By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - US winning in Iraq

solojohlo on 28 July 2008

The only type of victory accomplishable in iraq now by the UK+US is pyrrhic in nature



Hi, i'm solojohlo and i'm pretty fucking awesome

Around the Network
randomuser83 on 28 July 2008

I don't know why it says we are winning, there is nothing to "win" in a ficticious war.....



solojohlo on 28 July 2008
Retrasado said:
PS360ForTheWin said:
Ickalanda said:
whatever said:
Hmmm. I guess we'll start hearing a lot of these, Iraq is going great, Afghanistan is going great since we have an election coming up and the current regime wants nothing more than McSame to get elected.

I don't buy it for a second.

 

Right because George W. Bush and the Republican party control the media that makes perfect sense.

 

The reason why you can tell the conflict in Iraq is going well is because of the fact that news stories about Iraq have died down in the liberal media and the only mention of it you ever see is when they say that it is a big issue or about how Obama is going to pull out and crap like that.  If it was going poorly the libs would be all over it because it going poorly would be the only thing they have going for them but since its not they don't want anybody to know.

 

And @ PS360ForTheWin the UN doesn't control the world and if it was illegal you would think they would have done something about it but they didn't.  The United States approved it and by United States law it is completely legal.

of course, i forget, the US government dont care about trivial things like international law

 

ummmm.... actually, according to "international law" (whatever that is) the US can pretty much do whatever it wants. please read this article. Just because most of the world doesn't like it doesn't mean it's "illegal." If all the other countries in the world really think that as much as they say they do, why don't they just launch an all-out attack on US troops in Iraq? Heck, why don't they simply lauch a full-scale nuclear attack on the US and be done with it?

 

Because the rest of the world likes to think before it provokes nuclear war

 



Hi, i'm solojohlo and i'm pretty fucking awesome

DTG on 28 July 2008

US is winning Iraq like it won Vietnam. It is just slaughtering it's citizens with nmo forseeable political victory. For all the spending that goes into the US army it has proved itself to be one of the most incompetetent and weakest armies in the world incapable of grasping victory against third world countries. What is going on now is a desperate attempt by the US to keep its military prestige in the face of rising powers unlike the third world countries the US cannot defeat.

It is this imperialist, expansionist, un-provoked violence that make much of the world hope for US defeat.



Kasz216 on 28 July 2008
DTG said:
US is winning Iraq like it won Vietnam. It is just slaughtering it's citizens with nmo forseeable political victory. For all the spending that goes into the US army it has proved itself to be one of the most incompetetent and weakest armies in the world incapable of grasping victory against third world countries. What is going on now is a desperate attempt by the US to keep its military prestige in the face of rising powers unlike the third world countries the US cannot defeat.

It is this imperialist, expansionist, un-provoked violence that make much of the world hope for US defeat.

So you didn't read the article,

Around the Network
Kasz216 on 28 July 2008
NJ5 said:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/29/world/middleeast/29iraq.html?bl&ex=1217390400&en=7280f1d67a084de4&ei=5087%0A

Seems the insurgency is not over. In a single day, 61 dead and 238 wounded from three suicide attacks.

 

Who said it was over? "Winning" isn't having the insurgency be done with. It's having the insurgency be small enough that Iraqi troops can deal with it themselves.

Which should bet the case so long as the largest Sunni group stays attached to the government.

Besides which... stuff like that happened against the Kurds during Sadam's rule as well. The difference was it was state funded. Heck, even that article you've posted shows the "winning" part.

They talk about the negotiations and about how Iraqi forces are being sent to the city instead of US.



Kasz216 on 28 July 2008
Rath said:
Kasz216 said:
PS360ForTheWin said:
Ickalanda said:
whatever said:
Hmmm. I guess we'll start hearing a lot of these, Iraq is going great, Afghanistan is going great since we have an election coming up and the current regime wants nothing more than McSame to get elected.

I don't buy it for a second.

Right because George W. Bush and the Republican party control the media that makes perfect sense.

The reason why you can tell the conflict in Iraq is going well is because of the fact that news stories about Iraq have died down in the liberal media and the only mention of it you ever see is when they say that it is a big issue or about how Obama is going to pull out and crap like that. If it was going poorly the libs would be all over it because it going poorly would be the only thing they have going for them but since its not they don't want anybody to know.

And @ PS360ForTheWin the UN doesn't control the world and if it was illegal you would think they would have done something about it but they didn't. The United States approved it and by United States law it is completely legal.

of course, i forget, the US government dont care about trivial things like international law

The US didnt break any international laws in attacking Iraq.

It's highly arguable. Basically for the US not to have broken any laws they would need to prove that Iraq had definitely broken the UN resolution about their WMD program. As they have really failed to do so the war probably is illegal.

However the UN is powerless against the USA or any other super-power.


Nah... Iraq didn't let the UN inspectors in and the deadline passed. They broke the UN resolution by not allowing the inspectors in the areas requested. Whether or not they actually had the weapons after that just matters with how much they broke the resolution.



PS360ForTheWin on 28 July 2008

Iraq War = Epic Fail

End of thread/



DTG on 28 July 2008
Kasz216 said:
NJ5 said:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/29/world/middleeast/29iraq.html?bl&ex=1217390400&en=7280f1d67a084de4&ei=5087%0A

Seems the insurgency is not over. In a single day, 61 dead and 238 wounded from three suicide attacks.

 

Who said it was over? "Winning" isn't having the insurgency be done with. It's having the insurgency be small enough that Iraqi troops can deal with it themselves.

Which should bet the case so long as the largest Sunni group stays attached to the government.

Besides which... stuff like that happened against the Kurds during Sadam's rule as well. The difference was it was state funded. Heck, even that article you've posted shows the "winning" part.

They talk about the negotiations and about how Iraqi forces are being sent to the city instead of US.

 

"Winning" as the US defines it. The perspective of Iraq and much of the world is quite different.



bouzane on 28 July 2008

A war that is not worth fighting is a war that is not worth winning.