michaeledward
Grandmaster
In 10 years, it is quite possible there will not be any 'Iraqi' people.
They will be Iranians, Kurds, and pissed off Sunni's.
They will be Iranians, Kurds, and pissed off Sunni's.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
michaeledward said:Some have argued that most of Iraq is stable, blah, blah, blah. The part that is not stable is the 20% minority Sunni population.
michaeledward said:The problem with the 'Three State Solution', is that central Iraq (Sunniland) does not have any oil. (Generalized statement).
The Kurds have substaintial oil deposits in Northern Iraq. As I understand it, approximately 1/4th of the known oil reserves in Iraq are located geographically in the autonomous Kurdish areas of Iraq.
The Shi'ite controlled southern portion of Iraq contains 3/4 of the known Iraqi oil reserves.
The Sunni Triangle has squat.
Some have argued that most of Iraq is stable, blah, blah, blah. The part that is not stable is the 20% minority Sunni population. The Sunni's have no easily adaptable economic platform. With little economic choice in front of them, the civil war is going to go on for a very long time.
Soon, Iran will be more blatant in supporting the Clerics who will soon be in government. Southern Iraq will be joined in the battle against the Sunni's by Iran. The United States will be defending what is left of Fallujah ... a city we destroyed.
There is no good solution. There never was. Too late.
But, it sure is doing a good job destroying the future of the American Economy ... except for halliburton and co.
sgtmac_46 said:That whole argument is built on the inherently prejudiced assumption that these people are incapable of compromise and thoroughly incapable of building and maintaining a functioning democracy.
I'd like to hear your argument as to why that would be. Are they cultural or racially incapable of this in your estimation? Or are you claiming some other quality exists that makes those things impossible?
"These tribes" are human beings, like you and I.....unless you know something I don't. What's more, in the entire history of mankind, can you name more than a handful of people's and regions that have remained peaceful for more than a generation. How many times in the last century has our own tribe been unable or unwilling to compromise?michaeledward said:There is no argument in my post. There is simply a statement that I feel is accurate. It is quite possible that I am wrong. It is quite possible that "we will be greeted as liberators, with chocolate and flowers", too .... well maybe not so much.
Iraq has existed as a "country" for less then 100 years. Before that, these tribes have lived in the same geographic area for between 3 and 5 millenia. In 3,000 years, they have been unable or unwilling to reach a 'compromise'. Yet, they have been able to build and maintain a governing structure.
The same hubris that believed we could accomplish the same in Germany and Japan, both nations with long histories of martial aggression. Japan, in particular, was less than 60 years out of a feudal society, when we occupied their nation and attempted to bring democratic reforms.michaelward said:What hubris would lead someone to believe that the influence of an outside group, for a couple of years, or hell, even a couple of decades ("It could last six days, six weeks. I doubt six months." D.Rumsfeld) could alter these ancient civilizations?
Well, if we're going to see the world as it is, not as we wish it were, then it is equally clear that we've accomplished the most important task....Eliminating Saddam Hussein as leader of Iraq. Though you will argue this will lead to some apocalyptic outcome, that has yet to be illustrated in anything but the most rabid fantasies of the left.michaelward said:I guess if you want to sum up my argument, it is this: I prefer to see the world as it is, not as I would like it to be. This country followed willfully and blindly Rumsfeld, Perle, Kristol, Hadley, Armitage, Cheney, and the Project for A New American Century lunatics into a war that is going to destroy this country.
I do find the admission that, instead of being money grubbing fiends, those you have named, are instead, idealistic would be nation builders, who truly DO desire democracy in the middle east. What an ironic twist. Perhaps you've hit on the truth that Neo-Conservatives aren't conservatives at all, but merely branched off from liberalism, to form a strange hybrid of both political views.michaelward said:Really, this war isn't even about the god damned carbons stuck in the ground. That would have been just an added benefit, if we were ever to get 'our son of a *****' Chalabi installed as Client/Puppet President.
We shall see.michaelward said:But, there you have it ... right in my signature ... we are well on the way.
Fluffy said:Eveyone seems to want to share a political opinion around here, why? What good does it do to tick off a good 1/2 of the members? I just don't get it!
Fluffy said:Eveyone seems to want to share a political opinion around here, why? What good does it do to tick off a good 1/2 of the members? I just don't get it!
Jonathan Randall said:While you have a good point, I think it depends upon how it is done. People should be able to disagree without disrespecting one another. Also, if someone with a different view makes a valid point, acknowledge it rather than brush it off because it doesn't fit your own party line.
The Iraq war is such a major issue facing America today that I think dialogue on the subject is essential. However, we don't need to call each other names or imply a lack of patriotism to those with different viewpoints.
Jonathan Randall said:While you have a good point, I think it depends upon how it is done. People should be able to disagree without disrespecting one another. Also, if someone with a different view makes a valid point, acknowledge it rather than brush it off because it doesn't fit your own party line.
The Iraq war is such a major issue facing America today that I think dialogue on the subject is essential. However, we don't need to call each other names or imply a lack of patriotism to those with different viewpoints.
Inside the Tactical Operations Center (called a TOC in our parlance) in this Battalion headquarters chatter from multiple radio systems barks across the room. American units on routine patrols send in their reports steadily. One element searches for the source of gunfire they recently heard coming from a few blocks away. Another unit coordinates and removes the possibility for confliction between two Iraqi units operating in close proximity to each other. To the untrained ear the constant stream of callsigns, grid coordinates and acronyms may seem like chaos. But, just as stock brokers on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange can pull meaning from their pits on the floor of the Exchange, so to do American soldiers mentally create order from these streams. It is a delicate and precious skill. But today, at this instant and for the next twelve minutes, the chatter is drown out by events more local. This too is a skill. I am here as witness to a ceremony.
The front of the room is covered with maps, screens, and charts. In the back, however, two soldiers hold aloft an American flag. It is the only adornment, the only concession to a special event, the sole decoration for this ceremony. In front of the flag stand a Second Lieutenant of Infantry and a Lieutenant Colonel, the latter some eighteen years senior to the former. The Colonel commands the battalion, the lieutenant is one of his officers. A major, few captains, and some Non-commissioned officers cluster in a horseshoe around them. The sergeants on watch, still at their stations, turn down the radios. The Colonel speaks.
He has words of praise for the young officer. He speaks of the shiny gold bar which a Second Lieutenant wears, and how it discolors and becomes worn over time. His metaphor speaks to the process of developing wisdom through the only true method known to man, by making mistakes. He speaks of growth and maturation, and most of all he speaks to an unstated element of potential. This, he is saying, is a young man who is worthy. They are words filtered through his own long years of service, but they carry with them the message of faith. Not faith in any religion, for this is the ultimate secular ceremony, but faith in the man standing before him. It is a faith I share, for I know this Lieutenant. I came to Camp Liberty from my own base specifically to be here for this event. After a few moments the Colonel issues the sole command of the event, Publish the orders. Nineteen sets of mud-encrusted heels clomp in near unison as every man present snaps to. We are in the position of attention. Silence reigns, broken only by the staccato bursts of situation reports over the radio nets.
The Adjutant speaks out, reading aloud the words many of us have heard hundreds of times before, words that are new to only one man in the room. The President of the United States has reposed special trust and confidence in your patriotism, valor, fidelity and abilities. In view of these qualities and your demonstrated potential for increased responsibility, you are, therefore, promoted in the United States Army to the grade of First Lieutenant...
The order is as short as it is direct. Only four sentences long, it takes about twenty seconds to read. Halfway through the recitation the Colonel comes from the position of Attention and faces the lieutenant. With his right hand he reaches out, and tears the old rank, the golden butterbar of Second Lieutenant from the young mans chest. A second later he replaces it with the black bar (silver on our non-combat uniforms) of a First Lieutenant. The promotion is complete.
There are many things that we do not do well in my Army. There are many things in which the military as a whole could do better. In our professional journals I am among the first to point these out. But there is one thing, at least, which we perform magnificently. We make it clear, to each man and woman, with each promotion, that this means something. Officer or enlisted, there is always an acknowledgement of the qualities, and often the sacrifices, of the person being promoted.
Here, in combat, promotion means something else as well. There is an added frisson, an added measure of validation. You have been tested, judged worthy by your peers and superiors, selected, promoted and you will now be tested again, immediately, with even more responsibility.
Fluffy said:I posted that while in a bad mood...........I'm over it.
~Fluff
On average, the reservists made $850 more per month while on duty than in their civilian jobs, the report found.
To get a good idea of the impact on a full year’s pay, it also provided statistics for the 51,200 reservists who were at their regular jobs for most if not all of 2001, and then on duty for more than 271 days in either 2002 or 2003. For those reservists the study found:
* The average civilian pay was $39,300, compared with $56,400 while on combat duty.
* 83 percent made more on duty than at their civilian jobs.
* 66 percent saw their pay increase more than $10,000 while on duty.
* 7 percent lost more than $10,000 while on duty.