SFReader.com : Science Fiction, Fantasy, and Horror Book Reviews & more      SFWatcher.com : Science Fiction, Fantasy, and Horror Movie Review



  Home | Log In | Register | Calendar | Search | Help
   
SFReader Forums > The Real World > World Events > Victory in Iraq  Forum Quick Jump
 
New Topic Post Reply Printable Version
588 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page :
 
[ << Previous Thread | Next Thread >> | Show Newest Post First ]

Silverdrake
Stablehand



Email Address Not AvailablePersonal Homepage Not AvailablePrivate Messaging Not AvailableAIM Not AvailableICQ Not AvailableY! Not AvailableMSN Not Available
Date Joined May 2006
Total Posts : 49
 
   Posted 2/25/2007 2:02 AM (GMT -5)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
MichaelEhart said...
Okay, Nathan, how about this one from that pinko commie rag the American Conservative :)

http://www.amconmag.com/2007/2007_01_29/cover.html


Interesting article. Bacevich sounds like a typical Jeffersonian, Kagan like a variant of Wilsonian (and a moron), and Baker like a Hamiltonian (and a long-known idiot, and a typical example of Foggy Bottom Annelidae).

In case you don't grok the referents: http://www.lts.com/~cprael/Meade_FAQ.htm

And your point is... what? That not all conservatives engage in sound-bite parroting group-think?


Cogito cogito, ergo cogito sum.

Back to Top
 

Silverdrake
Stablehand



Email Address Not AvailablePersonal Homepage Not AvailablePrivate Messaging Not AvailableAIM Not AvailableICQ Not AvailableY! Not AvailableMSN Not Available
Date Joined May 2006
Total Posts : 49
 
   Posted 2/25/2007 2:16 AM (GMT -5)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
nathan said...
You can't have it both ways, Nathan. He violated UN resolutions, but the UN failed to sanction the war--they wanted inspectors.

His jerking off and kicking out of inspectors is what led to the impression that he had WMDs in the first place. The same UN who was making money hand-over-fist from Sadaam? Of course I can have it both ways. The resolutions are like laws and the UN was like a corrupt policeman. The fact that the policeman is useless changes nothing. Besides we had a peace treaty with him. The mandates were part of the treaty he had with us to stop us rolling into Baghdad the first time. Violating the mandates nullified our treaty. The UN stuff was window dressing.


Conditional cease-fire, not a peace treaty. The possibility of a peace treaty was based on his satisfying all particular conditions of the cease-fire.

By the terms of the cease-fire, at any violation of any part of it, any member or group of members of the coalition could immediately have gone in and wiped him off the map. No further resolutions were required from the UN.


Cogito cogito, ergo cogito sum.

Back to Top
 

Silverdrake
Stablehand



Email Address Not AvailablePersonal Homepage Not AvailablePrivate Messaging Not AvailableAIM Not AvailableICQ Not AvailableY! Not AvailableMSN Not Available
Date Joined May 2006
Total Posts : 49
 
   Posted 2/25/2007 2:29 AM (GMT -5)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
Specfiction said...
I could go on, but let it suffice to say that I don't think that the central gov is a friend of the US. Yes, maybe as long as we help them kill their enemies--a little like the Taliban. You know even Bin Laden asked for US help against the Russians. As soon as the Russians left and our forces remained in Saudi Arabia--well you know the rest of the story.


Bin Laden never had contact with the US while fighting the Soviets. All contacts were handled through Pakistani Intelligence. He got pissed at the US after we kept forces in SA -- defiling holy ground with our infidel presence -- to defend it and the southern no-fly zone after Desert Storm. Which was some time after the Soviets left Afghanistan.

Bin Laden was not a member of the Taliban. They consisted of non-Afghani religious students (possibly Wahabbists?) who walked in and took over after the Soviets left. IIRC, because they were the only ones the warring native tribes could stand to have running things. The locals certainly weren't going to let anyone from another local tribe take control.

Specfiction said...
Bottom line is we will leave. And when we do, my guess is that the Iraqi gov will not be a friend for long. I hope I'm wrong.


I don't care if they are a friend, just so long as they are not (stupid enough to be) an enemy.


Cogito cogito, ergo cogito sum.

Back to Top
 

Silverdrake
Stablehand



Email Address Not AvailablePersonal Homepage Not AvailablePrivate Messaging Not AvailableAIM Not AvailableICQ Not AvailableY! Not AvailableMSN Not Available
Date Joined May 2006
Total Posts : 49
 
   Posted 2/25/2007 2:38 AM (GMT -5)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
Jordan Lapp said...

2) The world weeps for Rwanda and Darfur. We could have another situation like that in Iraq between Sunnis and Shiites if things get out of control. Where will the guilt for such an atrocity lie?


With the Sunnis and the Shiites. No one is forcing them to kill each other. They just do it. It's their thing.

Jordan Lapp said...
3) Iraq could very well be a model of democracy in action for the rest of the autocratic, oppressive arab world. Provided it gets its chance.


And I really want to see it get that chance. Have you read any of the Iraqi blogs? There are some smart people there who deserve to have a decent life in a civilized country.

Jordan Lapp said...
4) Curtailing Iranian influence. This country is run by the Mad Hatter with Nukes. Need I say more?


Times like this, I'm reminded of what my seadaddy said: Putting one bullet in one madman's brain is a hell of a lot more moral than sending hundreds of thousands to shoot and kill each other. So damned unfortunate that we're oh-so-civilized that we won't do assassination.

Jordan Lapp said...
Whatever the reasons for the US invasion, whether they were misguided or not, now that they're there, they need to stay. Pulling out now would do irreparable harm.


Check upthread; I cover the reasons. The legitimate ones, not the ones that Bush's advisors said would be sexy enough to stir up public opinion. rolleyes


Cogito cogito, ergo cogito sum.

Back to Top
 

Silverdrake
Stablehand



Email Address Not AvailablePersonal Homepage Not AvailablePrivate Messaging Not AvailableAIM Not AvailableICQ Not AvailableY! Not AvailableMSN Not Available
Date Joined May 2006
Total Posts : 49
 
   Posted 2/25/2007 3:12 AM (GMT -5)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
nathan said...

36_Commando

Mainly they were chosen to represent all political divides of the country in a unitifed command. They then performed as almost no other Iraq unit has--as a national, nationalistic, unit and not along ethnic/political/religious divides.


That means there's hope for the Iraqi nation, per se.

nathan said...
Each member has a bounty specifically on their head because of their non-secterian alliegence to the concept of Iraq.


And that means that hope still has a long row to hoe before it can be realized. I'd say a prayer for them, but I'm not "of the Book" so I doubt they'd appreciate it.

Heck with it; prayer sent anyway. The Lord and Lady will know how to direct it. ;-)


Cogito cogito, ergo cogito sum.

Back to Top
 

Daniel
Carl Jung's Waterboy



Email Address Not AvailablePersonal Homepage Not AvailablePrivate Messaging Not AvailableAIM Not AvailableICQ Not AvailableY! Not AvailableMSN Not Available
Date Joined Aug 2003
Total Posts : 4515
 
   Posted 7/3/2007 2:39 PM (GMT -5)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
I think the most pertinent question regarding the situation in Iraq right now is: what is going to happen when the US pulls out? Will this be like Laos and Cambodia and Viet Nam?

Mass slaughter?

Regional war?

Even more outright aggression against Israel?

And, truly, the failed war in Iraq means the empowerment of our enemies; those who had already determined to fight us and those who had just been waiting for us to show weakness.

How do we move forward from this failed war? It is worse than Viet Nam already in some ways because our miltary is now also "broken."

How do we restore 1) America's global image 2) our miltary forces 3) American domestic security

Subquestions: is this something that is still predicated on "party" politics? Or are we looking at the possibility of some actual mature, thinking people, from either side or both sides of the aisle, getting down and grappling with the difficult challenges to come?

Is "K" street and Haliburton and Iraq and NSA spying and refusing Congressional subpoenoas the way of the past or future? Has "W" returned us to a Nixonian paradigm that we won't easily get out of, or are there good signs we're all ready to move past this admittedly self-destructive and rather provincial (and childish) vision of politics and world affairs?


"Art is the celebration of the ego's destruction."

Daniel

Back to Top
 

Daniel
Carl Jung's Waterboy



Email Address Not AvailablePersonal Homepage Not AvailablePrivate Messaging Not AvailableAIM Not AvailableICQ Not AvailableY! Not AvailableMSN Not Available
Date Joined Aug 2003
Total Posts : 4515
 
   Posted 7/4/2007 9:32 AM (GMT -5)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
Some notes I wrote relating the war in Iraq to Sun Tzu's "The Art of War." This is a truncated version of an article I ghost-wrote for Who Cannot Be Named and reflects my run-up to the writing of the article, not the article itself. Point being, the material here is somewhat dated, by a few months anyway.
 
(I've crossposted this in its own thread.)
 
 

The Art of Victory in Iraq

Strategic victory by the United States in Iraq is predicated on domestic politics as well as international politics and military conditions (the ongoing occupation and insurgency) on the ground. As Sun Tzu remarks, "Warfare is the greatest affair of state, the basis of life and death, the Way (Tao) to survival or extinction" (Sawyer, 167).

Therefore, a central precept in “The Art of War: “The Tao causes the people to be fully in accord with the ruler” (Art of War, 167) would seem to indicate that a change in political leadership at the highest level, specifically Commander-in Chief, would be desirable. However, this change would not ensure that the new political leadership’s “Tao” would bring about the needed domestic popular support for the ongoing operations in Iraq. Ergo, it is highly debatable whether a change in leadership sans a major change in policy would achieve much toward restoring domestic support for the war in Iraq.

What is less debatable is whether or not the ‘Rulers” of the conglomerate enemies of the Unites States with operations in Iraq, Al Qaeda among them, have attained the “greater Tao,” that is, the lion’s share of popular support among the world’s population, or more specifically, and more importantly, the population of the occupied territories. This rising popular support for US enemies, coupled with the plummeting domestic support for both President Bush and the American Congress certainly seems to indicate that the “Tao which causes the people to be fully in accord with the ruler” has shifted to those opposed to the present prosecution of US interests in Iraq. Other avenues besides direct military force are needed to redirect this balance of “Tao.”

As Andrew Torelli observes in his essay Sun Tzu's Theory of War for Understanding the Outcomes of Terrorist Campaigns: “Sun Tzu's "The Art of War" codifies from a broad perspective the threat of military action combined with non-military methods such as diplomatic, economic, psychological means could be used to attack an enemy's alliances and strategy which would lead to the greatest achievement of winning without fighting by convincing the enemy to yield or switch sides” (Torelli, 2004).

The foremost and most highly visible attribute of the present strategy in Iraq is the military occupation. The associated events of this same military occupation: military and civilian casualties, high economic cost, widely reported abuses and atrocities, rising gas-prices, and the expenditure of materiel are widely regarded as primary influences for the present disaffection for the civilian leadership in the US.

Caution against prolonged conflict is an underlying theme in “The Art of War” and a subsequent caution against occupation is implied in a number of Sun Tzu’s edicts; among them is this strong warning: “Thus the army values being victorious; it does not value prolonged warfare. Therefore, a general who understands warfare is a Master of Fate of the people, ruler of the state’s security of endangerment” (Sawyer, 174).

Thus, a prolonged engagement by the US military in Iraq, unsupported by the popular will, is a recipe for disaster. Insurgencies and civil-wars are regarded as markedly volatile, “Thus combat between armies is advantageous; combat between masses is dangerous” (Sawyer, 197)

A central concern according to the philosophies espoused by Sun Tzu is that of “terrain.” Types of terrain differ from mere topography and have more to do with the placement of an army in strategic relation to its goals, support mechanism, and enemy disposition. There are nine types of terrains, which are not necessarily exclusionary; that is, it is possible for an army to occupy more than one type of terrain simultaneously.

The US military occupation of Iraq seems to fall under three categories of terrain:

“When one penetrates deeply into enemy territory, by passing numerous cities, it is ‘heavy terrain.’

“Where the entrance is constricted, the return is constricted, and with a small number they can strike our masses, it is called ‘encircled terrain.’

“Where one fights with intensity he will survive but if he does not fight with intensity he will perish, it is ‘fatal terrain’” (Sawyer, 219).

Redeploying the troops from the types of terrain described above (heavy, constricted, fatal) would satisfy Sun Tzu’s precepts for warfare and likely result in both a better military and domestic political situation regardless of a change of political leadership, per se. The frequently leveled criticism that withdrawing troops is an act of military weakness, does not stand up to analysis by way of The Art of War which remarks “Warfare is the way of deception. Thus although you are capable, display incapability to them. When committed to employing your forces, feign inactivity. When your objective is nearby, make it appear as distant; when far away, create the illusion of being nearby” (Sawyer, 168).

Conclusion: A redeployment of troops coupled with the tactical redisposition of air power, sea power, and a policy of economic and diplomatic inclusiveness, backed by the threat of US military intervention would seem a suitable remedy to the ongoing occupation. These military moves, coupled with diplomatic, political, and economic incentives would be more in keeping with the philosophies expressed by Sun Tzu in The Art of War.

Sources:

Sawyer, R. (1994) Sun-tzu The Art of War Barnes & Noble Books

Torelli, A. (2004) Sonshi 


"Art is the celebration of the ego's destruction."

Daniel

Back to Top
 

Daniel
Carl Jung's Waterboy



Email Address Not AvailablePersonal Homepage Not AvailablePrivate Messaging Not AvailableAIM Not AvailableICQ Not AvailableY! Not AvailableMSN Not Available
Date Joined Aug 2003
Total Posts : 4515
 
   Posted 7/6/2007 11:15 PM (GMT -5)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
Here's an article of immense interest where someone far more qualified than I (and obviously no bleeding heart liberal) takes a pretty firm stance on Iraq.
 


"Art is the celebration of the ego's destruction."

Daniel

Back to Top
 

Daniel
Carl Jung's Waterboy



Email Address Not AvailablePersonal Homepage Not AvailablePrivate Messaging Not AvailableAIM Not AvailableICQ Not AvailableY! Not AvailableMSN Not Available
Date Joined Aug 2003
Total Posts : 4515
 
   Posted 7/7/2007 7:13 PM (GMT -5)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
HUGE attack in Iraq today with massive casualties.
 


"Art is the celebration of the ego's destruction."

Daniel

Back to Top
 

Daniel
Carl Jung's Waterboy



Email Address Not AvailablePersonal Homepage Not AvailablePrivate Messaging Not AvailableAIM Not AvailableICQ Not AvailableY! Not AvailableMSN Not Available
Date Joined Aug 2003
Total Posts : 4515
 
   Posted 7/8/2007 11:34 AM (GMT -5)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
More GOP defections on IRAQ.
 
Will there be a Republican party of any note or power after Bush?
 
 


"Art is the celebration of the ego's destruction."

Daniel

Back to Top
 

Daniel
Carl Jung's Waterboy



Email Address Not AvailablePersonal Homepage Not AvailablePrivate Messaging Not AvailableAIM Not AvailableICQ Not AvailableY! Not AvailableMSN Not Available
Date Joined Aug 2003
Total Posts : 4515
 
   Posted 7/12/2007 6:18 PM (GMT -5)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
Good article on the utter failure of the Bush doctrine and "War on Terror" -- the world is ready to move past this, the weakest and most disgraced (lame duck) President in recent memory:
 
A pertinent excerpt:
 
"More crucially, much of the rest of the world simply does not share the president’s fundamental vision of the "war on terror." At his news conference Thursday—held to announce an interim report on Iraq—Bush again made the case that “Al Qaeda in Iraq” was the same group “that attacked us on September 11.” Yet the facts are otherwise: Saddam’s Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, as Bush himself has previously admitted, and Al Qaeda in Iraq didn’t even exist before the Iraq invasion, which followed 9/11 by a year and a half. A new National Intelligence Estimate concluding that Al Qaeda has reconstituted its core structure is yet another piece of clear evidence that the Bush administration disastrously  distracted itself after 9/11. Its main task was to obliterate Al Qaeda from its base in Afghanistan and Pakistan. When it invaded Iraq, it squandered that opportunity, and the world's good faith."
 


"Art is the celebration of the ego's destruction."

Daniel

Back to Top
 

Daniel
Carl Jung's Waterboy



Email Address Not AvailablePersonal Homepage Not AvailablePrivate Messaging Not AvailableAIM Not AvailableICQ Not AvailableY! Not AvailableMSN Not Available
Date Joined Aug 2003
Total Posts : 4515
 
   Posted 7/14/2007 11:58 AM (GMT -5)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
A inside peek into why journalists aren't reporting "good news" from Iraq....
 
 

 


"Art is the celebration of the ego's destruction."

Daniel

Back to Top
 

Daniel
Carl Jung's Waterboy



Email Address Not AvailablePersonal Homepage Not AvailablePrivate Messaging Not AvailableAIM Not AvailableICQ Not AvailableY! Not AvailableMSN Not Available
Date Joined Aug 2003
Total Posts : 4515
 
   Posted 7/23/2007 11:35 AM (GMT -5)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.

White House coming apart on Iraq?

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=3361754&page=1

 


"Art is the celebration of the ego's destruction."

Daniel

Back to Top
 
New Topic Post Reply Printable Version
588 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page :
 
 
Forum Information
Currently it is Wednesday, January 07, 2009 3:28 AM (GMT -5)
There are a total of 85,798 posts in 7,116 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 19 new threads and 70 reply posts. View Active Threads
Who's Online
This forum has 1334 registered members. Please welcome our newest member, esbrown.
12 Guest(s), 0 Registered Member(s) are currently online.  Details