DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post - The United States lost the war in Iraq with dignity

**GenrieAB** · 03-10-2010, 02:33 AM

Define 'a stable Iraq.' We are past the era of the losing party trotting out with a white flag, or even surrendering in the wake of another country destroying every man woman and child in two of their cities. We aren't going to do that again, I feel fairly certain. I think the degree of stability required is purely subjective. I mean look how long we have had a presence in Germany and I have to question if it was really necessary after the first 5 years or so. Ramstein has been a BIG outlay for the US but with very little return, IMO.

I think it is debatable whether we should have ever been in Iraq and it was hotly debated for years. I find it VERY ironic that those who debated so hotly against us even being there now think we are pulling out too soon.

A stable Iraq would be a country where there was no need for any foreign involvement to keep the government in power. There would be no foreign occupation forces in the country, no matter what you call them, all security would be provided by Iraqi forces. There is no stable Iraq, now or in the near future.

We failed dismally, for several reasons, terrible leadership, Bush was clueless, driven to invade by Karl Rove's need for a war for the election. From that standpoint, the war was an unqualified success, it got Bush re-elected. But other than that it really was a complete fuck up.

Besides poor leadership, which extended downwards from the top, there was a military that was ill prepared for this kind of mission, and they fucked it up royally.

But given the vast military resources of the US, it is possible to pretend that a humiliating defeat is really some kind of victory.
Don't hold your breathe for the ticker tape parade though...

03-10-2010, 02:33 AM	#29
GenrieAB Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 552 Senior Member	Define 'a stable Iraq.' We are past the era of the losing party trotting out with a white flag, or even surrendering in the wake of another country destroying every man woman and child in two of their cities. We aren't going to do that again, I feel fairly certain. I think the degree of stability required is purely subjective. I mean look how long we have had a presence in Germany and I have to question if it was really necessary after the first 5 years or so. Ramstein has been a BIG outlay for the US but with very little return, IMO. I think it is debatable whether we should have ever been in Iraq and it was hotly debated for years. I find it VERY ironic that those who debated so hotly against us even being there now think we are pulling out too soon. A stable Iraq would be a country where there was no need for any foreign involvement to keep the government in power. There would be no foreign occupation forces in the country, no matter what you call them, all security would be provided by Iraqi forces. There is no stable Iraq, now or in the near future. We failed dismally, for several reasons, terrible leadership, Bush was clueless, driven to invade by Karl Rove's need for a war for the election. From that standpoint, the war was an unqualified success, it got Bush re-elected. But other than that it really was a complete fuck up. Besides poor leadership, which extended downwards from the top, there was a military that was ill prepared for this kind of mission, and they fucked it up royally. But given the vast military resources of the US, it is possible to pretend that a humiliating defeat is really some kind of victory. Don't hold your breathe for the ticker tape parade though...
	Quote