How can Iraq do anything but go along with the US? It's gunboat diplomacy - they have no options whatsoever. I wouldn't exactly call it a sovereign nation.Pug wrote:
That's a stretchCameronPoe wrote:
lolNantanCochise wrote:
Iraq's government wants these bases to be permanent. Iraq is an ally of the US. So far the US has agreed. What are we talking about again?
"Iraq is an ally of the US."
Pardon me if the US army death toll in Iraq, general Arab opinion of the US and Moqtada Al Sadr's Mehdi Army suggest otherwise.... With the world's most technologically advanced army in your country staring at you down the barrel of a gun the expedient thing to do is to say 'OK then, I'm your ally'....
So are you saying the Iraqis want the troops to stay or go?CameronPoe wrote:
How can Iraq do anything but go along with the US? It's gunboat diplomacy - they have no options whatsoever. I wouldn't exactly call it a sovereign nation.
Kind of like the Irish/UK relationship in the past.CameronPoe wrote:
lolNantanCochise wrote:
Iraq's government wants these bases to be permanent. Iraq is an ally of the US. So far the US has agreed. What are we talking about again?
"Iraq is an ally of the US."
Pardon me if the US army death toll in Iraq, general Arab opinion of the US and Moqtada Al Sadr's Mehdi Army suggest otherwise.... With the world's most technologically advanced army in your country staring at you down the barrel of a gun the expedient thing to do is to say 'OK then, I'm your ally'....
Exactly like that. No option but to comply being that we were weaker militarily. WWI weakened Britain sufficiently for us to finally kick em out. For Mehdi Army read Irish Republican Brotherhood and general Arab opinion read Irish Americans.NantanCochise wrote:
Kind of like the Irish/UK relationship in the past.CameronPoe wrote:
lolNantanCochise wrote:
Iraq's government wants these bases to be permanent. Iraq is an ally of the US. So far the US has agreed. What are we talking about again?
"Iraq is an ally of the US."
Pardon me if the US army death toll in Iraq, general Arab opinion of the US and Moqtada Al Sadr's Mehdi Army suggest otherwise.... With the world's most technologically advanced army in your country staring at you down the barrel of a gun the expedient thing to do is to say 'OK then, I'm your ally'....
Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-06-06 06:42:09)
This 2007 survey of 2,200 Iraqis spread across the country is quite telling:Pug wrote:
So are you saying the Iraqis want the troops to stay or go?CameronPoe wrote:
How can Iraq do anything but go along with the US? It's gunboat diplomacy - they have no options whatsoever. I wouldn't exactly call it a sovereign nation.
Q28 Overall, do you think the presence of US forces in Iraq is making security in our country better, worse, or having no effect on the security situation?
%
Better 21
Worse 69
No Effect 10
Refused/don’t know -
So Germany and Japan consented to US military bases back in the 1940s?CameronPoe wrote:
US has bases in allied countries by mutual consent - you don't often get thousands of Germans marching for an end to these bases (although you sometimes do in Korea) - you get them frequently in Iraq. Iraq is not an ally of the US: it's a quasi-sovereign interim government to all intents and purposes, with a middle class that has fled to Europe and elsewhere and a remining population who view the US as an occupying force acting in their own interests and in the interests of the arch nemesis of the entire Arab world: Israel. Your correlation is extremely poor.M.O.A.B wrote:
US has bases in Germany and the UK as well, Ramstein and RAF Mildenhall to name two. I see these bases as nothing more than a security reinforcement for the area. Following most conflicts, WW2, Korea etc bases will be setup in the aftermath to keep watch on the situation.
Shouldn't you be out hugging a terrorist or something.
The American Empire.. I like the sound of that.
Do we have to throw out our current government in favor of an Emperor? When can we start expecting non military settlements? I hear the weather in Iraq is fabulous this time of year. I can't wait to stake my claim.
Serious time:
Do we have to throw out our current government in favor of an Emperor? When can we start expecting non military settlements? I hear the weather in Iraq is fabulous this time of year. I can't wait to stake my claim.
Serious time:
It appears that this would not be possible unless we agreed to the Iraqi terms.A majority of the Iraqi parliament has already written to the US Congress rejecting the long-term security deal unless it is linked to a requirement that US forces leave.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Decimate a country and they'll generally assent to you building a base on their land, not through any great love of you mind you... Poor examples anyway - Germany and Japan both declared war on and attacked the US, unlike Iraq.Lotta_Drool wrote:
So Germany and Japan consented to US military bases back in the 1940s?
Shouldn't you be out hugging a terrorist or something.
Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-06-06 07:07:35)
Kmarion wrote:
The American Empire.. I like the sound of that.
Do we have to throw out our current government in favor of an Emperor? When can we start expecting non military settlements? I hear the weather in Iraq is fabulous this time of year. I can't wait to stake my claim.
Serious time:It appears that this would not be possible unless we agreed to the Iraqi terms.A majority of the Iraqi parliament has already written to the US Congress rejecting the long-term security deal unless it is linked to a requirement that US forces leave.
CameronPoe wrote:
We all know it but now it looks like 'Imperialist USA' might actually be made official.
Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-06-06 07:09:10)
Ok, so you are saying the Iraqi people don't like to be governed by their own government, and don't like the US. Gotcha.CameronPoe wrote:
This 2007 survey of 2,200 Iraqis spread across the country is quite telling:Pug wrote:
So are you saying the Iraqis want the troops to stay or go?CameronPoe wrote:
How can Iraq do anything but go along with the US? It's gunboat diplomacy - they have no options whatsoever. I wouldn't exactly call it a sovereign nation.
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/4 … 03x201.gif
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/4 … 16x419.gif
Q28 Overall, do you think the presence of US forces in Iraq is making security in our country better, worse, or having no effect on the security situation?
%
Better 21
Worse 69
No Effect 10
Refused/don’t know -
So tomorrow the US pulls out of Iraq. What happens next? Rainbows and unicorns?
Feel free to propose an alternative to US protection...it's been a while since I've seen a proposal.
If Germany or Japan wanted the US's military facilites gone, they could just tell the US to bugger off. They haven't told the US to bugger off, ergo they're happy for the US to stay.
Strikingly similar to the situation in the US currently...Pug wrote:
Ok, so you are saying the Iraqi people don't like to be governed by their own government, and don't like the US. Gotcha.
Civil war and a new regime representative of the fact that the country is in fact three countries in which no external party has a direct political influence.Pug wrote:
So tomorrow the US pulls out of Iraq. What happens next? Rainbows and unicorns?
Civil war and a new regime representative of the fact that the country is in fact three countries in which no external party has a direct political influence.Pug wrote:
Feel free to propose an alternative to US protection...it's been a while since I've seen a proposal.
If Russia invaded Georgia or Ukraine on the basis of a perceived threat from either and set up new institutions of government and guided the ratification of legislation in said countries, I take it you would endorse that. [At least Ukraine and Georgia actually border Russia unlike with USA/Iraq]
Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-06-06 07:44:22)
Mmmmmm...I can imagine how that conversation would go:Pubic wrote:
If Germany or Japan wanted the US's military facilites gone, they could just tell the US to bugger off. They haven't told the US to bugger off, ergo they're happy for the US to stay.
Germany/Japan: Hello America, we'd like you bugger off and get your military bases out of our country please.
America: Okay, sorry about that. Don't worry, we won't bear a grudge and punish you in any way as regards trading, investment or economic ties.
So the US leaves immediately and the Iraqis have an immediate civil war...CameronPoe wrote:
Strikingly similar to the situation in the US currently...Pug wrote:
Ok, so you are saying the Iraqi people don't like to be governed by their own government, and don't like the US. Gotcha.Civil war and a new regime representative of the fact that the country is in fact three countries in which no external party has a direct political influence.Pug wrote:
So tomorrow the US pulls out of Iraq. What happens next? Rainbows and unicorns?Civil war and a new regime representative of the fact that the country is in fact three countries in which no external party has a direct political influence.Pug wrote:
Feel free to propose an alternative to US protection...it's been a while since I've seen a proposal.
If Russia invaded Georgia or Ukraine on the basis of a perceived threat from either and set up new institutions of government and guided the ratification of legislation in said countries, I take it you would endorse that. [At least Ukraine and Georgia actually border Russia unlike with USA/Iraq]
...There will be parades worldwide and an international celebration...and everyone will love the US (while the Iraqis kill themselves)...
R U kiddin' me?
Why are you concerned about whether or not the world loves the US? The world doesn't meaningfully bat an eyelid or lift a finger on Burma, Tibet, Zimbabwe, Darfur, etc., etc. I think you overestimate how compassionate Generation X is. People won't love the US, but they'll begin on the path back to respecting them again (unless of course they go and engage in some other act of perceived busibodiness). Did the world criticise you for leaving Vietnam? No, they didn't. In hindsight pretty much everyone views the US action and stay in Vietnam as wrong, despite what that meant for the Vietnamese on either side of their ideological fence.Pug wrote:
So the US leaves immediately and the Iraqis have an immediate civil war...
...There will be parades worldwide and an international celebration...and everyone will love the US (while the Iraqis kill themselves)...
R U kiddin' me?
You've already dropped Israel into this thread, and now Tibet, Zimbabwe, Darfur & the Gen X culture. Let's focus on the Iraqis.CameronPoe wrote:
Why are you concerned about whether or not the world loves the US? The world doesn't meaningfully bat an eyelid or lift a finger on Burma, Tibet, Zimbabwe, Darfur, etc., etc. I think you overestimate how compassionate Generation X is. People won't love the US, but they'll begin on the path back to respecting them again (unless of course they go and engage in some other act of perceived busibodiness). Did the world criticise you for leaving Vietnam? No, they didn't. In hindsight pretty much everyone views the US action and stay in Vietnam as wrong, despite what that meant for the Vietnamese on either side of their ideological fence.
My real point is you'd rather see more Iraqis die.
If Hitler had said, quite rightly, that loads of collaboraters would be killed if Germany pulled out of occupied Europe so we shouldn't kick them out, would you have sided with him?Pug wrote:
So the US leaves immediately and the Iraqis have an immediate civil war...CameronPoe wrote:
Strikingly similar to the situation in the US currently...Pug wrote:
Ok, so you are saying the Iraqi people don't like to be governed by their own government, and don't like the US. Gotcha.Civil war and a new regime representative of the fact that the country is in fact three countries in which no external party has a direct political influence.Pug wrote:
So tomorrow the US pulls out of Iraq. What happens next? Rainbows and unicorns?Civil war and a new regime representative of the fact that the country is in fact three countries in which no external party has a direct political influence.Pug wrote:
Feel free to propose an alternative to US protection...it's been a while since I've seen a proposal.
If Russia invaded Georgia or Ukraine on the basis of a perceived threat from either and set up new institutions of government and guided the ratification of legislation in said countries, I take it you would endorse that. [At least Ukraine and Georgia actually border Russia unlike with USA/Iraq]
...There will be parades worldwide and an international celebration...and everyone will love the US (while the Iraqis kill themselves)...
R U kiddin' me?
This situation is even more obvious as the well polled Iraqi people overwhelmingly want the coalition forces to leave. The US doesn't have to care about responsability if there's a civil war because that's the path that the Iraqi people chose for themselves. There's no point in invading Iraq to supposedly give them democracy if you're going to utterly ignore the demands of the overwhelming majority of the populace.
Ahh, so now the US is Hitler.PureFodder wrote:
If Hitler had said, quite rightly, that loads of collaboraters would be killed if Germany pulled out of occupied Europe so we shouldn't kick them out, would you have sided with him?
This situation is even more obvious as the well polled Iraqi people overwhelmingly want the coalition forces to leave. The US doesn't have to care about responsability if there's a civil war because that's the path that the Iraqi people chose for themselves. There's no point in invading Iraq to supposedly give them democracy if you're going to utterly ignore the demands of the overwhelming majority of the populace.
All the puzzles are in place...makes sense now.
"Utterly ignore the demands of the overwhelming majority" - what demands are these? I want to make sure we pin them down before we discuss them.
The US entering Iraq caused the deaths, directly and indirectly, of tens of thousands of Iraqis: don't try the 'poor Iraqis' bullshit. The US being in Iraq makes it the number one vacation spot for Al Qaeda from Morocco to Sumatra. Don't give me the 'Iraqis will die' bullshit.Pug wrote:
You've already dropped Israel into this thread, and now Tibet, Zimbabwe, Darfur & the Gen X culture. Let's focus on the Iraqis.
My real point is you'd rather see more Iraqis die.
Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-06-06 08:53:13)
Ok, Iraqis won't die if there's a civil war.CameronPoe wrote:
The US entering Iraq caused the deaths, directly and indirectly, of tens of thousands of Iraqis: don't try the 'poor Iraqis' bullshit. The US being in Iraq makes it the number one vacation spot for Al Qaeda from Morocco to Sumatra. Don't give me the 'Iraqis will die' bullshit.Pug wrote:
You've already dropped Israel into this thread, and now Tibet, Zimbabwe, Darfur & the Gen X culture. Let's focus on the Iraqis.
My real point is you'd rather see more Iraqis die.
Happy?
Much has changed in a year (March 2007). A dramatic decrease in violence would surely effect popular opinion.CameronPoe wrote:
This 2007 survey of 2,200 Iraqis spread across the country is quite telling:Pug wrote:
So are you saying the Iraqis want the troops to stay or go?CameronPoe wrote:
How can Iraq do anything but go along with the US? It's gunboat diplomacy - they have no options whatsoever. I wouldn't exactly call it a sovereign nation.
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/4 … 03x201.gif
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/4 … 16x419.gif
Q28 Overall, do you think the presence of US forces in Iraq is making security in our country better, worse, or having no effect on the security situation?
%
Better 21
Worse 69
No Effect 10
Refused/don’t know -
It's understandable that you hadn't noticed.
http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/86930/During the first 10 weeks of 2007, Iraq accounted for 23 percent of the newshole fornetwork TV news. In 2008, it plummeted to 3 percent during that period. On cable networks it fell from 24 percent to 1 percent, according to a study by the Project for Excellence in Journalism.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Iraqis will necessarily die in a civil war. They're dying right now, those that aren't boxed into segregated walled communities refusing to go to the market that is.Pug wrote:
Ok, Iraqis won't die if there's a civil war.
Happy?
Here's the Reuters feed on Iraq for today, the 6th of June 2008, with several hours of said day left to go:Kmarion wrote:
Much has changed in a year (March 2007). A dramatic decrease in violence would surely effect popular opinion.
It's understandable that you hadn't noticed.http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/86930/During the first 10 weeks of 2007, Iraq accounted for 23 percent of the newshole fornetwork TV news. In 2008, it plummeted to 3 percent during that period. On cable networks it fell from 24 percent to 1 percent, according to a study by the Project for Excellence in Journalism.
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/ANS621059.htm
Just because Iraq has dropped out of the news does not mean it's all scented flowers and campfires...
I find it odd that Americans willingly indebt themselves to China in Iraq while they have enough domestic woes of their own.
This past May, 508 Iraqis lost their lives incidentally.
Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-06-06 09:08:33)
Well I believe there's a possibility of strengthing the Iraqi government without violence and without Imperialism. There are examples in this thread earlier which you dismissed as bullshit or not relevant.CameronPoe wrote:
Iraqis will necessarily die in a civil war. They're dying right now, those that aren't boxed into segregated walled communities refusing to go to the market that is.Pug wrote:
Ok, Iraqis won't die if there's a civil war.
Happy?
Just a quick check though - Is this another "I told you so" thread re: Iraq War?
Ok, you can't seriously believe that I equated the US to Hitler, so presumably you're just being obtuse. I just gave an example where a similar argument could easily be made, but with very different parties. Now that it's the bad guys not wanting to withdraw due to the obvious repercussions that involve lots of people suffering and being killed that DID happen you no longer support your own argument. If you can't get that example try this one:Pug wrote:
Ahh, so now the US is Hitler.PureFodder wrote:
If Hitler had said, quite rightly, that loads of collaboraters would be killed if Germany pulled out of occupied Europe so we shouldn't kick them out, would you have sided with him?
This situation is even more obvious as the well polled Iraqi people overwhelmingly want the coalition forces to leave. The US doesn't have to care about responsability if there's a civil war because that's the path that the Iraqi people chose for themselves. There's no point in invading Iraq to supposedly give them democracy if you're going to utterly ignore the demands of the overwhelming majority of the populace.
All the puzzles are in place...makes sense now.
"Utterly ignore the demands of the overwhelming majority" - what demands are these? I want to make sure we pin them down before we discuss them.
If Saddam had claimed that there would be a civil war in Kuwait if he left would you care, even if it were true? No, you'd want him to fuck right off back to Iraq and pay massive reparations for all the damage caused.
As far as the demands of the overwhelming majority of the populace goes, go look up any poll of the Iraqi populace, they all have a majority wanting the coalition forces out of their country. There's simply no question if a referendum were allowed to take place in Iraq over the issue what the outcome would be. They want the invaders to leave. If we're even remotely serious about spreading democracy to Iraq, surely this is the most significant thing to act upon. The US/UK should have absolutely no say whatsoever over when they leave. It's not their country so it's not up to them. If the populace want them to stay, then they will stay, if they want them to bugger off tomorrow, then bugger off tomorrow they will. Otherwise drop all pretense that this has anything to do with helping the Iraqi populace or spreading democracy, accept that we are imperialist scumbags.