidal civil war has already begun, this country isn't gonna be put back together anyway...
@skinna wouldn't three dictators of weaker countries be more manageable? just think even if one of them hated the US, we would only lose a third of the country...!

Divide Iraq in 3 states and Iran, Turkey and Syria will invade one part of it as soon as America withdraw. America needs a powerful Irak to balance Iran or Turkish influence.

[Hells Bells]

well you could always give the kurds all the power since theyve been nice, cooperating with us n all.

[Thanatos]

... until they get the chance to flip the bird at us.

[RusskiSoldat]

Make Iraq into three seperate countries, Kurds, Arabs, and Shiites, and then put a dictator in each one. That way they would never be powerful enough to invade Kuwait, Iran or Turkey. Really guys, a three state solution is the only way to go at this point, the genocidal civil war has already begun, this country isn't gonna be put back together anyway...

Yeah, because there'll be no hard feelings over the country being torn apart.

And I agree with the whole dictator thing.
At this point it's looking like a more humane route as well as a more economically tolerable one.

[JP226]

I miss the fact how the US can be physically removed other than attacking our heart strings. From a military standpoint, they can not physically remove us, especially given that so few americans have died, comparatively speaking.

If anything the weakness is the bleeding heart, the loser college kid/ teenager with the new found ability to vote and "change the world"

[mrjesushat]

Gentlemen, please. The answer is obvious. We must kill all of the Iraqis and the Iranians, and then settle the countries with Mexicans. Duh. How hard is this to understand? We kill three birds with one stone.

Seriously, there is no answer, except maybe that we should learn from this retardation. Hey, I've got an idea. Let's stop engaging in bs-imperialistic behavior and be a real citizen-run Republic again. Let's make it illegal for any individual or group worth more than...say, $1 million...to give money to any political campaign. And let's make it illegal for reporters and media personalities to attend functions that mix them with business and political leaders. Then, we make it a capital crime for a President to deploy U.S. troops to any region without first getting a declaration of war by the U.S. Congress.

Are we ****ed in Iraq? The real question is, are we ****ed at home?