DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**nizcreare** · 01-09-2010, 12:18 PM

Sluggo, et al,

There is a missing perception.

I am starting to think not near enough people understand what "the End of Operations Iraqi Freedom" really means. There is still plenty of work to do and the 'war' is far from over for the something like 50K people (anyone know the real number? The media can't seem to agree on this), and their families, that are still going to be over there in various support roles. Anyway, it was not some historic moment. It was just a date in which the conflict, for the US, has changed a little. Not all that much but enough to remove certain forces from the fight. Politics is the take away here, not much else. Which is sad when thinking about this in terms of the sacrifice these troops and their families have made, and will continue to have to endure both in Iraq and Afghanistan. As for the speech itself... I am in mid debate myself on how I feel about what all he said.

(COMMENT)

Make no mistake --- the War is over. It has been over for several years. With the defeat of the conventional Opposing Force (OPFOR), the capture of Saddam, the destruction of the capacity and ability to wage war, the Post-Combat Phase began.

There may be some discussion on the successful way in which the US implemented the Post-Combat operations; political and military decisions that gave rise to the domestic insurgency; but the War ended when Iraq lost the ability and capacity to wage war.

The inability of the US to stabilize Iraq, install an honest government, and benefit the people of Iraq, is an entirely different issue. Those issues are directly related to US competency. There were critical mistakes made.

Sometimes, the best intentions turn-out poor results. But when the intentions are confused in the beginning, the results may be chaos.

'EXCERPT: Iraqis are conflicted as U.S. combat mission ends: By Liz Sly, Los Angeles Times'

"It would have been better if they didn't come, but now that they're here, they should stay," said Ali, 44, a wedding musician who hated Saddam Hussein, yet fondly remembers the days when the dictator was in control, the days before the chaos set in.

"How can the Americans leave when we don't have a government, don't have a state?" asked Hafedh Zubaidi, 39, who sells mattresses in Baghdad's middle-class Karada district and is deeply anxious about the future given the political stalemate over the formation of a government six months after national elections.
"We thought things were really going to be better when the Americans came, and instead they brought us only sorrow," he said. "But if they leave now, there will be no Iraq."
"The Americans came here and did all of this," he said, a question mark rising in his voice. "And now they are leaving?"

World (COMMENT)

The Iraqis, after seven (7) years, expected so much more and had hoped the Americans would have done so much better.

'EXCERPT: Gates, in Iraq, Takes the Long View: By ELISABETH BUMILLER, New York Times'

In markedly anti-triumphal remarks on Wednesday morning to reporters in Ramadi, the provincial capital of Anbar Province and the scene of some of the fiercest fighting of the war, Mr. Gates said that while American service men and women “have accomplished something really quite extraordinary here, how it all weighs in the balance over time I think remains to be seen.”
Asked directly if the war had been worth it, Mr. Gates replied, “It really requires a historian’s perspective in terms of what happens here in the long run.”
The war, he added, “will always be clouded by how it began,” — that is, he said, the premise on which it was justified, Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction, which did not exist. “This is one of the reasons that this war remains so controversial at home,” he said.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/02/wo...2military.html
We hope that Iraq will evolve. But clearly, some Iraqis don't hold that same expectation. Even the Administration does not want to go on the record as to the legitimacy of the war or the outcome. The beginning was tainted and the exceptionally poor implementation of Post-Conflict restoration efforts (Military & Diplomatically) combine to give us the results we see today. While it's true, that the Historical Account might give a different perspective, it is in doubt even now by senior officials.

Most Respectfully,
R

01-09-2010, 12:18 PM	#3
nizcreare Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 566 Senior Member	Sluggo, et al, There is a missing perception. I am starting to think not near enough people understand what "the End of Operations Iraqi Freedom" really means. There is still plenty of work to do and the 'war' is far from over for the something like 50K people (anyone know the real number? The media can't seem to agree on this), and their families, that are still going to be over there in various support roles. Anyway, it was not some historic moment. It was just a date in which the conflict, for the US, has changed a little. Not all that much but enough to remove certain forces from the fight. Politics is the take away here, not much else. Which is sad when thinking about this in terms of the sacrifice these troops and their families have made, and will continue to have to endure both in Iraq and Afghanistan. As for the speech itself... I am in mid debate myself on how I feel about what all he said. (COMMENT) Make no mistake --- the War is over. It has been over for several years. With the defeat of the conventional Opposing Force (OPFOR), the capture of Saddam, the destruction of the capacity and ability to wage war, the Post-Combat Phase began. There may be some discussion on the successful way in which the US implemented the Post-Combat operations; political and military decisions that gave rise to the domestic insurgency; but the War ended when Iraq lost the ability and capacity to wage war. The inability of the US to stabilize Iraq, install an honest government, and benefit the people of Iraq, is an entirely different issue. Those issues are directly related to US competency. There were critical mistakes made. Sometimes, the best intentions turn-out poor results. But when the intentions are confused in the beginning, the results may be chaos. 'EXCERPT: Iraqis are conflicted as U.S. combat mission ends: By Liz Sly, Los Angeles Times' "It would have been better if they didn't come, but now that they're here, they should stay," said Ali, 44, a wedding musician who hated Saddam Hussein, yet fondly remembers the days when the dictator was in control, the days before the chaos set in. "How can the Americans leave when we don't have a government, don't have a state?" asked Hafedh Zubaidi, 39, who sells mattresses in Baghdad's middle-class Karada district and is deeply anxious about the future given the political stalemate over the formation of a government six months after national elections. "We thought things were really going to be better when the Americans came, and instead they brought us only sorrow," he said. "But if they leave now, there will be no Iraq." "The Americans came here and did all of this," he said, a question mark rising in his voice. "And now they are leaving?" World (COMMENT) The Iraqis, after seven (7) years, expected so much more and had hoped the Americans would have done so much better. 'EXCERPT: Gates, in Iraq, Takes the Long View: By ELISABETH BUMILLER, New York Times' In markedly anti-triumphal remarks on Wednesday morning to reporters in Ramadi, the provincial capital of Anbar Province and the scene of some of the fiercest fighting of the war, Mr. Gates said that while American service men and women “have accomplished something really quite extraordinary here, how it all weighs in the balance over time I think remains to be seen.” Asked directly if the war had been worth it, Mr. Gates replied, “It really requires a historian’s perspective in terms of what happens here in the long run.” The war, he added, “will always be clouded by how it began,” — that is, he said, the premise on which it was justified, Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction, which did not exist. “This is one of the reasons that this war remains so controversial at home,” he said. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/02/wo...2military.html We hope that Iraq will evolve. But clearly, some Iraqis don't hold that same expectation. Even the Administration does not want to go on the record as to the legitimacy of the war or the outcome. The beginning was tainted and the exceptionally poor implementation of Post-Conflict restoration efforts (Military & Diplomatically) combine to give us the results we see today. While it's true, that the Historical Account might give a different perspective, it is in doubt even now by senior officials. Most Respectfully, R
	Quote