Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Heron TSG]

I don't hate the American public (not most of it, anyways), I just hate the morons you elected.

Welcome to the club.

I mean, most of the time it seems America goes in, bombs the fuck out of everything, then leaves declaring 'Job done!', only for everything to fall to shit in a year.

Theoretically, we spent quite a bit of time in Iraq because we were trying to fix things up a bit. If we just wanted to bomb Iraq and leave, it wouldn't have been all that hard. But US Troops stuck around for 8 years trying to rebuild roads and schools and whatnot. It didn't work very well, we got fed up, and left. You make it sound like that 8 year ordeal was just some casual bombing run. I mean, everyone certainly wishes we did a better job. I just have no idea what more we could have feasibly done with the kind of idiots that the military hired to do the rebuilding. (Halliburton and friends fucked up pretty badly, and it doesn't help that Dick Cheney was heavily invested in that company...)

EDIT: Just saw Leafsnail's post as I was about to post this one.

Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.

I'm very much aware of that. I mentioned in my post that I was eight years old and didn't understand that at the time. I don't need you to educate me about the war that has affected my country for more than a decade.

My condolences for your loss, but try to imagine an Iraqi making a similar post about the impact that the invasion (and the subsequent civil war, and now the genocidal campaign of the IS) has had on their lives.

Yeah, it'd suck too. I have no illusions about nobody being harmed on the other side. I'm sure they would be super keen on another US invasion, to boot.

Do you really think it's unreasonable to expect a country to fix the problems it creates (in this case by inflaming sectarian divisions, crippling the Iraqi army and carelessly providing weapons that are now in the hands of IS militants)?  Particularly when they are the country that is best able to fix the problem.  If it were possible to undo the Iraq invasion that would be great, but it isn't, so I expect the US to deal with the consequences of that.

I think it's unreasonable to say that we armed ISIS directly, when those arms were stolen from the Iraqi military. We armed the military to prevent this sort of insurgency, and they didn't hold up their end. (Actually using that equipment to defend their state.) The sectarian divisions of Iraq existed long before we came by, which is why our military decided to give support to the Iraqi government to keep a lid on things like this. I, for one, don't want my high school friends to have to pay for the mistakes of the Iraqi military and government. This is why I don't support a return to Iraq and never will.

[smjjames]

Second category are people equally sick of your foreign politics bullshit, but expect you to actually realize what you promised and fix what you broke.

I'd like to hear what your suggestions are of how the US fixes what it broke. Also, the Iraqis are supposed to be the ones deciding their future, not the US choosing what their future is.

It also doesn't help if the people, whose stuff that we are trying to fix, don't even want us there.

[Criptfeind]

Ai Shizuka already said in this post that he doesn't want the US to go back. To make it clear. Smjjames

[Ai Shizuka]

Why is it hypocritical to expect you to fix that mess?

Hypocracy because the US hasn't gotten significantly better. There's not going to be a largely different outcome. They are decrying something and then asking for it to happen again. Hypocracy was the nicest word I could think of. (Foolishness might be another word, but I was giving the benefit of the doubt.)

I'm perfectly aware an US ground invasion would be useless at best. That's why I, personally, am against any kind of armed intervention.
But it's not a completely unreasonable reaction either.
What's the purpose of the current course of action? What do you expect to accomplish with a few drones? Your president is trying to appease everyone and to not displease anyone at the same time.
If you think you still have some kind of moral commitment over there, go all in.
If you think you are done, be really done with it.
In both cases, do it for real.

Or there is another option and this is also an answer to Smjjames. Stick to an entirely humanitarian operation.
You know what would be both useful and appreciated by the rest of the world? Just helping people, for once, instead of bombing random shit. You could actually retrieve those poor fuckers stranded on the mountains. Bring them somewhere safe (Egypt? I don't know, you have bigass bases everywhere), give them food and water. The public opinion would improve, both in the US and over here in Europe. How many muslims would realize you aren't pure evil but can actually do something good for once?

It's not a solution for the whole problem, obviously. But there is NO solution right now, as far as I can see.

[Criptfeind]

Yes. I think we should should be really done with it.

[smjjames]

Ai Shizuka already said in this post that he doesn't want the US to go back. To make it clear. Smjjames

We don't want to go back either, and like I said, I'd like to hear his suggestions of how to fix things since the Iraqis don't want us there.

[Frumple]

It's interesting to notice that in all this back & forth about whether the US caused the problem or not, & whether it's someone else's turn to f' up the middle east, that no-one mentions the UK/Australian involvement (albeit on a smaller scale). We had our own share in messing things up.

Presumably because they didn't really do much. UK apparently had nearly a third the soldiers on the ground the US did (austrailia had something like 1 soldier for every 23 the UK sent, so... yeah), but soaked something like 1 death for every 25 the US ate, and the overall expenditure from the UK was something like a percent of the US's, if the wiki summation of the costs is anything even remotely approaching accurate.

Who knows, maybe if they'd actually got up and sunk a third the money the US did into the fiasco we wouldn't be having this conversation at all. Doubtful, but who can say? I've kinda' gotten the point that Europe in general gives as much a damn about Iraq as I do, though, beyond using it as a point to gripe at the US. I mean, the latter bit is okay, US has plenty to be griped about at, but the whole complete unwillingness to meaningfully contribute to improving the situation really shows how much effort is willing to be expended. I say the states should match that level of effort, ha.

[smjjames]

Why is it hypocritical to expect you to fix that mess?

Hypocracy because the US hasn't gotten significantly better. There's not going to be a largely different outcome. They are decrying something and then asking for it to happen again. Hypocracy was the nicest word I could think of. (Foolishness might be another word, but I was giving the benefit of the doubt.)

You could actually retrieve those poor fuckers stranded on the mountains. Bring them somewhere safe (Egypt? I don't know, you have bigass bases everywhere), give them food and water. The public opinion would improve, both in the US and over here in Europe. How many muslims would realize you aren't pure evil but can actually do something good for once?

Have you ever watched the news? we are TRYING to, and there is only so much a helicopter can carry. The helicopters have to fire their machine guns while flying back to Kurdistan, it's THAT dangerous. There are thousands of people there and what they need is a corridor out.

[Ai Shizuka]

Yes, I'm watching the news. Impartial news for non-brainwashed people. You are pretending to help them. You want everyone to believe you are helping them, but it's a drop in the ocean.
As said above, do it for real or don't bother at all.

[Leafsnail]

To be clear I don't support another ground intervention in Iraq, but IS is unambiguously genocidal (and even proud of that fact) and air strikes may be the only thing that can stop them spreading across Kurdistan.

[smjjames]

Yes, I'm watching the news. Impartial news for non-brainwashed people. You are pretending to help them. You want everyone to believe you are helping them, but it's a drop in the ocean.
As said above, do it for real or don't bother at all.

Oh, then tell me what you think 'helping them for real' is? Charging in on tanks while blaring the cavalry charge to plow a corridor???

I was being sarcastic about the charging in on tanks, but seriously, tell me how you think we should do it so that it doesn't look like pretending, I really want to know what your idea is.

[Wolfhunter107]

That probably IS the best way to clear a corridor for them...

[Ai Shizuka]

Yes, I'm watching the news. Impartial news for non-brainwashed people. You are pretending to help them. You want everyone to believe you are helping them, but it's a drop in the ocean.
As said above, do it for real or don't bother at all.

Oh, then tell me what you think 'helping them for real' is? Charging in on tanks while blaring the cavalry charge to plow a corridor???

I was being sarcastic about the charging in on tanks, but seriously, tell me how you think we should do it so that it doesn't look like pretending, I really want to know what your idea is.

One of the most laughable internet warrior types is the armchair general, so I'm not going to be one. Obviously I can't provide a concrete tactical solution. I'm not there. I'm not a general.
But I can provide you a pretty surefire answer. Pretend those are US citizens on the mountains. Do you think they would still be there? It's been over a week and you don't even know how many people are up there. All you have done so far is dropping a few supply crates. The rescue plan is still under development and your president still has to approve it.

Nobody asked you to do anything, but you delivered your promises, as usual. And, as usual, you are not holding up to them.
You said you want to help them, but you don't want to put US soldiers at risk. How is it supposed to work exactly?
I know it's getting repetitive, but if you are going to half-ass it, don't bother at all.

I'm going away, so I won't check the thread until tomorrow.

[smjjames]

Does anybody else think they can feasably do more than just airdrops at this point?

And can anybody else refute Ai Shizukas strawmanning (or whatever logical fallacy is being used)?

[Heron TSG]

I think that it's possible he's underestimating the difficulty of evacuating thousands of people via helicopter in hostile territory, but I do not know how hard that is myself.