Thread: In Iraq 'til 2020?

Originally Posted by Bourne

Eventually, yes, once the country is stabilized just as Europe, Japan and Korea were stabilized.

And yet there is Lebanon and Vietnam. And I personaly dont think that the rest of the arab world will like the US changing one of their brother states. There could always be resistors there, somewhat like Isreal.

Hell, people forget that G. Washington had to put down a rebellion in the United States before we were done. In any country it takes some time for change to take hold. The real winner is whether the people are better off than they were under the old system. If Iraq stabilizes and becomes a better place to live than it was under Saddam, then people will go with it.

For example, the thing that turned the Sunni leadership against Al Qaeda in Iraq was the violence that they used to strangle opposition to them in any areas that they controlled. They often used draconian means that killed the innocent and eventually the Sunnis realized that this was no future for them. So the Sunnis started to turn in the insurgents and cooperate with the Americans and the Iraqi government. They just had to see the benefit in it first.

Originally Posted by Thunderstorm Patriot

Hell, people forget that G. Washington had to put down a rebellion in the United States before we were done. In any country it takes some time for change to take hold. The real winner is whether the people are better off than they were under the old system. If Iraq stabilizes and becomes a better place to live than it was under Saddam, then people will go with it.

For example, the thing that turned the Sunni leadership against Al Qaeda in Iraq was the violence that they used to strangle opposition to them in any areas that they controlled. They often used draconian means that killed the innocent and eventually the Sunnis realized that this was no future for them. So the Sunnis started to turn in the insurgents and cooperate with the Americans and the Iraqi government. They just had to see the benefit in it first.

And as we surge, make deals with tribes and arm them, tell me, once Al Qaida is neutralized, and we start pressuring the Sunni to "compromise" with the Shia, how this is not going to come and bite us in the ass?

Originally Posted by 2lane

And as we surge, make deals with tribes and arm them, tell me, once Al Qaida is neutralized, and we start pressuring the Sunni to "compromise" with the Shia, how this is not going to come and bite us in the ass?

It will.

It is just a question of when.

But why is that an issue?

Do you think that any kind of alliance or agreement is forever?

It might be 5 years or 50 years. But nothing lasts forever.

You can't be afraid of taking action just because at sometime in the unknowable future your actions might come back to hurt you .

Originally Posted by 2lane

And as we surge, make deals with tribes and arm them, tell me, once Al Qaida is neutralized, and we start pressuring the Sunni to "compromise" with the Shia, how this is not going to come and bite us in the ass?

The problem is not one of conflict. There is always conflict. Even here in America. The question is whether we can convince these people that resolution of conflict is best done peacefully. I think we can because it is sensible.

When you try to solve your differences through fighting people die and infrastructure is destroyed. The labor of centuries can be devastated in a few short years. It is a waste and ultimately hold back the progress of your people. Most reasonable people can clearly see this. The only real question is whether we can make the Iraqis be reasonable. Some people would rather burn everything down then lose even one debate.

The trends in Iraq are going the right direction though and they are doing so in a big way. The violence is dropping off and people are looking more to the political process to resolve their issues. If this trend can be completed then we will succeed.


But if you want a more unbiased view of Iraq instead of the controlled media take a look at this blog: Michael J. Totten

Originally Posted by Thunderstorm Patriot

The problem is not one of conflict. There is always conflict. Even here in America. The question is whether we can convince these people that resolution of conflict is best done peacefully. I think we can because it is sensible.

When you try to solve your differences through fighting people die and infrastructure is destroyed. The labor of centuries can be devastated in a few short years. It is a waste and ultimately hold back the progress of your people. Most reasonable people can clearly see this. The only real question is whether we can make the Iraqis be reasonable. Some people would rather burn everything down then lose even one debate.

Read a history of mesopotamia then tell me again how likely this is to happen. You know the British formed modern Iraq. You see any Brits still around? I'm not talking about "coalition" forces. What's wrong with letting these people work this out on their own? Beside us not getting a say in their oil. Finally, our small standing military was never meant for nation building. Dayton (and apparently you) want to spend limited resources on this idiocy, I'd rather it be spent on education, healthcare and infrastructure.

Originally Posted by Vortex

SunHerald.com : In Iraq 'til 2020?

If you have any children, nieces, nephews, in the first grade and older, look at them now - imagine them 12 years from now in uniform.

The hell that GWB's war is will be known by too many before it ever ends.

In Germany till 2030!!!!??? We will be in Germany till 2030 some predict and maybe well beyond that!! Thank goodness it is only a miltary base just as the one will will have in Iraq, if the host government requests we have a base there.

Originally Posted by 2lane

Read a history of mesopotamia then tell me again how likely this is to happen. You know the British formed modern Iraq. You see any Brits still around? I'm not talking about "coalition" forces. What's wrong with letting these people work this out on their own? Beside us not getting a say in their oil. Finally, our small standing military was never meant for nation building. Dayton (and apparently you) want to spend limited resources on this idiocy, I'd rather it be spent on education, healthcare and infrastructure.

I second this.

The Republicans claim to be so pragmatic. But nobody can offer any precedence for a Western power successfully "changing" or otherwise "holding" a Middle Eastern nation. They just figure "we'll be the first!"

Originally Posted by Davocrat

I second this.

The Republicans claim to be so pragmatic. But nobody can offer any precedence for a Western power successfully "changing" or otherwise "holding" a Middle Eastern nation. They just figure "we'll be the first!"

And it seems to be working. Who'd a thunk it!

Originally Posted by justoneman

And it seems to be working. Who'd a thunk it!

Bush thunk it. Consider the source. Iraq is hardly a successful Wester ally.