Iraqi "Rebels" cannot be defeated

Luzifer's right hand · Post by **Luzifer's right hand** » 2004-07-09 11:22am

The officials told The Associated Press the guerrillas can call on loyalists to boost their forces to as high as 20,000 and have enough popular support among nationalist Iraqis angered by the presence of U.S. troops that they cannot be militarily defeated.

I thought they would need many years to figure this out.
It seems some at leats some people learned a little bit from the past

Dartzap · Post by **Dartzap** » 2004-07-09 12:09pm

or somone gave them a tip off

Dartzap · Post by **Dartzap** » 2004-07-09 12:12pm

On a more serious note, they should have known this before going in surely? slightly more planning perhaps?

Sadly, this means more and more of the innocents will have to pay the ultimate price, as usual

JME2 · Post by **JME2** » 2004-07-09 12:28pm

George W. Bush, if you have the brains to read this, I hope you're happy. Your greed will be the end for thousands, if not millions more.

Axis Kast · Post by **Axis Kast** » 2004-07-09 05:50pm

Care to substantiate that part about George Bush's "greed"?

18-Till-I-Die · Post by **18-Till-I-Die** » 2004-07-09 06:34pm

Axis Kast wrote:Care to substantiate that part about George Bush's "greed"?

Ever heard of a little discovery called 'oil'? Sticky black stuff that makes cars go 'vroom-vroom'? I hear they have a few drops over in Iraq. I hear tell it's worth a few bucks, too.

18-Till-I-Die · Post by **18-Till-I-Die** » 2004-07-09 06:35pm

Seriously, greed or no greed, even if the war was PERFECTLY just, it's still going to cost thousands and thousand sof lives. At worst it's a landgrab, at best it's a quicksand pit.

Galvatron · Post by **Galvatron** » 2004-07-09 06:45pm

At this point, the popular fallback justification for invading Iraq was to liberate its people from Saddam's regime. My response is usually to ask if their liberation was worth the cost of hundreds (going on thousands) of American lives.

Axis Kast · Post by **Axis Kast** » 2004-07-09 07:23pm

Seriously, greed or no greed, even if the war was PERFECTLY just, it's still going to cost thousands and thousand sof lives. At worst it's a landgrab, at best it's a quicksand pit.

Is that a back-peddle I see? Why, yes, it is.

Seriously. If you're going to levy a charge like that, make sure you're doing so with something better to go on then, "Well, there's this oil, and we know he sure likes that, now don't we?!" If it was merely oil that he was after, we might as well have begun with Venezuela first. Greed was far from our prime motivation in Iraq.

You're like some of my co-workers; it's as if, like them, you pulled your justifications from irate rap songs and F-9/11 screenings. I hope that you - quite unlike some of them - know that we did invade Afghanistan and not only Iraq, however.

Howedar · Post by **Howedar** » 2004-07-09 07:25pm

God help us all, but Axi is right. One would hope Bush's greed was not the primary reason for a war in Iraq, because sure as hell there are easier and cheaper oil nations to take.

18-Till-I-Die · Post by **18-Till-I-Die** » 2004-07-09 07:33pm

Yeah, ok, greed wasnt the PRIMARY reason behind the war. Gnerally, i truly beleive it was just stupidity and very, very bad intelligence plus some outright bullshiting. But, IMO, greed was at least a part of the equation. Still, the fact we're loosing people very frequiently and that hundreds of Americans and thousands of Coalition and Iraqis are already dead means it IS a quicksand pit, one i think we'll be in for a while.

Xon · Post by **Xon** » 2004-07-09 11:41pm

18-Till-I-Die wrote:
Axis Kast wrote:Care to substantiate that part about George Bush's "greed"?
Ever heard of a little discovery called 'oil'? Sticky black stuff that makes cars go 'vroom-vroom'? I hear they have a few drops over in Iraq. I hear tell it's worth a few bucks, too.

The contracts to rebiuld Iraq given the various US companies are worth a hell of a lot more than any oil coming out of Iraq.

Pablo Sanchez · Post by **Pablo Sanchez** » 2004-07-09 11:54pm

Axis Kast wrote:Seriously. If you're going to levy a charge like that, make sure you're doing so with something better to go on then, "Well, there's this oil, and we know he sure likes that, now don't we?!" If it was merely oil that he was after, we might as well have begun with Venezuela first.

Because the American people were really going to support an invasion of a non-hostile democratic nation with a real live military (instead of lightly armed "insurgents") without even the most flimsy casus belli. And the state department would really enjoy the international outcry, which would come not just from our traditional enemies, but also from every country on Earth.

Retard.

Greed was far from our prime motivation in Iraq.

I agree. The prime motivation was jerkoff neo-con hubris. They thought we would storm into Iraq, turn it into a democracy in two shakes of a lamb's tail, make the Iraqis friends with Israel, turn Islam on it's ear, and thus save the fucking world. Dumb with a capital U.

But the fact that Iraq has some minor oil reserves would probably be the number two reason. Number three would be the personal vendettas against Saddam held by prominent members of the administration.

You're like some of my co-workers; it's as if, like them, you pulled your justifications from irate rap songs and F-9/11 screenings. I hope that you - quite unlike some of them - know that we did invade Afghanistan and not only Iraq, however.

And doing a fucking fine job maintaining control of Afghanistan, aren't we.
We're keeping the Taliban from regaining control... of Kabul. The rest of the country is more iffy. But look at all the progress our "reconstruction efforts" have given that nation! Why, they're producing several times as more opium than they have ever produced in all their history!

Afghanistan was an immediate and justifiable military reaction to the Al-Qaeda problem, and the campaign was executed admirably. The followup has been poor (largely due to the focus on... hmm... Iraq). But it also happens to be an obvious red herring in this situation. What does the invasion of Afghanistan have to do with the cause for war on Iraq?

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2004-07-10 12:34am

And doing a fucking fine job maintaining control of Afghanistan, aren't we.

We had control of Afghanistan at some point?

We're keeping the Taliban from regaining control... of Kabul. The rest of the country is more iffy.

Oh, come on, we fucked up the Taliban's shit good, I'd be surprised if they controlled more than 10-20 percent of the country, at most. It's other warlords that have got control now.

But look at all the progress our "reconstruction efforts" have given that nation! Why, they're producing several times as more opium than they have ever produced in all their history!

Well, were you expecting us to get them off the opium (no pun intended) so fast to begin with? It's their biggest cash crop, they've been producing it for years, and they're still well-equipped to produce it. That kind of economic reinvention takes time.

Knife · Post by **Knife** » 2004-07-10 12:54am

Well, were you expecting us to get them off the opium (no pun intended) so fast to begin with? It's their biggest cash crop, they've been producing it for years, and they're still well-equipped to produce it. That kind of economic reinvention takes time.

I lost hope for the campaign at the exact moment that the US military didn't destroy that crop and send a big, happy, cloud of poopy drifting across that fucking waste of a desert, they call home.

The Kernel · Post by **The Kernel** » 2004-07-10 04:15am

Joe wrote: Oh, come on, we fucked up the Taliban's shit good, I'd be surprised if they controlled more than 10-20 percent of the country, at most. It's other warlords that have got control now.

And a fine bunch they are at that.

Well, were you expecting us to get them off the opium (no pun intended) so fast to begin with? It's their biggest cash crop, they've been producing it for years, and they're still well-equipped to produce it. That kind of economic reinvention takes time.

Actually Joe, from what I understand their Opium production was practically non-existant (at least compared to historical levels) during the reign of the Taliban. After the Taliban was overthrown, Opium farming increased dramatically in only a few short months.

BlkbrryTheGreat · Post by **BlkbrryTheGreat** » 2004-07-10 04:21am

Actually Joe, from what I understand their Opium production was practically non-existant (at least compared to historical levels) during the reign of the Taliban. After the Taliban was overthrown, Opium farming increased dramatically in only a few short months.

I think I remember reading that they were still selling the huge stockpiles of opium they had from previous surplus years; though I could be mistaken.

Stuart Mackey · Post by **Stuart Mackey** » 2004-07-10 06:28am

Axis Kast wrote:
Seriously, greed or no greed, even if the war was PERFECTLY just, it's still going to cost thousands and thousand sof lives. At worst it's a landgrab, at best it's a quicksand pit.
Is that a back-peddle I see? Why, yes, it is.

Seriously. If you're going to levy a charge like that, make sure you're doing so with something better to go on then, "Well, there's this oil, and we know he sure likes that, now don't we?!" If it was merely oil that he was after, we might as well have begun with Venezuela first. Greed was far from our prime motivation in Iraq.

Axi Axi Axi, are you really so naive as to beleive that greed on such a scale is so blatently displyed as if in a comic book in a democratic nation in this day and age? Sure oil was not the only reason..but as all the stated reason for invading Iraq are more or less defunct what other reason is there? other than greed? Greed for this that or the other sure, but the welfare of the citizens of Iraq was never on the agenda.

You're like some of my co-workers; it's as if, like them, you pulled your justifications from irate rap songs and F-9/11 screenings. I hope that you - quite unlike some of them - know that we did invade Afghanistan and not only Iraq, however.

And Afganistan was a very nice pretect for invading Iraq..not exactly a new method for justifying a war.

MKSheppard · Post by **MKSheppard** » 2004-07-10 06:30am

Stuart Mackey wrote:Greed for this that or the other sure, but the welfare of the citizens of Iraq was never on the agenda.

If that's so, then WHY THE FUCK DO IRAQIS HAVE 5 CENT GALLON GAS, WHILE I HAVE TO PAY $2.00?!?!!? Greed my fucking ass

Stuart Mackey · Post by **Stuart Mackey** » 2004-07-10 06:33am

MKSheppard wrote:
Stuart Mackey wrote:Greed for this that or the other sure, but the welfare of the citizens of Iraq was never on the agenda.
If that's so, then WHY THE FUCK DO IRAQIS HAVE 5 CENT GALLON GAS, WHILE I HAVE TO PAY $2.00?!?!!? Greed my fucking ass

I see the concept of Public Relations has not occured to you.

MKSheppard · Post by **MKSheppard** » 2004-07-10 06:47am

Stuart Mackey wrote:I see the concept of Public Relations has not occured to you.

If we really are raping Iraq out of greed, why are we spending billions of
dollars to buy Gasoline and have it shipped into Iraq? There's a point
where you pass "public relations" and that occurs around the "billion"
mark.

Stuart Mackey · Post by **Stuart Mackey** » 2004-07-10 06:56am

MKSheppard wrote:
Stuart Mackey wrote:I see the concept of Public Relations has not occured to you.
If we really are raping Iraq out of greed, why are we spending billions of
dollars to buy Gasoline and have it shipped into Iraq? There's a point
where you pass "public relations" and that occurs around the "billion"
mark.

Nope you still dont get it.
You have lot of troops in Iraq, so why make life hard for yourself in an election year by jacking up fuel prices in a nation with bugger all cash and people who tend to take pot shots at said troops?
A nation, further more, in a part of the world that does not like the US very much.
Do I need to go on, or do you get it yet?
The world is slightly more sophisitcated than 'the gas price in the US is too high'.

Luzifer's right hand · Post by **Luzifer's right hand** » 2004-07-10 09:07am

I was under the impression that the war in Iraq is financed by the american taxpayers.

Sure there are cheaper ways to get oil but the problem with this argument is that the organistions which earn money in Iraq did not pay for the war.

It's not so easy to dismiss greed is one of the reasons for the war imho.

PainRack · Post by **PainRack** » 2004-07-10 11:50am

You know, what I will really like to know is this.
Does anyone seriously believe that if Iraq is not sitting on a huge oil reserve, if it has a capable army and airforce, armed with chemical weapons that can take control of the Arab world oil supplies, that George W Bush would still invade Iraq so as to "liberate" its people?

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2004-07-10 12:33pm

Actually Joe, from what I understand their Opium production was practically non-existant (at least compared to historical levels) during the reign of the Taliban. After the Taliban was overthrown, Opium farming increased dramatically in only a few short months.

You understand wrong, Afghanistan was the biggest opium producer in the world in 2000 - and that's with a drought - and they were the year before as well.