|
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 |
cbclark4
Joined: 20 Aug 2006
Location: Masan
|
 Posted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 8:24 am Post subject: Will the World Allow US to Leave Iraq ? |
 |
|
Here's a good question.
Will the UN, Nato, the Arab League allow the US to pull out of Iraq.
cbc |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
happeningthang
Joined: 26 Apr 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 9:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Did they have any clout regarding the US going in to Iraq? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 9:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
Will the UN, Nato, the Arab League allow the US to pull out of Iraq.
|
I doubt the Arab League could formally call for the US to remain in Iraq without provoking about a wave of anti-government riots accross the arab world. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 12:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Both questions (the title and the OP) seem premised on the extremely simplistic "U.S. vs. the rest of the world" dichotomy.
This is an inaccurate, jingoistically-reductionistic depiction of world affairs, usually pushed by hostile critics (and I am not saying OP is one of them, just that this is their premise, and he or she might have unconsiously internalized it).
But not even the Arab states operate as a single polity, let alone the European Community, which bickers incessantly, and the fractious United Nations, who cannot agree on much. Collectively, they praise, support, criticize, and oppose the United States on a range of issues.
This dilemma, too, overlooks the many undisclosed allies who are with the U.S. in Iraq (and elsewhere), and for multiple reasons -- just as we ran the 1980s Afghanistan op jointly with the Pakistanis, the Saudis, the Egyptians, the Israelis, and the British, with some logistical support and weapons sales from the "neutral" Swiss. All of this was hidden at the time, of course, but now we know exactly how this worked. Same in the first Gulf War, which was far more public. In ten to fifteen years, perhaps we will know much more about everyone who backed us in Iraq the second time around and why.
So how "the world" would react if the U.S. withdrew from Iraq is not clear, however, even if it is clear that it has not ever spoken in a singular, decisive voice on anything. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ddeubel
Joined: 20 Jul 2005
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 1:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Gopher,
| Quote: |
| Both questions (the title and the OP) seem premised on the extremely simplistic "U.S. vs. the rest of the world" dichotomy. |
Please change the record, this one is broken.
The OP asked a very simple question and it refers to the complete opposite of your disclaimer, namely, "isn't the world going to want/support the U.S. to stay in Iraq.".
Further, please don't try to couch, crunch, misportrait the support / allies, backing the U.S. in Iraq (unlike Afghanistan in many ways but even in Afghanistan a case can be made that it was the U.S. way/party line, the whole 100 yards). They went in without a U.N. mandate, scorning world opinion. Their suppossed "world voice" you talk about, amounts to little. Your words sound like the crock full of lies, Bush went on about.........how little Vanautu was sending its full support etc....
You continually chastize others who make claims, using words like, "undisclosed" , "you will see in 15 years" etc....stay with the facts and quit the cat in the hat, line of reasoning.
Fact is -- the U.S. has little world support for its Iraq misadventure. Fact is -- the U.S. went against "most" of the world, in this Alice in oil land adventure. Fact is -- Bush is continuing to go against the support against this empty adventure, from his own citizens. Fact is, the world doesn't speak as one voice but we'd be raving mad to assign anything but a high level "nay" to the voice of the Arab world or Europe, when it comes to Iraq.
DD |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cbclark4
Joined: 20 Aug 2006
Location: Masan
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 8:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
My point being...
The Dems are calling for the strategic redeployment of US resources out of Iraq.
Remove all Reserve and National Guard units.
Leave a contingency of special forces.
Move all others in the theater to Afghanistan.
Leave Iraq security to Iraq.
How do members of this forum think the world would react to this action?
Would the Arab League send troops, money, other resources?
Would NATO?
Would the UN? China, Russia, France, India
Would Syria and Iran take advantage?
If the US pulled out overnight, would people rejoice?
cbc |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Junior
Joined: 18 Nov 2005
Location: the eye
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 10:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| cbclark4 wrote: |
If the US pulled out overnight, would people rejoice?
|
Personally i think theres a chance that the Iraq mission may succeed. Once the dragon (saddam) is killed, an era will close. If the U.S can oversee a partitioning of the country into separate ethnic regions, then a forward-looking administration can concentrate on rebuilding the country.
The US losses in Iraq are insignificant when compared to Vietnam or other conflicts. The U.S should not be thinking of pulling out before time. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 10:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| The US losses in Iraq are insignificant when compared to Vietnam or other conflicts. |
The one and only time I will be linking to anti-war.com
Follow the link from Estimated wounded: 22,000-100,000
| Quote: |
One reason for the rise in discontent is the high percentage of veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan who return from the war with serious injuries. According to documents obtained by the National Security Archive at George Washington University, 25 percent of veterans of the "global war on terror" have filed disability compensation and pension benefit claims with the Veterans Benefits Administration.
One is a July 20, 2006, document titled "Compensation and Pension Benefit Activity Among Veterans of the Global War on Terrorism," which shows that 152,669 veterans filed disability claims after fighting in Iraq or Afghanistan. Of the more than 100,000 claims granted, Veterans Administration records show at least 1,502 veterans have been compensated as 100 percent disabled. |
I agree that proportionate to those killed in the entire Vietnam conflict, these three years in Iraq have not been comparatively bad. But in terms of wounded, its a regular hell-hole.
Remember, you don't need to break an army by killing all of its members. You just need to dismember one soldier at a time. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ddeubel
Joined: 20 Jul 2005
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 06, 2006 2:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| I agree that proportionate to those killed in the entire Vietnam conflict, these three years in Iraq have not been comparatively bad. But in terms of wounded, its a regular hell-hole. |
Despite better medics and protection, U.S. casualties are greater over the same period than in Vietnam! Let's not hide that fact. It wasn't until late 60s that U.S. casualties soared as more troops were "requisitioned" overseas. But in terms of a volunteer army, Vietnam and Iraq, it is even steven in terms of casualties.............so let's face the facts. AND as Kuros said, much greater in terms of wounded than Vietnam over the first 3 years.
DD
Junior, I don't know how any sane person can say, "the Iraq mission may succeed." There is NO WAY , even given the greatest possible change, that given what has happened, it can be declared a success. If you burn your dinner, despite having something to eat at the end, you in no way can still say, "success". |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cbclark4
Joined: 20 Aug 2006
Location: Masan
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 06, 2006 8:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
The question is not should the US pullout.
The question is can the US pullout.
And the world view should there be a pullout.
Without unified "international interdiction".
I think a partitioning would occur naturally.
The northern Kurds would come under Turkish protection.
The western Sunni under Syrian.
The eastern Shiites under Iran.
cbc |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nowhere Man
Joined: 08 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 06, 2006 9:32 am Post subject: ... |
|
|
OK. Back to the question.
Can we pull out?
Sure. But wouldn't it be cool if Dubya asked all of those groups for assistance. Then, told them to screw off because he's prepared to "pull out alone"?
That would be bad-ass. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
twg
Joined: 02 Nov 2006
Location: Getting some fresh air...
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 06, 2006 9:41 am Post subject: Re: ... |
|
|
| Nowhere Man wrote: |
Sure. But wouldn't it be cool if Dubya asked all of those groups for assistance. Then, told them to screw off because he's prepared to "pull out alone"?
That would be bad-ass. |
That is so bad-assed he could get elected again! |
|
| 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
