|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
 Posted: Fri Mar 10, 2006 12:40 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Yu_Bum_suk wrote: |
[
A bombing raid of Iran will quickly change all that. |
Perhaps not as much as you think or hope.
A lot of the Shia don't have much affection for Iran. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 10, 2006 4:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Mills wrote: |
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| Mills wrote: |
| Summer Wine wrote: |
| Quote: |
The Kurds will seek greater autonomy, and perhaps secede. We should support them in this endeavour, as much as it may upset our 'allies' the Turks.
Iraq should be allowed to collapse, and the Kurds should be given military and economic support to help them create a viable state. The Kurds are much less susceptible to miltant Islam, as they rightly associate it with Arab supremacism.
|
I think if you do some reading and thinking that its almost apparent that this is what the Kurds are hoping upon happening. This would in how many centuries allow them an individual state and one supported by the fire power of the still strongest state. The US is losing it on the ground, if the Kurds controlled the ground and the US the air, then Kurdistan as a nation may exist for the first time? (in a long time?) ever. |
The majority of Iraqi oil is in the North, the Kurd controlled region. To declare "Kurdistan" an atomonous state would leave the Sunni and Shia Iraqis resourceless. No way the US would let this happen. The whole Middle East would be devastated and we would just be stuck there even longer trying to figure out how we f_ucked things up so bad. |
most of Iraqs' the oil is in fact in the south of Iraq in the Shia areas.
|
Most of Iraq's oil? Oil what? Deposits or infrastructure? Granted, most Iraqi oil production (pre-invasion) was in the southern Shia Arab region. Now? Most infrastructure there (Shia Arab region) was destroyed during the invasion by insurgents. Rebuilt? Not yet.
So... my original statement "the majority of Iraqi oil is (not "was" and not "deposits") in the North" is more factual than yours, "most of Iraqs' the oil is in fact in the south of Iraq in the Shia areas", because the Kurds oil infrastructure is still hopping along nicely, they are able to process a product for resale.
Iraq Pre-Invasion Oil Fields and Facilities |
Ok I stand corrected |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Summer Wine
Joined: 20 Mar 2005
Location: Next to a River
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 11, 2006 2:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
The creation of three individual Iraqi states (Sunni, Shiite, and Kurdish) was discussed before and immediately after the invasion. If this was a viable option would not we have begun to implement, rather than forcing a coalition government?
_________________
|
I agree with you on this. Though circumstances have changed and people have to deal with what is, not always with what we want.
The Kurds have never been shy in the past about a desire for a state and if the state of Iraq fails, then its likely they will be open to the opportunity of having a US presence in their region.
If the US wish to remain in the immediate region, they would more likely choose the safest option whichis probably more consistant with the desires of their voters. Thus, it may be in theirs and the Kurdish peoples benefit to have a kurdish state vs a failed Iraqi state and no role in the region.
If Iraq as a single body will continue to exist and retain a majority population support, then the concept of an Kurdish state will be a distant dream in the kurdish minds, but if the latter doesn't occur, then should the US condemn the Kurdish people to another 1000 yrs of turmoil because larger states don't agree.
If the US is truly about freedom, then in terms of blood and loss, the Kurds have earned the right to be free of other states control. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
igotthisguitar
Joined: 08 Apr 2003
Location: South Korea (Permanent Vacation)
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 12, 2006 12:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
Here's a decorated British soldier who's seen enough ...
British soldier quits army, accuses US troops of illegal tactics in Iraq
LONDON (AFP) - An elite British soldier reveals that he quit the army after refusing to fight in Iraq anymore on moral grounds
because of the "illegal" tactics used by US troops on the ground.
Ben Griffin, a member of the Special Air Service (SAS) described in an interview with The Sunday Telegraph
the experiences that led him to end his impressive army career after just three months in Baghdad.
The 28-year-old, who was discharged last June, is believed to be the first SAS soldier to refuse to go into combat and to quit the army on moral grounds.
"I saw a lot of things in Baghdad that were illegal or just wrong," Griffin told the weekly newspaper in his first interview since leaving the SAS.
"I knew, so others must have known, that this was not the way to conduct operations if you wanted to win the hearts and minds of the local population.
"And if you can't win the hearts and minds of the people, you can't win the war."
Griffin, who worked in the SAS's counter-terrorist team, recalled joint operations to tackle insurgents with his American counterparts.
"We would radio back to our headquarters that we were not going to detain certain people because, as far as we were concerned,
they were not a threat because they were old men or obviously farmers, but the Americans would say: 'No, bring them back'," Griffin said.
"The Americans had this catch-all approach to lifting suspects. The tactics were draconian and completely ineffective."
The SAS soldier spoke of another operation which netted a group of innocent civilians who were clearly nothing to do with the insurgency.
"I couldn't understand why we had done this, so I said to my troop commander:
'Would we have behaved in the same way in the Balkans or Northern Ireland?' He shrugged his shoulders and said:
'This is Iraq', and I thought: 'And that makes it all right?'"
Griffin said he believed US soldiers had no respect for Iraqis, whom they regarded as "sub-human".
"You could almost split the Americans into two groups: ones who were complete crusaders, intent on killing Iraqis,
and the others who were in Iraq because the army was going to pay their college fees," he said.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/britainusiraqmilitaryunrest;_ylt=Av2ZhFOhjDA6Mukmg9r4Pi1hr7sF;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bulsajo
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 21, 2006 2:26 pm Post subject: Re: All British and United States troops serving in Iraq |
|
|
Bush: Troops to Stay in Iraq Through '08
By TERENCE HUNT , 03.21.2006, 04:35 PM
President Bush said Tuesday that American forces will remain in Iraq for years and it will be up to a future president to decide when to bring them all home. But defying critics and plunging polls, he declared, "I'm optimistic we'll succeed. If not, I'd pull our troops out."
The president rejected calls for the resignation of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, chief architect of wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. "Listen, every war plan looks good on paper until you meet the enemy," Bush said, acknowledging mistakes as the United States was forced to switch tactics and change a reconstruction strategy that offered targets for insurgents.
He also rejected assertions by Iraq's former interim prime minister that the country had fallen into civil war amid sectarian violence that has left more than 1,000 Iraqis dead since the bombing last month of a Shiite Muslim shrine.
"This is a moment the Iraqis had a chance to fall apart and they didn't," Bush said, crediting religious and political leaders with restraint.
The president spoke for nearly an hour at a White House news conference, part of a new offensive to ease Americans' unhappiness with the war and fellow Republicans' anxiety about fall elections. He faced skeptical questions about Iraq during an appearance Monday in Cleveland, and plans another address soon on Iraq.
Public support for the war and for Bush himself has fallen in recent months, jeopardizing the political capital he claimed from his 2004 re-election victory. "I'd say I'm spending that capital on the war," Bush said.
The White House believes that people appreciate Bush's plainspoken approach even if they disagree with his decisions.
"I understand war creates concerns," the president said. "Nobody likes war. It creates a sense of uncertainty in the country."
Bush has adamantly refused to set a deadline for the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq. Asked if there would come a day when there would be no more U.S. forces in Iraq, Bush said, "That, of course, is an objective. And that will be decided by future presidents and future governments of Iraq."
Pressed on whether that meant a complete withdrawal would not happen during his presidency, Bush said, "I can only tell you that I will make decisions on force levels based upon what the commanders on the ground say."
White House officials worried Bush's remarks would be read as saying there would not be significant troop reductions during his presidency. They pointed to comments Sunday by Gen. George W. Casey, commander of U.S. forces in Iraq, who said he expected a substantial troop reduction "certainly over the course of 2006 and into 2007."
The Pentagon announced last December that U.S. force levels would be reduced from the baseline figure of about 138,000 to about 131,000 by the end of March. The total currently is 133,000. In late February the Pentagon told Congress that "it will be possible to consider" additional reductions as the political process moves forward and as Iraqi security forces gain experience. No timetable has been set for deciding on additional cuts.
More than 2,300 American troops have died in Iraq. At home, nearly four of five people, including 70 percent of Republicans, believe civil war will break out in Iraq, according to a recent AP-Ipsos poll.
"I am confident - I believe, I'm optimistic we'll succeed," the president said. "If not, I'd pull our troops out. If I didn't believe we had a plan for victory I wouldn't leave our people in harm's way."
Bush said U.S. forces were essential for the stability of Iraq and restraining al-Qaida in the Middle East.
"Their objective for driving us out of Iraq is to have a place from which to launch their campaign to overthrow moderate governments in the Middle East, as well as to continue attacking places like the United States," he said.
Despite pleas from fellow Republicans, Bush has rejected calls for a White House staff shake-up, saying he was satisfied with his aides. He did not rule out bringing in a savvy Washington insider, as some have suggested, but said, "I'm not going to announce it right now." Aides said later he was not trying to signal any appointment.
Bush defended his administration's warrantless eavesdropping program whose legality has been questioned by Democrats and Republicans alike. Putting his remarks in a political context, he said, "Nobody from the Democratic Party has actually stood up and called for getting rid of the of the terrorist surveillance program."
Bush accused Wisconsin Sen. Russ Feingold of "needless partisanship" for urging censure of the president for authorizing the surveillance program.
On the economy, Bush sidestepped a direct answer when asked whether he was concerned about rising interest rates. He simply said the U.S. economy was very strong. He expressed disappointment that Congress shelved his Social Security overhaul and said the system won't be changed without the cooperation of Democrats and Republicans together.
http://www.forbes.com/home/feeds/ap/2006/03/21/ap2611467.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 21, 2006 2:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| what a big surprise. shocking. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bulsajo
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 21, 2006 2:55 pm Post subject: Re: All British and United States troops serving in Iraq |
|
|
| Forbes quoting Bush wrote: |
"I am confident - I believe, I'm optimistic we'll succeed," the president said. "If not, I'd pull our troops out. If I didn't believe we had a plan for victory I wouldn't leave our people in harm's way." |
It's pretty clear that any plan for victory that the Bush administration might have only concerns American troops and American interests.
Just as in 1992, the average Iraqi is simply shit out of luck.
So much for bringing democracy to the Middle East... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
