http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20041120/capt.bag11011201138.iraq__bag110.jpg

A U.S. soldier walks backwards as a group of Iraqis advance chanting anti-government and anti-US slogans after a car bomb exploded killing at least one person in downtown Baghdad Saturday Nov. 20, 2004.

Violence Breaks Out All Over Baghdad (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&u=/ap/20041120/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_041119191056)

When are people gonna realize this whole thing is a pipe dream.

Some people will never realize; they will continue to hate people who don't want to be like them and live like them, and say that we must "win" at all costs.

Some people will never realize that this whole war is just another step towards establishing a global capitalist empire spearheaded by the US government.

But the Iraqis in this picture realize it all too well, and I applaud their efforts to resist. :nice:

I'm starting to think the occupation of Iraq is a stupid idea. Why is the US Army still there? Bush said this was to be over months ago. Looks like Vietnam all over again.

I'm starting to think the occupation of Iraq is a stupid idea.

What TOOK you so LONG? :rolleyes:


Why is the US Army still there?

Because the FOOL that runs things at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue is an IDIOT! :mad:


Bush said this was to be over months ago.

He just disconnected his "Growing Nose" circuitry, that's all.. :D


Looks like Vietnam all over again.

SHAME that a LOT of us have reached that sad conclusion.. :nonono:

Vietnam will be remembered as a cakewalk compared to the attempted global take-over that is in full-swing already.

Vietnam will be remembered as a cakewalk compared to the attempted global take-over that is in full-swing already.

It makes me SHUDDER with....FEAR.... :eek3:

If that soldier had shot a few of them he wouldn't have to walk backwards. That picture is indeed telling. It shows that the people have no respect nor fear of our troops because they know we will "play by the rules". Until they learn not to antagonize men with assault weapons, the situation is hopeless. :(

If that soldier had shot a few of them he wouldn't have to walk backwards. That picture is indeed telling. It shows that the people have no respect nor fear of our troops because they know we will "play by the rules". Until they learn not to antagonize men with assault weapons, the situation is hopeless. :(

:nonono: So what you're advocating is that the US soldier fire into a group of what appear to be unarmed, if angry, protestors.

Yeah, that'll win the Iraqis over :rolleyes:

:nonono: So what you're advocating is that the US soldier fire into a group of what appear to be unarmed, if angry, protestors.

Yeah, that'll win the Iraqis over :rolleyes:Dude, call me a coward, but I'd be afraid for my life to have 30+ people coming after me like that. Protestors stay away from the soldiers, lynch mobs don't. Nice try though.

If an overwhelming majority of Iraqis want America out, then we should leave. But this picture only shows 30 Iraqis, who are yelling at an American soldier because another Iraqi planted a car bomb.

If they lack the foresight to realize that if American soldeirs weren't there, they would have to face the insurgents without our help, then maybe they deserve another dictatorship.

Vietnam will be remembered as a cakewalk compared to the attempted global take-over that is in full-swing already.


Hegemony or Survival....guess which one we picked...

If an overwhelming majority of Iraqis want America out, then we should leave. But this picture only shows 30 Iraqis, who are yelling at an American soldier because another Iraqi planted a car bomb.

how odd !
complaing to the police for lack of security !


If they lack the foresight to realize that if American soldeirs weren't there, they would have to face the insurgents without our help,
or maybe there wouldn't be insurgents ...
then maybe they deserve another dictatorship.

now, you really believe they'll not get one as it is ?

or maybe there wouldn't be insurgents ...
Yeah, and gold would fall from the sky and life would be wonderful.
:|

or maybe there wouldn't be insurgents ...

now, you really believe they'll not get one as it is ?

are you suggesting that Al-Zarqoui is a better hope for democracy than the US Army?

are you suggesting that Al-Zarqoui is a better hope for democracy than the US Army?

LOL you act as if there is a SANE answer to this question.

Neither one of those groups have a DAMN THING to do with "establishing democracy".

LOL you act as if there is a SANE answer to this question.

Neither one of those groups have a DAMN THING to do with "establishing democracy".

alright, so give me another answer. don't just sit here and complain about the situation. everybody knows that the situation in Iraq sucks. do you think we should just abandon them?

alright, so give me another answer. don't just sit here and complain about the situation. everybody knows that the situation in Iraq sucks. do you think we should just abandon them?

"Abandon" them?! You're talking about a country of 25 million adults as if it were America's newborn baby!

The answer is we never should have invaded. There is no solution now. It's like asking what's the answer to a reverse a murder. There is no answer. Hell, most people don't even see a problem.

Vietnam will be remembered as a cakewalk compared to the attempted global take-over that is in full-swing already.

"Abandon" them?! You're talking about a country of 25 million adults as if it were America's newborn baby!

The answer is we never should have invaded. There is no solution now. It's like asking what's the answer to a reverse a murder. There is no answer. Hell, most people don't even see a problem.

I agree 100%.

"Abandon" them?! You're talking about a country of 25 million adults as if it were America's newborn baby!

The answer is we never should have invaded. There is no solution now. It's like asking what's the answer to a reverse a murder. There is no answer. Hell, most people don't even see a problem.
Invasion is needed based on information available then (congress approved it). This pictures shows Iraq people are free from suppression. You see the same thing in US once a while.

Our goal was to disarm a dictator. Saddam has no power now. We may still achieve a higher goal to introduce democracy to Iraq. Remember the prisoner being abused wish to live in US? We may fail like Vietnam, but if we win like in South Korea, 22 million people will live in freedom. It may also stabilize middle-east. In the worst case, Iraq will turn into another Afganistan after 1980 war. I hope most people here agree this is a bad thing and hope it does not happen.

Invasion is needed based on information available then (congress approved it). This pictures shows Iraq people are free from suppression. You see the same thing in US once a while.
What was that information about? Was it about WMD? If it was, then wouldn't that be our reason and goal for entering Iraq?

Our goal was to disarm a dictator. Saddam has no power now.
Before we put him in power, he had no power. Before we armed him, he had no arms. When he was in power, it was severely limited, but he had control over his people. When he was in power, his arms couldn't do anything of significance. Now he has no power, and his people are living in violence and chaos. Now his arms are killing our troops. For what? If our goal was to disarm him, then we have acheived our goal. What is the point of sticking around? They don't want us, we're dying for no reason, and we're making little, if any, progress. I won't use the Vietnam word "quagmire" to describe the situation, but this situation is not going to improve.


Let's ask ourselves a fundamental question that is crucial to this entire subject. Why does Democracy work in America? The answer is simple and obvious: Tradition. The West has a history of proto-Democracies, along with several important documents. We had Locke and Hobbes. We had the Enlightenment Movement. We had the Magna Carta. We had Parliament. We had all these things. Does Iraq have any of these things in its history? No. Does the Middle East? No. Does its peoples have any knowledge of these strong traditions? Yes, but not in the way that would allow for it to work over there. Are they led and held silent by extremists? Yes. Was America? Well, not really. So what can we reasonably conclude? Democracy worked and continues to do so in America and the West because of the strong traditions that are tied into its history. The Middle East, especially Iraq, does not have such straditions. This is simply a fact.

What is the point of sticking around? They don't want us, we're dying for no reason, and we're making little, if any, progress. I won't use the Vietnam word "quagmire" to describe the situation, but this situation is not going to improve.
.
Did you read my whole post?


Let's ask ourselves a fundamental question that is crucial to this entire subject. Why does Democracy work in America? The answer is simple and obvious: Tradition. The West has a history of proto-Democracies, along with several important documents. We had Locke and Hobbes. We had the Enlightenment Movement. We had the Magna Carta. We had Parliament. We had all these things. Does Iraq have any of these things in its history? No. Does the Middle East? No. Does its peoples have any knowledge of these strong traditions? Yes, but not in the way that would allow for it to work over there. Are they led and held silent by extremists? Yes. Was America? Well, not really. So what can we reasonably conclude? Democracy worked and continues to do so in America and the West because of the strong traditions that are tied into its history. The Middle East, especially Iraq, does not have such straditions. This is simply a fact.
South Korea is an example democracy can work in country with no 'tradition'.

Invasion is needed based on information available then (congress approved it). This pictures shows Iraq people are free from suppression. You see the same thing in US once a while.

Our goal was to disarm a dictator. Saddam has no power now. We may still achieve a higher goal to introduce democracy to Iraq. Remember the prisoner being abused wish to live in US? We may fail like Vietnam, but if we win like in South Korea, 22 million people will live in freedom. It may also stabilize middle-east. In the worst case, Iraq will turn into another Afganistan after 1980 war. I hope most people here agree this is a bad thing and hope it does not happen.

Yes freedom of speach and assembly mean nothing to the left. All they want is failure, for some reason that I cannot fathom.

When we do leave, with a free government in place, who will the Iraqis march against? Themselves. Like Jwreck said, they need to learn to respect authority, and to live peacefully. As far as I know, no one was killed or injured by these people.

The left seems to think that after we leave, they will pick up their guns and start killing each other. That may be true, but I hope they enjoy their freedoms (those that are on display here for instance) enough to live peacably.

The failure of the Iraqis to conduct themselves in a repectable manner and get along has nothing to do with America ultimatly. When people say this is a pipe dream, what they are really saying is that they don't believe the Iraqis are capable of governing themselves, with or without America's help. It's also a stab at the US military, which they hate to their bones. They could say what they mean, but it wouldn't sound as good.

They complain about insugents being in Iraq, call it Vietnam, want out right now, but don't realize leaving will cause a massive hellhole of violence.

Why does the left want us to fail? I don't know. The only thing I get out of them is whinning and moning. They know that's all they do. Why don't you guys give me an exit stratigy, or a plan to win the peace? Isn't the lack of a cohesive plan what cost you the election? Put your money where you mouth is and talk turkey.

"Abandon" them?! You're talking about a country of 25 million adults as if it were America's newborn baby!

The answer is we never should have invaded. There is no solution now. It's like asking what's the answer to a reverse a murder. There is no answer. Hell, most people don't even see a problem.

I agree 100%.

With TT. What DHM said.

With TT. What DHM said.


If there was ever a need for a DA hall moniter, this post would get detention.

I see you are incapable of answering the ?

Pull out now and put our troops where they can do something legitimate and useful.

Did you read my whole post?
Yes, and I read nothing but unrealistic hopes that will fall apart.

South Korea is an example democracy can work in country with no 'tradition'.
Good thing Japan had no influence. Wait, it did. We failed in Korea. North Korea is still dictatorial. South Korea survived for the same reason as Japan. The people of the country had strong traditions of following the will of their leaders. In Japan, the Emperor ordered his people to not resist, and they did not. That allowed us to use a heavy hand over the course of many years to create a Democracy. This was then used in South Korea. We did the job well enough and we knew what had to be done, so it worked in both countries. Japan and Korea were fundamentally different on a cultural and societal level. This makes them irrelevant as examples.

Invasion is needed based on information available then (congress approved it). This pictures shows Iraq people are free from suppression. You see the same thing in US once a while.


Not nearly enough.



Our goal was to disarm a dictator.

...who was already disarmed.

Saddam has no power now.

...just as before the invasion.

We may still achieve a higher goal to introduce democracy to Iraq. Remember the prisoner being abused wish to live in US?

No. no, I don't. I hear a lot of right-wingers squawk about this, but I never saw the story myself.

We may fail like Vietnam,

I love how you say this so casually, as if we were playing Keno.

Easy to talk that way for you, I guess.

but if we win like in South Korea, 22 million people will live in freedom.

:rolleyes: If it was a fifth we'd all be drunk. If, if, if....

It may also stabilize middle-east. In the worst case, Iraq will turn into another Afganistan after 1980 war. I hope most people here agree this is a bad thing and hope it does not happen.

The right-wing is all talk and bluster when it's time for some bombs and some "shock and awe", but when reality sets in and it's obvious that we have created one of the worst international crises in decades, then it's time to cross our fingers and hope for the best.

Thanks guys.

Yes freedom of speach and assembly mean nothing to the left. All they want is failure, for some reason that I cannot fathom.

Probably for the same reason you can't fathom a whole lot of other stuff.



When we do leave, with a free government in place, who will the Iraqis march against? Themselves.


Some will. Many others will become involved with terrorist networks and participate in attacks against Americans. For many years to come.



The left seems to think that after we leave, they will pick up their guns and start killing each other. That may be true, but I hope they enjoy their freedoms (those that are on display here for instance) enough to live peacably.

I'm sure they'd be thrilled to hear your fond wishes for them.



The failure of the Iraqis to conduct themselves in a repectable manner and get along has nothing to do with America ultimatly.

It has to do with forced borders and colonialism, with a Western government forcing their way onto disparate tribes.

Which is what the US is doing all over again right now.

It's also a stab at the US military, which they hate to their bones. They could say what they mean, but it wouldn't sound as good.


Well, we're not as poetic and articulate as you after all.

And I will say openly that I hate the US military "to my bones".



They complain about insugents being in Iraq, call it Vietnam, want out right now, but don't realize leaving will cause a massive hellhole of violence.


I realize it, but I don't care. I have friends over there who are more important to me, who really don't want to have to kill anybody to survive.

Speaking of which, why aren't YOU over there? You seem pretty passionate about the cause....from behind your computer.



Why does the left want us to fail? I don't know.


There seems to be a whole lot you don't know, or just won't acknowledge. That is hardly the left's fault.

The only thing I get out of them is whinning and moning.


For as much as you over-use these phrases, are you ever going to spell them right? Just once?

Why don't you guys give me an exit stratigy, or a plan to win the peace? Isn't the lack of a cohesive plan what cost you the election? Put your money where you mouth is and talk turkey.

My "plan" has been the sdame since day one; Get the hell out and don't go back until those people settle their differences one way or another.

Why don't you tell us YOUR plan? Aside from sending more young Americans (besides yourself of course) to die until things magically "settle down".

Good thing Japan had no influence. Wait, it did. We failed in Korea. North Korea is still dictatorial. South Korea survived for the same reason as Japan. The people of the country had strong traditions of following the will of their leaders. In Japan, the Emperor ordered his people to not resist, and they did not. That allowed us to use a heavy hand over the course of many years to create a Democracy. This was then used in South Korea. We did the job well enough and we knew what had to be done, so it worked in both countries. Japan and Korea were fundamentally different on a cultural and societal level. This makes them irrelevant as examples.

So, what you're saying is that each country may or may not be suited for democracy, and we can only determine that on a case-by-case basis. Why, then, are you so quick to give up on Iraq?



I want to bring up a relevant point about the transformation of South Korea. They had democracy immediately after the majority of American soldiers withdrew, but it wasn't very stable. The people of South Korea had to rise up and demand democracy in order to get it.


By the time the war ended, two million people had died and the country had been officially divided. After a few years of semi-democracy in the South, martial law was declared in 1972. The next 15 years rollercoastered between democracy and repressive martial law, hitting a stomach-heaving low in 1980 when 200 student protesters were killed in the Gwangju massacre. By the late 1980s the country was at flashpoint - student protests were convulsing the country and workers all over Korea were walking off the job to join them. Among the demands were democratic elections, freedom of the press and the release of political prisoners. The government wasn't budging and civil war looked imminent until, to everyone's jaw-dropping surprise, President Chun suddenly decided that everything the protesters were asking for was alright by him.

In 1988 - the year Seoul hosted the Olympic Games - elections were held and Roh Tae-woo, another military figure, was elected president. Student protests continued apace, but, contrary to expectations, Roh significantly freed up the political system. Relations were re-established with China and the Soviet Union. In 1992, Roh was replaced by Kim Young-sam and his Democratic Liberal Party. Kim's hobby horse was corruption, and during his term of office several politicians were prosecuted for abusing the system. Most notably, ex-presidents Chun and Roh were brought to book for their role in the Gwangju massacre. Roh was sentenced to 22 years, Chun to death, but in December 1997, Kim granted them a presidential pardon and the two were released from prison. 1997 was a very bad year for South Korea's economy, with the won taking a tumble and tourism dropping dramatically. In February 1998, former dissident Kim Dae-jung became president, the first time a non-conservative had headed the country in its 50 years of independence. Kim promised to introduce economic and democratic reforms and improve relations with North Korea.


Source (http://www.lonelyplanet.com/destinations/north_east_asia/south_korea/history.htm)

Having said that, it would be a deleriction of duty for the US to pull out of Iraq now. We've made a promise to establish democracy, and we must keep our promises. Once a democratically elected government is in place and we've done what we said we'd do, then we can pull out. The rest must be up to the Iraqis.

are you suggesting that Al-Zarqoui is a better hope for democracy than the US Army?

not at all ...
I merely contend that Zarkawi's presence and action is a consequence of the US invasion .

I want to bring up a relevant point about the transformation of South Korea. They had democracy immediately after the majority of American soldiers withdrew, but it wasn't very stable. The people of South Korea had to rise up and demand democracy in order to get it.
Still way better than North korea and Cambodia, after US's defeat.

If Iraq can follow the path of South Korea, whole world benifits, not just Iraqis.

Some will. Many others will become involved with terrorist networks and participate in attacks against Americans. For many years to come.
I realize it, but I don't care. I have friends over there who are more important to me, who really don't want to have to kill anybody to survive.
My "plan" has been the sdame since day one; Get the hell out and don't go back until those people settle their differences one way or another.".
So you know if US leave now, Iraq may become another Afganistan after 1980 war. Yet you want US army to leave and let it happen again. Ask your friend whether he wants to fight the same war twice?


Speaking of which, why aren't YOU over there? You seem pretty passionate about the cause....from behind your computer.".
Do not want to. You must be crazy (or extreamly patriotic) to willingly put yourself in danger. If there is not enough volunteers, I support draft. Everyone share the responsibility to save the world. I also support complete care for soldiers and their families who is hurt or killed while fighting for us.


Why don't you tell us YOUR plan? Aside from sending more young Americans (besides yourself of course) to die until things magically "settle down".
The plan is already there. They are doing it. As long as they follow the South Korea, they will end up better. If you want more, I collected some ideas:
(1) US promise of bill of rights to protect minorities.
(2) Promise to reduce 5% US personel if there is no attack in 1 month. 20 month later there will be no US soldiers there.
(3) For every attack, we will optionally increase amount of soldiers.
Not that US want anything from Iraq, not oil, not to support Israel. Just for the safety of Iraq public and ensure the country will not become another threat to us.

(2) Promise to reduce 5% US personel if there is no attack in 1 month. 20 month later there will be no US soldiers there.


That's actually a REALLY good idea. We both want the attacks to end and the American soldiers to come home. The problem is that neither side will let down first. This solution puts both our interests in the same direction. After 20 months of no attacks, Iraq could be pretty stable.

That's actually a REALLY good idea. We both want the attacks to end and the American soldiers to come home. The problem is that neither side will let down first. This solution puts both our interests in the same direction. After 20 months of no attacks, Iraq could be pretty stable.

20 months of no attacks? That's pure fantasy. We don't even have that in Afghanistan...

I realize it, but I don't care. I have friends over there who are more important to me, who really don't want to have to kill anybody to survive.

Speaking of which, why aren't YOU over there? You seem pretty passionate about the cause....from behind your computer.

The fact that your are willing to create a magnitude of fututre conflicts that will cost the lives of many by pulling out because you don't want your friend to do his duty says alot about your reasoning.

I've already explained to you why I'm not in the military. It was really none of your business anyway, but since you couldn't keep your nose to yourself I told you. I'm not going to reiterrate it for you.

Everything else in your post was trash.

Sounds like France wants to go to Iraq:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=574&ncid=574&e=13&u=/nm/20041123/wl_nm/iraq_france_dc