| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
catman
Joined: 18 Jul 2004
|
 Posted: Sun Aug 23, 2009 8:23 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Sergio Stefanuto wrote: |
| catman wrote: |
How about that they were incompetent |
I've already discussed that. You're asking me to believe the Coalition neglected the possibility of fighting between Sunnis and Shi'ites. I find that comical. They'd have to completely forget about and disregard the history and the demographics of the region. |
To the severity of the insergency? Yes.
Remember, the admin ignored advice/conclusions from others like in the State Dept. They were only interested in being told what they wanted to hear.
| Quote: |
You're not thinking logically.
Premise 1: no WMDs were found
Premise 2: no links with AQ established
Premise 3: not welcomed as liberators
Conclusion: no deliberate attempt to provoke civil war
It's a fallacy of the ad hominem variety - that, since "neo-cons" have made numerous false claims previously, any claim must be false in the light, and solely in the light, of this fact. |
Yet, you haven't presented any evidence to back up your theory. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
RJjr
Joined: 17 Aug 2006
Location: Turning on a Lamp
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 23, 2009 8:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Sergio Stefanuto wrote: |
| My opinion is that the Coalition - at least partly - deposed Saddam in order to deliberately spark an internal Islamic conflict. They can't possibly have neglected the likelihood of civil war. I don't however think one could possibly argue that the civil war itself is solely our fault. Nobody is forcing them to kill each other. |
You're probably right. Yet, what was sold to the public was that the Iraqis would shower our soldiers with rice and rose petals, the war would be won in a matter of weeks. I agree largely with what you said, but I feel like the American public was duped into this war.
| Sergio Stefanuto wrote: |
| Exactly my point. The conflict drew every terrorist in the book to one comparatively little place. |
Why couldn't we have just drawn them into Afghanistan instead, since we were already there to hunt bin Laden and his guys? It seems like that would've had us stretched out a lot less with a lot more American soldiers in Afghanistan. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
catman
Joined: 18 Jul 2004
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 23, 2009 12:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Exactly my point. The conflict drew every terrorist in the book to one comparatively little place. |
How do you know that you "drew every terrorist in the book" to Iraq?
How do you know that was the plan? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sergio Stefanuto
Joined: 14 May 2009
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 23, 2009 3:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| catman wrote: |
Yet, you haven't presented any evidence to back up your theory. |
It's self-evident
| catman wrote: |
How do you know that you "drew every terrorist in the book" to Iraq?
|
Many terrorists were drawn there
Foreign terrorists from from Saudi Arabia, Syria and Iran crossed the Iraqi borders
| catman wrote: |
| How do you know that was the plan? |
Because it's completely, manifestly obvious
| RJjr wrote: |
| Why couldn't we have just drawn them into Afghanistan instead, since we were already there to hunt bin Laden and his guys? |
The Americans wanted a big war between Sunnis and Shi'ites - an inevitable consequence of removing Saddam Hussein |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
T-J
Joined: 10 Oct 2008
Location: Seoul EunpyungGu Yeonsinnae
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 24, 2009 4:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
| bacasper wrote: |
I am also sorry that people around the globe hate me because I am American for doing just such things.
|
Please make no mistake they do not hate you for what America has done, or hasn't done.
They hate you pure and simple because of who you are and the god that you worship.
Plain and simple, it's tribal. No actions of kindness or humanity will ever curb the rabid dog of Islamic fundamentalism. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
catman
Joined: 18 Jul 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 24, 2009 5:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Sergio Stefanuto wrote: |
| catman wrote: |
Yet, you haven't presented any evidence to back up your theory. |
It's self-evident |
About as self-evident as the government being behind 9/11. Just another theory. In this case it is neo-con apologetists needing an excuse to justify the war.
| Sergio Stefanuto wrote: |
]How do you know that you "drew every terrorist in the book" to Iraq?
Many terrorists were drawn there
Foreign terrorists from from Saudi Arabia, Syria and Iran crossed the Iraqi borders |
So it wasn't "every terrorist in the book" then. Just some.
| Sergio Stefanuto wrote: |
How do you know that was the plan?
Because it's completely, manifestly obvious |
.......and it comes with a lack of evidence as well.
| Sergio Stefanuto wrote: |
Why couldn't we have just drawn them into Afghanistan instead, since we were already there to hunt bin Laden and his guys?
The Americans wanted a big war between Sunnis and Shi'ites - an inevitable consequence of removing Saddam Hussein |
Another excuse without a source.
Afghanistan has and is drawing scores of foreign fighters for the Taliban/AQ. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sergio Stefanuto
Joined: 14 May 2009
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 24, 2009 7:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| catman wrote: |
In this case it is neo-con apologetists needing an excuse to justify the war.
|
Nobody's justifying anything. I just find it very difficult to believe that war between Islamic fundamentalists is an unplanned consequence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bacasper
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 24, 2009 8:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| catman wrote: |
| About as self-evident as the government being behind 9/11. Just another theory. |
It is "just another theory" to those who have not looked at the evidence, or it may be like the theory of gravity, but let's not thread-hijack. Please see the sticky. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Summer Wine
Joined: 20 Mar 2005
Location: Next to a River
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 02, 2009 3:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Doesn't strike me as a whole lot different than attorney Lynne Stewart getting 28 months for defending the blind sheikh in the first WTC bomb right here in the good ol' US of A.. |
Yeah, probably not if she was raped and tortured by the guards while she was in prison.
I guess the US prison system is the same as the saddam iraqi system. Though, I might have misunderstood the whole "this isn't america ideology" promoted by the latest political group in regards to Cuban US soil" and the stupidity carried out on it.
Well, who cares eh? The US is the DEVIL and WE(?) hate thems we do  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Cheonmunka
Joined: 04 Jun 2004
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 11:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
I have heard of the war-skill of 'divide and conquer.' Apparently the Roman used to have some strategy around that. It sounds like it is something similar - perhaps 'decrease and conquer.' Can someone expand on that?
Frankly I think that the US wouldn't want Iraq so organised as to be autonomous, in charge of its own decisions.
Also, Iraq (Saddan) was going to switch incoming payments for his oil to the Euro just before this war. I think that is the real, and overlooked, reason for the war.
So, get the nation burned out, half destroyed then can move in and take over effortlessly. But, have to keep a strong presence there in the meantime .....
It seems like a crapshoot, but I am sure there is a master-plan. I mean the relationship between US and Iraq oil is decades old. There must be some computer in an office with fellahs sitting around it arranging various possible strategies and outcomes. It makes sense to have a strategic center well-developed. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
