Right again. When I was referring to cutthroat tactics I was basically suggesting we revamp the entire oil industry in that area. Kick *** and take names in regard to their leverage and funding of terror. Cripple them in this sense and we can play watchdog.

 

You mean demanding they give us better prices and demanding that they stop giving terrorists and religious fanatics money? Good luck...I mean, I think it's a nice idea. But how do we enforce? Clearly invasion doesn't work too well. And when they're the haves and we're the have nots...well, they have and we don't. There are pleanty of countries that will buy oil if we don't.

If you're suggesting being cutthroat in terms of developing nuclear, wind, solar, and geothermal power then I agree completely.

Edit...your edit clarified what you meant...

 

Well lets see, so far we've killed somewhere between 50,000 and 150,000 Iraqis, and granted that some- possibly even a majority- (if I was to give "your side" the benifit of the doubt, although prsonally I highly doubt it) might have actually been people that would have been combatants or "terorists".

So, care to explain how cutting even more throats is going to win hearts and minds?

 

I told you this would happen years ago. But I guess you saw me as a crazy liberal. How you could not see this would not happen is beyond me.

First off we went in with to little troops. We did not have to be cutthroat at all but have a large influence over the area. I just finished reading, "Naked in Baghdad The Iraq war as seen by NPR's correspondent" by Anne Garrels, its a short book shouldn't take more than a couple of hours to read. It explains how the Iraqie people are a proud people and that while they are happy that Saddam is gone they are unhappy that American's are in their country. It also tells about how while we took over Iraq we could not police it. Basic chaos has hence happened after we took over Iraq. She goes more indepth about how Iraq was run before we took over and shortly covers what happened when we got there. It is to me those first days that were the most important. Since we ****ed that up, we lost.

I will not get into how your views on them is VERY jaded. But how do we solve this problem that the person YOU helped elect put us in. I think I have said this repeatedly that we need to create more jobs for them, ask more countries to help us rebuild iraq, start helping out more in areas like hospitals etc, and start showing how the terrorist are not just killing Americans but also Iraqie childrens. Start putting yourself in touch with the religious leaders and help them become a positive force for US. Make sure they understand we are leaving as fast as possible. The list goes on and on but thats a start, but mainly we need to get out of there as fast as possible and let them become independent of us.

 

We are MAJOR idiots for supporting Israel. Not only can Israel take care of itself already but we make a target of ourselves by helping them.

Want the US to show a good sign of faith that it is not against Islam? Start paying the Pal's as much or more than you pay Israel. Doubt that will happen though.

Still think the best solution is to stop paying either all together but thats a bit late. Start pumping money into the Pal's for hospitals, jobs, etc...

 

I think the problem is more that the insurgency has now turned it into more of a civil war than a war against the "infadel" (US). If you look at the attacks, more and more are targeting Iraqi Shi'ites, and it seems like less are targeting our troops. Maybe its just the media coverage, but the attacks on civilians have definately risen in number/casualties.

I believe that if it keeps going the way it is right now, this "war" is going to turn into a peacekeeping mission. Furthermore, it proves to me that a unified Iraq is probably not going to work out, simply because the divisions between the groups. Sunni's don't want to work with anyone, Kurds don't really want to work with anyone (though they are working with the Shi'ites because they don't like the Sunni's), and the Shi'ites are vengeful of the years under Sunni rule. Too many divisions. This part is completely not our fault, but is the fault of those who divided up the empires without looking at the populations around.

Furthermore, even if peace is achived I find it doubtful that it will last permanantly due to the factions mentioned above. Kurds desperately want their own country, and I'm fairly sure they will get it sometime. Sunni's and Shi'ites might end up getting along, but probably only to face the threat of a Kurdish succession. The Kurds may be getting along fine right now with the Shi'ites, but I'm sure once they realize they have less power than they may have hoped, talk of a Kurdistan will reapear.
Just thinking out loud...
-Jeff

 

Interesting article that says basically what I meant (in the begining at least)
http://democracyrising.us/content/view/390/151/

 

https://www.i-club.com/forums/teh-politics-forum-114/good-ole-rummy-his-9-11-meeting-notes-127083/

wonder if rumsfield thought about all that before he had a hard on for war?