(08-19-2014 10:28 PM)Knightbengal Wrote:  

(08-19-2014 10:27 PM)CyberBull Wrote:  

(08-19-2014 10:11 PM)Knightbengal Wrote:  

(08-19-2014 10:08 PM)CyberBull Wrote:  

(08-19-2014 08:14 PM)Knightbengal Wrote:  See the next post. My wife served as well. The bottom line is a10s do not provide solutions. Boots on the ground do. People and materiel can hide from everything we can throw at them. If you go to war you have to have boots on the ground period. I didn't say that was what we should do.


Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

We have tried boots on the ground...remember...and for all those brave men and women who put their lives on hold or made the ultimate sacrifice, nothing changed. It's hard to nation build when the different factions that makeup the alleged nation don't want to cooperate.

Some of my best friends are current or former military and while we may disagree politically about why they should or shouldn't be there every american should have ultimate respect for our service men/women. Im just not sure that even if we would have remained in Iraq another 25 years if anything would be different once we eventually left. if that is the case why not be more selective on where we deploy our resources. plenty of weakness to tackle abroad that more directly influence our national strength and security.

And that is a political decision. We can choose where we fight but we have to be in it for the long haul otherwise it's all for naught. The difference today is that the American people are fractured upon political divides and as such can't/won't support a sustained multi term effort. We simply don't support our political leaders or compromise any more


Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

i am not sure there is popular or real support from mainstream america from either side of the political spectrum regarding longterm occupation, especially when its been proven that it would be a futile exercise to try our hand at nation build in a place where ppl don't want to be united. if anything longterm occupation will cause further division in this country when there are so many domestic issues to tackle.

They said the same thing about Germany.


Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

that is kind of a cliched answer and not really directly comparable. plus after Germany was soundly defeated/destroyed there were some clear parameters and metrics of success for rebuilding in reconstruction Europe. Moreover, the ppl in Germany weren't fighting each other based religion and thousands of year old feuds else the trillions of dollars spent in rebuilding Germany would have been for naught. Again, the US intervened with boots on the ground on two fronts...and where did that get us? if anything it has made things worse the war has now spawned an a group of ppl that make al queda seem mainstream.

BTW....i don't have an answer, much like nobody has for the last couple thousand years in that area. For better or for worse, the only stability that area has enjoyed has been when one group has been oppresed by ruthless leaders.

(08-19-2014 10:33 PM)ecumbh1999 Wrote:  

(08-19-2014 10:28 PM)Knightbengal Wrote:  

(08-19-2014 10:27 PM)CyberBull Wrote:  

(08-19-2014 10:11 PM)Knightbengal Wrote:  

(08-19-2014 10:08 PM)CyberBull Wrote:  We have tried boots on the ground...remember...and for all those brave men and women who put their lives on hold or made the ultimate sacrifice, nothing changed. It's hard to nation build when the different factions that makeup the alleged nation don't want to cooperate.

Some of my best friends are current or former military and while we may disagree politically about why they should or shouldn't be there every american should have ultimate respect for our service men/women. Im just not sure that even if we would have remained in Iraq another 25 years if anything would be different once we eventually left. if that is the case why not be more selective on where we deploy our resources. plenty of weakness to tackle abroad that more directly influence our national strength and security.

And that is a political decision. We can choose where we fight but we have to be in it for the long haul otherwise it's all for naught. The difference today is that the American people are fractured upon political divides and as such can't/won't support a sustained multi term effort. We simply don't support our political leaders or compromise any more


Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

i am not sure there is popular or real support from mainstream america from either side of the political spectrum regarding longterm occupation, especially when its been proven that it would be a futile exercise to try our hand at nation build in a place where ppl don't want to be united. if anything longterm occupation will cause further division in this country when there are so many domestic issues to tackle.

They said the same thing about Germany.


Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

The is a very long track record with Iraq, 3,000 years long. It goes beyond religious divides. You have Kurds, Arabs, Turks, Persians, none get along.

Exactly. a longterm US occupation of 25 or even 50 years would be a drop in the bucket in the overall history that has contributed to the current state of affairs.

(08-19-2014 10:37 PM)CyberBull Wrote:  

(08-19-2014 10:28 PM)Knightbengal Wrote:  

(08-19-2014 10:27 PM)CyberBull Wrote:  

(08-19-2014 10:11 PM)Knightbengal Wrote:  

(08-19-2014 10:08 PM)CyberBull Wrote:  We have tried boots on the ground...remember...and for all those brave men and women who put their lives on hold or made the ultimate sacrifice, nothing changed. It's hard to nation build when the different factions that makeup the alleged nation don't want to cooperate.

Some of my best friends are current or former military and while we may disagree politically about why they should or shouldn't be there every american should have ultimate respect for our service men/women. Im just not sure that even if we would have remained in Iraq another 25 years if anything would be different once we eventually left. if that is the case why not be more selective on where we deploy our resources. plenty of weakness to tackle abroad that more directly influence our national strength and security.

And that is a political decision. We can choose where we fight but we have to be in it for the long haul otherwise it's all for naught. The difference today is that the American people are fractured upon political divides and as such can't/won't support a sustained multi term effort. We simply don't support our political leaders or compromise any more


Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

i am not sure there is popular or real support from mainstream america from either side of the political spectrum regarding longterm occupation, especially when its been proven that it would be a futile exercise to try our hand at nation build in a place where ppl don't want to be united. if anything longterm occupation will cause further division in this country when there are so many domestic issues to tackle.

They said the same thing about Germany.


Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

that is kind of a cliched answer and not really directly comparable. plus after Germany was soundly defeated/destroyed there were some clear parameters and metrics of success for rebuilding in reconstruction Europe. Moreover, the ppl in Germany weren't fighting each other based religion and ethnic and thousands of year old feuds else the trillions of dollars spent in rebuilding Germany would have been for naught. Again, the US intervened with boots on the ground on two fronts...and where did that get us? if anything it has made things worse the war has now spawned an a group of ppl that make al queda seem mainstream.

BTW....i don't have an answer, much like nobody has for the last couple thousand years in that area. For better or for worse, the only stability that area has enjoyed has been when one group has been oppresed by ruthless leaders.

Also, we the allies started planning for post war reconstruction before the final plans were drawn up for the D-Day landings. We planned for 2 1/2 years. Iraq? Started what 2 weeks after taking Baghdad? The post war planning for Iraq was an epic failure and put us behind the eight ball from the start on reconstruction, then the disbanding of the Iraqi Army was an bad move. The whipped out their officer corp, many of which were not loyal to Saddam, now their Military leadership is sorely lacking.

My brother (he is applying for the Naval Academy) reads many firsthand accounts/books of soldiers in Iraq. The absurd regulations those heroes had to obey strangled their ability to fight. How can a solider fight a war when the politicians hand him an empty gun to combat with?

(08-19-2014 10:53 PM)HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine Wrote:  My brother (he is applying for the Naval Academy) reads many firsthand accounts/books of soldiers in Iraq. The absurd regulations those heroes had to obey strangled their ability to fight. How can a solider fight a war when the politicians hand him an empty gun to combat with?

Perhaps, but bad policies and politics aside...not sure how a longterm occupation promises to be anything but a long term expense that diverts our attention from more pressing domestic issues. BTW, last time I checked the number of Iraqi that have been killed dwarf american casualties. So it's not like our boys were not allowed to fight with real bullets.

Again, I understand what you are saying and I have heard similar stories from folks on the ground about some of the idiotic policies.... but that isn't wasn't the major reason why our nation building efforts in Iraq failed.

(08-19-2014 11:06 PM)CyberBull Wrote:  

(08-19-2014 10:53 PM)HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine Wrote:  My brother (he is applying for the Naval Academy) reads many firsthand accounts/books of soldiers in Iraq. The absurd regulations those heroes had to obey strangled their ability to fight. How can a solider fight a war when the politicians hand him an empty gun to combat with?

Perhaps, but bad policies and politics aside...not sure how a longterm occupation promises to be anything but a long term expense that diverts our attention from more pressing domestic issues. BTW, last time I checked the number of Iraqi that have been killed dwarf american casualties. So it's not like our boys were not allowed to fight with real bullets.

Again, I understand what you are saying and I have heard similar stories from folks on the ground about some of the idiotic policies.... but that isn't wasn't the major reason why our nation building efforts in Iraq failed.

I agree. Thousands of years of hatred and anger contributed to the mess. It is up to the country itself to change. Weapons cannot kill ideology. The Roman Empire discovered that fact after their persecution against Christians led to more Christians.

(08-19-2014 11:06 PM)CyberBull Wrote:  

(08-19-2014 10:53 PM)HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine Wrote:  My brother (he is applying for the Naval Academy) reads many firsthand accounts/books of soldiers in Iraq. The absurd regulations those heroes had to obey strangled their ability to fight. How can a solider fight a war when the politicians hand him an empty gun to combat with?

Perhaps, but bad policies and politics aside...not sure how a longterm occupation promises to be anything but a long term expense that diverts our attention from more pressing domestic issues. BTW, last time I checked the number of Iraqi that have been killed dwarf american casualties. So it's not like our boys were not allowed to fight with real bullets.

Again, I understand what you are saying and I have heard similar stories from folks on the ground about some of the idiotic policies.... but that isn't wasn't the major reason why our nation building efforts in Iraq failed.

The low end is 650,000 civilian dead and that was 2 years ago. For comparison, Saddam is thought to have killed 300,000-500,000 of his own people and that was from 1979 to 2003. Again, he was a monster, but this war has hurt us more than it has helped IMO.

thats the reason i always carried an extra M4 and AK round on me

(08-19-2014 06:53 PM)USFRamenu Wrote:  Should have stepped on the gas instead of the breakes when we crossed the Euphrates river.

So how do one step on the "breakes"?

I hope he makes it out safely. American troops there would be exactly what ISIS needs right now it would once again make them the to many Muslims the saviors of Islam fighting the invading western crusaders
As bad as it is there we must support the Kurds etc but let them solve their problems we won't solve it by sending troops there

Someone said it earlier in this thread, we just need to arm and train the Kurds. They love us (worked with them in Iraq 2006-7) and have offered us land for a base in northern Iraq. We never accepted because we don't want to piss off Turkey. Aside of Israel the Kurds are our only friends in that region.

This is terrible news. Austin Tice, a former UH student and current field reporter, is still missing and reportedly being held captive since his abduction in Syria 2 years ago. It literally makes me shake with anger to think it but, both UCF and UH grads could be on deck for a senseless killing by these putrid simpletons.

(08-19-2014 10:08 PM)CyberBull Wrote:  

(08-19-2014 08:14 PM)Knightbengal Wrote:  

(08-19-2014 08:08 PM)Cougar King Wrote:  

(08-19-2014 07:44 PM)Knightbengal Wrote:  Still need boots on the ground

Easy for you to say, you're not the one who will be deployed.

See the next post. My wife served as well. The bottom line is a10s do not provide solutions. Boots on the ground do. People and materiel can hide from everything we can throw at them. If you go to war you have to have boots on the ground period. I didn't say that was what we should do.


Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

We have tried boots on the ground...remember...and for all those brave men and women who put their lives on hold or made the ultimate sacrifice, nothing changed. It's hard to nation build when the different factions that makeup the alleged nation don't want to cooperate.

Some of my best friends are current or former military and while we may disagree politically about why they should or shouldn't be there every american should have ultimate respect for our service men/women. Im just not sure that even if we would have remained in Iraq another 25 years if anything would be different once we eventually left. if that is the case why not be more selective on where we deploy our resources. plenty of weakness to tackle abroad that more directly influence our national strength and security.

There were silly political reasons that required that we attempt to rebuild Iraq as a single unified nation (which it really is not). Hopefully, the current situation will allow the powers that be to see than the nation ideally should be subdivided into 3 separate nations. At the very least, it needs to move to a federal/state government that allows a very high degree of independence for the "states", but leaves them united under one very limited federal government where power is shared. Either way, a powerful military presence will be required for some time due to the unstable nature of the region---but at least these two proposals might actually be able to work long term.

Iraq as it stands is an unstable collection of peoples and territories that was designed via tense negotiations between the Russian, Americans, and British following WWII. It has little to do with the way things really are in Iraq.

The only way for some people to advance is to be conquered. Whether by the United States, France, Great Briton or any other civilized country. Hell, even Russian and China would be a major step up. Unfortunately war has usually been a major form of evolution. Or maybe we should call it "evilution". Wish there was another way but we haven't evolved enough.

(08-20-2014 06:18 AM)8BitPirate Wrote:  Someone said it earlier in this thread, we just need to arm and train the Kurds. They love us (worked with them in Iraq 2006-7) and have offered us land for a base in northern Iraq. We never accepted because we don't want to piss off Turkey. Aside of Israel the Kurds are our only friends in that region.

I agree. Turkey can just deal with it. Besides, I suspect they would prefer the Kurds to ISIS. I'd take the Kurds up on their offer in a heart beat. You are exactly right, the Isaelis and Kurds are the only two groups in the region that are our friends and both actually have the stomach to fight fire with fire. That's a rare combination among our allies.

(08-20-2014 04:57 AM)Cubanbull Wrote:  I hope he makes it out safely. American troops there would be exactly what ISIS needs right now it would once again make them the to many Muslims the saviors of Islam fighting the invading western crusaders
As bad as it is there we must support the Kurds etc but let them solve their problems we won't solve it by sending troops there

Winner.

Putting boots on the ground is EXACTLY what they want. IS killing innocent Muslims = Muslim sympathy to Western support of Kurds, ethnic minorities, and governments. Americans fighting IS in Syria and Iraq = Muslim sympathy to IS. Nonetheless, I hope they get blown to Hell and back.
FWIW, I've seen the video. The scum that killed the journalist is British. A solid portion of IS happen to be European. But it's okay, because the ******* Euros are too busy making sure that they look "strong" on Russia while stile maintaining trade for Russian resources that Europe heavily depends on. Then again, can't say what we've been doing is any better.

Support the Kurds and fuuuk Turkey and all our other supposed "friends".

"US President Barack Obama’s authorization of airstrikes on ISIS targets in Iraq serves as an opportunity to remind ourselves which countries are bankrolling the deadly terror group.

The answer: Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Turkey and Qatar – three of the United States’ biggest allies in the region."

(08-19-2014 06:53 PM)USFRamenu Wrote:  I said it before and I'll say it again. Should have stepped on the gas instead of the breakes when we crossed the Euphrates river. Then made a hard left and finshed the job.

AMEN! D@MN does this get my blood boiling! Lifting up my prayes for him, his family, friends, and the entire UCF NATION! Today, we are ALL AMERICANS.....and not just on the sporting field(s)! I will spare us all from my ideas for possible solutions to this problem, both at home & abroad. Praying for all involved, no matter the level of said involvement!

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

(08-20-2014 03:05 PM)knightmite Wrote:  Support the Kurds and fuuuk Turkey and all our other supposed "friends".

"US President Barack Obama’s authorization of airstrikes on ISIS targets in Iraq serves as an opportunity to remind ourselves which countries are bankrolling the deadly terror group.

The answer: Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Turkey and Qatar – three of the United States’ biggest allies in the region."

Saudi Arabia is the biggest producer of these extreme idiots. They teach in their schools