The Official War Room

Originally posted by SoniCX
and we dont see the real war pictures anyways. just the pics that they can take b4 they get shot.
Click to expand...
I don't know how those pictures would not be "real" war pictures, assuming they're in the middle of it... :rolleyes:

This war has been the most widely publicized war ever. Live video and everything. I'm believing what I'm seeing.
 
A number of news organizations today announced that they are removing their "embedded" reporters and cameramen so that they can get a better view of the war. The restrictions placed on the reporters have severely limited their ability to "see" what is going on. Embedding was an amazing success story for the US. Limiting what was reported on and limiting who the reporters could speak with. Now that more reporters are free from the controls of the US, maybe we will get a better view of what is actually happening.

By the way, where did all the US flags come from that the Iraqi people have been waving? I somehow doubt that Saddam had been stockpiling them. The US flag has no business being flown in Iraq, except at the US embassy. Thankfully the military today stated the same and has prohibited the troops from displaying the flag.
 
Originally posted by Ugg
...
By the way, where did all the US flags come from that the Iraqi people have been waving? I somehow doubt that Saddam had been stockpiling them. The US flag has no business being flown in Iraq, except at the US embassy. Thankfully the military today stated the same and has prohibited the troops from displaying the flag.
Click to expand...

You've intertwined two different issues. US personel displaying the US flag and Iraqis displaying the US flag. I assume that troops are not under orders to prevent Iraqis from displaying the flag. For the most part, the US troops have been doing a fairly good job of this even before this prohibition. A few notable exceptions of course, but overall, they've been keeping it low key.
 
Originally posted by binaryDigit
You've intertwined two different issues. US personel displaying the US flag and Iraqis displaying the US flag. I assume that troops are not under orders to prevent Iraqis from displaying the flag. For the most part, the US troops have been doing a fairly good job of this even before this prohibition. A few notable exceptions of course, but overall, they've been keeping it low key.
Click to expand...

Yes, I did intertwine the two, but I could have made it more clear. Obviously those flags were handed out by Americans to the Iraqi people, were they soldiers or reporters? Either way it was nothing more than a photo op.

The Brits have refrained from such imperialistic shows, why can't the Americans follow suit?
 
Originally posted by Ugg
Yes, I did intertwine the two, but I could have made it more clear. Obviously those flags were handed out by Americans to the Iraqi people, were they soldiers or reporters? Either way it was nothing more than a photo op.

The Brits have refrained from such imperialistic shows, why can't the Americans follow suit?
Click to expand...

Well one because the US was the driving force (both literally and figuratively) in the war, so two, they have more of a vested interest in making sure that the PR war is also won. I would assume the troops provided the flags and yes, in many ways it is contrived. But unless you think the soldiers threatened them unless they acted happy and waved the flag, their positive attitude is the bigger issue, not that they were waving some US flags. Wars are fought on many fronts, all very important to win.
 
MDLarson said:
Firstly, from what I have seen on TV, the war has truly been a liberation. The majority of Iraqi people have welcomed coalition forces with open arms (human appendages, not guns.) It has been very heart-warming to see the Iraqi people so happy!

Secondly, I have been growing more and more unforgiving and antagonistic of those who see no good coming out of the war, and those who so vehemently accuse President Bush of crimes a normal person would attribute to Saddam himself. George W. Bush does not equal Saddam Insane.

Have a great day, Iraq! Let freedom ring.
Click to expand...


It's been a long time this thread has been dead. With 3 years passed when this discussion was on, I have reread some of it. I was especially startled by your comment, MDLarson. Do youy realize how much off your view of the whole issue was three years ago? I hope you do.

The WMDs have never been found, the pictures of rejoicing Iraqis have obviously been taken from a very slanted angle, Iraq is far from stable, Military, guerilla and civilan casualties are still on the rise, the troops are getting more and more worn off, the costs of the whole adventure are beyond control and GWB loses more and more support (well, not solely just based on the Iraq disaster). Shall I go on? I'm not saying getting rid of Saddam (BTW I hope they don't grant him his wish for execution by bullet but instead hang him like a dog) was a bad thing. It's just that there have been so many mistakes in the whole undertaking that you have to ask youself if the end justifies the means, even more so that this is far from over and a stable and strong government has yet to be established in Iraq.

What do you guys and gals think? We're all 3 years wiser and I wonder what your stance is today.
 
That the USA started a war under false pretense and theoretically would need some UN sanctions? Will the president of the USA, who's clearly responsible for these crimes, ever have to stand trial? Or, if that seems rather impossible, will he just say "I'm sorry!" when he leaves the office? I know, I know, probably someone will now again say I'm a little too aggressive myself about this stuff, that I'm an outsider and have no idea about all of this, but let's just get one thing clear here about this: The USA brought war to places _much_ nearer to where I live. "Fight them there so you don't have to fight them here?" Take it in- or outside, buddies, because the world's _my_ bar as well.
 
Wow, I hadn't noticed this thread before and some of the views stated just amazed me...

I essentially agree with what fryke posted, above. To summarize, I thought, and still think, the invasion of Iraq was nothing to do with "liberation" (*cough*), a dictatorship, WMD, or 9/11. As I expected, sadly, it has turned out to be quite a mess and I don't see things getting better any time soon. In fact, I still see hawkish attitudes towards other Middle Eastern countries. The world is becoming less safe now.

From some of the things I read or hear, I really, really despair at some people's attitudes and, erm, questionable understanding of history and politics. Now, that said, I should emphasize that, as some posters have already raised, people in any country are still individuals. So it goes without saying that no one should tar a whole nation with the views expressed by one or two of its citizens.

There's just so much which could be said or cited. I'll keep this brief, though.
 
I think GWB wants a Holy war. Not between Christians and Muslims, but between Muslims and Muslims (Sunnis and Shias). Keep them fighting each other so they eventually implode.

Divide and rule. Worked well for the British in its former Empire days.

To prove my point, why is it that on more than one occasion it is alleged that coalition forces were about to apprehend Osama Bin Laden, but were told to withdraw at the eleventh hour? What's the reason for keeping him alive?
 
The suffering inflicted on the Iraqi people by the Saddam Hussein regime absolutely PALES when compared with the suffering and misery brought upon them by the US from 1991 to the present; from the ten year embargo which destroyed Iraq's acclaimed social services structure, to the devastation of Iraqi towns and villages by US firepower, the wholesale slaughter of civilians, the poisoning of Iraqi land by tons of depleted uranium weapons resulting in an explosive increase in horrible birth defects and cancers......a war crime of staggering proportions, and the intentional creation and encouragement of internecine warfare between Islamic factions(Iraq has no history of such fighting between Islamic groups prior to the US invasion and occupation).
The occupation of Iraq is just one part of an overall "game plan" by the US for domination of the entire near and middle east(the current rape of Lebanon by America's client, Israel, is just one facet).
I recommend reading the book, "The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and It's Geostrategic Imperatives, by Zbigniew Brzezinski: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/04...104-6578716-2602349?s=books&v=glance&n=283155. It was published in 1998.
Brzizinski was President Jimmy Carter's national security advisor, and is a Machiavellian proponent of what is, in fact, an imperialist thesis.
Read it in light of what is currently transpiring in the near/middle east. It's all chillingly laid out in this book.
 
And I recomend the viewing of "Rambo 3":

"Plot Summary for
Rambo III (1988) [from imdb.com]

John Rambo's former Vietnam superior, Colonel Samuel Trautman, has been assigned to lead a mission to help the Mujahedeen rebels who are fighting the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, but the Buddhist Rambo turns down Trautman's request that Rambo help out. When the mission goes belly up and Trautman is kidnapped and tortured by Russian Colonel Zaysen, Rambo launches a rescue effort and allies himself with the Mujahedeen rebels and gets their help in trying to rescue Trautman from Zaysen."

:D
 
I watched that recently, reminded me of the time some ex CIA high up admitted teh US had no human assest in Afghanistan prior to the invasion because their guys had all been taliban, who the US had supplyed with them guns to fight the russians.
 
Esquilinho said:
And I recomend the viewing of "Rambo 3":

"Plot Summary for
Rambo III (1988) [from imdb.com]

John Rambo's former Vietnam superior, Colonel Samuel Trautman, has been assigned to lead a mission to help the Mujahedeen rebels who are fighting the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, but the Buddhist Rambo turns down Trautman's request that Rambo help out. When the mission goes belly up and Trautman is kidnapped and tortured by Russian Colonel Zaysen, Rambo launches a rescue effort and allies himself with the Mujahedeen rebels and gets their help in trying to rescue Trautman from Zaysen."

:D
Click to expand...

I actually saw that movie about 3 weeks after 9/11. The irony of it would be too funny hadn't been there so much suffering and death on 9/11.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top