| Author |
Message |
Puck
The Texan
Joined: 05 Jan 2004
Posts: 5596
|
 Wed Jan 17, 2007 11:20 pm Give us guns � and troops can go, says Iraqi leader |
|
| Quote: | | America�s refusal to give Baghdad�s security forces sufficient guns and equipment has cost a great number of lives, the Iraqi Prime Minister said yesterday. |
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,7374-2553148.html
|
|
|
WeAz
Commodore
Joined: 03 Apr 2004
Posts: 1519
Location: Where you aren't
|
| Wed Jan 17, 2007 11:32 pm |
|
And we wonder why the Iraqi security forces aren't ready? 
|
|
|
Puck
The Texan
Joined: 05 Jan 2004
Posts: 5596
|
| Wed Jan 17, 2007 11:35 pm |
|
I don't think Bush thinks that the government is very capable, and that's why they haven't been given more power. According to the 60 minutes report earlier this week, the Iraqis are not going after all of the people they need to be.
|
|
|
Starbuck
faster...
Joined: 19 Feb 2003
Posts: 8715
Location: between chaos and melody
|
| Thu Jan 18, 2007 8:40 am |
|
You know what? I don't really think they're ready for this, but we got rid of Saddam. They need to learn how to stand up on their own, we should just give them some guns, and get out. Our people are dying because they can't handle themselves, thats not right, and they'll never learn until they have to stand up on their own. We cannot keep holding their hands. They are their own country, they have their own sovereignty. They need to take care of themselves.
|
|
|
Puck
The Texan
Joined: 05 Jan 2004
Posts: 5596
|
| Thu Jan 18, 2007 6:52 pm |
|
We've been there less than four years. I think they are doing quite well for a government that has only been in existence for a little over three years. Let's stay just a tad longer, and hold their hands a little bit more.
|
|
|
PrankishSmart
Rear Admiral
Joined: 29 Apr 2002
Posts: 4779
Location: Hobart, Australia.
|
| Thu Jan 18, 2007 9:26 pm |
|
| Puck wrote: | | We've been there less than four years. I think they are doing quite well for a government that has only been in existence for a little over three years. Let's stay just a tad longer, and hold their hands a little bit more. |
That is a repetitive thing I always hear. It's always stay there a little longer. How long is a little longer? What's the justification for staying there longer?
|
|
|
WeAz
Commodore
Joined: 03 Apr 2004
Posts: 1519
Location: Where you aren't
|
| Thu Jan 18, 2007 10:59 pm |
|
We've given them their country. Now they can fight for it, and die for it.
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Thu Jan 18, 2007 11:20 pm |
|
| PrankishSmart wrote: | | What's the justification for staying there longer? |
Making sure that we leave a stable government and a stable country that can defend itself and sustain itself. Iraq is very much like our baby - we can't leave it until its ready to go out on its own.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Puck
The Texan
Joined: 05 Jan 2004
Posts: 5596
|
| Fri Jan 19, 2007 12:21 am |
|
| PrankishSmart wrote: | | Puck wrote: | | We've been there less than four years. I think they are doing quite well for a government that has only been in existence for a little over three years. Let's stay just a tad longer, and hold their hands a little bit more. |
That is a repetitive thing I always hear. It's always stay there a little longer. How long is a little longer? What's the justification for staying there longer? |
I don't know how much a little longer is...I don't really have a time table drawn out of how I think Iraq should be going. We're developing a country after all...you can't really layout exact dates. We have not even been in Iraq four years yet. It's not like we've been there forever. If people expect a country that has been overthrown, and rebuilt to be completely stable and problem free in four years, that's just silly.
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Fri Jan 19, 2007 12:29 am |
|
| Puck wrote: | | I don't know how much a little longer is...I don't really have a time table drawn out of how I think Iraq should be going. We're developing a country after all...you can't really layout exact dates. We have not even been in Iraq four years yet. It's not like we've been there forever. If people expect a country that has been overthrown, and rebuilt to be completely stable and problem free in four years, that's just silly. |
Exactly. What's so funny is the uproar there was this past year when they were talking about pulling out of Germany! We're still in Germany and it's how long after WWII?
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
PrankishSmart
Rear Admiral
Joined: 29 Apr 2002
Posts: 4779
Location: Hobart, Australia.
|
| Fri Jan 19, 2007 4:33 am |
|
| Puck wrote: | | PrankishSmart wrote: | | Puck wrote: | | We've been there less than four years. I think they are doing quite well for a government that has only been in existence for a little over three years. Let's stay just a tad longer, and hold their hands a little bit more. |
That is a repetitive thing I always hear. It's always stay there a little longer. How long is a little longer? What's the justification for staying there longer? |
I don't know how much a little longer is...I don't really have a time table drawn out of how I think Iraq should be going. We're developing a country after all...you can't really layout exact dates. We have not even been in Iraq four years yet. It's not like we've been there forever. If people expect a country that has been overthrown, and rebuilt to be completely stable and problem free in four years, that's just silly. |
I understand what you're saying there and would agree, if anything new now was happening there. But their isn't. At least, to my knowledge. And I bet their government is untrusted by many at this point in time.
|
|
|
Starbuck
faster...
Joined: 19 Feb 2003
Posts: 8715
Location: between chaos and melody
|
| Fri Jan 19, 2007 2:39 pm |
|
| Republican_Man wrote: | | PrankishSmart wrote: | | What's the justification for staying there longer? |
Making sure that we leave a stable government and a stable country that can defend itself and sustain itself. Iraq is very much like our baby - we can't leave it until its ready to go out on its own. |
Iraq is not our baby. We gave them their country, why should my family have to go fight and die in Iraq?
|
|
|
WeAz
Commodore
Joined: 03 Apr 2004
Posts: 1519
Location: Where you aren't
|
| Fri Jan 19, 2007 3:26 pm |
|
| Republican_Man wrote: | | Puck wrote: | | I don't know how much a little longer is...I don't really have a time table drawn out of how I think Iraq should be going. We're developing a country after all...you can't really layout exact dates. We have not even been in Iraq four years yet. It's not like we've been there forever. If people expect a country that has been overthrown, and rebuilt to be completely stable and problem free in four years, that's just silly. |
Exactly. What's so funny is the uproar there was this past year when they were talking about pulling out of Germany! We're still in Germany and it's how long after WWII? |
Difference. The German people actively helped to form the government there. We didn't face any insurgency in Germany.
|
|
|
Defiant
Fleet Admiral
Joined: 04 Jul 2001
Posts: 15946
Location: Oregon City, OR
|
| Fri Jan 19, 2007 5:59 pm |
|
OK, great. Give them the guns, and get the heck out of dodge. That would be amazing. If they truly care about their country, they will fight to make it work, and the US can offer assistance from afar. You can't honestly expect to hold their hand forever.
|
|
|
Puck
The Texan
Joined: 05 Jan 2004
Posts: 5596
|
| Fri Jan 19, 2007 6:33 pm |
|
| PrankishSmart wrote: | | And I bet their government is untrusted by many at this point in time. |
That is my real problem. I do try and overlook most of the problems in Iraq, hoping they are short term, but that is where I really have my doubts. I honestly can't say I have much faith in the current officials within their government.
|
|
|
Arellia
The Quiet One
Joined: 23 Jan 2003
Posts: 4425
Location: Dallas, TX
|
| Fri Jan 19, 2007 6:51 pm |
|
Here's a question. How many of those who support the Iraq occupation (I can't call it a war any more, because it doesn't act like one, and there's nothing to win or conquer), are willing to die for that country? Right now, if you gave your life in the pursuit of... whatever we're supposedly doing in Iraq, could you say it was worth it? You see, I couldn't, and I don't see the honor in throwing more troops--more people that are loved, and that should have the chance to live and love themselves--at a problem that we aren't solving, and that I don't think is our problem to solve. Anyone who dies in the military is dying for a worthy ideal. However, in this case, we're wasting those kinds of honorable men and women. It doesn't make their sacrifice less immense, but it does make it even moreso a tragedy.
|
|
|
PrankishSmart
Rear Admiral
Joined: 29 Apr 2002
Posts: 4779
Location: Hobart, Australia.
|
| Fri Jan 19, 2007 9:28 pm |
|
| WeAz wrote: | | Republican_Man wrote: | | Puck wrote: | | I don't know how much a little longer is...I don't really have a time table drawn out of how I think Iraq should be going. We're developing a country after all...you can't really layout exact dates. We have not even been in Iraq four years yet. It's not like we've been there forever. If people expect a country that has been overthrown, and rebuilt to be completely stable and problem free in four years, that's just silly. |
Exactly. What's so funny is the uproar there was this past year when they were talking about pulling out of Germany! We're still in Germany and it's how long after WWII? |
Difference. The German people actively helped to form the government there. We didn't face any insurgency in Germany. |
Also Republican Man, I'm sure a lot of veterans would be very offended by even comparing the Iraq war/occupation or whatever it is, with World War II.
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Fri Jan 19, 2007 10:23 pm |
|
| PrankishSmart wrote: | | WeAz wrote: | | Republican_Man wrote: | | Puck wrote: | | I don't know how much a little longer is...I don't really have a time table drawn out of how I think Iraq should be going. We're developing a country after all...you can't really layout exact dates. We have not even been in Iraq four years yet. It's not like we've been there forever. If people expect a country that has been overthrown, and rebuilt to be completely stable and problem free in four years, that's just silly. |
Exactly. What's so funny is the uproar there was this past year when they were talking about pulling out of Germany! We're still in Germany and it's how long after WWII? |
Difference. The German people actively helped to form the government there. We didn't face any insurgency in Germany. |
Also Republican Man, I'm sure a lot of veterans would be very offended by even comparing the Iraq war/occupation or whatever it is, with World War II. |
All I did was point out the fact that we're still there now and people want us to pull out Iraq when we're in there not even close to that same amount of time. It's the facts, sir, nothing more. Though I call the War on Terror, of which Iraq is part and parcel, World War III, as I think it is, but that shouldn't be offensive at all. As a matter of fact, I've met a WWII vet who feels the same way about the WoT.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Puck
The Texan
Joined: 05 Jan 2004
Posts: 5596
|
| Fri Jan 19, 2007 10:51 pm |
|
| Arellia wrote: | | Here's a question. How many of those who support the Iraq occupation (I can't call it a war any more, because it doesn't act like one, and there's nothing to win or conquer), are willing to die for that country? Right now, if you gave your life in the pursuit of... whatever we're supposedly doing in Iraq, could you say it was worth it? You see, I couldn't, and I don't see the honor in throwing more troops--more people that are loved, and that should have the chance to live and love themselves--at a problem that we aren't solving, and that I don't think is our problem to solve. Anyone who dies in the military is dying for a worthy ideal. However, in this case, we're wasting those kinds of honorable men and women. It doesn't make their sacrifice less immense, but it does make it even moreso a tragedy. |
I wouldn't say I would die for the country, but I would be willing to die for the people in it. They deserve safety, and if sacrificing my life would bring that to them, then I would do so. Unfortunately, I think you bring up a fair point in that throwing more troops down won't completely solve the problems. We also need to beef up diplomatic efforts in the entire region. To my knowledge, it appears that they are currently lacking, to say the least.
|
|
|
PrankishSmart
Rear Admiral
Joined: 29 Apr 2002
Posts: 4779
Location: Hobart, Australia.
|
| Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:14 am |
|
| Republican_Man wrote: | | PrankishSmart wrote: | | WeAz wrote: | | Republican_Man wrote: | | Puck wrote: | | I don't know how much a little longer is...I don't really have a time table drawn out of how I think Iraq should be going. We're developing a country after all...you can't really layout exact dates. We have not even been in Iraq four years yet. It's not like we've been there forever. If people expect a country that has been overthrown, and rebuilt to be completely stable and problem free in four years, that's just silly. |
Exactly. What's so funny is the uproar there was this past year when they were talking about pulling out of Germany! We're still in Germany and it's how long after WWII? |
Difference. The German people actively helped to form the government there. We didn't face any insurgency in Germany. |
Also Republican Man, I'm sure a lot of veterans would be very offended by even comparing the Iraq war/occupation or whatever it is, with World War II. |
All I did was point out the fact that we're still there now and people want us to pull out Iraq when we're in there not even close to that same amount of time. It's the facts, sir, nothing more. Though I call the War on Terror, of which Iraq is part and parcel, World War III, as I think it is, but that shouldn't be offensive at all. As a matter of fact, I've met a WWII vet who feels the same way about the WoT. |
I wouldn't call the Iraq war/occupation part of the WoT in that regard. I interpret the WoT more to do with the Al Qaeda threat and the possible threat within you're or mine's country, etc.
|
|
|
WeAz
Commodore
Joined: 03 Apr 2004
Posts: 1519
Location: Where you aren't
|
| Sat Jan 20, 2007 11:09 am |
|
| Republican_Man wrote: | | PrankishSmart wrote: | | WeAz wrote: | | Republican_Man wrote: | | Puck wrote: | | I don't know how much a little longer is...I don't really have a time table drawn out of how I think Iraq should be going. We're developing a country after all...you can't really layout exact dates. We have not even been in Iraq four years yet. It's not like we've been there forever. If people expect a country that has been overthrown, and rebuilt to be completely stable and problem free in four years, that's just silly. |
Exactly. What's so funny is the uproar there was this past year when they were talking about pulling out of Germany! We're still in Germany and it's how long after WWII? |
Difference. The German people actively helped to form the government there. We didn't face any insurgency in Germany. |
Also Republican Man, I'm sure a lot of veterans would be very offended by even comparing the Iraq war/occupation or whatever it is, with World War II. |
All I did was point out the fact that we're still there now and people want us to pull out Iraq when we're in there not even close to that same amount of time. It's the facts, sir, nothing more. Though I call the War on Terror, of which Iraq is part and parcel, World War III, as I think it is, but that shouldn't be offensive at all. As a matter of fact, I've met a WWII vet who feels the same way about the WoT. |
In Germany we faced no Insurgency, the people pretty much welcomed us to help them rebuild, and they helped out. Furthermore, the troops we have in Iraq are an occupying force. The troops we have in Germany are stationed in bases. There is a huge difference, that you are just dismissing.
|
|
|
|
Search
FAQ
Log in
