Here's one reason why we're losing in Iraq

Status
Not open for further replies.
First of all, there is NO evidence that we are "losing" in Iraq! The majority of the provinces are peaceful, with businesses up-and-running in a fairly normal fashion. It's only Baghdad and the Sunni triangle regions that are still combat zones, and they are starting to cool down.

Secondly, there was a HUGE cadre of U.S. police officers that were sponsored by the government, and went to Iraq to start the training of the Iraqi police. I know that officers from the LAPD, NYPD and Chicago PD went over there, along with Deputies from various U.S. counties. Add to that, there were/still are numerous retired U.S. police officers that went over there for training purposes. I was approached for going over there, as a retired LEO, but turned down the $200,000 job offer. The money would have been great, but some family problems held me back.

The major problem is the language barrier. Second, the police applicants don't all have their heart in it....they just want WORK! Thirdly, the rivalry between the Muslim sects seems to have increased after Saddam was no longer in power. Fourthly, those people lived under a tyrannical power for so many decades, and it will take a LONG time for them to understand how "democracy" will benefit them.

By the way, there were "insurgent" attacks in Germany for close to 5 years AFTER the Nazi Army had surrendered! And, the last Japanese soldier to surrender didn't take place until 1970....a full 24 years after the war!

For what appears to be purely political reasons, the news media does NOT want us to believe that we are "winning" in Iraq! Heck, if todays news media had been on Normandie Beach on D-Day, they would have reported that we "lost" WW-II!
 
First, there's no reason to believe that democracy will benefit them. Democracy isn't right for everybody. Believing that democracy is right for everybody is the height of arrogance and ignorance.

Second, (and tangential to my first observation) it's not likely that tribal savages who've hated each other for centuries will be easily swayed by foreign intervention or so-called western "enlightenment."

Third, there is no reasonable benchmark for "winning" in Iraq. Those aforementioned tribal savages will keep killing foreign intervenors (Is that a word?) until the end of time.

Fourth, if the Prez can't figure a face-saving way out of this mess, we can say, "welcome Hillary" to the White House in 08.
 
We aren't "losing" anything but global respect.

In Iraq, our military can kick maximum ass if they are ALLOWED to...they aren't. It's the IRAQI PEOPLE who are losing because they don't have the will to stand up and fight. Consequently, we are WASTING OUR TIME, lives and $$$$$$$$$$$ "training" those bastards...they will melt away in the first "insurgent" attack, or use that training and guns against us, like the Palestinians did against Israel.

Nor did we "lose" in Viet Nam, which has MUCH in common with Iraq, although Bush and others won't admit it! Same situation...our military kicked ass over there when ALLOWED to do so (President LBJ was one of our worst enemies), but for the most part, we were NOT allowed to. In the end, the South Vietnamese people AND ARVN didn't have the will to stand up and fight. In the end , is was South Vietnam that lost the "war"...as President Kennedy warned.

So history is repeating itself in Iraq.

So much for civilian leadership in time of "war."

-- John D.

[The word "war" above is in quotes because what I've been seeing is a serious abuse of the word, the meaning of it watered-down to the absurd. I have seen no "war" in Iraq yet, no "war" on terror, likewise no "war" on crime and no "war" on drugs here at home. When you have a war, it's serious BUSINESS: Ruthless, many thousands of enemy bodies/POWs and the enemy is annihilated. I'm not seeing it. All I see is an embarrassment to our country while the hog-tied/unilateral rules-of-engagement American military looks like circus clowns over there, just getting killed every day like revolving ducks in a carnival shooting gallery...thanks to our civilian "leadership." That can stop overnight if it REALLY WERE a war going on there, but that word is meaningless nowadays...same as the word "hero"...everyone is a hero now. What BS. It's all a shameful disgrace]

-- JD
 
I'd say the iraqis have plenty

of willingness to "stand up and fight"... each other. What they're unwilling to do is stand up and fight their own side on behalf of the central government. And we can't make them do it.

And, if the definition of "victory" is a stable, multi-ethnic, multi-sectarian, pro-American, democratic government in control of a unified Iraq... then yeah, we're losing. I'd even go so far as to say lost, since I don't see any evidence that such an outcome is possible, let alone likely.

What good is an Iraqi government that can "sustain itself and defend itself" if that government is a Sharia theocracy allied with Iran? Is such a government worth the life of a single American GI?

--Shannon
 
A coworker who is a field grade reserve officer in Iraq summed it up well when he said that the vast majority of Iraqis have no real concept of national allegiance, but fierce loyalty and devotion to their religious sect or tribe. How do you build a democracy on that foundation?
 
I concur....in November I finished up a year in Iraq..my second one. They are so divided along religious lines that it is unlikely that they will ever be able to work together peacefully.
 
First of all, there is NO evidence that we are "losing" in Iraq! The majority of the provinces are peaceful, with businesses up-and-running in a fairly normal fashion. It's only Baghdad and the Sunni triangle regions that are still combat zones, and they are starting to cool down.
Click to expand...

Like dude, December was the second worse month of 2006 for american casualties.

We just lost 20 soldiers today (1/20/2007). Cooling down? You gotta be kidding me.

Of course we aren't losing, but that doesn't mean we are winning...

The words you used were used by our government 2 years ago, and then 1 year ago. Now they want 20,000 more troops. I'm sure it's cooling down.
 
Believing that democracy is right for everybody is the height of arrogance and ignorance.
Click to expand...
Believing that everyone has a right to have a say in how they are governed is none of those things.

Iraq seems similar to the former Yugoslavia: 3 regions, 3 religions, held together and at bay by a brutal tyrant.

Perhaps a similar breakup would be the best course.
 
First of all, there is NO evidence that we are "losing" in Iraq! The majority of the provinces are peaceful, with businesses up-and-running in a fairly normal fashion. It's only Baghdad and the Sunni triangle regions that are still combat zones, and they are starting to cool down.
Click to expand...
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...oh my...thanks for that one. I was an intel analyst (96b) in the first Gulf War and I can tell you with my limited expertise we are definately NOT winning this war. To deny something this obvious is not serving anyone.
 
We are not, what?

Of course, we are losing, politically, economically, in soldier's lives, in
wounded GIs, without any practical solution because of Bush's idiotic
fiasco. We should have stayed in Afganistan to hunt Bin Laden.
I do not expect the Iraqis to have a "Jeffersonian Democracy" any time
soon.
Iraq is so divided that it needs another strong Dictator to run it as a whole.
Corruption, vengeance and hatred is too much to forgive and forget what
happened in the past.
There will be a blood bath before things settle down.
We are going to be there for years in some capacity.
Bush and Cheney will go down in history as one of the worse leaders
because of this idiocy. They deserve it.
 
So if people

look at the facts, and come to a conclusion based on those facts, that's different from yours, you throw them into a bin you've labeled "DU", where their thoughts and opinions can be safely ignored.

You know, there's more to victory than the will to win. It's a necessary but not a suficent condition. There have been plenty of groups who kept their will to win right up until their final defeat. Imperial Japan and the Confederacy come quickly to mind, and a quick review of history will give many other examples. And here's another historical tidbit: By the time leaders start talking about "defeatism", their side has usually already lost.

Some goals cannot be attained, and wishing something into reality won't make it real. This works both ways. When I say that the United States has, at least in terms of the goals set out by our leaders, already lost, that statement has no more power to effect the world than does the President's saying that we're winning. It's not what I (and I assume others who agree with me) <b>want</b> to happen, it's what I think <b>is</b> happening. To acknowledge the world as I see it is not an endorsement or a condemnation of that world.

If you think those of us who fail to see any positive outcome of this are wrong, feel free to offer solid, reality based reasons why you think that. We'll listen. But if all you've got are slogans and sound bites, you won't change many minds. Reality doesn't fit on a bumper sticker.

--Shannon
 
If you think those of us who fail to see any positive outcome of this are wrong, feel free to offer solid, reality based reasons why you think that.
Click to expand...
I am not bullish about the military outcome of US involvement, but all is not doom and gloom in Iraq.
From Newsweek:
Civil war or not, Iraq has an economy, and—mother of all surprises—it's doing remarkably well. Real estate is booming. Construction, retail and wholesale trade sectors are healthy, too, according to a report by Global Insight in London.
...
Nor are ordinary Iraqis themselves short on cash. After so many years of living under sanctions, with little to consume, many built up considerable nest eggs—which they are now spending. That's boosted economic activity, particularly in retail. Imported goods have grown increasingly affordable, thanks to the elimination of tariffs and trade barriers. Salaries have gone up more than 100 percent since the fall of Saddam, and income-tax cuts (from 45 percent to just 15 percent) have put more cash in Iraqi pockets.
...
Consider some less formal indicators. Perhaps the most pervasive is the horrendous Iraqi traffic jams. Roadside bombs account for fewer backups than the sheer number of secondhand cars that have crowded onto the nation's roads—five times as many in Baghdad as before the war. Cheap Chinese goods overflow from shop shelves, and store owners report quick turnover. Real-estate prices have risen several hundred percent, suggesting that Iraqis are more optimistic about the future than most Americans are.
Click to expand...
 
Yep, it's all Bush's fault. He lied to us all. All the fingers point at him.
"How could you, Mr. President? Why would you want to topple a ruthless dictator that kills his own by the THOUSANDS? Why would you listen to several key leaders of their country that he has or had WMD and is making threats to use them? Why would you be so arrogant as to think people would want to be educated on what freedom REALLY is and let them experience what it is like to elect their own leaders for a better future? Why do you send our troops there to protect your precious oil reserves? Our 3000+ lives are more important than the hundreds of thousands that have been killed by Hussein, disease because of no running water, etc. We have other things to worry about like having a $250,000 three bedroom, 2 bath house, SUV's, $100 shoes. Screw them. There's just no hope for them.":rolleyes: :eek: :barf:
Man, Mr. President, what were you thinkin?:eek: :barf:
Yep, sure makes me sick. (feel the sarcasm?)
 
Something that George Washington said

in his farewell address...is so appropriate to the situation at hand.

He warned the future leaders of the United States to "avoid foreign entanglements." If they had heeded his words this wouldn't even be an issue. However since that address US leadership has consistently ignored that advice to the detriment of the country.

It should have been more than a suggestion..it should have been law.

Many of the problems this nation faces is a direct result of the government sticking it's nose into the affairs of foreign nations, intentionally involving us in the problems of other sovereign nations. We need to BUTT OUT.

Simple common sense dictates that other nations need to be responsible for their OWN affairs.
 
Iraq has an economy, and—mother of all surprises—it's doing remarkably well.
Click to expand...

Any word on when the oil money will start paying for this mess?

(Sorry Uncle Bill, may have to replace my signature)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top