Add Reply
Related Information to Post War IraqPost War Iraq - Page 63 of 171
QUOTE That’s a paraphrase, the original - Page 63 - Politics, Business, Civil, History - Posted: 17th Nov, 2004 - 4:57pm
Posts: 1362 - Views: 101506
versus 
So, now that the USA left Iraq can the country rebuild herself and become stable? Related Information to Post War IraqPost Date: 10th Nov, 2004 - 4:48pm / Post ID: #
NOTE: News [?]
Post War Iraq - Page 63
Fighting Dirty?
IRAQ PM'S RELATIVES KIDNAPPED, ADVISER SAYS
Three members of interim Iraqi Prime Minister Ayad Allawi's family were
kidnapped at gunpoint Tuesday morning as they left their home in Baghdad,
according to an Allawi adviser.
https://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/11/10/...dnap/index.html
Sponsored Links:
Post Date: 16th Nov, 2004 - 10:51am / Post ID: #
NOTE: News [?]
Iraq War Post
SADDAM'S ILLICIT PROFITS MORE THAN $21 BILLION
Over more than a decade, Saddam Hussein's government raised more than $21.3 billion in illegal revenue by subverting U.N. sanctions against Iraq including the humanitarian oil-for-food program, congressional investigators estimated Monday.
Ref. https://deseretnews.com/dn/view/1%2C1249%2C...05731%2C00.html
Post Date: 16th Nov, 2004 - 1:37pm / Post ID: #
Post War Iraq History & Civil Business Politics
I am just thinking what really is US/UK plan? They MUST be know that no irak people can benefit from what they are doing there and more...they really expect a positive feedback from the locals there...they are insane. Everything that could be taken into consideration say that will never happened and they still keep their presence there ...
Page 63 Iraq War Post
No matter what anyone thinks about the reasons for the US, the UK, and many other countries to enter into Iraq, the fact is that they are now there.
Without causing overwhelmingly severe consequences, it is impossible for the US and the UK to pull out right now. There has to be some sort of political infrastructure in place. In order for that to happen, the elections need to go on as planned.
Because of the chaos that the situation in Fallujah has created, it is necessary to clean it out. It isn't nice, or neat, but it is necessary.
As far as a plan goes, it is impossible for humans to "plan" things out so well that they can change a country immediately. After WWII, it took over 7 years before Germany was ready for elections. Japan also took many years to settle down and establish a new government.
From what I have read, by Iraqi people, they are generally supportive of what the US is doing - at least prior to Fallujah. I haven't read any blogs or articles about the situation there in the last couple of weeks. The majority of the Iraqi people are opposed to the foreign-based insurgency. Even most of the people in Fallujah have wanted it out of their city for quite a while now. This is the only way to get it out.
International Level: International Guru / Political Participation: 854 
85.4%
Post Date: 16th Nov, 2004 - 9:44pm / Post ID: #
Iraq War Post
I agree with Nighthawk, it will take some time for things to settle in Iraq. That said, the US will need more international help and the trust of the Iraqi people.
On the question of international help, I think Bush's approach to the invasion of Iraq, eliminated all hope of support from the international community ie; France Germany, Canada etc.... In addition, Blair is up for re-election, there is a good chance he will not win because of his cosiness to Bush. So the US may have to go it alone.
To go it alone, the US will have to gain the trust and confidence of the Iraqi people. which I don't think they have. So far the US has wiped out 2 cities and has a result of the invasion it is estimated by some,that over 100,000 iraqis have died. How much more can the Iraqis take.
I don't think the prison scandal, the total destruction of Fallujah and recent reports of the execution by a US marine of a wounded and unarm man will help the situation.
When will Bush realize that might is not always right and that diplomacy instead of bombs may be the answer to peace
Post War Iraq
It is very easy to say that diplomacy is better than bombs MrB, but didnt the US and the rest of the world use diplomacy with Iraq and Saddam for almost 12 years? How long were we supposed to continue attempting diplomacy when Saddam had no intentions of holding his end of the bargain? With the 9/11 attacks, the countries of the world that were once under the microscope had to realize that it was time to put up or face the consequences. Saddam realized this and still laughed in the faces of the UN inspectors. With the intelligence the US had after the Gulf War, we could not take the risk of there being WMD in Iraq that could be handed over to terrorists for future activities, and so diplomacy had to take a back seat. It is very easy to make decisions in hindsight. No one is saying that Iraq will be easy to clean up, but leaving it unfinished will do more harm than good.
International Level: Envoy / Political Participation: 241 24.1%
Post War Iraq - Page 63
| QUOTE (MrB @ 16-Nov 04, 4:44 PM) |
| I don't think the prison scandal, the total destruction of Fallujah and recent reports of the execution by a US marine of a wounded and unarm man will help the situation. |
Here is an excellent commentary on the "execution" by a Marine.
https://www.lonsberry.com/writings.cfm?story=1536
| QUOTE |
| To better understand what happened and why, it's necessary to know a little bit of how the enemy has been fighting in Iraq. Like the booby-traps being set on the remains of enemy fighters. The same day this Marine killed the wounded enemy, another Marine in Fallujah was killed - and five of his buddies were hurt - by an explosive rigged to a dead fighter. Some of the enemy wounded have been fitted with suicide vests, to detonate when American troops come to their aid. And some able-bodied enemy fighters have hidden among their wounded comrades in order to attack our soldiers and Marines. Think that through. What that means is that what appears to be a bunch of dead and wounded guys to us, is a very real threat to a GI. The training and experience of that Marine told him that those enemy combatants lying on the ground were a potential threat to him. That's why he yelled what he yelled. He's faking! He's not dead! That's a paraphrase, the original language was a little strong, but that's what he said. He felt it necessary to yell to his buddies that one of the enemy combatants was pretending to be dead, but was really alive. He shouted it as a warning. And he immediately shouldered his rifle and fired. He struck the man in the head, killing him instantly. Why? Sadism? Cruelty? No. Neither his words nor his actions indicate that. He did it to protect himself and his buddies. That's his job. He's a warrior. |
As far as international help is concerned, Bush did everything possible to get that international help. He had 37 countries that participated in various ways. France, Germany, and Russia were all against it, because they were profiting from the current situation. Now, Old Europe is beginning to realize just what they have been against. Radical Islamism is on the march in Spain, the Netherlands, and France. It isn't just the US. It took 3000 deaths in the US to wake us up. 300 in Spain. 1 in Amsterdam. As the radical Islamist movements make more and more enemies, I believe that you will see more countries lining up to help out.
International Level: International Guru / Political Participation: 854 85.4%
Post War Iraq Politics Business Civil & History - Page 63
| QUOTE |
| That’s a paraphrase, the original language was a little strong, but that’s what he said. He felt it necessary to yell to his buddies that one of the enemy combatants was pretending to be dead, but was really alive. He shouted it as a warning. And he immediately shouldered his rifle and fired. He struck the man in the head, killing him instantly. Why? Sadism? Cruelty? No. Neither his words nor his actions indicate that. He did it to protect himself and his buddies. That’s his job. He’s a warrior. |
Sorry but this part of the article doesn't appear to me as 'excellent'. Now in order for me to understand this I need to ask a question to those who are familiar with the rules:
So if this Marine saw an enemy laying down and faking he was dead but in reality he was alive (he was wounded by the way) then it is a US marine rule that he takes his gun and shot him on the head?. Now, I'm not trying to be sarcastic, I'm just trying to understand how are the procedures. I thought that what he is supposed to do is take the guy as a prisoner. He cannot go and take his gun and shot him on the head to someone who is already down, am I right?. If I'm right, I don't see how he could be protecting himself and his buddies. The guy was down, wounded, and his 'buddies' and him could have perfectly take him into custody but he did not do that. He killed him in cold blood. Please explain me the procedures.
International Level: International Guru / Political Participation: 1089 100%
TOPIC: Post War Iraq