War is Imminent

[JonathanLB]

"Europe has never recovered? Care to explain?"

Yes, the France film industry didn't start again until after 1955, 10 years later. The German film industry was ruined at a time when there was an INCREDIBLE amount of talent there. Most of the people left for Hollywood and enjoyed mixed results here (Lang did well, Murnau made some great films, Freund did well too, others really didn't prosper unfortunately). German film basically stopped in 1933 until well after the war, again a huge loss.

It wasn't just the film industry, though. You can figure out what happens when you have all of these very intelligent people, millions of them, lost in wars that ravage your continent. I went to Italy, the place is still 30 years behind the U.S., at least. I am positive there's not a country in all of Europe that is even with either the U.S. or with Japan, which has been able to rebuild the most effectively, which I suspect is a lot because the U.S. has helped them, or did at the start, and they've never rebuilt their military that large, so they've been able to focus on technology. I'm not an expert on the Japanese culture, I just appreciate it and know a little here and there. What I do know is Japan is argubaly even a few months ahead of the U.S. in many respects, maybe up to 6 months ahead on a lot of technology, but Europe is just in the stone age. When I went to Italy in 1997, nobody even had the Internet there. I am not saying I didn't appreciate their culture, but it wasn't sophisticated...

I just don't think Europe has ever fully recovered from those losses. Although the U.S. lost a lot of troops, our losses were not very significant compared to Russia, Germany, Italy, and some of those countries. I guess France didn't lose that many people in WWII, seemingly, but I think the U.K. did. I'm just saying that if you lose smart people, they are gone, any ideas they would have thought up are not going to exist now. Any kids they would have had are now never going to exist. Wars dumb down countries when that many people die and they ravage morale and supplies.

You know largely why the United States is the dominant film producing country now? A lot of people would give a stupid patriotic response like, "Because we're the best!!!" Well, that's rather circular. Actually, in the earliest days of film there were just as many movies in the U.K., France, and in the U.S. and other countries began to develop thriving film industries. World War I killed a lot of those film industries entirely. You might think, "Well it only lasted a few years." True, but what happened is these countries were huge producers, then film largely stopped during the First World War for them and in that time, the U.S. made huge advances at a critical juncture in the medium. Once we surpassed some of those countries, after the war we exported our movies to them and the exhibitors in tens of foreign countries made a lot of money on our films and precious little from domestic product, so the local film industries never really had a chance to revive. Some of them luckily did, and I say luckily because of course other cultures have a lot to add to the worldwide medium of film. I must say I'm having a blast going through Soviet films, German expressionist films, French New Wave films, and of course Kurosawa's work from Japan.

So just when a lot of these industries are beginning to recover, at least a substantial number of them, then there is World War II, which not only just stops film industries in many European nations, but destroys great classics from earlier days, then has the other awful effect (for these countries) of forcing filmmakers to flee to the United States, generally. German filmmakers fled to France first, then they left soon after for the U.S., like Fritz Lang. We gained greatly by it because we had great filmmakers from all over the world come to make films in Hollywood, which helped make it the mecca for film. Ever since then, there has been no substantial competition from any other international film industry. There have been a lot of great movements, Italian Neorealism, the French New Wave, and the numerous other great films from all of these countries, but the local box offices in those countries remains significantly influenced by our films, usually to the point where 5 out of 10 of the weekly top grossers are U.S.

Here in the states, it's rare that even 1 of our top 10 is from a foreign country. We rule the exports, which is fine because it's all supply and demand, HOWEVER it hurts a lot of these countries when their theaters choose to play our movies over local movies and then local filmmakers have fewer opportunities to show their potential or their talents. I guess you might say that is a drawback of globalization, but that's an entirely different matter.

Anyway I am not saying Europe is inferior now to the U.S., because that's not the opinion I have, at least. Technologically, I think the U.S. is vastly superior to every country but Japan. I would say U.K. military technology is probably not far behind the U.S., either, but we have the largest space program, we have the largest military, we have the most developed industrial complex in the world. We are #1. That doesn't mean that the U.S. culture is BETTER, because some people like their way of life living simply in a tribe in Africa or something, for instance, and there is nothing wrong with that. I mean, you can hardly argue that there is anything better about spending an hour on the cell phone a day than, say, making spears in the plains of rural Africa or whatever, haha. Plus, there is much to be said of the family structure in Italy, which seems to me to be better than in the U.S., where the family is deteriorating. Our country has its problems, they just don't lie in technological sophistication.

[Sanis Prent]

Because EVERYBODY knows that the watermark of cultural sophistication and advance is in the film industry :rolleyes

I don't know whats worse...that you believe that, or that I wasted 10 minutes of my life to read it.

[Sejah Haversh]

Family structure better in Italy than the US? Hee hee hee, don't make me laugh!

In cities, do you have any idea how few parents actually raise their own kids? Most of the child-rearing is done by nannies so that the parents can go make bookoo bucks and have great social lives. I hardly deem that better than the American way. But, then again, I believe that a kid should be raised by their parents, and that's just me.

And, I agree with Charley, the film industry does not constitute a country's recovery. It is no better an art form than writing, painting, or beat poetry, or even mimes in the park. It exists to entertain us, and maybe educate us. Sure, there might not have been GREAT films made in Europe right after the war, but Mark Chegal was painting the day he got out of Germany and into Spain.

[ReaperFett]

He has an opinion. Stop being so insulting.


I would say U.K. military technology is probably not far behind the U.S
Trust me, I wouldnt. Unless your guns struggle to fire :)

[Dutchy]

Originally posted by JonathanLB
Europe is just in the stone age.

True. You have any idea how hard it is for me to ram my posts on this forum in this rock I got here on my desk? :p

Anyway, you've been there, done that before, that the U.S. is #1 in technology and what not.

As for military technology, space program, industrial complex, yes, true.

The U.S. is not #1 in politics and diplomacy, though, as last week showed. Nor is it in social security, something which may not apply to a rich guy like you, but to many others it does. All your technology and weapons can't feed people's mouths or make them healthy again. But then again, if they're just poor white Americans or minorities, you wouldn't even care. :\

Besides that, many Americans only like American stuff. That's part of they live quite isolated. They don't care about foreign stuff. That's why you don't see foreign movies in the movie top 10.

[ReaperFett]

You dont see many non-UK/US movies in our top 10. Your point?

[JonathanLB]

Really? Is the U.K. military not that up to date? I just kind of assumed it probably was.

Thanks, btw, Reaper.

"Because EVERYBODY knows that the watermark of cultural sophistication and advance is in the film industry"

I didn't say that, I was focusing on one part of what I know about Europe post-WWII. PS: That took you ten minutes to read? LOL!!!

If you did read the post and it took you 10 minutes, and you think that I meant ONLY the film industries suffered, then your comprehension is almost as poor as your speed, no offense. But thanks for the witty comments, Sanis. They are always appreciated as they add so much to the discussion here.

Sejah, well I don't know all about Italy either, but what are you talking about?!?! Parents rarely raise their kids in the U.S. anymore. All kinds of parents get nannies to do their own thing now and not have to raise their kids. Then you have the single-parent families, which don't work as well, no matter what anyone wants to say. Families are supposed to have a mom and a dad. I don't care what anyone else wants to say -- NOT two dads, NOT two moms, and NOT one mom or one dad. The ideal way is one dad, one mom. 'Nuff said.

The American family right now is detestable. That's why you have all of these problems in this country, because the parents won't own up to their responsibilities to raise their kids properly. This never used to be a problem. I don't want to get into yet MORE controversial territory, but I wouldn't be alone to say that it has a lot to do with the feminist movement. When women feel that only career is a valuable indicator of success and that raising children is not noble or not valuable, then you have a problem because when both parents work, the kids suffer. It's that simple. My mom quit her job to raise me and my sister. It works a lot better than throwing your kids into childcare the whole day. You can't say, either, "Well not everyone is rich enough to have just the dad work!" Ok, umm, well before World War II, that's how it was, so bad argument.

[Dutchy]

Originally posted by ReaperFett
You dont see many non-UK/US movies in our top 10. Your point?

No, Jonathan's point.

[JonathanLB]

Why you don't see many foreign movies in our top 10 is because there are honestly not a lot of great foreign movies being made right now. There are some, but there aren't a ton. I am not impressed by the international film industry today. I am much more contented watching movies from past decades. You just had more talent around. My opinion only of course. I still enjoy some foreign films that should have done better here than they did. American audiences are not very open to foreign movies; it's a matter of habit probably.

"social security, something which may not apply to a rich guy like you, but to many others it does"

Social security should be abolished. Don't even go there. The U.S. would be #1 in social security if we didn't have it at all and that goes with ALL other social programs too. Every one of them should be eliminated and phased out over the next 25 to 30 years or whatever is a reasonable window of time. Charitable donations could take care of many more problems than handing over tax money to the government and having only 25 cents on the dollar at the very most get to the actual people who need help. No thanks to your lousy socialist programs over in Europe. That's a huge problem with that whole continent -- socialism runs rampant.

[Marcus Telcontar]

Why you don't see many foreign movies in our top 10 is because there are honestly not a lot of great foreign movies being made right now

-_-

I'll refrain from posting more, because the searing language I would like to use would burn the server and close this thread.

[Dutchy]

Originally posted by Marcus Elessar
-_-

I'll refrain from posting more, because the searing language I would like to use would burn the server and close this thread.

Yeah, and that one was just about movies. I can just image the server if you'd take his viewpoints on poor white Americans, minorities, feminists and social security as well. :)

I think I'm gonna give up for now and call it a day. :\

[Darth Viscera]

Originally posted by JonathanLB
Parents rarely raise their kids in the U.S. anymore. All kinds of parents get nannies to do their own thing now and not have to raise their kids.

IMO, that statement is completely incorrect.

[Sanis Prent]

Originally posted by Obi Wan Kenobi
It's the truth...from a certain point of view.


A really, really, really, really warped certain point of view, but the point stands.

[ReaperFett]

Are you HIGH?!?!
Didnt I just say drop the insults?

[Sejah Haversh]

The ratio of families with nannies in Italy to those in the USA is not even possible to compare.

And, don't give me this single parent stuff. My mom is a single mom, and dang it, I turned out just fine, as did my brother and sister. And don't say it's because she must make a lot of money,. either, for a few years I could have qualified for the free lunch program at my school because we were so poor.

But, you did raise a good point in that a lot of parents don't do a great job at raising their kids, and a lot of that has to do with too much power having been given to the kid. Kids often think they run the household, and that shouldn't be. The parent should always be in control. That is a problem that is not only a USA one today, but all around the world. We are being asked to do too much in too little time, and the family is suffering.

[Marcus Telcontar]

Sounds like USA forces have hit resistance and are in a fight. It also seems that the firing of scud missiles have stepped forward the ground invasion.

[Sanis Prent]

Scuds?! Like...scuds they don't have???

I'd heard missiles were fired, but assumed they were Al Samoud 2's...

[TheHolo.Net]

CNN, FoxNews and MSNBC have all reported at least 1 confirmed as a scud at this pont.

[Marcus Telcontar]

I'd heard missiles were fired, but assumed they were Al Samoud 2's...

One or two were. Apparently tho (and I say apparently as it is not confirmed) at least two were SCUD's that were shot out of the sky by PATRIOT's.

Which then I think means there is a very interesting political situation as Iraq has clearly used illegal ordinance and why I comments specifically on it. Why they used it is beyond me as the use of illegal ordinance would prove the USA's point immediatly and justify the war instantly.

[Sanis Prent]

Yeah that's very interesting. They aren't afraid to show their hand, and outright admit their liars. Of course, this is scary too, as now there's no doubt they'll use other things they "don't have" :\

[Marcus Telcontar]

Originally posted by Sanis Prent
Yeah that's very interesting. They aren't afraid to show their hand, and outright admit their liars. Of course, this is scary too, as now there's no doubt they'll use other things they "don't have" :\

I just wish the USA put proof positive on the table. I could clearly see the USA knew Iraq had these weapons, but htere was no real proof displayed. That lack of proof bothered me, but this is well... real hard and fast proof. You cant deny Hussein has illegal weapons and yes, you have to wonder what's next. I would say that the allies will now be ratcheting up attacks, because hte situation has clearly taken a turn with the confirmation Iraq does have illegal weapons.

It also is a nice political toy to play with. Use or finding of illegal ordinance will invalidate French stand immediatly.

[imported_Eve]

Maybe sharing certain proofs would have made certain surveillance sources vulnerable. The US did show enough proof to create suspiscion. Whatever happened, and when, we now know the Bush administration was right.

The war may cost alot of money, but 9/11 already has cut too hard. Bush knows what he's doing. We can't risk another attack, as it would be more costly. How many Americans can say they weren't affected by it? None. We were, or knew, someone effected. I'm not talking emotionally; I'm talking financially.

We lost stock. All investors lost something. My 401K is nothing.

We lost jobs. I know so many people who lost jobs. My stepfather lost his, after 15 years. I run a property and we're losing residents because they have all lost income, and have no one to turn to. HUD ran out of assistance for months, and had to turn millions away for money.

We lost income, at least partially. Of the people who still have their job, many suffered income cuts. My sister lost 4000 in income cuts to help save the company going under. She and others did. Look at the airlines.

Oh yeah, and we lost over 3000 souls.

I could go on. The point: an attack hurt us more than anyone could imagine. Our economy went into recession. Interest rates go down and down. We can't go through that again. Bush is doing what he can to stop that.

It affects us all, and other countries. If the US economy suffers, so will others. What ya gonna do when you get invaded and the US and the UK can't help you because they're too weakened by terrorism? Who will uphold UN regulations then? Then. people would blame Bush for doing nothing.

He's doing what he signed up to do. I will follow him, like I followed his father before. Watch how public opinion changes as people see Bush was right.

----------------------------

And Jon - you're so offensive, arrogant, and uninformed, that you have no clue. You really need to keep lurking.

[Admiral Lebron]

Just because it is is a SCUD missile does not mean it is carrying biological or chemical weapons. A missile delivers the warhead. Whether it contains anthrax or composition B has yet to be determined.

[Sanis Prent]

Originally posted by Admiral Lebron
Just because it is is a SCUD missile does not mean it is carrying biological or chemical weapons. A missile delivers the warhead. Whether it contains anthrax or composition B has yet to be determined.

Its a blatantly banned weapon system though, exceeding weapons range mandates by...oh...about 300 kilometers, and carries a much fatter payload than any Al Samoud 2 does.

[Admiral Lebron]

Eh. Didn't think about range...

[Marcus Telcontar]

It affects us all, and other countries

That it does, but only five countires have put their troops in. Despite quite some words of support, only UK and Australia have any substansial troops in line. Bulgaria and the Czechs have about 150 troops each.

I dont really believe Iraq was a current threat to the world. I dont believe he was supplying or supporting Al-Quadia. There was no evidence for that and I believe Bin Laden hates people like Hussein just as much as he hates the USA. I do believe Hussein was a humanitarian disaster, a murderer and needed to be dealt with. That was probably reason enough and could have been parlayed into a much wider coalition.

There should be more countries in the coalition and if the Bush Admin were more politically astute instead of hawkish, there would have been. There would have been less protests too.

[Admiral Lebron]

Ya know... I'm confused. Tonight Tony Blair said Britains troops were the finest in the world... yet I heard that America's were the best... but then again... I thought the Iraqi Republic Guard was the best... I'm confused. :huh

[Morgan Evanar]

Despite quite some words of support, only UK and Australia have any substansial troops in line. Bulgaria and the Czechs have about 150 troops each.

In those nation's defense, thats probably all they can reasonably field at this point.

BTW, the UK has very advanced equipment, but it wasn't designed for use in a desert environment, at all. Our stuff does well in the desert because it was one of the things kept in mind when building some of it, and we know a lot about it because the Israelis modifiy anything that we ship over. The US probably just asked.

SCUDs are bad news for Sadam. I hope we find chemical weapons in bottles, and not in the air.

[Marcus Telcontar]

Most Aussie stuff was modded with deserts and stinking hot conditions in mind. Considering 2/3'rds of this place is a sand pit like the middle east.

[Marcus Telcontar]

First USA caualties - a Helicopter with 12 troops has come down, all reported lost.

[Sanis Prent]

I swear, we crash more helicopters than firestone-wielding SUV's. :(

I also heard there were 4 brits aboard.

[Lilaena De'Ville]

:\

I'm glad that Iraq was stupid enough to use weapons they claimed that they don't have. Just so people can see that the US isn't batty after all.

Also I do recall reading about Colin Powell's address to the UN, where he went over very carefully all the surveilance photos and etc, pointing out things.

However the article stated that the pictures had been blurred on purpose, so that the extent of US intelligence capabilities would not be known. So he had to point to a picture that was quite possibly as clear as day and say, "Look at these such-and-such trucks outside this complex that shouldn't be here" and no one could make anything out. Its like, look at this photo, and pretend the blur isn't there....doesn't she have a great rack?!

Its hard to make people believe things like that. Unfortunately.

[Janus Versa]

Originally posted by Marcus Elessar
First USA caualties - a Helicopter with 12 troops has come down, all reported lost.

I hate this. I hate this.

[Sigil Roland]

May those sixteen souls find their way to heaven.

:(

[JMK]

I heard it was 12 British and 4 Americans.

[Sanis Prent]

Confirmed on that.

[Marcus Telcontar]

Source www.smh.com.au


Spies believe Saddam and sons were hit in bombing
March 21 2003





US intelligence believes Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein and possibly two of his sons were present inside a suburban Baghdad compound when it was struck by US missiles and bombs and that medical attention was summoned afterward, government officials said.

The officials, who spoke only on condition of anonymity, said intelligence agencies have not made any determination yet whether Saddam or his sons were injured or killed in the attacks and they were carefully analysing videotapes purporting to show the Iraqi leader after the attack.

US officials said there was no evidence that Saddam, or anyone else, was in overall command of Iraq's security or military operations in the aftermath of the attack.

The officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said there was no definitive word whether Saddam was caught in the pre-dawn attack, nor whether he was alive or dead.

"We have reason to believe he was in there," one senior US official said. "It is not clear exactly on whose behalf the medical attention was summoned."



advertisement

advertisement

The attack, which involved ship-launched Tomahawk cruise missiles and bombs dropped from stealth fighters, was aimed at a residential complex where US intelligence believed Saddam, and possibly his sons, were sleeping.

Naval missile strikes in Baghdad also were aimed at the headquarters of the Special Republican Guard, a paramilitary force that was expected to defend Baghdad from any US assault, and other security organisations.

After the attack, intelligence reports indicated Iraq's leaders were not organising any coordinated response in Baghdad or in the rest of the country, suggesting the leadership might be in chaos or cut off from communicating with field commanders.

At the Pentagon, Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said military planners had good reason to believe top Iraqi leaders were at the site of the first bombing.

US intelligence suspected Saddam's sons, Qusay and Uday, might have been with him during the strike. Both hold high-level security positions. Qusay, the younger son, is believed to be Saddam's likely successor.

A defiant Saddam appeared on Iraqi television a few hours after the strike. However, officials said the taped message did not prove he was alive.

It appeared to be him and not a look-alike, officials said after initial analysis. A voice analysis was under way.

There was nothing in the tape that made specific reference to the attack, or other events, that would confirm it was made in the hours after the strike. Saddam's reading of the date could have been recorded earlier, officials said.

However, the fact that Saddam read the speech from a notepad indicated a fairly impromptu production, suggesting it came after the strike, the officials said.

If Saddam survived, US officials hoped the surprise attack at least would leave him distrustful of his inner circle and suspecting betrayal by one of his advisers, leaving him less able to command.

Officials said the surprise attack was the product of a complex operation that benefited from human intelligence, electronic spying, special military operations and changes in technology that permitted military chiefs to quickly reconfigure the cruise missiles for a pinpointed attack.

US intelligence indicated the site had a reinforced bunker beneath the primary structures, and military officials designed a two-stage attack. The officials said the attack began with about three dozen naval cruise missiles that levelled the aboveground structures. Air Force F-117A Nighthawk stealth fighters then dropped a new 900 kg "bunker buster" bomb, called the EGBU-27.

The EGBU-27 warhead is specially designed to penetrate deep underground. It is guided by satellite signals.

[Shawn]

I saw a clip of said video, and it really didn't look like Saddam to me at all.

[Marcus Telcontar]

If it was, he looked badly out of sorts and incoherent.

[Figrin D'an]

I looked like him to me, although the fact that he read from a notepad and wore glasses suggested that that whole thing was put together rather quickly. He did look very much out of sorts. I'm willing to bet that one or both of his sons may have been killed in strike... that would certainly explain his lack of composure when compared to other speeches he has made.

[Marcus Telcontar]

Byt he fact USA 7th Calaery is now making a run at Baghdad with 3rd Mechanised following, gives more evidence Iraqi is right now basically leaderless. What happened in that first strike? Who did they hit?

[Dutchy]

First combat death reported. :\

[ReaperFett]

CIA have said that it WAS Saddam. Could be a recording though.


Apparently, he has made his pilots sign something saying if they DONT do Kamikaze when the time occurs, their familys were suffer. So, we HAS missiles over the allowed range. He IS still practicing the poor human rights (Could be argued that it was all in the past by some). And still the UN wont admit that hes in the wrong?

[Dutchy]

The U.N. won't admit a war is justified at this moment in time.

[ReaperFett]

Will they ever? Maybe the normal UN members, but would the Security Council ever?

[Dutchy]

Do they have to? As if it's a bad thing they don't want to give into war.

[Wei Wu Wei]

Despite quite some words of support, only UK and Australia have any substansial troops in line. Bulgaria and the Czechs have about 150 troops each

At least they bothered to show up.

[ReaperFett]

Giving into butchers is better? "Ah, they may have been lying about those missiles, and sure hes threatening pilots through their families, the most depraved thing possible, but at least we wont be warring!"?

[Dutchy]

North Korea next?

[Wei Wu Wei]

Now remind me why we want to go after North Korea next? I know they got weapons, but what else?

[Sanis Prent]

Their leader is an unhinged nutjob, and the Korean War's been on cease fire for 50 years?

[Wei Wu Wei]

Unhinged nutjob? Never heard about that. All I ever hear about is how North Korea has nuclear weapons and the like, and how Americans are scared that the Koreans will nuke us for more or less no reason.

Cease fire for 50 years? What, so basically any move the US makes towards North Korea will be to just "finish the job?"

[Sanis Prent]

Wei, North Korea has one of the largest standing armies in the world, positioned a stone's throw away from the DMZ, and have hundreds upon hundreds of guns locked onto Seoul. It is a much trickier situation than Iraq. At the onset of hostilities, they would blast the South Korean capital to its foundations. These people are in a desperate regime, one that is on the brink of collapse. They are capable of anything.

[Wei Wu Wei]

Ah. I see. "Handle with Care." So, how would the US handly North Korea? It seems that war would truly be a bad move to make.

[Sanis Prent]

I honestly don't know. I'm not a military planner.

[Figrin D'an]

The only way to get North Korea to back down a bit is to convince China to give it's redheaded stepchild to the south a spanking. Even then, Kim Jong Il can be pretty unpredictable. He's borderline insane, which is why he's a larger threat than Saddam is(was) IMO (from a global security point of view).

[Sanis Prent]

Agreed, but a preventative campaign against Saddam was far more tenable. He has aspirations and possibly components for the bomb. He likely doesn't have it, hence the need in striking before he does, and a campaign against him becomes untenable (which is what I perceive North Korea to be, unless otherwise convinced)

[Figrin D'an]

No argument there...

Unfortunately, the Korean peninsula might be the next powder keg to have it's fuse lit... may diplomacy work there, where it failed with Iraq. :\

[Sejah Haversh]

The biggest thing I've got against North Korea is that according to the last recorded figure, a tenth of the population live in slave labor camps.

Slavery is flat out wrong, and how Il is depriving his people of things like FOOD and giving it to his military is a blatant show of how little he cares abotu humanity. The newspapers are all government run, as is all the television. TVs are specially made to recieve only Korean signal, too, so they have no hope of getting outside information. The internet is also not availible in North Korea, so he can lie to his people as much as he wants and they will never know the truth. Like Saddam, Il has also ordered the deaths of many of his people. I would like to see a little more diplomatic solution, or at least a covert sniper team sent in instead of a war in Korea. We couldn't make the same moves we have in Iraq in Korea, mainly for geographic purposes.

[Sanis Prent]

The internet is also not availible in North Korea

This is why Korean unification may never be possible. South Koreans will pwn their butts at SC, CS, etc. They may never psychologically recover.

[Figrin D'an]

Originally posted by Sanis Prent
This is why Korean unification may never be possible. South Koreans will pwn their butts at SC, CS, etc. They may never psychologically recover.

:lol

In that respect, South Korea would slaughter everyone. :)

[Sanis Prent]

True. Glad we're on their side :D

[Evil Hobgoblin]

Originally posted by Figrin D'an
The only way to get North Korea to back down a bit is to convince China to give it's redheaded stepchild to the south a spanking. Even then, Kim Jong Il can be pretty unpredictable. He's borderline insane, which is why he's a larger threat than Saddam is(was) IMO (from a global security point of view).

Handling the simpler tactical problem first, and doing so handily with proper reconstructive efforts, gives us an edge in dealing with future problems of a similar nature, such as North Korea.

Edit: One thing I am very very interested in seeing is how many countries contribute to building a new government in Iraq. I think that may be a telling point regarding who has genuine interests in seeing peace in the region and who has simply been firing their mouths off to cover personal interests.

[Figrin D'an]

Originally posted by Evil Hobgoblin
Handling the simpler tactical problem first, and doing so handily with proper reconstructive efforts, gives us an edge in dealing with future problems of a similar nature, such as North Korea.

To a degree, yes. N. Korea is a bit of different animal, though. It can't be approached the same way as the current Iraqi issue. A lot of it is also dependent upon what the UN decides to do in regards to both post-war relief and potential resolutions on the "legality" of the current military action.


Edit: One thing I am very very interested in seeing is how many countries contribute to building a new government in Iraq. I think that may be a telling point regarding who has genuine interests in seeing peace in the region and who has simply been firing their mouths off to cover personal interests.

*COUGHCHIRACCOUGH*

He's already denouncing the latest UN proposal for post-war civil peacekeeping and rebuilding. Go figure, huh? :rolleyes

[Evil Hobgoblin]

Originally posted by Figrin D'an
To a degree, yes. N. Korea is a bit of different animal, though. It can't be approached the same way as the current Iraqi issue. A lot of it is also dependent upon what the UN decides to do in regards to both post-war relief and potential resolutions on the "legality" of the current military action.

Different, but as I mentioned, similar. If, for example, we develop a good reputation during the Iraqi regime change based on our handling of the occupation and rebuilding, we may have more nations on board next time sharing the costs of money and manpower. We'll be at least able to point to this and say "Look, guys, we did that in good faith, give us a chance on this one."


*COUGHCHIRACCOUGH*

Pretty much hit my implication on the head there. :) I'm now wondering what effect the turnout of this series of military and political events will have on his Presidency.

[Figrin D'an]

That's pretty much the example I would have cited as well. I would love for it to work out that way, and have that kind of positive effect. Unfortunately, it probably won't be quite that simple. :\

That scary thing is that France almost voted in someone that would have been about 10 times worse than Chirac... *shudder*

[Evil Hobgoblin]

Well, I'm not up to date on the election probabilities of various French personalities, so I couldn't answer to that one.

It's funny. Suddenly, I want all kinds of information on political standings around the world to know how things could get better or worse in each one, where we could best build support and how.

Militarily, I have to say I like our tactics for occupation so far. Just looking at some of the info on CNN.com makes me wonder if they won't hit Kirkuk with an occupation force to try and divide Mosul and Baghdad to encourage surrender in northern Iraq.

I hope occupation forces keep moving though. Getting caught in a flash flood is not good.

[Dutchy]

I just saw the big demonstrations in San Francisco from yesterday. People blocking street crossings and stuff. I think about 1,500 people got arrested. Tomorrow people in New York have planned the same kinda demonstrations.

[Admiral Lebron]

Looks like Turkey is itching for a fight... :\

[ReaperFett]

I just saw the big demonstrations in San Francisco from yesterday
To quote a man from SF on the radio today, they'd demonstrate about a change in the weather :)


People blocking street crossings and stuff
Stopping the emergency services

[Figrin D'an]

Very true... San Fran is hot bed for protesting pretty much anything.

[Morgan Evanar]

I have no problem with protests... but I loathe people who screw up traffic. I have no sympathy for any individual who impeeds my journey between A and B.

People who block the streets boil my blood.

[Admiral Lebron]

Turkey looks like they might put troops into Kurdland... Kurds don't like that.

[Dutchy]

Stopping the emergency services

Yeah, blocking traffic doesn't get my vote either.

[CMJ]

People were blocking a big intersection in LA yesterday too. Big protest in Westwood. Figures...right by UCLA. ;)

[Marcus Telcontar]

http://www.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,6167193%255E25777,00.html

8000 surrender.

[Admiral Lebron]

Better then 8,000 dead.

[Darth Viscera]

The Iraqi 51st Mechanized Division was a part of the III Corps, and was deployed at Zubair. Keep an eye out for the other infantry division (11th) and armored division (6th) from the III Corps to surrender somewhere near their own deployment zones, somewhere near Al Nasseria and Majnoon, respectively.

Assuming that the entire III Corps (which has no republican guard troops but rather 27,000 Regular army troops left) surrenders, the road on the center-east line of advance will be open all the way to Deyala!

The British 7th Armoured division should, in the case that the eastern line is deployed aggressively, make short work of the Iraqi IV Corps, deployed at Al Amara, which isn't even as heavily armed as the III Corps.

It's only a matter of time before the II, III and IV corps surrender, leaving the road to Baghdad (and its accompanying 2 RG corps and 1 SRG division-100,000 men) completely open.

[Admiral Lebron]

I think that getting to Baghdad will be easy... taking it will be hard.

[Sanis Prent]

No. Taking Baghdad will not be difficult.

[Marcus Telcontar]

Agreed wth Sanis, especially with the CIA now fairly definate three top Iraqi officers are dead as well as one of saddam sons. They are also certain Saddam was injured.

[Sanis Prent]

Did you see the "OMG, SADDAM'S ALIVE" video clip from the Iraqi Intel guy? :lol Nice try...

[Marcus Telcontar]

No? Link please?

[Sanis Prent]

I don't have a link, unfortunately. But it was a video clip (no sound) of Saddam at a press conference, looking much less grey, much less bloated, years younger, etc, and hanging around with all of his top-echelon buddies in an opulent meeting room.

In other words....nice try, guys :lol.

[Sanis Prent]

Marines are engaging enemy in Umm Qasr. Snipers, RPGs, and other resistance pockets

Edit: Its Basrah, not Umm Qasr.

[Sanis Prent]

Conscripts shoot their own officers rather than fight
From Tom Newton Dunn with 40 Commando near al-Faw, southern Iraq



IRAQI conscripts shot their own officers in the chest yesterday to avoid a fruitless fight over the oil terminals at al-Faw. British soldiers from 40 Commando’s Charlie Company found a bunker full of the dead officers, with spent shells from an AK47 rifle around them.
Stuck between the US Seals and the Royal Marines, whom they did not want to fight, and a regime that would kill them if they refused, it was the conscripts’ only way out.

In total, 40 Commando had collected more than 100 prisoners of war yesterday from the few square miles of the al-Faw peninsula that they controlled. Two of them were a general in the regular Iraqi Army and a brigadier. They came out from the command bunker where they had been hiding after 40 Commando’s Bravo Company fired two anti-tank missiles into it. With them was a large sports holdall stuffed with money. They insisted that they had been about to pay their troops, to the disbelief of their captors.

These were the men who had left their soldiers hungry, poorly armed and almost destitute for weeks, judging by the state we had seen them in, while appearing to keep the money for themselves.

It was only as dawn broke that the 900 Royal Marine commandos, who had moved forward during the night, realised the pitiful shape of the enemy. The first white flag was hoisted by three soldiers in a trench just outside the complex’s north gate, which had been surrounded by heavy machinegunners from Command Company.

They were taken prisoner by Corporal Fergus Gask, 26, who may have accepted the first surrender of the war. “We started engaging their positions with GPMGs (general purpose machineguns) when I noticed this white flag go up,” he said. “I didn’t know whether it was a trick or not, but I approached the trench anyway, probably a pretty silly thing to do if I think about it.

“But as soon as I saw their faces I knew they were genuine. They actually looked very relieved they didn’t have to fight any more. And they became very pleased to see us when they realised we weren’t going to do them any harm.”

The dawn light appeared to have provoked an exodus.

Small groups of dishevelled Iraqis were standing up all around us with their hands in the air, or with a dirty white T-shirt tied to a stick waving above them. Every time you turned around, a new trickle of silhouettes emerged from the horizon walking slowly towards us. One Marine joked: “Oh no. They’re surrendering at us from all sides.”

Each prisoner was thoroughly searched before he was accepted into captivity in a procedure that the commandos had clearly practised many times. The injured were quickly treated and a handful received almost immediate helicopter evacuation from the oil terminal to HMS Ocean, where a temporary hospital for PoWs has been set up.

As a new day began, so did the Marines’ gradual expansion outwards into the large expanse of waste ground that is still pockmarked with shell craters from the Iran-Iraq War.To save them having to translate from Arabic maps, 40 Commando named the clear paths they had established or wanted to seize with London street names: Downing Street, Abbey Road or Fulham Road.

Engineers, meanwhile, began the work of shutting down the many oil pipeline valves.

[Lilaena De'Ville]

One Marine joked: “Oh no. They’re surrendering at us from all sides.”

My favorite part. I pray this ends quickly and decisively. It appears it will, but my thoughts and prayers are with our boys out there. And girls, as the case may be. As well as with our leaders.

And when I say "Our" I don't mean just American.

[Princess Sunflower]

Originally posted by Dutchy
I just saw the big demonstrations in San Francisco from yesterday.

That's true. And what's even more disgusting is they were sticking their finger down their throats to make themselves throw up as a sign of protest.

EWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW!

[Darth Viscera]

Grrr....Turkish troops are invading Kurdistan, likely looking for trouble. Those bastards should go home before they get their throats slit.

[ReaperFett]

Vis, you wouldnt believe how hypocritical that sounds :)

[Darth Viscera]

There is a HUGE difference. The Turks don't mind committing massive human rights violations or just outright massacres, Fett. 1.5 million Armenians can testify to that.

[Marcus Telcontar]

Originally posted by Darth Viscera
There is a HUGE difference. The Turks don't mind committing massive human rights violations or just outright massacres, Fett. 1.5 million Armenians can testify to that.

The Turks want to make sure the Kurds dont get themselves a big oilfield or any type of ability to be independant. They see that the Kurds with that type of monetary clout of the northern oilfields, would fund an independant Kurdish homeland from part of Turkey.

It's a "Dont think about it" move. Potentially highly messy.

[Dutchy]

Originally posted by Princess Sunflower
That's true.

That I saw them? Of course that's true. :p

[ReaperFett]

They also wont to stop people claiming Asylum swarming Turkey. Just remember, you can go home at the end of this. They have to live there.

[Sanis Prent]

I don't see why they can't do that from their side of the border. This is not a good idea on Turkey's behalf, IMO.

[ReaperFett]

Well, theyve said they havent crossed the border, theyve stayed on their side.

[Sanis Prent]

Well thats a different story altogether. So long as they do that, I don't have a problem.

[Darth Viscera]

First the Turks announced that they had crossed the border. Then the Turks announced that they had not crossed the border.

I'm betting that they have crossed the border.

[Sanis Prent]

I think the PUK would have let the world know if the Turks crossed the border.

[ReaperFett]

I heard the Turkish were RUMOURED to have crossed, and then they Military CONFIRMED they hadnt.

[Princess Sunflower]

Originally posted by Dutchy
That I saw them? Of course that's true. :p

I wasn't doubting you Dutchy..I just meant that as a figure of speech. :crack

No worries. :wave

[Dutchy]

Originally posted by Princess Sunflower
I wasn't doubting you Dutchy..I just meant that as a figure of speech. :crack

No worries. :wave

Okeyday. :)

[Lilaena De'Ville]

CHINOOK HELICOPTER CRASH

The families of four U.S. Marines killed Thursday in the crash of a Chinook helicopter were notified of the deaths early Friday.

The Defense Department on Saturday identified two U.S. Marines killed in action in Iraq on Friday as a lieutenant from Mississippi and a lance corporal from California.

The Pentagon said 2nd Lt. Therrel Childers, 30, of Harrison, Miss., was assigned to the 5th Regiment of the 1st Marine Division based at Camp Pendleton, Calif.

Lance Cpl. Jose Gutierrez, 22, of Los Angeles, was assigned to the 1st Regiment of the 1st Marine Division at Camp Pendleton.

The Pentagon identified the Marines killed in the crash of the CH-46E Sea Knight helicopter as Maj. Jay Thomas Aubin, 36, of Waterville, Maine; Capt. Ryan Anthony Beaupre, 30, of Bloomington, Ill.; Cpl. Brian Matthew Kennedy, 25, of Houston, Texas; and Staff Sgt. Kendall Damon Watersbey, 29, of Baltimore, Md.

Aubin was assigned to the Marine Aviation Weapons and Tactics Squadron-1, 3rd Marine Aircraft Wing at the Marine Corps Air Station in Yuma, Ariz. Beaupre, Kennedy and Watersbey were assigned to the Marine Medium Helicopter Squadron-268, 3d Marine Aircraft Wing at the Marine Corps Air Station at Camp Pendleton, Calif., the Pentagon said.

The crash of the helicopter, assigned to the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force, also claimed the lives of eight British Marines.
Taken from:
http://www.msnbc.com/news/888496.asp

I think that Lance Cpl. Jose Gutierrez is from my brother-in-law's unit. My brother-in-law is one year removed from being in the Marine reserves, and so was not called up with the rest of his men. If my sister wasn't pregnant, he would have volunteered to go with them.

I'm still trying to find out if this is his friend Gutierrez or not, I had to leave a message on their phone, but hopefully I'll find out soon.:cry

[imported_Eve]

You guys see the protesters that are using the Star Wars logo to say Stop Wars, instead?

[Lilaena De'Ville]

No but I had a woman in my store today with a "No War" button on and I just wanted to slug her.

[Marcus Telcontar]

Originally posted by Eve
You guys see the protesters that are using the Star Wars logo to say Stop Wars, instead?

No, but our race suits have the Rebel Alliance patch and flight numbers :D


Ahem. Yes well.

I personally dont have an issue with anti war protestors expressing their opinon in peaceful ways. I only draw issue when they vandalise and distrupt.

[Morgan Evanar]

No but I had a woman in my store today with a "No War" button on and I just wanted to slug her.

Why?

[Jedi Master Carr]

Me too Marcus.
About Turkey well I understand their problem they are afraid the Kurds will get their own state, hopefully they will stay on their own side and won't go any farther other wise we could have a mess.

[Admiral Lebron]

I think if the Turks go into Kurdistan it will be very stupid as the Kurds won't put up with them.

[Lilaena De'Ville]

*points to post 353*

That's why. I was feeling emotional.

[Jedi Master Carr]

The Kurds would get rolled over, they don't have the arms that the Turks have.

[Admiral Lebron]

And of course America will step in...

[Diego Van Derveld]

Originally posted by Jedi Master Carr
The Kurds would get rolled over, they don't have the arms that the Turks have.

I doubt that. The Kurds are rather well armed, and trained by our forces.

[Marcus Telcontar]

Besides the fact the Kurds have been fighting for a long time and Iraqi army needs WMD to keep them at bay. The Kurds can certainly fight

[ReaperFett]

No, but our race suits have the Rebel Alliance patch and flight numbers
PLEASE tell me they're orange :)

[ReaperFett]

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/030323/80/dw2l8.html


Support is rising. Hope they dont move straight into Iran though. Job one should be sorting out Iraq.

[Darth Viscera]

I think it highly unlikely that we would move into Iran any time soon. Politically, the Iranian people don't feel the overwhelming need to be liberated like the Iraqis do. Political pressure is something else entirely, though. Something fierce.

[JediBoricua]

Finally I reached the end, I thought this thread would never end.

I'm against the war, but thankfully they are fighting it in a humane way (if that expression can be used). It seems they got the top iraqui leadership because US-British forces aren't even encountering stone throwers. So that at least is a good thing. Of course I could change my opinion once I get a civil casualty count.

What I fear about the war though is the Turks going into the north. I am with Vis here, I believe they are inside already. This has the potential to become an even messier issue. I'm not going to start a flame war here, but now the Turks have every justification to go in if they please, the Coalition is doing it without authorization so why can't they? And don't get me started about this 40 country strong 'Coalition of the Willing'. Those are all countries heavily dependant on US Aid, most don't have armies (ie Marshall Island who share defense with the US), and who aren't directly involved in the crisis. There is no Arab Support and most important no UN support. It seems that Rumsfeld's 'New Europe' statement worked though, they have all of it's support :rolleyes.

On other news, what about that grenade attack on the US tent. It seems it was a job from the inside. Really weird.

And finally how true is it that Delta Force and other Elite Units are already in Bahgdad. It makes sense, someone must be marking the buildings.

[Darth Viscera]

Originally posted by JediBoricua
There is no Arab Support

I'm sorry, but who are the Kuwaitis if not Arabs? Vikings?

[JediBoricua]

One small arab state that is pro-US (rightly so pro-US btw). That's laughable.


Another thing I remembered, please somebody demote the US solider that raised an american flag in Umm Qusar (spelling?). Just what leftist, terrorist group and other enemies of the US wanted, proof of US Neo-colonailism. Good thing it was removed immediatly.


I'm going to start a section, Today's funny protestor's sign:

I'm doing three today because I haven't been able to post since the war started:

"Monica, keep Bush busy as well"

"Somewhere in Texas a town has lost it's fool"

"The last man to listen to a bush spent forty years in the desert"

There is another one, but I believe it violates the Rules of the forum, so if you want to hear it PM me.

[ReaperFett]

JB, was the one you speak of carried by a female? I think I know the one :)

[Admiral Lebron]

Technically this thread should be done.. as the war is upon us..

[Lilaena De'Ville]

Australian Commandos? That's pretty darn cool.


Separately, Australian commandos operating deep in Iraq called in allied fighters to destroy an Iraqi ballistic missile site. “I understand that the target was a small military installation suspected of being involved with the launching of missiles,” defense spokesman Brigadier Mike Hannan told a media briefing in Canberra. Australia is one of a handful of nations that have contributed special operations forces to the Iraq war.

[ReaperFett]

mm, their SAS I believe.

[JediBoricua]

No, I saw the foul one in a protest at college.

[Dutchy]

Arab TV Shows Captured American Soldiers (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=540&e=2&u=/ap/20030323/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_prisoners)

I was wondering... did or will American TV show this? Overhere they just did. Not a pretty sight. :\

[Dutchy]

From that news story:


Showing the television footage may have been Iraq's way of testing America's resolve in the war. In Somalia in 1993, American audiences were outraged by television pictures showing Somali crowds dragging the bodies of American soldiers through the streets of Mogadishu: U.S. troops were pulled out of Somalia shortly after the incident.

Yeah, true. In the Iraqi footage they also showed a couple of dead bodies.

[Diego Van Derveld]

Considering such things violate the Geneva convention, I doubt they'll show the footage here. That is despicable.

[Princess Sunflower]

Originally posted by Dutchy
Arab TV Shows Captured American Soldiers (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=540&e=2&u=/ap/20030323/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_prisoners)

I was wondering... did or will American TV show this? Overhere they just did. Not a pretty sight. :\

I just heard them say during a news briefing that the US Government will not release the footage for American TV.

What they showed is againt the rules of the Geneva Conference as far as filming the dead soldiers :( .

Does anyone know if we are still holding all the people we captured while looking for Bin Laden? Haven't heard anything about them for months.

[JediBoricua]

Yep, X-Ray camp get's dozens of 'captives' every month in Guantanamo.

A sad thing really, that is my major grudge with W's administration. Not that they are capturing terrorists, is how they treat them.

[Diego Van Derveld]

Does anyone know if we are still holding all the people we captured while looking for Bin Laden? Haven't heard anything about them for months.

We are still holding them, yes.

[Darth Viscera]

Poor prisoners. I don't want to think about what the monstrous Iraqi interrogators are going to do to them :(

[JediBoricua]

Yeah it's really sad, worse when you think that they were of a supply convoy. This are not the elite forces trained to survive brutal interrogations.

[Dutchy]

BTW, did America get to see Bush' 2 pre-speech minutes where he was being worked on hair-wise by a lady and cracking smiles with the camera crew?

[Sanis Prent]

No. I've seen them though.

[Dutchy]

I just saw an interview with CBS journalist Bob Simon, who was captured by Iraq in 1991 for 40 days. He was very anti-war, even making some political incorrect comments. I think they forbid him to appear on some talkshow coz of his very critical attitude.

[Marcus Telcontar]

Originally posted by ReaperFett
PLEASE tell me they're orange :)

* Inserts whistle here *

[ReaperFett]

That rules :)

[Princess Sunflower]

Originally posted by Dutchy
I just saw an interview with CBS journalist Bob Simon, who was captured by Iraq in 1991 for 40 days. He was very anti-war, even making some political incorrect comments. I think they forbid him to appear on some talkshow coz of his very critical attitude.


Dutchy, he is scheduled to be on "Larry King Live" here tomorrow (Tuesday) so you may wanna check it out if his show is aired over there. I know I'll be curious to hear the account of his captivity.

[JediBoricua]

Today's funny protestor sign:

Bush picture on the sign: "There is an empty chemical warHEAD in the White House"

[Stardust]

Well, it seems that Iraq TV no longer has a TV station....

[Diego Van Derveld]

yay :)

Their programming sucked anyway

[Dutchy]

So, what does everyone think of the war so far?

It's not making as much progress as Bush thought it would. Iraqi people are resisting much more than expected. Plus they're not exactly waving and cheering as soon as the allies 'liberate' a village or city. If there is even a city yet they have under control.

They'll have to come up with some new and unconvencional combat to take Baghdad, otherwise it's gonna be ugly there.

[Dutchy]

Originally posted by Dutchy
Plus they're not exactly waving and cheering as soon as the allies 'liberate' a village or city.

Maybe people are reluctant to do so, because they're still afraid of Saddam. Especially since they remember the first Gulf war.

BTW, what's the image US media is giving now?

[JMK]

Is that an addition to your previous post or what?

If it isn't I think it will be the first time I've ever seen someone comment on their own post. :lol

[Dutchy]

Do you know what BTW stands for? :p

[Marcus Telcontar]

Maybe people are reluctant to do so, because they're still afraid of Saddam. Especially since they remember the first Gulf war.


That and I suspect the Iraqi people dont want Saddam - but they dont want the Americans either. It's interesting listening to Arab POV's cause it's insightful - the Arabs hate and detest Saddam, but here is the Great Satan (As they see it) coming to topple him. It's a case of what's worse? to them. I think they will be happy with Saddam getting botted, while the USA gets a square kick in the groin.

You have to remember, these people just do not see things the Western way. Iraq will take a fearful beating abd it's clear the Allies can at will kill the Iraq Military - but for the sake of pride, the Arabs will be saying "look how well our brothers are fighting!"

Arabs dont like the USA over what they see as double standards with Israel. Israel has defied more resolutions and DOES have WMD. Why arent they being curtailed? To an Arab, that's a totally valid question. Thence, getting rid of Saddam, but getting a measure of pride is what the Arab world will want.

Al Jazeera, the Arab version of CNN is interesting to try and follow. Not necessarily bias in a FOX sort of way (Believe me, avoid FOX at all costs if you want balanced coverage), but seeing things from an Arab POV. Much like CNN sees things from a USA POV. It's also a point Arab sensibilities are vastly different too. Some things Al Jazeera show are shocking, but to the arab's well..... thats normal and acceptible. Like dead bodies. They dont hold back in showing the gore in accidents, bombings, wars, etc.

[Figrin D'an]

I've seen/read several reports indicating that many Iraqi people behave differently when the media is around. They fear that Saddam and his loyalist followers will kill them if they show signs of going against his regime. Once the cameras stop rolling and there aren't any reporters around, military personal have been commenting that there is a dramatic change in behavior. So... I guess take from that what you will. :|


There has been some reporting in the US media about the "slower than expected" progress, and the reactions of the Iraqi people... it's been talked about quite a bit today, with the Bush-Blair joint press conference from Camp David and all... it was a mistake by some people in the administration to claim that war would be a "cakewalk." That sets completely unrealistic expectations. Honestly, though, looking at it realistically, there has been quite a bit of progess made in just one week.

[Dutchy]

Originally posted by Marcus Elessar
You have to remember, these people just do not see things the Western way.

Indeed. The US will have to build on the Iraqi people trusting hem, and seeing how they can set them free.

There's an LA-sized city to fight for first, though.

[JMK]

Originally posted by Dutchy
Do you know what BTW stands for? :p

:lol I was talking about the line above it. The one that starts with "maybe..."

[Dutchy]

Originally posted by Figrin D'an
I've seen/read several reports indicating that many Iraqi people behave differently when the media is around. They fear that Saddam and his loyalist followers will kill them if they show signs of going against his regime. Once the cameras stop rolling and there aren't any reporters around, military personal have been commenting that there is a dramatic change in behavior. So... I guess take from that what you will. :|

Yeah, yesterday I saw Iraqi people who didn't want to be filmed...


it's been talked about quite a bit today, with the Bush-Blair joint press conference from Camp David and all...

That didn't impress me much, btw. They didn't have any news and Bush repeated his "we WILL win" speech.


Honestly, though, looking at it realistically, there has been quite a bit of progess made in just one week.

True. It'll all depends on the fight over Baghdad, though.

[Dutchy]

Originally posted by JMK
:lol I was talking about the line above it. The one that starts with "maybe..."

Are you aware of Post subjects? :p

BTW, let's not fight in here. This is a war topic. :p

[JMK]

Who's fighting? Certainly not I. My Prime Minister forbids it. :p

[Marcus Telcontar]

Originally posted by Dutchy


That didn't impress me much, btw. They didn't have any news and Bush repeated his "we WILL win" speech.


Oh, I think the Allies WILL win. Their tatics arent great, Rumsfield's theories are not playing out. I do note they are changing tatics very fast. That is a good thing. Basra will show how hard a fight the allies will have.



True. It'll all depends on the fight over Baghdad, though.

True. Again, Basra is a kind of test bed. Unfortunanlty if the Iraqi's want to fight, it's goign to be very, very ugly.

What is disappointing I guess is that the USA's expectations were wrong. They were expecting somethign quite different to this. So far the fight is going well for the allies. But the problem they have is huge supply lines. Cut them, they are in trouble. I think consolidation is needed, before the big push goes back on.

[Figrin D'an]

Yeah, I really wasn't expecting much new from Bush or Blair. I was a "let's stay the course, firm up our resolve" puff piece more than anything. There will likely be more of those in the weeks to come, I'm sure.

[Jedi Master Carr]

Hopefully there is no war with North Korea with the tactics we are showing in Iraq I am not sure we would fare too well against that huge North Korean war machine (over 1 million troops). That situation is more of a mess though because of the nuclear issue.

[ReaperFett]

Something I don't get. Friendly fire. If an artillery strike hits the wrong target, or an aircraft does a slight miscalculation then fine, I can understand that. But how exactly can an RAF Tornado get shot down by a Patriot missile when it is the ONLY thing in the sky?



Similar note, did the trial of the pilots that killed the Canadians in a FF incedent finish yet?

[Diego Van Derveld]

Sorry, but there is a pervading pall of pessimism over how things are going. This is the greatest combat advance in military history...even more than Patton's romp across France. In eight days, we've covered over 250 miles in a combat advance, and this is through marsh, floodplain, firefight, and sandstorm. Furthermore, we've sustained a quarter as many casualties as in the Gulf War, in a war taking place in five times as much ground territory, and taking twice the length of time as the Gulf War's ground campaign. This isn't a mission to repulse an invading army from Kuwait, it is a full-scale dismantling of a nation's capacity to wage war...an entirely different endeavor. Our air force has absolute dominance, and currently is running out of targets to hit, and has switched to a primarily CAS deployment. The issue with the Fedayeen is minor. Um Qasr and Al Nasiriyah are secured to the greater extent. There are small-arms elements still active in the region, but this is a normal event in urban warfare. Al Basrah will be secure within a week, and that's a city of nearly two million. With repeated confirmation of civilian uprisings within that city, despite repression attempts by the Baathist militia and Fedayeen elements, I'd say that is a substantial sign of how things really are.

So, I dispute the claim that this war is not going to expectation. Nobody claimed that we'd get out of it with no casualties, but our military has performed in an exemplary fashion.

[Darth Viscera]

Originally posted by Marcus Elessar
What is disappointing I guess is that the USA's expectations were wrong. They were expecting somethign quite different to this. So far the fight is going well for the allies. But the problem they have is huge supply lines. Cut them, they are in trouble. I think consolidation is needed, before the big push goes back on.

What did you expect that our expectations were? Did you have a timeline in mind?

[Diego Van Derveld]

Originally posted by ReaperFett
Something I don't get. Friendly fire. If an artillery strike hits the wrong target, or an aircraft does a slight miscalculation then fine, I can understand that. But how exactly can an RAF Tornado get shot down by a Patriot missile when it is the ONLY thing in the sky?



Similar note, did the trial of the pilots that killed the Canadians in a FF incedent finish yet?

First question: If the Tornado's IFF transponder was damaged, then it would likely be targeted.

Second question: No charges were pressed, and it was dismissed, to my knowledge.

[Dutchy]

Originally posted by Diego Van Derveld
Furthermore, we've sustained a quarter as many casualties as in the Gulf War, in a war taking place in five times as much ground territory, and taking twice the length of time as the Gulf War's ground campaign.

The main ground territory, Baghdad, has yet to be entered, though.


So, I dispute the claim that this war is not going to expectation.

Bush/Rumsfeld thought they were gonna liberate the Iraqi people. So far the allies have not been taken in as heros. Like I've said, though, it may be because people see Saddam's still in control.

[ReaperFett]

The charges were definately pressed, becasue that's how I knew about it. It just suddenly went quiet, thought I may have missed something.

[Diego Van Derveld]

Originally posted by Dutchy
The main ground territory, Baghdad, has yet to be entered, though.


Yes, and?

The British Desert rats, Royal Marines, and Scottish Dragoons are making marked progress in al Basrah. Baghdad is maybe three times as large, and has a suitably much larger spearhead assaulting it. I fail to see the problem here.

[JMK]

The guys who dropped the bombs on the Canadians by accident are not being thrown in the can as far as I know.

[Darth Viscera]

Originally posted by Dutchy
Bush/Rumsfeld thought they were gonna liberate the Iraqi people. So far the allies have not been taken in as heros. Like I've said, though, it may be because people see Saddam's still in control.

Yes, it is because Saddam (or rather, the Ba'ath party) is still in control. There will be plenty of time for the Iraqi people to express their gratitude safely, don't start jumping to anti-bush conclusions yet, please.

[FireKat]

Also, lets analyze timeframe. Combat in Desert Storm took months to conclude. The same for combat in Afghanistan. In just over a week, coallition forces have maneuvered into attack position around the two largest cities in Iraq, have dismantled Iraqi C&C capability to the point of shifting the air force to a CAS mission, and are now in the process of shattering the Hammurabi and Medina divisions of the Republican Guard that protect the southern approaches via al Najaf and Karbala. The units that present themselves on the battlefield are being swept away with impunity. In the span of two weeks, you'll see a fourth division spearhead, supported by other combat units, open up on either Kirkuk, Mosul, Tikrit, or all of the above, and dismantle the Nebuchadnezzar division.

We could be in Baghdad by as early as the first week of April. It is entirely possible. That means we'll have prosecuted this war to the viper's nest in what...three weeks? Against the full force of Iraq's military, which is nevertheless a formidable army, that is a massive accomplishment.

[Darth Viscera]

We need more men.

The Saddami forces around Baghdad number 100,000 at nominal strength. Add in the paramilitary feyadeen.

The forces which we have approaching Baghdad from the center-west flank number some 15,000 very exhausted mechanized infantry (3rd infantry division), and some 10,000 light infantry (~10 out of ~12 battallions of the 101 airborne, basically 2.5 brigades). Urban combat in Baghdad may very likely be hell and result in our troops being cut up badly.

We should wait until the 1st mechanized infantry is landed in Northern Iraq and in proximity to Baghdad (meaning they've routed northern resistance) and the 4th mechanized infantry reinforces the 3rd before moving into Baghdad. In that case we'd be going in with 55,000 troops in nearly 4 divisions, rather than 25,000 troops in nearly 2 divisions.

We have to cut off the II and IV corps and the remnants of the III corps and prevent them from reinforcing Baghdad. If we could get the 1st marine division up to Al Kut and have the 3 British brigades attack along their Al Basrah line, we might well pocket all 3 corps and force a capitulation on those 85,000 Iraqis. That would free up 25,000 more troops from the eastern region to join in the attack on Baghdad.

How the devil are we going to force a capitulation on the Iraqi I and V corps, though? We can't very well drop the 101 airborne on Tikrit and attack along the Mosul and Karkuk fronts knowing what the Iraqis have near Tikrit. We'd have to use the 1st mechanized infantry division to attack at As Sulaymaniyah, then quickly flank our way down to Bayji, a task which would be made much easier if we could get the 1st marine or the 4th infantry to cross the Tigris and the Nahr Diyala and secure Samarra and Ba'qubah so we could drop the 101 into the rear of the northern iraqi forces.

In any event, we need more men.

[Diego Van Derveld]

Its not nearly so urgent. At any rate, they'll likely hang a perimeter around the metropolitan area, reinforcing their lines, replenishing supplies, and rotating personnel. In the meantime, if the rest of the republican guard haven't dashed themselves to pieces against our positions, then our bored-to-tears airforce will be looking for them. The 1st and 4th will likely set up a similar southerly thrust, with our paratroopers and other elements supporting the Peshmurga in northern front skirmishes. Whether the 1st and 4th go straight to Baghdad, or decide to engage some of the northern cities, it should be more than enough troops in the area. The Iraqi corps in the south, either way, are doomed. They hold their positions, and they get plinked apart, one by one. They move north, they all die at once. Its their call.

[JMK]

120,000 more troops are headed out to Iraq within the next month, no?

[Diego Van Derveld]

Correct. Mainly the 1st and 4th infantry divisions. Cream of the crop.

I believe theres also an armor reserve division, heading to bolster the southern spearhead.

[Dutchy]

Originally posted by Darth Viscera
Yes, it is because Saddam (or rather, the Ba'ath party) is still in control. There will be plenty of time for the Iraqi people to express their gratitude safely, don't start jumping to anti-bush conclusions yet, please.

It's not going like expected, that's what I said. You even comfirmed that by saying: "We need more men".

[ReaperFett]

If it was going to plan, we'd win with what he had.

[Sanis Prent]

The plan was to use these forces, even before we began the attack. The reason they weren't implemented from the get-go was because Turkey denied the open front up north. So instead, we've been preparing an insertion point in Kurdish-held territory. So, we're essentially bringing that phase of the plan back to reality. We haven't "changed" anything in that regard. We're doing something we'd wanted to do anyway.

[Darth Viscera]

@ Dutchy & Reaperfett

What makes you think that bringing in the 1st and 4th divisions to reinforce our army isn't part of the plan? You don't know what the plan is, so you can't very well say that we're not going according to it. CENTCOM is perfectly aware that we have to be tactically patient in the carrying out of this plan, which continues to develop as situations change.

Dutchy, your persistance in taking cheap shots at the U.S. given whatever straws you can grasp for is getting rather tedious. The cup is FULL, darnit. Stop complaining about the 10% of it that looks empty. It'll be done when it's done, the war's only been going on for a week and already there's complaining! yeesh.

[Dutchy]

True, Turkey's prolly the reason of the later bringing in of those troops.

Fact is still that it's not going as smoothly as they said it would. Of course it's not hopeless either. It's just not the 10 hour and a half clean war they hoped for.

BTW, was Bush' $74.7 billion extra war budget also part of the plan?

[Darth Viscera]

Just think of the nightmare scenarios which could have already taken place but didn't. Oil from the Al Faw peninsula could be out in the persian gulf. More oil derricks could have been set on fire. Al Basrah could have been gassed. The Scuds and Al-Samouds that landed in Kuwait could have carried a payload of chemical weapons, and they might have come closer to Kuwait City. Scuds and Al-Samouds could have been launched at Tel Aviv with chemical payloads. Saddam Hussein's bunker might not have been hit during the first day of the war.

It's ugly now, yes, but it could have been a lot uglier.

[Jedieb]

"The enemy we're fighting is different from the one we'd war-gamed against, because of the paramilitary forces. We knew they were here, but we did not know how they would fight."

The war has not progressed as smoothly as we would have liked. "Shock and Awe" has not produced the results that some were hoping for. The situation is by NO means hopeless. The outcome is inevitable, but it's a fair assessment to say that the best case scenario; (massive Iraqi surrenders, little resistance, quick collapse of the regime) have not come to pass.

Then there's the nice little bomb some of the Iraqi dissidents dropped yesterday. Calling for a new Iraqi government that does not include a U.S. occupational force. Who's to say what will come of that but it does point out the difficulty of managing a post war Iraq. It's not going to go as smoothly as many had hoped.

[JediBoricua]

Militarily speaking the war is going well. Less than 50 dead is a major achievement and I believe that the army is going out of it's way not to target civilians. Kudos on that.

But, and a big BUT that is, the iraquis are not seeing this as a liberation army but as an occupation army. I have a couple of points to prove this, but let me begin with a bit of history. When Napoleon invaded Spain and put his brother in command, the first thing they did was end the monarchie's iron grip on the people. They granted liberties, established social justice institutions, made education available for everyone. Many spanish citizens had been fighting for these reforms against the monarchs for decades. Yet they did not welcome the french, they rebelled and fought. 'Pepe Botella', how the spanish called Napoleon's brother, once asked the multitude if they wanted the slavery of the monarchy and the multide claimed: "Que vivan las cadenas""(Horray for the Chains!). The same thing is happening in Iraq.

I understand that Saddam is still in command and that some people might be scared, but everyone knows that the regime is on it's last days. Yet there are no american flag waving iraquis or baby kissing marines even on the cities fully controlled by Marines and English forces, if they were they would already be on the press and on the networks. Worst yet, a CNN reporter in the Jordan/Iraqui border was reporting that close to 300 iraquis a day have been returning to their country to enlist against the US invasion. These are people that fled to Jordan because of Saddam, but they are now willing to fight for their country. CNN also interviewed a man who used to be Saddam's son double (the resemblence was irie). He wrote a book against the regime, yet he condemn the war and called it a war: "against the iraqui people".

The first days of the conflict CENTCOM, Rumsfeld and the President talked about how happy the iraquis would be when they were liberated. There was expectation to see some WW2-like reception of Marines. But these is not happening. Fact is that the iraquis are not being liberated. They are under the grip of a dictator, that is true, but not under the grip of a foreign power like the french on the 40's. The iraquis hate and don't want Saddam, but they fear more a puppet government under the command of DC and London.

By all lights this will be military victory, and an astounding one, but it could very well turn in a classic pirric victory were the losses on the political ground would be even more costly that those on the battleground.

[Darth Viscera]

You're absolutely wrong, Jediboricua.

[Sanis Prent]

Dutchy, FFS, the budget was also part of the plan. For the love of God!

Boricua, I think thats a bigger assumption to make than you're claiming the administration made. I've seen many instances of grateful iraqis, but the fact remains that they have to feel they are safe first. I doubt the French would have cheered much if there were plainclothes Germans in the crowds with mg30's pointed at their families. Iraq is the most terrifying police state since East Germany. Why does it suprise you that people are reluctant to be all grins when cameras go on?

[ReaperFett]

Dutchy, FFS, the budget was also part of the plan. For the love of God!
Prove it.


Why does it suprise you that people are reluctant to be all grins when cameras go on?
Because all they are seeing is an invading force, who lets not forget left them last time, blowing buildings up? Doesnt matter whos wrong or right, they are still going to see that in a bad light.








Oh, and today the UK Government is having troubles over lying. You here about the two British soldiers that were executed? Well, the day before the families were told they died in combat (Wheras executed is died in captivity). So, either the Government is lying to make people more pro-war, or Blair is an unthoughtful person who AS USUAL thinks about mass PR, not about the individuals. IMO, it's most likely the second, as all Blair is is a big showman.

[JMK]

You're absolutely wrong, Jediboricua.
You can't say that about someone's post, a post that seems to be reasonably well substantiated and say nothing to back your stance. What does that achieve? If you plan on an informed reply, fine, but leaving it at that proves nothing.

[Dutchy]

Originally posted by Sanis Prent
FFS

Does that mean what I think it means? :p


Originally posted by ReaperFett
or Blair ... AS USUAL thinks about mass PR

I guess that's why him and Bush get along so well. ;)

[JediBoricua]

Well Visc. I guess we'll have to wait and see how 'absolutely wrong I am'.

I understand that Sanis, but I would expect that in Umm Quasar where the British have held the city for almost a week now and where relief ships are already arriving to have more 'gratefulness', as you put it, from the iraquis. Fact is, considering how much the army has spent on PR for this war, that if there were massive showing of 'gratefulness' we would have been seeing it since day 1. Maybe 'massive' is a wrong word, but if 100 citizens walked in the street thanking the marines, the news tickers will be flooding with it. The only real thing I've seen is an iraqui man taking down a Saddam portrait with his shoe (and also read it in the ticker).

And the two examples of real iraquis talking about the occupation and political refugees rejoining the military, well there is no denying it, I saw it with my own eyes on CNN, not Al-Jazeera or Iraq TV.

[ReaperFett]

Well JB, you could still argue they're saying what theyre told to say.



And 50 civilians have just died in one attack. This could cause major problems.

[Sanis Prent]

Originally posted by ReaperFett
Prove it.

What's there to prove? War costs money. This is obvious. For weeks, its been in conjecture as to how much would be spent on the war. They delivered a figure. Exactly what the hell is the problem here?

[Darth Viscera]

Originally posted by JMK
You can't say that about someone's post, a post that seems to be reasonably well substantiated and say nothing to back your stance. What does that achieve? If you plan on an informed reply, fine, but leaving it at that proves nothing.

JMK, please realize that I've been posting the exact same contrasting argument for the last 18 months. I've argued the same points absolutely ad nauseam since the war in afghanistan began. Everyone knows my stance, they are perfectly aware that it is my opinion that the Iraqis will rise up when they are truly safe from Saddam and his goons, drop to their knees and thank akbar Allah for sending our heroic boys to liberate them from a level of inhuman oppression that has never before been seen on this planet.

I've said it again and again and again and again. My stance is undeniably well-backed.

[ReaperFett]

The problem is the way you responded to Dutchy. Why is "for the love of god!" needed? Are you struggling to simple argue without having to try and belittle him?


JMK, please realize that I've been posting the exact same thing to argue against Jediboricua's post for the last 18 months. I've argued the same points absolutely ad nauseam since the war in afghanistan began. Everyone knows my stance, they are perfectly aware that it is my opinion that the Iraqis will rise up when they are truly safe from Saddam and his goons, drop to their knees and thank akbar Allah for sending our heroic boys to liberate them from a level of inhuman oppression that has never before been seen on this planet.

I've said it again and again and again and again. My stance is undeniably well-backed.
No it isnt. It only is in your opinion. Your post shouldnt have been posted, as the FORUM MODERATOR said. End.

[Sanis Prent]

Originally posted by ReaperFett
The problem is the way you responded to Dutchy. Why is "for the love of god!" needed? Are you struggling to simple argue without having to try and belittle him?

I'm leaving this god-forsaken thread before I pop off at the mouth and say something I regret later.

[Darth Viscera]

@Fett
Don't try and invalidate all my previous posts with your own opinions. When I say that my stance is undeniably well-backed, you know very well that the backing I'm referring to is my own opinions, take them or leave them.

[ReaperFett]

So dont say he's absolutely wrong then.

[Darth Viscera]

There's no minimum word limit on disagreeing with a person.

[ReaperFett]

Also, if it is going so well, why is Rumsfeld angry at the general who said something along the lines of "We didnt wargame the type of opposition we are facing from the Iraqis"



And apparently, Rumsfeld has accused Syria and Iran of helping Iraq. I'd love to know how this is going to help in ANY way.

[Darth Viscera]

I'd venture to say that Rumsfeld's scolding of Syria doesn't hurt the war effort nearly as much as Syria's shipment of night vision goggles to Saddam Hussein.

[ReaperFett]

I dont mean the war effort. But think this way. Every country in the area is seeing innocent Iraqis die while Rumsfeld is lining up the other countries. How will this STOP terrorism?

[Darth Viscera]

Well, it stops it a helluva lot more than saying nothing and allowing the syrians to continue arms shipments. Would you rather combat a terrorist armed with night vision goggles, or a terrorist indignant after having been scolded on Al Jazeera by Rumsfeld?

[Dutchy]

Originally posted by ReaperFett
And 50 civilians have just died in one attack. This could cause major problems.

There's no proof of that yet. About it being an attack by the allies, i.e. There's no comment of the allies, either. We'll have to wait and see what really happened.


Originally posted by Darth Viscera
There's no minimum word limit on disagreeing with a person.

Providing an argument makes it more valuable, though. Which you actually usually do, btw.

[JMK]

Originally posted by Darth Viscera
Everyone knows my stance

Not necessarily true. I don't always read every word of every thread. I don't (and I'm sure there are others) that do not know your particular views in this instance. I do know you have solid arguments for your opinions, but if you're going to use 30 seconds and 5 words to destroy someone's post, I would prefer to see yours alongside those 5 words.

[Darth Viscera]

Originally posted by Dutchy
Providing an argument makes it more valuable, though. Which you actually usually do, btw.

Well can ya blame me for not wanting to rewrite it again? :p

[JMK]

Well, yes, I for one would like to see it again. It would be an enormous pain in the rear to have to research your opinion. That's all I meant. If you're going to disagree with someone, you've got to be willing to state why, regardless of how many times you've said it before.

[Dutchy]

Originally posted by Darth Viscera
Well can ya blame me for not wanting to rewrite it again? :p

Not for me, but maybe for others you should. :)

[Dutchy]

Originally posted by JMK
If you're going to disagree with someone, you've got to be willing to state why, regardless of how many times you've said it before.

You haven't told this to Jonathan, have you? ;)

[Darth Viscera]

Well, yes, I for one would like to see it again. It would be an enormous pain in the rear to have to research your opinion. That's all I meant. If you're going to disagree with someone, you've got to be willing to state why, regardless of how many times you've said it before.

But I just stated my opinion in post #415! It's on the same page even.

[Dutchy]

Originally posted by Darth Viscera
But I just stated my opinion in post #415! It's on the same page even.

Yup, but JB's was more extensive than yours. One of his arguments against yours was: "Yet there are no american flag waving iraquis or baby kissing marines even on the cities fully controlled by Marines and English forces".

[JMK]

OK, so it is on the same page. Then you know what, you should have linked to your opinion, or copy pasted, or said see post 415.
The way you posted makes it soundlike you're a know-it-all. That's no good. If you don't want to write your opinion for the umpteenth time, I can understand that, especially if it was made on the same page. But you have to reference it one way or another. This is not an argument, just a suggestion.

[Darth Viscera]

@JMK
Okee doke, noted for future reference.

@Dutchy
Try convincing the Iraqis that their cities are fully controlled by the coalition forces. They're going to be keeping their opinions to themselves until Saddam is dead and people who wave at coalition forces on TV don't turn up the next day with missing heads.

24 years of brainwashing and murdered dissidents. Remember that.

[Marcus Telcontar]

The Arabs, I believe, do not want Hussein. They curse him and pray he dies. YET, they dont like America either. They see the USA as the Satan, for various reasons - the big one is the total support they give Israel. I might add the Arabs are justifiably angry on how Israel can defy UN resolutions and yet Iraq gets this smack down.

thence, I believe Boricua is right. The Iraqi people dont want the USA in. They do see the USA as an occupational force and also, there is clearly bad will after 1991 when the people rose up and yet were not helped in any way by the allies of Gulf war 1. Can you blame them for not trusting the words of the allies this time around? You can repeat the allies lines all that you want, but the fact is, the Arabs dont want the USA in, they dont trust them.

Nor however, as I have said do they want Hussein.

So, what happens? I bet the Arabs want Hussein to FOAD, but they want their Arab brothers in arms to give a bloody good fight. Sure the result isnt in doubt, but it's a pride issue I think. The Usa are invading, the arabs dont want that, thence the best result is for them is Hussein dead and the USA getting a good square kick in the nuts.

[Dutchy]

Viscera, I know, I only quoted JB. :)

Meanwhile there was a large explosion in a Kuwait city mall.

[Darth Viscera]

Originally posted by Marcus Elessar
The Arabs, I believe, do not want Hussein. They curse him and pray he dies. YET, they dont like America either. They see the USA as the Satan, for various reasons - the big one is the total support they give Israel. I might add the Arabs are justifiably angry on how Israel can defy UN resolutions and yet Iraq gets this smack down.

thence, I believe Boricua is right. The Iraqi people dont want the USA in. They do see the USA as an occupational force and also, there is clearly bad will after 1991 when the people rose up and yet were not helped in any way by the allies of Gulf war 1. Can you blame them for not trusting the words of the allies this time around? You can repeat the allies lines all that you want, but the fact is, the Arabs dont want the USA in, they dont trust them.

Nor however, as I have said do they want Hussein.

So, what happens? I bet the Arabs want Hussein to FOAD, but they want their Arab brothers in arms to give a bloody good fight. Sure the result isnt in doubt, but it's a pride issue I think. The Usa are invading, the arabs dont want that, thence the best result is for them is Hussein dead and the USA getting a good square kick in the nuts.

I've talked to a lot of arabs, and they're okay with the U.S. U.S.-Iraq public relations will be fine once we redeem ourselves for 1991 by liberating them. Americans are very tight with people from the middle east because there's such a huge middle eastern community over here (hence my existence), and we like each other fine. Remember, we put a Saudi prince onto the space shuttle 18 years before we put an Israeli fighter jock into space.

I strongly disagree with your belief that they hate us as much (or nearly as much) as Saddam Hussein.

[Darth Viscera]

Besides, we already have a sampling of Iraqis who love us for having liberated them from Saddam. They're called the Kuwaitis, and at this moment they're shouting "Your days are numbered Saddam." I believe the Iraqis feel the same way as the Kuwaitis, who were just having a huge pro-war rally a few days ago. I hope to God that Al Jazeera is recording this!

[JMK]

Weren't you going to record the whole war with your dvd writers and video compression equipment?

[Darth Viscera]

I already have recorded every significant event and have 8.72 gigs (2 DVDs worth) of DVD compliant highly compressed video, which is approximately 10 hours. I'm going to edit it all when the war is over, and see if I can cram the most pertinent stuff onto 1 DVD.

It's been days since I recorded anything, though.

[JediBoricua]

I know the feeling Visc, I'm haven't watch news in like two days. I just feel saturated...

And about your reply, I do know your stance and did not take it badly. I was just expecting you to disect my post, as you usually do, and try to prove your point.

[JediBoricua]

I don't know how legit this is, but it seems to be getting some media coverage:

http://www.iraqbodycount.net/


And on other news, the german architect who designed Saddam's bunker says this:


The German architect of one of Saddam Hussein's main bunkers in Baghdad said on Friday the Iraqi leader can survive anything short of a direct hit with a nuclear bomb if he stays within its four-feet-thick walls.

No wonder they couldn't get him with the decapitation strike.

You can read the whole article here:
http://www.wired.com/news/business/0,1367,58276,00.html

[JediBoricua]

When asked if he felt bad for helping a Hilter like dictator the architect replied:

"It's not just one person getting protection, it's several people, it's the palace staff as well. I just see it as an achievement of bunker technology," said Esser


I guess that's how the A-Bomb scientists felt when the bomb hit Hiroshima...

[JediBoricua]

Just some more quotes to support my argument. This is from the iraqui blog that JediEB poste a while back.

"There are no waving masses of people welcoming the Americans nor are they surrendering by the thousands. People are oing what all of us are, sitting in their homes hoping that a bomb doesn’t fall on them and keeping their doors shut. "


"No one inside Iraq is for war (note I said war not a change of regime), no human being in his right mind will ask you to give him the beating of his life, unless you are a member of fight club that is, and if you do hear Iraqi (in Iraq, not expat) saying “come on bomb us” it is the exasperation and 10 years of sanctions and hardship talking. There is no person inside Iraq (and this is a bold, blinking and underlined inside) who will be jumping up and down asking for the bombs to drop. We are not suicidal you know, not all of us in any case."


Here is the link btw: http://dearraed.blogspot.com/

[Darth Viscera]

Yeah, I've been reading Dear Raed since 3/20. I don't know how he could feel so anti-war, seeing as how he's living in Baghdad and has likely seen countless people executed as dissidents.

Raed is walking a serious tightrope, if he's legit. If Saddam's security people see what he's posting on the net, he and his family are dead. They won't even blink when it comes to murdering a net dissident.

When you read that, you are reading a true, honest-to-god modern day Anne Frank diary. I just hope he doesn't die because of his blog.

[Darth Viscera]

A 4-6 day pause has been ordered in the U.S. ground advance. Airstrikes will continue.

I agree with the pause, but to ANNOUNCE IT PUBLICLY?! We just tripped on a stretch of political razor wire. WTF are they thinking?! The poor people rising up in Basrah are going to think that we've abandoned them again!

This 4-6 day pause is likely so that we can bring up the 4th infantry division, which is just now landing in Kuwait, and will greatly reinforce our army. The pause should have been done unofficially. We can't go telling the enemy every time we have to stall our advance just to let the supply trains catch up! This is utter madness! We just gave the enemy a massive supply of intel!

[Princess Sunflower]

Originally posted by Darth Viscera

Dutchy, your persistance in taking cheap shots at the U.S. given whatever straws you can grasp for is getting rather tedious. The cup is FULL, darnit. Stop complaining about the 10% of it that looks empty. It'll be done when it's done, the war's only been going on for a week and already there's complaining! yeesh.

Yes...I strongly agree. This "I want it over and over now attitude" is getting rather tiresome. People act like this war is being run by George Lucas who can rewrite the script at a moments notice and get the first scene done by dinnertime. Sheesh! o_O.

I'm no war strategist but I just don't think we can win this war in a week due to the logistics and the effort to keep casualties to a minimum. Sure..we could go in and bomb the heck out of everything and not care how many lives we lose but it's too high a price to pay to get the job done sooner. I really wonder tho if this 4-6 day pause is to give the troops a rest and resupply or if we are really scrambling to replace a failed strategy.

[Darth Viscera]

I honestly shudder to think of how Al Jazeera is going to report this 4-6 day pause to 200 million moslims.

[Princess Sunflower]

Originally posted by Darth Viscera
I honestly shudder to think of how Al Jazeera is going to report this 4-6 day pause to 200 million moslims.


EXACTLY!

[Jedi Master Carr]

Hey What about this Chinese missle that hit Kuwati today? So I guess China has been giving/selling arms to Iraq? It wouldn't really surprise me I don't trust that regime for nothing they are alot worse that Iraq.

[Sanis Prent]

That's old news. Silkworm missiles have been in Iraqi/Iranian possession for years.

[Jedi Master Carr]

I guess I just didn't know that :p Did China sell them to them or did they get them off the black market?

[Diego Van Derveld]

That I'm not so certain of. While China is an immense arms dealing siphon point (Russia alone pumps 8 billion dollars worth of military equipment into them each year), the silkworm is an indiginous weapon, like China's NORINCO armor. I can't imagine China willingly supplying Iran. They've had brutal dealings with fundamentalists in their western provinces before. Iraq....its possible.

[Dutchy]

Originally posted by Darth Viscera
Stop complaining about the 10% of it that looks empty. It'll be done when it's done, the war's only been going on for a week and already there's complaining! yeesh.

You can't complain about a war that's been going on for ONLY a week?

I guess we close this thread and open it when you think it's okay for people to complain, k?

[Princess Sunflower]

Originally posted by Dutchy
You can't complain about a war that's been going on for ONLY a week?

I guess we close this thread and open it when you think it's okay for people to complain, k?

No...you just need a little patience and show some faith in our troops to get the job done no matter how long it may take.

[Dutchy]

Originally posted by Princess Sunflower
No...you just need a little patience and show some faith in our troops to get the job done no matter how long it may take.

I have faith. All I did was saying that things are not going like expected.

[Sanis Prent]

<a href=http://www.swforums.net/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=28377>A little simulated warfare</a> :)

[Marcus Telcontar]

reports that Aussie SAs are up front of everyone, doing reconnisance and taking out Iraqi observation and missile areas.

[Dutchy]

Robin Cook left the Labour Party as soons as Blair joined Bush in the war. Here's what he's currently saying:

http://www.sundaymirror.co.uk/news/news/page.cfm?objectid=12790012&method=full&siteid=106694

[Dutchy]

Oh, isn't this the weirdest of pics looking at it now? :)

[Dutchy]

Here it is. See attachment.

[Jedieb]

Cook's article echoes many of the sentiments I've held for months now. The best case scenario that Shock and Awe was suppose to produce has not come to pass. That's not even debatable anymore. There has been more resistance that was anticipated. I can only imagine the verbal firestorm going on behnd the scenes between the officers and enlisted men who have to deal with this mess. You can bet that any diplomatic but nevertheless embarrasing statement made in front a microphone was preceeded by some private f-bomb filled tirades to junior officers. That's how these things work. People in my unit once saw Scwartzkopf (sp?) bitch a junior officer on the phone out because his men hadn't secured an objective. You wouldn't have recognized him from his press conferences. By the time Generals start making public statements about how they've been "surprised" you can bet there's been a firestorm behind the scenes.

Now we have the taking of Baghdad to look forward to. The most difficult part of the war is YET to come. If Iraqi's loyal to Saddam have been able to put up more than anticipated resistance outside of Baghdad then I wonder what surprises they have in store for us in the streets of Baghdad.

Britain and the U.S. are already having minor disagreements on the managing of a post war Iraq. Iraqi opposition groups are already calling for a post war Iraq that DOESN'T involve a U.S. occupation force. When Saddam is gone, the anti-U.S. sentiment that he thrives on wont magically go away with him. His brand of fear and oppression will be gone, but to think that some other form of brutal rule won't be waiting in the wings in naive. There's going to be 20 years of payback waiting to be dished out. Many Iraqis will like nothing more than for the U.S. to get the hell out of Dodge so they can get around to settling those scores.

Eventually, I believe we're going to get stuck in a messy, but short occupation. When that occupation ends and the troops pull out and many of the reporters go back home, the blood is going to start to flow. Mark my words, I've seen it happen in countries with governments who we APPROVE of. Public stonings were suspended in Saudi Arabia for the benefit of many of our troops during the Gulf War. Once the shooting was over business went back to normal and women who were unfortunate enough to commit adultery or even be ACCUSED of it went right on getting their brains bashed in by stones in a public square. To expect that anything less will happen in Iraq once the lid has been taken off the powder keg is naive. 20 years of hatred and scores waiting to be settled aren't going to be avoided by whatever dream form of government the Administration thinks it's going to impose on Iraq.

[ReaperFett]

Can I point out that Cook has withdrawn a number of his comments since people started reacting. In fact, if you read the article he NEVER calls anyone a "hawk" that I see, nor does he say to bring them back. I heard him on the radio not three hours ago, he said that you CANT bring them back now. The Mirror is an anti-war paper, which is one of your standard "Lie and sensationalise everything you can" kinds. In fact, I'd say they are the worst at it that we have.


But to be honest, I don't care what Cook thinks. WE, the British people, pay him to do his job. So he leaves it the moment he disagrees on an issue? What use is he to anyone? But notice he only quits the cabinet, not his job as an MP. So we still get to pay him :rolleyes

[Jedi Master Carr]

I agree with you Jedieb I think once US forces leave another dictator (either by our choosing or just one who rises from the ashes) will be in power.

[William Neir]

By what reasoning do you make such assumptions? Iraq is a nation that is relatively well-educated, secularized, and extremely heterogeneous. If anywhere in the region, democracy could find roots in such a place. Its already flourished for more than a decade in the north, and there is a very strong expatriate movement in other nations, of iraqi nationals who are working hard for a democratic movement within their nation. This is very attainable, and I find such a wholesale pessimistic outlook rather dubious.

[Jedi Master Carr]

It is a muslim nation it is simple as that the law of the land is the Korean and because the Korean teaches intolearance I can't see how democracy can exist. Also I am not a pessmist, I am realist, studing history I can see the trends and it tells me that it won't work.

[Sanis Prent]

Tell that to the Kurds, plz. I'm sure they can show you what you can do with that historical trend. And Iraqi Kurdistan is more Islamic per capita than below the northern no-fly marker, so if Islam is really teaching intolerance (and the fundamentalist's "Islam" is about as Islam as David Koresh's crap was "Christian"), then what's going on there? You also conveniently forget the few million or so Chaldean Catholics that live in Iraq. As I said before, its far more heterogeneous than almost any other middle-eastern state.

[Darth Viscera]

Carr, can you pay more attention to your spelling, please? It's distracting. An Iroquois is a native american, an Iraqi is an Arab. A Korean is an Asian, the Qu'ran is a muslim holy book. I don't mean to be rude, it's just distracting.

[Figrin D'an]

Iraq is about the most non-muslim muslim nation in existence. I have to echo Sanis' sentiments. Grouping it with the rest of the Middle Eastern "muslim" nations is far from accurate.

[Sanis Prent]

Even those who are religious in the country, you have great variety. There are the generic Sunni muslims, then there are the conservative Wahhabists. The majority are Shia, which is a younger sect of Islam. On top of those, are Chaldeans, and Ezedies (sp), as well as a few other minority religions. This is discounting those who are so secularized as to be agnostic.

[JediBoricua]

I seem to have missed a statement by Visc where he said that we have an example of grateful arabs in Kuwait.

But you prove my point, Kuwait was actually liberated from a real invading foreign army.

[Jedi Master Carr]

I didn't misspell Iraqi in any my recent posts maybe you are looking at somebody elses post I don't know. And Is the Qu'ran spelled Koran in English? And come on I type fast it is not like this is for a history paper where I would double check my errors.

[Dutchy]

Originally posted by Darth Viscera
Carr, can you pay more attention to your spelling, please? It's distracting. An Iroquois is a native american, an Iraqi is an Arab. A Korean is an Asian, the Qu'ran is a muslim holy book. I don't mean to be rude, it's just distracting.

You must be really running out of arguments if all you can come up with is a spelling lecture. :)

[Sanis Prent]

Considering that he's expounded upon these same points a billion times over, I think he considered it a moot point. The discussion isn't talking about anything new in that regard...so I fail to see your point there.

[Dutchy]

Jedieb wrote an extensive piece on the subject, so I figured Darth Viscera would have had at least something to say.

Though I was more kidding than being serious, btw.

[Jedi Master Carr]

I did think that was being a little harsh, I only misspelled one of those words and it was a typo last time checked stuff on this board isn't graded, and I have seen countless people who have misspelled more words than me.

[Darth Viscera]

No, I'm not being harsh, I'm just pointing out that it's Qu'ran, not Korean. How would you like it if I were a muslim talking to my peers and kept referring to the holy bible as the holy babylon because I couldn't remember how to spell it? Personally, I'd want someone to correct me.



Originally posted by Dutchy
You must be really running out of arguments if all you can come up with is a spelling lecture. :)

Yes, you're right. Perhaps I should repeat my arguments 5 more times, just to reinforce them a bit. Gimme a break please Dutchy.

[Dutchy]

Originally posted by Darth Viscera
Yes, you're right. Perhaps I should repeat my arguments 5 more times, just to reinforce them a bit. Gimme a break please Dutchy.

I already did:


Originally posted by Dutchy
Jedieb wrote an extensive piece on the subject, so I figured Darth Viscera would have had at least something to say.

Though I was more kidding than being serious, btw.