ISIS Takes Control of Mosul

[WooPigSooie]

 

[Velo Vol]

You can't beat a good Nodong missile.

 

[volprof]

Bull****. It happens sometimes.

 

[WooPigSooie]

Bull****. It happens sometimes.

Bush senior allowed us to go to war in Desert Storm, Dubya gave the thumbs up for "Iraqi Freedom" .. now that Jeb Bush is rising up the Republican ranks.. maybe he can get elected and green light "Operation: Okay, For Real This Time".

I use the terminology of a president "allowing" or "green lighting" a military operation because defense industries all over the world are always pushing for a sustained conflict. Especially ours in the good ole US. It's up to our politicians in office to do what they can to rein these powerful corporate executives in.. assuming said politicians don't also just do happen to be perched atop a big business that stands to make big profit from such a conflict.

Here is a fairly simple chart to interpret:

It's not just CEOs pushing with constant conflict.. our military brass does as well. After all, how many medals can be awarded or stories be written about an exclusively peace-time general. Got to further your career somehow.

 

[CagleMtnVol]

He was right the main military operations against Saddam & the Iraqi military was over and we won we were in Baghdad, Saddam was in a hole somewhere.

It was then they started fighting among each other and terrorists from Iran/Syria started infiltrating and causing trouble.

 

[Grand Vol]

Here is a fairly simple chart to interpret:

It's not just CEOs pushing with constant conflict.. our military brass does as well. After all, how many medals can be awarded or stories be written about an exclusively peace-time general. Got to further your career somehow.

Cute when the numbers aren't in perspective. Of your numbers, here's the percentages of GDP:

US: 3.8
Russia: 4.1
PRC: 2.0
UK: 2.3
Japan 1.0 (Constitutional cap)

Highest percentage of GDP spent on the military?

Saudi Arabia: 9.3
UAE: 4.7

So there are three nations above us in spending when it comes to GDP: Russia, the UAE, Saudi Arabia. We may spend the most, but it's certainly not the highest percentage.

 

[WooPigSooie]

Cute when the numbers aren't in perspective. Of your numbers, here's the percentages of GDP:

US: 3.8
Russia: 4.1
PRC: 2.0
UK: 2.3
Japan 1.0 (Constitutional cap)

Highest percentage of GDP spent on the military?

Saudi Arabia: 9.3
UAE: 4.7

So there are three nations above us in spending when it comes to GDP: Russia, the UAE, Saudi Arabia. We may spend the most, but it's certainly not the highest percentage.

Yup. I also saw the spending to GDP numbers. Im sure there are all sorts of fun ratios out there such as percentage of taxes used for military spending by country.. etc.

It makes little difference what percentage of our GDP goes towards the military when its something like 640 bn annually. Above, beyond, and out of sight of anyone else's spending. This much spending on anyone's military in the 21st century is not really a good thing. Any new advancements in technology that have been developed for the military, ultimately, are not going to prove to be productive in the long run.

This is kind of a long conversation that either you agree with or you dont so arguing is futile.. but we dont build up our military to protect/preserve our country.. regardless of the crap politics and media outlets constantly push. We have a game we play where we destabilize poor/resource rich areas of the world for the purpose of exploiting fossil fuels and/or creating a sustained conflict so defense companies that lobbied to get these politicians in office in the first place, can make their money. WWII taught the world a lot about wartime business and we've made sure there have been battles to fight ever since.

There are areas of our government that at least SOME of the roughly 600 - 700 billion dollars a year we spend on our military could actually help people.. and not just our people but all people. Over hauling our energy infrastructure to be more environmentally friendly comes to mind.. Maybe sling a little more NASAs way so that we might better know our solar system seems like a good idea.. Who knows, we might find resources we can use or be ready for the next extinction sized asteroid.

America wont fall apart if we scale back our military just a tiny bit.. might even make diplomacy a little easier if we didnt have a gun pointed at everyone's face.

 

[WooPigSooie]

He was right the main military operations against Saddam & the Iraqi military was over and we won we were in Baghdad, Saddam was in a hole somewhere.

It was then they started fighting among each other and terrorists from Iran/Syria started infiltrating and causing trouble.

There was a large portion of Saddams trained and professional army soldiers that didnt care of Saddam's regime.. they were just soldiers by profession. It was how they fed their families. When Saddams military infrastructure fell apart and the Americans took over things, these professional soldiers wanted to fight with western forces and help secure their neighborhoods and districts so that they could continue to provide for their families.

Apparently our leadership over there didnt approve or didnt care so all of these trained soldiers were effectively laid off. Incidentally, another item that was not far up on the checklist during American occupation was putting security forces on known weapons caches in the area. You can imagine what a disgruntled trained soldier with access to his weapons would begin to think about after seeing his hometown fall apart and his family starve.

Thus, many of these "insurgents" were sort of by our own making .. at least during the initial stages of occupation.

 

[Gramps]

He was right the main military operations against Saddam & the Iraqi military was over and we won we were in Baghdad, Saddam was in a hole somewhere.

It was then they started fighting among each other and terrorists from Iran/Syria started infiltrating and causing trouble.

BS.

Taking Baghdad was the easy part. The tough part started the day Baghdad fell.

The US mission was far from being over when W stood in front of the "Mission Accomplished " sign.

 

[therealUT]

BS.

Taking Baghdad was the easy part. The tough part started the day Baghdad fell.

The US mission was far from being over when W stood in front of the "Mission Accomplished " sign.

Yes, but the obvious point is that W had nothing to do with the signage, and he never once alluded to any type of grand mission accomplishment in his speech that day.

 

[volprof]

BS.

Taking Baghdad was the easy part. The tough part started the day Baghdad fell.

The US mission was far from being over when W stood in front of the "Mission Accomplished " sign.

The American military delivers nothing but one big hot piece of death should it ever have to face a conventional military force. And everyone with half an IQ, so to speak, knows this. This is also the reason why Saddam got his ass spanked not once but twice by our guys. But when you're a megolomaniac, somethings just get lost upon you.

But we have never been, and I don't think we ever will be, a force that can fully reckon with guerillas and insurgencies. We might kill 50 to 100 times their ranks as opposed to our losses, and it still wouldn't matter. I'm not sure any national military anywhere ever will be able to combat such a resistance.

Makes one wonder what the hell we were thinking in the first place.

 

[82_VOL_83]

I assume this is in response to my inquiry. I don't know much about aircraft, but I've always had a soft spot in my heart for the P-51. I love that plane. You hear some people say it was ugly, but I think it's a beautiful design and a hell of a good war bird to boot.

The Corsair and Mustang to this day are two of the most beautiful aircraft ever produced.

 

[Gramps]

Yes, but the obvious point is that W had nothing to do with the signage, and he never once alluded to any type of grand mission accomplishment in his speech that day.

George W Bush " mission accomplished speech.

Thank you. Thank you all very much.

Admiral Kelly, Captain Card, officers and sailors of the USS Abraham Lincoln, my fellow Americans, major combat operations in Iraq have ended. In the battle of Iraq, the United States and our allies have prevailed.

And now our coalition is engaged in securing and reconstructing that country.

In this battle, we have fought for the cause of liberty and for the peace of the world. Our nation and our coalition are proud of this accomplishment, yet it is you, the members of the United States military, who achieved it. Your courage, your willingness to face danger for your country and for each other made this day possible.

 

[Gramps]

The American military delivers nothing but one big hot piece of death should it ever have to face a conventional military force. And everyone with half an IQ, so to speak, knows this. This is also the reason why Saddam got his ass spanked not once but twice by our guys. But when you're a megolomaniac, somethings just get lost upon you.

But we have never been, and I don't think we ever will be, a force that can fully reckon with guerillas and insurgencies. We might kill 50 to 100 times their ranks as opposed to our losses, and it still wouldn't matter. I'm not sure any national military anywhere ever will be able to combat such a resistance.

Makes one wonder what the hell we were thinking in the first place.

It doesn't appear thw WH was thinking past taking Saddam down.

 

[therealUT]

George W Bush " mission accomplished speech.

Is there a reason that you are cutting out most of the speech?

Major combat operations had ended, and in the battle against the Iraqi military, we had prevailed. W rightly acknowledges both of those points, then goes on to say that there is a long, tough, and dangerous road ahead in Iraq, as security and stabilization operations would continue for some time.

The overwhelming majority of patrols in Iraq after that speech were not traditional combat patrols. They were not FM 7-8 type tactical operations (i.e., they were not attacks, movement to contact, ambushes, etc.) They were, by and large, police-type operations. Aside from Fallujah, the vast majority of the operations after that speech that involved combat which one could say was initiated by US forces were cordon-and-search/knock and raids aimed at specific individuals. After that speech, we were no longer dropping JDAMs all over the place in Iraq, although some were still called for and dropped due to specific, exigent circumstances.

At the end of the day, W never made any claims that the mission was accomplished in Iraq nor that our work was done or it would be easy and non-dangerous from there on out. To state otherwise is simply to get caught up in the picture and miss the point of the speech.

 

[therealUT]

It doesn't appear thw WH was thinking past taking Saddam down.

They certainly were. The major mistake made by the WH was handing over a great deal of strategic control to the State Department, however, and to giving in to the De-Baathification requests from prominent Shia individuals that made promises that they could govern the country and keep it in line. Bremer was ultimately afraid of losing the support of the Shia population, which comprises the majority of the population south of Mosul. Bremer should have said 'no', left the Sunni officers in charge until all elections could be had. He didn't.

 

[82_VOL_83]

I don't find it hard at all. I prefer Latina and Asian women, we are all different bro!

I'm pretty sure you may have broken some sort of rule with the second half of the post but whatever you always seem angry. Maybe you need to worry about your own sex life and your anger issues may subside.

FYI I resent the money part of your posting 'fixing', I have never been with a prostitute and never would.

The fact that you are obviously a troll and are posting is a major rule violation....... Just sayin.

 

[82_VOL_83]

Just curious, has anyone here actually flown an airplane? Or is all this talk just from Wikipedia, Popular Mechanics magazine, and sitting around at lunch with your friends?

Yes and from being in the industry for nearly 20 years.

 

[82_VOL_83]

Bull****. It happens sometimes.

Reading comprehension not strong with you English teacher? You either didn't read the speech or read it and didn't understand it.

 

[lawgator1]

I am really torn on this. On the one hand, if we do nothing, then by all accounts this extremely violent terrorist state will almost certainly come into being, at the foot of Europe. Even if the current Iraqi regime could recover, it would resent us for doing nothing. And, it will be extremely destabilizing to the rest of the ME.

On the other, if we helped bomb ISIS into submission, that's only temporary and they just pop up somewhere else, in some other form. And the cycle begins again.

 

[alexmanu]

The fact that you are obviously a troll and are posting is a major rule violation....... Just sayin.

Having a different opinion does not constitute trolling and posting on a forum is a rule violation? LOL well we're all guilty then. If I were like you I would call you a troll for being a 'neocon' like you hate the "libs". Calm down chum. Fact is I'm not calling anyone names and I haven't accused people of using prostitutes as TRUT did.

 

[Grand Vol]

I am really torn on this. On the one hand, if we do nothing, then by all accounts this extremely violent terrorist state will almost certainly come into being, at the foot of Europe. Even if the current Iraqi regime could recover, it would resent us for doing nothing. And, it will be extremely destabilizing to the rest of the ME.

On the other, if we helped bomb ISIS into submission, that's only temporary and they just pop up somewhere else, in some other form. And the cycle begins again.

It's called being screwed no matter what we do. With Iran making nice-nice with the current Iraqi government, we are pretty much screwed as far as influence goes.

And before anyone says it's our fault and it could have been avoided if we hadn't invaded, no. It was going to happen eventually whether we took Saddam out of power then or it happened later and this same situation was going on. Iran would have made a power play in Iraq long ago if it wasn't for us. And the ISIS gives them a good excuse to do so now.

 

[alexmanu]

It's called being screwed no matter what we do. With Iran making nice-nice with the current Iraqi government, we are pretty much screwed as far as influence goes.

And before anyone says it's our fault and it could have been avoided if we hadn't invaded, no. It was going to happen eventually whether we took Saddam out of power then or it happened later and this same situation was going on. Iran would have made a power play in Iraq long ago if it wasn't for us. And the ISIS gives them a good excuse to do so now.

If Saddam stayed it would've simply been a Shia jihadist uprising as opposed to a Sunni one. Either way this has little to do with the Iraq War, it is more linked to Syria seeing as it is open country for jihadists to group together right now and it provides a spot to plan, house a HQ and implement an invasion. Iran would've made some sort of powerplay if Saddam had stayed as you said as they would pull on the strings of the Shia majority.

John Kerry: U.S. Open To Cooperating With Iran Over Iraq Conflict

John Kerry is positioning the US into a position that I expected. Supporting Iraqi ground forces (possibly Iranian too if they commit ground troops) with aerial surveillance/attacks. There is no easy choice but I think Obama is leaning towards ordering attacks.

 

[Grand Vol]

If Saddam stayed it would've simply been a Shia jihadist uprising as opposed to a Sunni one. Either way this has little to do with the Iraq War, it is more linked to Syria seeing as it is open country for jihadists to group together right now and it provides a spot to plan, house a HQ and implement an invasion. Iran would've made some sort of powerplay if Saddam had stayed as you said as they would pull on the strings of the Shia majority.

John Kerry: U.S. Open To Cooperating With Iran Over Iraq Conflict

John Kerry is positioning the US into a position that I expected. Supporting Iraqi ground forces (possibly Iranian too if they commit ground troops) with aerial surveillance/attacks. There is no easy choice but I think Obama is leaning towards ordering attacks.

Find out who was supplying the Sunni insurgency behind the scenes and get back with me.

 

[Velo Vol]

They certainly were. The major mistake made by the WH was handing over a great deal of strategic control to the State Department, however, and to giving in to the De-Baathification requests from prominent Shia individuals that made promises that they could govern the country and keep it in line.

You said the military (DOD) is not suited for nation building.