Do you think the U.S. should stay the course in Iraq?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Craigbythesea, Feb 27, 2006.

  1. Craigbythesea

    Craigbythesea
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    5,500
    Likes Received:
    20
    A nation-wide poll taken today asked the following question,

    Do you think the U.S. should stay the course in Iraq?

    Out of 44,883 responses; 71% said no; 23% said yes, 6% said maybe

    What do you think?
     
  2. Johnv

    Johnv
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    21,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    The phrase "stay the course" is a bit nebulous. REgardless of what peoples' feelings were about originally getting involved in Iraq, I think we should keep our troops in Iraq so long as they're reasonably needed. Remember how long it took to rebuild Germany? I don't like the idea of our boys dying anymore than anyone else. But we in this day and age are a bit to used to instant results and instant gratification.
     
  3. poncho

    poncho
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    Messages:
    19,657
    Likes Received:
    128
    We were warring against those trying to build global empires in the wars against Germany and Japan. We now find ourselves trying to build a global empire under the guise of a war on terror and using the same propaganda techniques of those we fought against in WWII.

    How can we even compare the two Johnv? Can we be both for and against the building of global empires?
     
  4. Johnv

    Johnv
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    21,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    Since Iraq is not, nor have we attempted to make Iraq, a terriroty of the US; and since our efforts are, though imperfectly, an attempt to build a free, sovereign, independent, and democratic nation; it cannot be claimed that our involvement is one of empire building.
     
  5. Scott J

    Scott J
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2001
    Messages:
    8,462
    Likes Received:
    0
    Who conducted the poll? Was it on-line or a rep sample? That sample size implies something like a NYT on-line poll... which would favor the anti-war position heavily.

    If I were Bush advisor for a day, I would advise him to absolutely flood the public with good news from Iraq by whatever means necessary.

    While it would be difficult with a hostile press, it is necessary to provide people with balanced information. Be honest about set backs... but don't let the other side paint a unrealistically negative picture either. Polls like the one cited demonstrate more than anything else that most people are getting a one-sided negative opinion about the effort.

    On the few occasions where soldiers have been allowed to speak for themselves, they report that progress is being made on the ground. They further know what is largely lost on the public... we aren't fighting Iraqis any more. We are fighting al Qaeda in Iraq... The same folks who have been attacking us for years now.

    The very worst thing we can do is yield the field of combat to them. They would be encouraged to attack all the more.

    Also, it would be interesting to see public response to the specific details of the Iraq strategy. Notably, when Dems actually gave details on what they would do in Iraq during the last election cycle... it was pretty much what was being planned and executed. Only an idiot would think that execution would be improved just because Kerry sat in the WH rather than Bush.
     
  6. poncho

    poncho
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    Messages:
    19,657
    Likes Received:
    128
    You recite the rhetoric quite well indeed Johnv apparently you have accepted it as truth. Nevermind that the real objectives have been clearly spelled out and admitted by the CFR policy writers and advisors openly in many of their publications and documents.

    Clever omissions of important information on the part of the current administration and media do not make the rhetoric true no matter how many times it is repeated. It makes it misdirection and distraction and therefore acts to catapult the propaganda (to use a Bushism) in the information war being waged on the people of the United States and the world.

    You can believe the rhetoric to be the whole truth if you so choose if that makes you feel better about the situation in the Middle East. I otoh must take the globalists own admissions and their stated goals to be more in line with the truth.
     
  7. Johnv

    Johnv
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    21,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    Pot, kettle. I don't buy into rhetoric, whether it's pro-Iraq war or anti-Iraq war. My previous post is a matter of fact, whether it's in regards to the US's involvement in Iraq, or any other country's involvement in any other country in like manner.
     
  8. poncho

    poncho
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    Messages:
    19,657
    Likes Received:
    128
    I must respectfully disagree Johnv. If you were really weighing the facts as stated by the planners themselves instead of the rhetoric of the administration and media you and I would most likely be in agreement.

    For instance, the fact that Zbigniew Brzezinski laid out the pretext and plan for the "war on terror" in 1997.

    The fact that as soon as his feet touched Iraqi soil Bremmer and the coalitional authority illegaly changed Iraqi law to favor the globalists financial interests. For which he has never been taken to task, and has since received a reward for doing so.

    The fact that the members of the Project For A New American Century openly mention the pretext for the GWOT and openly admit that Saddam and his WMD's were only the "immediate justification for a broader control of middle eastern affairs".

    The fact that in his 1997 plan Zbigniew Brzezinski actually stated the real goal of the war on terror. The control of Eurasia and the eventual capture and control of Uzbekistan.

    To name a just a few.

    The actual facts and open admissions do not line up or even resemble the continually repeated colorful and patriotic hued rhetoric.
     
  9. Johnv

    Johnv
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    21,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    I will have to agree to disagree. My statement wasn't out of any sense of patriotism or rhetoric. It was based on what is a requisite to constitute the building of an empire. We can disagree on the topic, but I cannot be accused in any way of being beholden to politics, patriotism, or rhetoric. Nor do I accuse you of the opposite.

    You can respectfully disagree. I can respectfully agree to disagree. I'm sure, on that point, we'd agree. [​IMG]
     
  10. poncho

    poncho
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    Messages:
    19,657
    Likes Received:
    128
    Yes we can agree to disagree Johnv and we will more than likely continue to do so as long as one of us refuses to look at all the readily available facts. :D

    This in no way means that I have anything other than respect for you or your views on this topic or any other btw.

    Funny you should mention this as Zbigniew Brzezinski also clearly lays out the imperatives for building and maintaining an empire in his forward plan for the GWOT. He states in clear terms thusly.

    Notice the clear terminology and reference to "imperial geostrategy". The plan does not jib with the rhetoric at all. If the globalists were planning anything other than an imperial geostrategy doncha think they would have said so from the begining?

    The GWOT clearly planned in advance of 911 (the pretext of which is mentioned both by Brzezinski and the PNAC planners in surprisingly similar terms) is progressing rather nicely according to plan helped along by the colorful patriotic and false propaganda or rhetoric spoon fed to a fearful population which has been clearly conditioned by time and events orchestrated by the globalists themselves and manipulated by those using fear as a means to an end into willing giving up their liberty, blood and treasure so deceivers can carry out their clearly stated plan to acheive their goal of world hegemony and a total surveillance society.

    Yes we can agree to disagree but imho we cannot dispell certain imortant facts just because the media talking heads and the globalists pliable vassals such as Bush, Kerry the Clintons and many others in congress choose not reveal them to the public at large.

    Do I believe we should pull out of Iraq? In light of the fact that we should never have gone there under provable false pretences in the first place I say yes! [​IMG]

    [ February 27, 2006, 08:05 PM: Message edited by: poncho ]
     
  11. StefanM

    StefanM
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    Messages:
    6,429
    Likes Received:
    72
    I think we should definitely pull out as soon as reasonably possible, and this withdrawal should be expedited if civil war erupts. We really don't need to take sides in that kind of war.
     
  12. LadyEagle

    LadyEagle
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b> <img src =/israel.gif>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    22,028
    Likes Received:
    1
    I expect to see our troops suddenly withdrawn as soon as it is officially recognized there is a civil war going on, it has been for quite some time, and the Bush/globalist dream of a "democratic" Iraq is an utter lost cause.

    I get sick of hearing Senators and Congressmen saying they never saw this coming. Some of us have been predicting a civil war all along based on the religious factions and history of the region.

    I can almost feel the urgency of choppers pulling out journalists, American civilians, and troops (the background music and sense of urgency portrayed in the movie, The Killing Fields, comes back to haunt the memory and blast us into the present) just like what happened before Saigon fell 30 years ago - mark the date -the 30th of April 1975.

    History repeats itself.

    The fact that people are finally starting to question whether or not a civil war is going on there just proves that it is. There are no Patrick Henry's in Iraq and there never have been.

    Our troops have been used as cannon fodder, life and limbs lost, in pursuit of a globalist dream. [​IMG]
     
  13. Joseph_Botwinick

    Joseph_Botwinick
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/532.jpg>Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2000
    Messages:
    17,527
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yes we should stay the course.

    Joseph Botwinick
     
  14. freedom's cause

    freedom's cause
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2005
    Messages:
    478
    Likes Received:
    0
  15. Joseph_Botwinick

    Joseph_Botwinick
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/532.jpg>Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2000
    Messages:
    17,527
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hello Freedom's Cause.

    Joseph Botwinick
     
  16. freedom's cause

    freedom's cause
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2005
    Messages:
    478
    Likes Received:
    0
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saadoun_al-Dulaimi

    notice the link to Georges Sada I would
    say He knows a lot more than we do about
    what went on in Iraq

    USA USA USA
     
  17. freedom's cause

    freedom's cause
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2005
    Messages:
    478
    Likes Received:
    0
    [CIA Homepage] [Iraq's WMD Contents]

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Regime Strategic Intent
    Annex D

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Iraq's WMD &gt; Regime Strategic Intent &gt; Annex D


    Saddam’s Personal Involvement
    in WMD Planning
    The Iraq Survey Group recovered this recording of Saddam and senior officials discussing the use of WMD. This discussion was part of a more general meeting which would appear from the content to have taken place during the second week of January, 1991. This is of particular interest as it provides a compelling demonstration of Saddam’s personal interest and involvement in WMD planning and preparation.

    Saddam’s Personal Involvement in WMD Planning

    Saddam: I was talking to ‘Abd and I told him there is no need to make a big fuss about these suits because we are going to use them in this special occasion, even if it is a Chinese design the collar, the neck line should be lower than this.


    Speaker 2: The suit, Sir, will have a neck line like the Dishdasha (Traditional dress of Arabia), so we can use normal white shirt with it.


    Saddam: Why did they bring it to us like this then?


    Speaker 2: No, I saw the state minister wearing the suit.


    Husayn Kamil: Sir, formally, we are wearing it, but you seem to be cold sir (everyone was laughing).


    Saddam: I think the people who designed that suit will not make that mistake: First, because you wear it right on the body, so it will get dirty soon; secondly, out of elegance, the hand shouldn’t appear from the suit like this.


    Speaker 2: Sir, the design of the suit is with a white shirt and a collar (neck line) like dishdasha.


    Saddam: Then my design is right.


    Husayn Kamil: Absolutely right, sir.


    Saddam: Then work on it and make the corrections to the sizes.


    Speaker 2: Sir, we will amend it to be exactly with the neck line.


    Saddam: Even if it appears a little bit. Now when some one wears a suit, of course the shirt line will appear a little bit, but here I prefer not to have it obvious.


    Speaker 2: Sir, you can see that nobody is wearing it.


    Saddam: It’s forgotten, but now I will ask Abu Muthanna, because he is the best at remembering [shackling noise]. Since 1958 the Iraqi army has been using these kinds of suits [people commenting and talking in the background].


    Saddam: I want to make sure that—close the door please [door slams)]—the germ and chemical warheads, as well as the chemical and germ bombs, are available to the “concerned people,” so that in case we ordered an attack, they can do it without missing any of their targets?


    Husayn Kamil: Sir, if you’ll allow me. Some of the chemicals now are distributed, this is according to the last report from the Minister of Defense, which was submitted to you sir. Chemical warheads are stored and are ready at Air Bases, and they know how and when to deal with, as well as arm these heads. Also, some other artillery machines and rockets (missiles) are available from the army. While some of the empty “stuff” is available for us, our position is very good, and we don’t have any operational problems. Moreover, in the past, many substantial items and materials were imported; now, we were able to establish a local project, which was established to comply with daily production. Also, another bigger project will be finalized within a month, as well as a third project in the coming two to three months that will keep us on the safe side, in terms of supply. We, Sir, only deal in common materials like phosphorus, ethyl alcohol and methyl [interrupted].


    Saddam: Etc. . . . this is not important to me.


    Husayn Kamil: So, Sir, regarding the germs and [he pauses].


    Saddam: And the Chemicals.


    Husayn Kamil: No, we have some of the chemicals available [interrupted].


    Saddam: So, we qualify that the missiles, by tomorrow, will be ready on the 15th.


    Husayn Kamil: Sir, we don’t have the germs.


    Saddam: Then, where are they?


    Husayn Kamil: It’s with us.


    Saddam: what is it doing with you, I need these germs to be fixed on the missiles, and tell him to hit, because starting the 15th, everyone should be ready for the action to happen at anytime, and I consider Riyadh as a target.


    Husayn Kamil: Sir, let me explain to you. What we produced now are the rocket heads and the containers, and we distributed them underground in three different locations. We considered these locations the best places we have, and that if we had a chance to scatter and to find more locations, then we would have done it. These locations are far away from Baghdad, this is problematic because of transportation which will take seven days to commute, but we minimized all the transportation procedures in a way. However, when we want to commute it, we cannot do it within one day Sir, and if we want to do it by plane, then, Sir, we have to go for the method [paused].


    Saddam: Let’s talk about it later [waiters entered the room, sound of plates banging and side talks to the waiters].


    Husayn Kamil: (door slams) Sir, we have three types of germ weapons, but we have to decide which one we should use, some types stay capable for many years [interrupted].


    Saddam: we want the long term, the many years kind.


    Husayn Kamil: Sir, this option is available and all other options are available as well.


    Saddam: You mean at which time should we use it and at which moment!


    Husayn Kamil: Yes sir. That is why there has to be a decision about which method of attack we use: a missile, a fighter bomb or a fighter plane.


    Saddam: With them all, all the methods.


    Husayn Kamil: Sir, we have to calculate now [interrupted].


    Saddam: Husayn knows about those.


    Husayn Kamil: Sir, there are some calculations we have to do, since we have modified fighters. The bombs or the warheads are all available, but the moment for using them at zero hour is something we should indicate sir; we will say that this will be launched (interrupted).


    Saddam: At the moment of use (zero hour), you should launch them all against their targets.


    Husayn Kamil: All of the methods are available, sir.


    Saddam: We don’t want to depend on one option. The missiles will be intercepted and the planes, at least one will crash, but whenever the missiles or planes fall down over the enemy land, then I consider the goal is achieved and the mission fulfilled.


    Husayn Kamil: Sir, it is available and stored “somewhere,” but if you, Sir, order us to transfer it, we are a bit worried it will cause contamination. It has been stored for 45 to 47 years, and yet has not been certified as being safe (uncontaminated). Sir, it had been experimented on only once and some of the employees, Sir, were contaminated.


    -Time 07:36-08:20, Saddam: I want as soon as possible, if we are not transferring the weapons, to issue a clear order to the “concerned people” that the weapon should be in their hands ASAP. I might even give them a “non-return access. “ [Translator Comment: to have access to the weapons; to take them with them and not to return them]. I will give them an order stating that at “one moment,” if I ‘m not there and you don’t hear my voice, you will hear somebody else’s voice, so you can receive the order from him, and then you can go attack your targets. I want the weapons to be distributed to targets; I want Riyadh and Jeddah, which are the biggest Saudi cities with all the decision makers, and the Saudi rulers live there. This is for the germ and chemical weapons.


    Husayn Kamil: In terms of chemical weapons, we have an excellent situation and good grip on them

    [Translator Comment: they are in good control of them].


    Saddam: Only in case we are obliged and there is a great necessity to put them into action. Also, all the Israeli cities, all of them. Of course you should concentrate on Tel Aviv, since it is their center.


    Husayn Kamil: Sir, the best way to transport this weapon and achieve the most harmful effects would come by using planes, like a crop plane; to scatter it. This is, Sir, a thousand times more harmful. This is according to the analyses of the technicians (interrupted).


    Saddam: We should consider alternatives Husayn (He called Husayn Kamil, Husayn). Meaning that if the planes don’t arrive, then the missile will, and if the missile is intercepted, the plane will arrive.


    Husayn Kamil: Sir, it is rare that the missiles are intercepted.


    Saddam: Anyways, it is our duty to think of all the bad scenarios of this mission. Then Israel first, and if the Americans attack us with unconventional, harmful types of weapons, or at the moment we see it feasible to attack, but as for now, put Riyadh and Jeddah as targets.


    Saddam: Air Force Commander [Muzahim Sa’b Hasan Muhammad Al Nasiri, at the time], you should coordinate with the Minister of Industry to get access to the weapons in the shortest time possible, of course with a lot of consideration for the technical and safety factors. Also, I want to give a written authorization to the “concerned people” that is signed by me, in case something happens to me. You know this is a life and death issue, all the orders about targets are sealed in writing and authenticated. Furthermore, for the officials from the missile (rockets) authority, you should coordinate with them so that they take the missile to locations. They are to inform the chief of staff, or operations commander deputy, to go to Husayn, Minister of Industry and go with the same necessary procedures. Regarding the chemical weapon [interrupted].


    Husayn Kamil: We are really in good control of it sir.


    Saddam: No, I mean it should be with the “taking action” people. [Translator Comment: the people who will execute the command; implementers.]


    Husayn Kamil: Sir, the chemical is available and our establishment is the one responsible for commuting the weapon and supervising how it is used.


    Saddam: Excellent. Do you have anything stocked in the establishment stores?


    Husayn Kamil: We have (empty) heads but we also have production all over. Not only in the factories; it is scattered.


    Saddam: I want you to keep in mind that by the 15th nothing should be stored in your factories that the “enemy” can have access to.


    Husayn Kamil: Sir, the Ministry of defense should pull that “Stuff” out. The Ministry of defense already ordered 25% of that stuff. When and if they ask us for the rest, we will have no problem supplying it. Sir, we are in an excellent & prepared situation regarding the missile warheads and fighter’s bombs. They are all modified and ready for launching any time, the chemical and the germ.


    No conversation (sound of plates banging).


    Saddam: Where are the most American forces and troops gathered and concentrated?


    Speaker 2: Sir, it is in Khalid Military city “Madinat Khalid,” located 60 kilometers past Hafr Al-Baten in Saudi, where the front General Command and Air Force Command are located. Most of the American army sectors, Sir, are by the coastal side in Al-Dammam, where most of the camp complexes exist.


    Saddam: I want these big gatherings and complexes to be allocated properly and given to the Air Force commander to be added to the above targets of the germs weapons. This should be done by an order to Muzahim. This is by a direct order and it has the green light from me, since this mission doesn’t fall into daily regular operations. I will issue a letter, signed by me, listing the commands and the alternative plans and probabilities of this mission, which should be followed literally.


    Speaker 2: Sir, Economically important targets such as refineries, power plants & water reservoirs, should we include them in the mission?


    Saddam: These locations should be put under the regular Air Force operations, and included in attacks not on this particular mission.


    Husayn Kamil: Sir, these vital locations must be added to the mission and become priority targets to the biological & chemical weapons, because this will end all sorts of life. People are drinking water from these desalination plants and getting their fuel from refineries, thus ending the mission.


    Saddam: Muzahim has already written these locations down and will take care of it, Refineries and [interrupted].


    Muzahim: The Refineries and desalination plants, Sir.


    Saddam: May God help us do it. Then there was no conversation.


    Saddam: We will never lower our heads as long as we are alive, even if we have to destroy everybody.


    The recording continues after this for a further 48 minutes, in which the participants discuss other military matters, such as senior command appointments and low-level defensive preparations. There was no further discussion of WMD.

    [return to top]


    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    [CIA Homepage] [Iraq's WMD Contents]
     
  18. LadyEagle

    LadyEagle
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b> <img src =/israel.gif>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    22,028
    Likes Received:
    1
    freedom's cause, this thread is not about whether or not we should have gone to Iraq - it is about whether or not we stay in Iraq and for how long; that being said, I have always believed Saddam will go free because we are holding the trial in Iraq.
     
  19. freedom's cause

    freedom's cause
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2005
    Messages:
    478
    Likes Received:
    0
    www.infoisrael.net/cgi-local/text.pl?source=2/a/iv/290120062 obviously when the time is right we should leave but our presence alone
    is a great deterrant to those like syria and iran who obviously would destroy Israel yes we could also be a target but so far were winning with God's help and God wins in the end hopefully many iraqi's syrians and iranians
    will be saved because of America's presence in Iraq and many christians will go and share the gospel something that may not have been as possible before saddam's demise I know that even though our leaders may think they are in control it is our Lord who directs the affairs of men it is His will that is going to be accomplished on this earth not theirs
     
  20. freedom's cause

    freedom's cause
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2005
    Messages:
    478
    Likes Received:
    0
    as for saddam time will tell but again it is our Lord who will have the final say and the scriptures indicate a horrifying ending may God have mercy on us all it is by His grace that we are saved and we take it so much for granted Thank You Lord God of Israel for your love toward us that while we were yet sinners you died for us if not our end would have surely been Hell but only your perfect sacrifice could pay the penalty for our sin in the old testament it says there is no remission of sin without the shedding of blood only you Jesus of Nazareth fullfilled that by dying for us on calvary even
    death on a cross I urge all muslims to take seriously the death of the Son of God on a cross for you if He had not done this you could not enter Heaven Praise God for His unfathomable Mercy and Love to us to anyone who will listen come to Christ Jesus the Messiah of Israel and you will find salvation and the only way to God
    possible I urge you to get a bible and read it in it's entirety and you will know the living God and His Son Jesus
     

Share This Page

Loading...