The War is Over - We've Lost

[michaeledward]

After a recent 10 day vacation away from all news input (remote fly-fishing camp in Northern Quebec, with no media access), I have had a chance to evaluate the current situation in Iraq with fresh eyes.

The war is over. The United States has lost.

We are now involved in an Iraqi civil war.

If we try to tell ourselves we are 'Nation Building', 'Spreading Democracy', or 'Bringing Peace to the Middle East' we are deceiving ourselves.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9084376/

Shiite officials said Thursday they believed talks were at a standstill and there was no legal requirement anyway to have parliament vote on a draft that was approved Monday by the Shiites and Kurds.
Al-Adeeb said Bush personally telephoned Shiite leader Abdul-Aziz al-Hakim and asked him to make compromises on parts of the constitution that would purge former members of Saddam’s Sunni-dominated Baath Party from government jobs and political life and on federalism, which the Sunnis strongly oppose.

The Administration told us, before the invasion, that the Iraqi people could live in democracy and rule themselves. The current Constitutional process is destined to create an oppressed Sunni minority which will battle to destruction with the Shi'ite majority. Iraq is splintering into a 'Federation', which seems an awful lot like the three-state solution we were promised could be avoided (although I argued that will be the final result on these pages before).

The draft constitution is based on Sharia law and if it ever is ratified, will succeed in creating a New Iran.

 

[mrhnau]

Just my personal opinion here, but I'm having difficulty seeing Iraq as one nation in the next 10 years. I forsee either some form of civil war (which the US will likely try to quell), or hopefully the alternative peaceful seperation. The US has stated that they don't support a seperation of nations, but keeping a unified nation will be difficult I fear. I hope I'm proven wrong.

 

[FearlessFreep]

The war is over. The United States has lost.

We are now involved in an Iraqi civil war.

Actually, if you want to break it into two sections; the war between the US and Iraq and now the internal civil war in Iraq that we are a part of, then you could say that yes, the first war is over, but I would say that the US won that war

 

[sgtmac_46]

The war is over. The United States has lost.

We are now involved in an Iraqi civil war.

Actually, if you want to break it into two sections; the war between the US and Iraq and now the internal civil war in Iraq that we are a part of, then you could say that yes, the first war is over, but I would say that the US won that war

It's just a case of another leftist trying to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. In the minds of leftists, a US defeat IS a victory.

 

[shesulsa]

It's just a case of another leftist trying to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. In the minds of leftists, a US defeat IS a victory.

This kind of unilateral us v. them thinking is why people loathe the right and is just plain wrong - it's designed to incite an argument and is off topic, just like your other post in the Pat Robertson thread. Are you feeling particularly insecure with your party affiliation or something? I don't see any other reason to make these unilateral statements and disrupt conversation other than to do just that.

 

[mrhnau]

This kind of unilateral us v. them thinking is why people loathe the right and is just plain wrong - it's designed to incite an argument and is off topic, just like your other post in the Pat Robertson thread. Are you feeling particularly insecure with your party affiliation or something? I don't see any other reason to make these unilateral statements and disrupt conversation other than to do just that.

Not necessarily Shesulsa. I think it is on topic. It depends on how we define "victory". A person with a differing political view is quite likely to look at things differently. A leftist might look at this war in as negative a light as possible, based on a political agenda. The right did the same thing when Clinton was in office. Care to discuss Bosnia and Monica-gate? Would the news coverage and political speak be any different if a democrat was in office?

Back to topic... What is seen as the ultimate goal? how are we going to define "victory" or "defeat"? If our goal was to remove the Hussein regime and stabalize the region, we have partial success. I'm not going to proclaim defeat while we are still there. Its still a work in process. Proclaimations regarding success or defeat are premature.

Here would be -my- definition of "victory": Removal of the Hussein regime and creating a stable self-sufficient government supporting a free society. Are we there yet? No, but I believe on our way.

sgtmac: You sound awful Rush Limbaughesque hehehe

 

[sgtmac_46]

This kind of unilateral us v. them thinking is why people loathe the right and is just plain wrong - it's designed to incite an argument and is off topic, just like your other post in the Pat Robertson thread. Are you feeling particularly insecure with your party affiliation or something? I don't see any other reason to make these unilateral statements and disrupt conversation other than to do just that.

I have a sneaking suspicion that any sort of articulated response defending my statement as being on topic would be dangerous, as the person I am arguing with is a moderator, especially one who has obviously taken a disliking to me today. So I will choose the better part of valor and bow out of this discussion.

 

[sgtmac_46]

sgtmac: You sound awful Rush Limbaughesque hehehe

Not really, but I have been known to play the devil from time to time.

 

[Sapper6]

Not necessarily Shesulsa. I think it is on topic. It depends on how we define "victory". A person with a differing political view is quite likely to look at things differently. A leftist might look at this war in as negative a light as possible, based on a political agenda. The right did the same thing when Clinton was in office. Care to discuss Bosnia and Monica-gate? Would the news coverage and political speak be any different if a democrat was in office?

Back to topic... What is seen as the ultimate goal? how are we going to define "victory" or "defeat"? If our goal was to remove the Hussein regime and stabalize the region, we have partial success. I'm not going to proclaim defeat while we are still there. Its still a work in process. Proclaimations regarding success or defeat are premature.

Here would be -my- definition of "victory": Removal of the Hussein regime and creating a stable self-sufficient government supporting a free society. Are we there yet? No, but I believe on our way.

very well said.

we waged war on the saddam-regime and won. we just happened to do it in the terrorist's backyard. of course the rebuilding timeline will be hampered by this. should we back away now? of course not, that would be ignorant.

i seem to remember reading about a country that once waged a war against it's oppressors and didn't have a constitution in place for another 11 years afterward. but perseverance paid off. you might of heard about them; the United States of America.

 

[Tgace]

The enemy of my political enemy is my friend???

The War is Over-We've lost....HOORAY !!!! ???

 

[sgtmac_46]

very well said.

we waged war on the saddam-regime and won. we just happened to do it in the terrorist's backyard. of course the rebuilding timeline will be hampered by this. should we back away now? of course not, that would be ignorant.

i seem to remember reading about a country that once waged a war against it's oppressors and didn't have a constitution in place for another 11 years afterward. but perseverance paid off. you might of heard about them; the United States of America.

Yeah, I heard about that place. It seems we've forgotten about it recently, however.

As I commented on another thread, we in America have really lost our attention span. If a situation isn't resolved in 2 hours, a week long mini-series at most, then we think someone has failed.

America today would have surrended in 1943 during WWII. 1,800 dead in Iraq since 2003? How many did we lose on June 6, 1944? Today's America would have been calling for all our troops out on June 7, 1944.

 

[shesulsa]

I have a sneaking suspicion that any sort of articulated response defending my statement as being on topic would be dangerous, as the person I am arguing with is a moderator, especially one who has obviously taken a disliking to me today. So I will choose the better part of valor and bow out of this discussion.

When a moderator participates in the discussion actively, we recuse ourselves of moderator duties and the remaining staff moderate the discussion. So my comments come from being another member, not as a moderator. You also stated I have taken a disliking to you which is false.

My comment was indicative of another member being tired of having the discussion always pulled off to weenie-wave between the politics of left and right, and then when called on it throwing hands up and going, "what'd I say? what'd I say? you're out to get me! what'd I say?"

So rather than try to make this between you and me ... let's back on topic, shall we?

 

[sgtmac_46]

When a moderator participates in the discussion actively, we recuse ourselves of moderator duties and the remaining staff moderate the discussion. So my comments come from being another member, not as a moderator. You also stated I have taken a disliking to you which is false.

My comment was indicative of another member being tired of having the discussion always pulled off to weenie-wave between the politics of left and right, and then when called on it throwing hands up and going, "what'd I say? what'd I say? you're out to get me! what'd I say?"

So rather than try to make this between you and me ... let's back on topic, shall we?

Sure thing.

 

[Sapper6]

you're right. dammit, i expect a war in microvable dinner speed.

so a guy pulls up at the drive thru window at McWars-R-Us. yes, i'd like a large, regime-unseating, with a side of regional terrorism-wipeout, and a large coke...what's that you say...? please pull forward...? dammit i haven't the time to wait, i wanna speak with the manager....LOL...too funny. that cracked me up. :ultracool

 

[sgtmac_46]

you're right. dammit, i expect a war in microvable dinner speed.

so a guy pulls up at the drive thru window at McWars-R-Us. yes, i'd like a large, regime-unseating, with a side of regional terrorism-wipeout, and a large coke...what's that you say...? please pull forward...? dammit i haven't the time to wait, i wanna speak with the manager....LOL...too funny. that cracked me up. :ultracool

Window server: "Everything's ready but the post-war political stability and the functioning constitutional democracy, we're holding on that, please pull forward, we'll bring it out when it's ready."

 

[shesulsa]

Explain your idea, please, on the purpose and effectiveness of a protracted war.

 

[sgtmac_46]

Explain your idea, please, on the purpose and effectiveness of a protracted war.

First explain what you mean by "protracted war". Is that any war that lasts more than 5 minutes? By that definition, every war the US has been involved in of any importance was "Protracted".

By the yard stick of US history, 2 years and 1,800 casualties is FAR from "protracted". Heck, we still have troops in Germany and Japan.

 

[mrhnau]

Explain your idea, please, on the purpose and effectiveness of a protracted war.

If there was a stable government installed, and the bombings stopped tommorow, I'd be the first to say "lets get out". Until there is a degree of stability in the region, our troops will be needed. We are also doing alot of good in the region that is not being oft reported. Rebuilding the infrastructure, supplying medical aid, food when needed, reopening schools. The "war" seems now just a ferreting out of insurectionist. Will that ever be done? Not any time soon, but the Iraqi military needs to be able to handle them before we head out. Hopefully the first step in doing that will be accomplished soon (A constitution).

 

[Tgace]

Militarily, the "war" was over when the president declared it was. The standing military was defeated in short order. Insurgency falls more under Operations Other Than War. (OOTW) IMO....

 

[sgtmac_46]

Militarily, the "war" was over when the president declared it was. The standing military was defeated in short order. Insurgency falls more under Operations Other Than War. (OOTW) IMO....

Don't go confusing me with the facts.