ISIS Takes Control of Mosul

#101
#101
Grand Vol said:
And this would have happened less than a month after we took Saddam out of power had we not been there to stabilize the place. I know it sure looked like we were getting our ass handed to us, but it only looks that way.

Several of us on here have hinted over these discussions that there is a lot more going on than you know about. And you have to trust is when we say there was a lot more going on that you don't know about. And if we weren't there, I'd hate to think of what it would look like right now.
Click to expand...

We'll just have to agree to disagree on this. We should never have invaded Iraq. If the international community felt like Saddam needed to be removed other countries would have stepped up to the plate. If they didn't, it probably would tell you a lot about the war they were asking their people to commit to. The outcome I see was that we spent trillions on a futile war, got deeper in debt, and suffered nearly 5,000 deaths and 32,000 injured, while eroding our support within the international community. Iraq posed no threat to us in 2003 and probably still wouldn't now. You may think I'm a prick for not caring about these people but they were not Americans and Americans weren't getting gassed, it really wasn't our duty to remove him in the end.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#103
#103
37L1 said:
It's al Maliki's fault.
Click to expand...

I believe you're right. He has stolen trillions of dinar along with his friends, some of which are still generals and control the troops. Maliki is desperate to remain in power because if he isn't he loses his immunity from prosecution. Maliki has asked parliament to declare a state of emergency which would leave him in power until he decides to remove it and would effectively make him dictator.

The new parliament becomes effective on Saturday the 15th and I believe the violence will subside soon after if a new PM is elected.

I believe the real goal of the Iraq invasion, after the #1 priority of removing Saddam, was to establish a military base in Iraq to have quick access anywhere in the ME. We did get either a very small base or the largest embassy in the world.
 
#104
#104
Don't know if someone posted this fact yet but from The Daily Beast story I read it refers to ISIS as a "group so extreme it got booted from Al Qaeda" & that's not an exaggeration. The report says ISIS is well-organized & well-funded. Foreign policy expert Tom Rogan summarizes that ISIS is "as bad as terrorism gets".
 
#106
#106
Burhead said:
We'll just have to agree to disagree on this. We should never have invaded Iraq. If the international community felt like Saddam needed to be removed other countries would have stepped up to the plate. If they didn't, it probably would tell you a lot about the war they were asking their people to commit to. The outcome I see was that we spent trillions on a futile war, got deeper in debt, and suffered nearly 5,000 deaths and 32,000 injured, while eroding our support within the international community. Iraq posed no threat to us in 2003 and probably still wouldn't now. You may think I'm a prick for not caring about these people but they were not Americans and Americans weren't getting gassed, it really wasn't our duty to remove him in the end.
Click to expand...

As we'll just have to agree ignorance is bliss.
 
#107
#107
rjd970 said:
So things would be worse or better today had we not invaded and removed Saddam?
Click to expand...

We'll never know for sure. Say what you want about the brutal techniques used by the Iraqis under Saddam, they maintained power for nearly 40 years uninterrupted until we stopped by.
 
#108
#108
Grand Vol said:
As we'll just have to agree ignorance is bliss.
Click to expand...

Just explain to me why we, the US, had to lead and fund the war? Why couldn't other countries take a lead for once? If it was about helping the Iraqis, why didn't we go into Rwanda or Darfur as well?
 
#109
#109
Burhead said:
Just explain to me why we, the US, had to lead and fund the war? Why couldn't other countries take a lead for once? If it was about helping the Iraqis, why didn't we go into Rwanda or Darfur as well?
Click to expand...

I agree with this. What super secret classified reason made all this worthwhile that couldn't have been shared with allies to garner their support?

This ignorance is bliss stuff is stupid. By all accounts the entire endeavor was a mistake and unless the tide changes and we intervene it looks like it could be worse than before if things keep progressing on their current trajectory.
 
#110
#110
Burhead said:
Just explain to me why we, the US, had to lead and fund the war? Why couldn't other countries take a lead for once? If it was about helping the Iraqis, why didn't we go into Rwanda or Darfur as well?
Click to expand...

You have already shown the lack of willingness to hear both sides of the story. So why exactly would I even attempt to talk this over with you now? You've made your mind up we were wrong and there is nothing I can do to change it.

Sorry, but I don't feel like wasting my time any more trying to get you, or others, to understand.
 
#111
#111
Grand Vol said:
You have already shown the lack of willingness to hear both sides of the story. So why exactly would I even attempt to talk this over with you now? You've made your mind up we were wrong and there is nothing I can do to change it.

Sorry, but I don't feel like wasting my time any more trying to get you, or others, to understand.
Click to expand...

You've known me to long to know that I always am willing to hear both sides of a debate with fairness. So let's have a open discussion with the facts. You said earlier there were stuff going behind the scenes that I wouldn't know during the war, what were those?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#112
#112
Grand Vol said:
You have already shown the lack of willingness to hear both sides of the story. So why exactly would I even attempt to talk this over with you now? You've made your mind up we were wrong and there is nothing I can do to change it.

Sorry, but I don't feel like wasting my time any more trying to get you, or others, to understand.
Click to expand...

What do you expect when the fall back position you take is you were privy to some unknown information you can't confirm or tell? I'm sorry, but "trust me" isn't a compelling argument.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#113
#113
Burhead said:
You've known me to long to know that I always am willing to hear both sides of a debate with fairness. So let's have a open discussion with the facts. You said earlier there were stuff going behind the scenes that I wouldn't know during the war, what were those?
Click to expand...

I said there were things going on that you have to go on a little faith that some people know more about it than you do. I said nothing about dragging them into the open, which I can't and won't.

So discussion ends.
 
#114
#114
Grand Vol said:
I said there were things going on that you have to go on a little faith that some people know more about it than you do. I said nothing about dragging them into the open, which I can't and won't.

So discussion ends.
Click to expand...

I'm good with that, and understand.

But let's not confuse the other position as not willing to listen or have their mind changed.
 
#115
#115
rjd970 said:
What do you expect when the fall back position you take is you were privy to some unknown information you can't confirm or tell? I'm sorry, but "trust me" isn't a compelling argument.
Click to expand...

I would expect someone to say "okay, understand" and not make grandiose statements about how the Iraqi people were better off under Saddam.

So hence, ignorance is bliss and you two enjoy feeding off each other while you condemn things you can't comprehend.
 
#116
#116
Grand Vol said:
I would expect someone to say "okay, understand" and not make grandiose statements about how the Iraqi people were better off under Saddam.

So hence, ignorance is bliss and you two enjoy feeding off each other while you condemn things you can't comprehend.
Click to expand...

Who is saying the Iraqis were better off under Saddam?
 
#120
#120
Grand Vol said:
I would expect someone to say "okay, understand" and not make grandiose statements about how the Iraqi people were better off under Saddam.

So hence, ignorance is bliss and you two enjoy feeding off each other while you condemn things you can't comprehend.
Click to expand...

Ok, understand.

Without the information you can't tell, I see no reason to change my position. I fundamentally disagree that makes me unwilling to listen or be open to reason.
 
#121
#121
There's a Shiite shrine in Samarra. If ISF don't stand and defend that, I'm not sure what they'll fight for.

Allegedly ISIS is going to make a run at Baghdad.
 
#122
#122
Anyways Grand, hope we're still cool. Wasn't my intention to piss you off or make this personal.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement


Back
Top