SPuDS Posted February 17, 2015 Report Posted February 17, 2015 well the whole thing is pretty incorrect. Winning the war is really easy. The problems arise after the battles are all won. See what happens is once the enemy forces are destroyed and the leadership is gone there is a power vacuum and more often than not it gets filled by less than desirable people. If you could still conquer a nation and annex them you'd see a lot less problems but that's not what goes on. They go in win the war then leave the locals to pick up the pieces and that leads to radicals stepping into that power vacuum. It's not about winning a war, it's about having the commitment to stay after it's won. Ya im sure that wont piss them off more. Stick around and occupy their land? Thats what pissed them off in the first place. Did the USA not back Saddam at one time? Did they also not back the rebels in Afgan against the Russians? How did all that turn out? The problem is and my point is..... They dont understand these people and you cant win against what you cant understand. You dont know who to help or give weapons to because they will just turn on you like it has many times over. The fact you truly believe American regime building lacks any insight into the people or the country astounds me.. They didn't show up, hand out weapons, say "that's our guy... Screw the rest of you.." And then lay waste to everyone not American enough for them.. The problem was essentially "fixed" but Iraqi government and military leaders gave up at almost first sign of having to go alone.. I'm pretty sure if Americans stayed and held the peace and kept the terror attacks and kills low, ISIS would have been crushed.. American pressure on themselves to come home left a power vacuum that these scum have walked right into and set up shop.. It's like America lanced the tumour out but didn't get to clean and sterilize the wound... Now infection has set in and gangrene is not far away..
New_Earth_Mud Posted February 17, 2015 Report Posted February 17, 2015 well the whole thing is pretty incorrect. Winning the war is really easy. The problems arise after the battles are all won. See what happens is once the enemy forces are destroyed and the leadership is gone there is a power vacuum and more often than not it gets filled by less than desirable people. If you could still conquer a nation and annex them you'd see a lot less problems but that's not what goes on. They go in win the war then leave the locals to pick up the pieces and that leads to radicals stepping into that power vacuum. It's not about winning a war, it's about having the commitment to stay after it's won. Ya im sure that wont piss them off more. Stick around and occupy their land? Thats what pissed them off in the first place. Did the USA not back Saddam at one time? Did they also not back the rebels in Afgan against the Russians? How did all that turn out? The problem is and my point is..... They dont understand these people and you cant win against what you cant understand. You dont know who to help or give weapons to because they will just turn on you like it has many times over. The fact you truly believe American regime building lacks any insight into the people or the country astounds me.. They didn't show up, hand out weapons, say "that's our guy... Screw the rest of you.." And then lay waste to everyone not American enough for them.. The problem was essentially "fixed" but Iraqi government and military leaders gave up at almost first sign of having to go alone.. I'm pretty sure if Americans stayed and held the peace and kept the terror attacks and kills low, ISIS would have been crushed.. American pressure on themselves to come home left a power vacuum that these scum have walked right into and set up shop.. It's like America lanced the tumour out but didn't get to clean and sterilize the wound... Now infection has set in and gangrene is not far away.. Well heres an idea. Go read and understand what your talking about. They all need to figure it out on there own without anyone telling them. America staying and putting up army bases is what pissed them off to start with. At one time the USA backed and sent weapons to a rebel group in Afgan to fight back against the Russians.That rebel group was AQ run by Osama bin laden.
iso_55 Posted February 17, 2015 Report Posted February 17, 2015 well the whole thing is pretty incorrect. Winning the war is really easy. The problems arise after the battles are all won. See what happens is once the enemy forces are destroyed and the leadership is gone there is a power vacuum and more often than not it gets filled by less than desirable people. If you could still conquer a nation and annex them you'd see a lot less problems but that's not what goes on. They go in win the war then leave the locals to pick up the pieces and that leads to radicals stepping into that power vacuum. It's not about winning a war, it's about having the commitment to stay after it's won. Ya im sure that wont piss them off more. Stick around and occupy their land? Thats what pissed them off in the first place. Did the USA not back Saddam at one time? Did they also not back the rebels in Afgan against the Russians? How did all that turn out? The problem is and my point is..... They dont understand these people and you cant win against what you cant understand. You dont know who to help or give weapons to because they will just turn on you like it has many times over. The fact you truly believe American regime building lacks any insight into the people or the country astounds me.. They didn't show up, hand out weapons, say "that's our guy... Screw the rest of you.." And then lay waste to everyone not American enough for them.. The problem was essentially "fixed" but Iraqi government and military leaders gave up at almost first sign of having to go alone.. I'm pretty sure if Americans stayed and held the peace and kept the terror attacks and kills low, ISIS would have been crushed.. American pressure on themselves to come home left a power vacuum that these scum have walked right into and set up shop.. It's like America lanced the tumour out but didn't get to clean and sterilize the wound... Now infection has set in and gangrene is not far away.. Well heres an idea. Go read and understand what your talking about. They all need to figure it out on there own without anyone telling them. America staying and putting up army bases is what pissed them off to start with. Tell ya what, why don't you enlighten us with your take on the situation over there.
New_Earth_Mud Posted February 17, 2015 Report Posted February 17, 2015 well the whole thing is pretty incorrect. Winning the war is really easy. The problems arise after the battles are all won. See what happens is once the enemy forces are destroyed and the leadership is gone there is a power vacuum and more often than not it gets filled by less than desirable people. If you could still conquer a nation and annex them you'd see a lot less problems but that's not what goes on. They go in win the war then leave the locals to pick up the pieces and that leads to radicals stepping into that power vacuum. It's not about winning a war, it's about having the commitment to stay after it's won. Ya im sure that wont piss them off more. Stick around and occupy their land? Thats what pissed them off in the first place. Did the USA not back Saddam at one time? Did they also not back the rebels in Afgan against the Russians? How did all that turn out? The problem is and my point is..... They dont understand these people and you cant win against what you cant understand. You dont know who to help or give weapons to because they will just turn on you like it has many times over. The fact you truly believe American regime building lacks any insight into the people or the country astounds me.. They didn't show up, hand out weapons, say "that's our guy... Screw the rest of you.." And then lay waste to everyone not American enough for them.. The problem was essentially "fixed" but Iraqi government and military leaders gave up at almost first sign of having to go alone.. I'm pretty sure if Americans stayed and held the peace and kept the terror attacks and kills low, ISIS would have been crushed.. American pressure on themselves to come home left a power vacuum that these scum have walked right into and set up shop.. It's like America lanced the tumour out but didn't get to clean and sterilize the wound... Now infection has set in and gangrene is not far away.. Well heres an idea. Go read and understand what your talking about. They all need to figure it out on there own without anyone telling them. America staying and putting up army bases is what pissed them off to start with. Tell ya what, why don't you enlighten us with your take on the situation over there. I just did. you skipped over some of what i said
17to85 Posted February 17, 2015 Report Posted February 17, 2015 well the whole thing is pretty incorrect. Winning the war is really easy. The problems arise after the battles are all won. See what happens is once the enemy forces are destroyed and the leadership is gone there is a power vacuum and more often than not it gets filled by less than desirable people. If you could still conquer a nation and annex them you'd see a lot less problems but that's not what goes on. They go in win the war then leave the locals to pick up the pieces and that leads to radicals stepping into that power vacuum. It's not about winning a war, it's about having the commitment to stay after it's won. Ya im sure that wont piss them off more. Stick around and occupy their land? Thats what pissed them off in the first place. Did the USA not back Saddam at one time? Did they also not back the rebels in Afgan against the Russians? How did all that turn out? The problem is and my point is..... They dont understand these people and you cant win against what you cant understand. You dont know who to help or give weapons to because they will just turn on you like it has many times over. They backed Saddam at one point because he could control the country, they trained and supplied and backed folks like Bin Laden in the past because they were willing to fight the soviets. So much **** in the world is related to the cold war. But hey staying and occupying is smarter than coming in and wrecking **** then leaving them to fend for themselves. That's how you get radicals and crazy people in power. They lack the will to stick around and make sure the mess gets cleaned up. It's not that they don't understand these people, that's an argument without a lot of thought put in. It really is a matter of lacking the full commitment to go into a place and stay until the job is actually done. You're going to conquer a place you best stick around to establish the new regime or else someone better armed and more blood thirsty will seize power.
The Unknown Poster Posted February 17, 2015 Report Posted February 17, 2015 every other country of consequence agreed by choosing not to get involved -a wise choice indeed. and, Canada thanks you Jean Chretien for declining to involve us in that. Chretien didnt decline for any insightful reason other than politics. The Liberals think the problem in the middle east is those pesky Jews and the terrorists wouldnt be terrorists if only we'd leave them alone. The are many differences between middle east strife and WWII, namely the religious aspect. But a lot of people wanted to "not get involved" back then too. Sometimes you have to get your hands dirty because it's the right thing to do. The mistake the US made in iraq was thinking the people there would embrace their own democracy. They were wrong. But a lot of people forget the Iraqi people's reaction when the US marched into Baghdad, which was throngs of people waving the US flag and cheering the allies. It was the vaccum that was left after Saddam was defeated that led to issues. The Iraqi people shot themselves in the foot.
17to85 Posted February 17, 2015 Report Posted February 17, 2015 every other country of consequence agreed by choosing not to get involved -a wise choice indeed. and, Canada thanks you Jean Chretien for declining to involve us in that. Chretien didnt decline for any insightful reason other than politics. The Liberals think the problem in the middle east is those pesky Jews and the terrorists wouldnt be terrorists if only we'd leave them alone. The are many differences between middle east strife and WWII, namely the religious aspect. But a lot of people wanted to "not get involved" back then too. Sometimes you have to get your hands dirty because it's the right thing to do. The mistake the US made in iraq was thinking the people there would embrace their own democracy. They were wrong. But a lot of people forget the Iraqi people's reaction when the US marched into Baghdad, which was throngs of people waving the US flag and cheering the allies. It was the vaccum that was left after Saddam was defeated that led to issues. The Iraqi people shot themselves in the foot. That's partly true... in a sense. The winners after WW2 just deciding to carve out a Jewish state in the middle east and telling the region to deal with it is a big part of the problem. All of the major world religions have their holy sites in the same places and now one group just comes in and says "ours now, rest of you **** off" How did anyone think that would turn out?
SPuDS Posted February 18, 2015 Report Posted February 18, 2015 well the whole thing is pretty incorrect. Winning the war is really easy. The problems arise after the battles are all won. See what happens is once the enemy forces are destroyed and the leadership is gone there is a power vacuum and more often than not it gets filled by less than desirable people. If you could still conquer a nation and annex them you'd see a lot less problems but that's not what goes on. They go in win the war then leave the locals to pick up the pieces and that leads to radicals stepping into that power vacuum. It's not about winning a war, it's about having the commitment to stay after it's won. Ya im sure that wont piss them off more. Stick around and occupy their land? Thats what pissed them off in the first place. Did the USA not back Saddam at one time? Did they also not back the rebels in Afgan against the Russians? How did all that turn out? The problem is and my point is..... They dont understand these people and you cant win against what you cant understand. You dont know who to help or give weapons to because they will just turn on you like it has many times over. The fact you truly believe American regime building lacks any insight into the people or the country astounds me.. They didn't show up, hand out weapons, say "that's our guy... Screw the rest of you.." And then lay waste to everyone not American enough for them.. The problem was essentially "fixed" but Iraqi government and military leaders gave up at almost first sign of having to go alone..I'm pretty sure if Americans stayed and held the peace and kept the terror attacks and kills low, ISIS would have been crushed.. American pressure on themselves to come home left a power vacuum that these scum have walked right into and set up shop.. It's like America lanced the tumour out but didn't get to clean and sterilize the wound... Now infection has set in and gangrene is not far away.. Well heres an idea. Go read and understand what your talking about. They all need to figure it out on there own without anyone telling them. America staying and putting up army bases is what pissed them off to start with. At one time the USA backed and sent weapons to a rebel group in Afgan to fight back against the Russians.That rebel group was AQ run by Osama bin laden. man I hate arguing with someone who reads just enough of story to be dangerous and attempts to tell the rest of us how it is.. You've clearly done next to no homework (yes, 1-2 YouTube videos does not constitute knowledge) my dog knows CIA helped establish Bin laden and Al-Qaeda and how they were instrumental in driving out the Russians.. I'm pretty sure your completely ignorant to the facts that the silent majority in Iraq were suffering under religious and racial persecution, corruption and daily murder squads roaming thru areas.. But none of that is worth going into a country to help, right? human rights abuses and a government hellbent on killing off a race or two of people is cool to you as well I suppose... Don't get me wrong.. Obviously a staging base and access to oil were very important as well but it's not the end all-be all to why America went into Iraq in the first place..
New_Earth_Mud Posted February 18, 2015 Report Posted February 18, 2015 well the whole thing is pretty incorrect. Winning the war is really easy. The problems arise after the battles are all won. See what happens is once the enemy forces are destroyed and the leadership is gone there is a power vacuum and more often than not it gets filled by less than desirable people. If you could still conquer a nation and annex them you'd see a lot less problems but that's not what goes on. They go in win the war then leave the locals to pick up the pieces and that leads to radicals stepping into that power vacuum. It's not about winning a war, it's about having the commitment to stay after it's won. Ya im sure that wont piss them off more. Stick around and occupy their land? Thats what pissed them off in the first place. Did the USA not back Saddam at one time? Did they also not back the rebels in Afgan against the Russians? How did all that turn out? The problem is and my point is..... They dont understand these people and you cant win against what you cant understand. You dont know who to help or give weapons to because they will just turn on you like it has many times over. The fact you truly believe American regime building lacks any insight into the people or the country astounds me.. They didn't show up, hand out weapons, say "that's our guy... Screw the rest of you.." And then lay waste to everyone not American enough for them.. The problem was essentially "fixed" but Iraqi government and military leaders gave up at almost first sign of having to go alone..I'm pretty sure if Americans stayed and held the peace and kept the terror attacks and kills low, ISIS would have been crushed.. American pressure on themselves to come home left a power vacuum that these scum have walked right into and set up shop.. It's like America lanced the tumour out but didn't get to clean and sterilize the wound... Now infection has set in and gangrene is not far away.. Well heres an idea. Go read and understand what your talking about. They all need to figure it out on there own without anyone telling them. America staying and putting up army bases is what pissed them off to start with. At one time the USA backed and sent weapons to a rebel group in Afgan to fight back against the Russians.That rebel group was AQ run by Osama bin laden. man I hate arguing with someone who reads just enough of story to be dangerous and attempts to tell the rest of us how it is.. You've clearly done next to no homework (yes, 1-2 YouTube videos does not constitute knowledge) my dog knows CIA helped establish Bin laden and Al-Qaeda and how they were instrumental in driving out the Russians.. I'm pretty sure your completely ignorant to the facts that the silent majority in Iraq were suffering under religious and racial persecution, corruption and daily murder squads roaming thru areas.. But none of that is worth going into a country to help, right? human rights abuses and a government hellbent on killing off a race or two of people is cool to you as well I suppose... Don't get me wrong.. Obviously a staging base and access to oil were very important as well but it's not the end all-be all to why America went into Iraq in the first place.. First of all you need to grow up and stop with the lil name calling garbage and discuss things like an adult. If america as you say is so hell bent on helping the people of these countrys then why stop there? Why not head into North Korea? Or how about Saudi Arabia? Nigeria? Should i go on? Now go back to what i said..... They cant control or win against something they dont understand. They have tried it before. Do you think the people in them countrys and in that region are better off now? Have a look at the countrys ( Libya, Afgan, Iraq, Syria ) that are being taken over by ISIS. What do they all have in common? America had a hand in all and help or putting their leaders in place. Are they all better off now? Is it under control?
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now