Quantcast

Remember the worst case scenario in Iraq?

Westy

Westy

the teste
Nov 22, 2002
54,497
20,296
Sleazattle
Anyone remember those pussy communist hippie anti war pundits 7 years ago that described a worst case scenario in Iraq? Well things are moving slowly but it seems the next step has become reality.
Turkey approves incursions into IRAQ

If you don't remember it went something like this.

Invade
3 way civil war
Kurds in Turkey get riled up
Turkey moves into Iraq
Iran gets involved
All of mid-east destabilized
Someone drags Israel into the mix
Israel nukes'em all.
Gas is $300 a gallon and the radioactive exhaust causes facial tumors.
 
Westy

Westy

the teste
Nov 22, 2002
54,497
20,296
Sleazattle
Serial Midget said:
We like Turkey, we do not like Iran. Why not just give Iraq to Turkey?
Click to expand...
Turkey isn't stupid,they don't want Iraq. I haven't read up on the situation in a few years but I think the concern is that Kurds in Turkey want independence. They cause problems in Turkey then run away to Iraq. Turkey moves into Iraq and pisses off Iraqi Kurds. Iraqi Kurds get more involved in supporting Turkish Kurds. More people get involved, it escalates even further, Archduke Ferdinand gets assasinated yadda yadda yadda.
 
BurlyShirley

BurlyShirley

Rex Grossman Will Rise Again
Jul 4, 2002
19,180
17
TN
Seriously though, has anyone actually taken seriously Patreus' account of things actually improving in Iraq? Or that progress at all is being made?
It seems that the media and politics at large completely ignored that assertion and went on about their way of slamming the admin.
What if things are looking up?
 
Westy

Westy

the teste
Nov 22, 2002
54,497
20,296
Sleazattle
BurlyShirley said:
Seriously though, has anyone actually taken seriously Patreus' account of things actually improving in Iraq? Or that progress at all is being made?
It seems that the media and politics at large completely ignored that assertion and went on about their way of slamming the admin.
What if things are looking up?
Click to expand...
We have been told things are looking up from day one. It is hard to believe even if it is true. I'd personally like to think what he said was true but even then it really doesn't mean we can get the hell out of there anytime soon. Until the Iraqis start taking complete responsibility for certain regions I pretty much consider it a statis quo.
 
Echo

Echo

crooked smile
Jul 10, 2002
11,819
15
Slacking at work
I don't have any problem with Kurds, sure they look a little different than the swiss, the cheddars, and the provolones, but that doesn't seem like a very good reason for Turkey to invade Iraq. Not that the US's reason for invading Iraq was much better.
 
ire

ire

Turbo Monkey
Aug 6, 2007
6,196
4
Echo said:
Not that the US's reason for invading Iraq was much better.
Click to expand...
I think worse, at least the Kurds are actually attacking Turkey. It will be interesting to see how the White House responds if the Turks go in. They have to drive across a fair chunk of Northern Iraq to get to the PKK strongholds....it'd be kinda funny if the Kurds encircled and defeated the Turkish military.
 
Secret Squirrel

Secret Squirrel

There is no Justice!
Dec 21, 2004
8,150
1
Up sh*t creek, without a paddle
ire said:
I think worse, at least the Kurds are actually attacking Turkey. It will be interesting to see how the White House responds if the Turks go in. They have to drive across a fair chunk of Northern Iraq to get to the PKK strongholds....it'd be kinda funny if the Kurds encircled and defeated the Turkish military.
Click to expand...
Funny like Korea?
Funny like 'Nam?

:confused:
 
bohorec

bohorec

Monkey
Jun 26, 2007
327
0
ire said:
I think worse, at least the Kurds are actually attacking Turkey. It will be interesting to see how the White House responds if the Turks go in.
Click to expand...
Attackers or freedom fighters? Whatever they are it's actually the same story that was going on in Kosovo, Albanians were attacking Serbia, Serbia started to defend itself, albanians withdrowing and then USA came.
 
M

MarinR00

Monkey
Aug 27, 2007
175
0
Iraq
For those of you who haven’t been to northern Iraq, it isn’t Iraq. Its Kurdistan. If you go into Kurdish areas around Mosul (I was there in ’05), there are border check-points manned by the peshmerga. It also is complete with Kurdish flags and pictures of Barzani (who they described to me as “their George Washington”.)

As for are things are getting better in Iraq, why not ask someone who is here, and has to keep coming back every two years.

Here is the deal, yes … and no. It all depends on what identifiers you use to determine success. If you ask specifically “How are reconciliation operations going?” I will say, “With the Sunnis, very well. With the Shia, they are proceeding, however at a slower pace.” Follow-on question “Will these be successful?” “Yes, presently. As of right now, it is a short term solution to a long term problem. The concerned local citizens (as we call them), are loyal to their tribe, religion, neighborhood, etc, not necessarily the Government of Iraq (GOI).”

But you can’t simply say “Things are going great.” or “Things are crappy.” It is a lot more complex than that. But if you have a question, go ahead and ask it. There are a few guys on the forum who are presently sucking sand.

And, it isn’t a three way civil war, its more like a 14,035,685 way civil war.
 
H8R

H8R

Cranky Pants
Nov 10, 2004
13,959
35
MarinR00 said:
Here is the deal, yes … and no. It all depends on what identifiers you use to determine success.
Click to expand...
Ok. I'll ask. 2 part question.


1) Are we truly achieving our objectives there?

and

2) WTF are our objectives now anyway?
 
valve bouncer

valve bouncer

Master Dildoist
Feb 11, 2002
7,843
114
Japan
No doubt the situation is confusing for Dubya, I mean imagine you being the one that has to explain to him the Kurds are a nation without a state. He'd blow a fuse and go back to playing Nintendo in a corner of the Oval office.:twitch:
 
M

MarinR00

Monkey
Aug 27, 2007
175
0
Iraq
Please understand that my visibility rests almost solely on the military aspect of the situation over here. I can’t speak with any certainty about the economic and political reform.

With any counter-insurgency, the goals of the economic, military and political processes must all mesh. This is something we have failed to do I am afraid

As of right now, our military mission is to provide security to the Iraqi people, plain and simple. The theory is that this will allow the GOI time to establish itself as the dominate governmental presence in the area. Now, here is where it gets tricky.

The security situation in Baghdad is indeed improving, that is not to say we are “Mission Accomplished”. Far from it. There are still attacks and Iraqis are still dying, which needs to stop. From a military stand-point it is my opinion that we are winning. I can confirm the media reports that Al Quada has been neutralized in many parts of the country. People misconceive the taking of American causalities with us losing. This is not the case. Soldiers die in a war. (In World War II, an average of 496 Americans died a day.)

Now, while we are winning militarily, will this mean we will “win-win.” Absolutely not. Vietnam is a good example. The Tet Offensive was one of the most single sided engagements of the war. We crippled the military arm of the Viet Cong and Viet Min. Our political and economic goals did not compliment our military ones (often they were contradictory), couple this with the massive unrest (both anti-war and civil rights) at home, and it lead to our ‘defeat’. It can happen again.

Politicians and the media, only spend days, maybe weeks over here. They receive a PowerPoint presentation on the current status of Iraq and consider themselves experts. The military, as an organization has spent the entire time here and as a collective, we have a much easier time seeing the bigger picture. GEN Patareus is one of the fore-most Counter-insurgency experts in the Military. His placement as the CG is about 5 years to late I’m afraid. When he gives a public briefing, it must be taken with a grain of salt, since a lot of the stuff he should be talking about he can’t, unless you have a security clearance.
 
ire

ire

Turbo Monkey
Aug 6, 2007
6,196
4
MarinR00 said:
As of right now, our military mission is to provide security to the Iraqi people, plain and simple.

...

Now, while we are winning militarily
Click to expand...
I'm not trying to be an ass, but I have two questions related to these statements:
1. How is the security we are providing any better than what they would get by turning to the militias?

2. How can we say we are winning militarily? We may kill more of their guys, but if they continue to recruit and attack is that really a win?

<edit> Did you see the documentry about the insurgents? I know they prescreened to soldiers over there....I was going to rent it when it becomes available
 
dante

dante

Unabomber
Feb 13, 2004
8,807
9
looking for classic NE singletrack
BurlyShirley said:
Seriously though, has anyone actually taken seriously Patreus' account of things actually improving in Iraq? Or that progress at all is being made?
It seems that the media and politics at large completely ignored that assertion and went on about their way of slamming the admin.
What if things are looking up?
Click to expand...
Honestly? We've heard the "we're winning, we've almost won" story so many times since May '03 that we're naturally suspicious of anyone saying that we're progressing, especially when it's also politically advantageous for him to say so. From the beginning we've been told that "Major military operations are now over", Mission Accomplished, "The insurgency is in its last throes", The (left-leaning media) isn't reporting on all the success stories over there, etc. Every single administration report has been rosy, we've killed *countless* terrorists, and benchmarks of how the Iraqi government are lowered so that it's suddenly a success story when they meet half of their objectives.

Added to this is just the general distrust of the administration who many of us feel lied to get us into the war. From questionable pre-war statements, to post invasion comments by Cheney (drawing the link between Saddam and Al Qaeda when there definitively wasn't one), many of us just don't believe anything the administration says. And yes Patreus' comments do carry a bit more weight than anything GWB or Cheney say, but at the same time there's things such as the non-partisan report that came out over the summer criticizing the Iraqi government's progress, and general Sanchez's comments about how the war is not going well.

Sorry, I just feel like a kid who's found out that Santa Claws isn't real, but is still being told that the Easter bunny is alive and well...
 
MikeD

MikeD

Leader and Demogogue of the Ridemonkey Satinists
Oct 26, 2001
11,698
1,749
chez moi
MMike said:
Istanbul was COnstantinopal, then Istanbul became Constantinopal (again)

Why did Constantinopal get the works?
That's nobody's business but the turrrrrrrks.....
Click to expand...
I was hoping I wouldn't have to be the one to bust that out.

Although I might have spelled Constantinople correctly, myself.

Oh, and "winning militarily" is just cover-talk for "losing the war, but killing more of their people than we're losing." War is just an extreme end of the political spectrum, not a contest of attrition that's going to be scored at the end.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom