Iraq: What to do? [FCS] [ferret]

[ferret]

This debate is a continuation of a debate from FCS. The original thread is located here:

http://www.frankensteincs.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=3320

The original thread post:
Its been quiet here lately so here's a new topic. Don't hold back, if you have a political view, post it. This thread will be moderatored like always. I'll post mine later.

Topic: What should the US do with Iraq?

Summary: Now that we're there, whether the reasons were good or bad, what should we do? Should we simply leave, beat the insurgents until they're no more, work on a new compromise with the Iraqi people, etc? Post your ideas on how best to resolve the current Iraqi situation.

Please note, we're not interested in whether or not the war was valid. That's moot at this stage, we're already there. I want to know what you think should be done to get us to a "happy ending"

[[TREK]RedAlert]

lets talk about why we are there...

first myth: OIL... NO we are not there for oil, the first gulf war was about oil, there was no way wo could let Sadam control iraq's 25% oft he worlds crude oil, plus the 15% from Kuwait; that would enable iraq to control over 35% of the worlds oil. that would be unaccaptable. but this war was not for oil, the united states was doing better buying from Sadam thru the UN oil for food program. Saddam was selling oil way under the market value. Besides, we arent an imperial power, just cuz our army is in control of their country doesnt mean the US is in control; of their Oil. we are not pumping and stealing oil.

2nd myth: "Wag The Dog"... I do NOT believe even President G W Bush would use our armed forces to bring his poll numbers up. it would take a very dispicable person to pay with the lives of 700 some solders to be re-elected. He is a moron and listens to whatever his advisers tell him. (exactly the problem that got Kennedy into the Bay of Pigs fiasco in 1960 in Cuba) Rumsfield says go so he goes. Rummy tells him there is WMD so he tells the world. Rummy tells him it wont turn into a long quagmire, he listens and belives.

3rd myth: Al-Qeda/Iraq connection: NONE EXISTS! there is no connection between Osama Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein, NONE!
Saddam wasnt that dumb, he has spent over 25 years in power trying to keep terrorists and islamic fundementalists out of his country. He knew the danger that terrorists could pose to his power. there was never any connection. am i saying that there was never a al-qeda militant in his country, but how can he be responsible for that, there are al-qeda militants in OUR country, is bush responsible for that??????!!!!

Fact: we are there because of revenge, we saw Iraq as someeone we could beat up after 9-11. almost directly after pred bush started outlining the case for iraq.

we were lied to to get approval to go in and now we are there and our troops are commiting humanitarian attrocities(sp?) and probably the whole of the islamic bloc countries are turning against us. But if we leave now we will be leaving the world a much less stable place that when we invaded iraq. if u asked me this ? before we were already in there id say STAY OUT! however, i also understand that the phrase "you borke it, you bought it" applies here. we now have a responsibility to leave behind us in Iraq a country able to govern its people, a country that is not going to break down into civil war, and a country ready to be a economic player in the global community. First tho we must turn the keys over to the interm authority on June 30th. and we need to have an elected body in Iraq say that we are wanted and needed in that country and if we arent we leave, simple as that. that was the problem in Vietnam, we didnt have the support of the population. if we are going to fight insurgants in Iraq we cant do it if the majority of the population doesnt wasnt us there. insurgant wars need one of 2 things to be effective: either that the majority of the popilation is indifferent to the cause or they are so affraid of the insurgants that they will not support us. also, you need a force 10 to 15 times the size fo the insurgant force, that means if the iraqis can find 30,000 people to try to gert us out, we need 300,000 to 450,000 to defeat them, we only have a 135,000 troop level now, that means we can only fight a force the size of about 10,000 to 14,000 any more than that and we need more troops. so... what should we do? figure out the exat size of the gurella force we are fighting and change our troop level to accomodate that.


ALSO:::: IRAQI PRISONER SCANDAL:


THIS HAS THE ABILITY TO COMPLETLY MITIGATE ALL THE GOOD WE HAVE DONE/COULD DO FOR IRAQ.

WE MUST CONVINCE THE MUSLIM BLOC COUNTRIED FO THE WORLD THAT WE ARE SERIOUS IN PROSOCUTING THE PEOPLE WHO COMMITED THESE CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY.

ANYONE WHO ORDERED OUR SOLDERS TO COMMIT THESE ACTS MUST BE PUNISHED AS/MORE SEVERELY THAN THE ONES WHO ACTUALLY CARRIED OUT THE CRIMES....

THIS IS VERY UNLIKELY BUT I BELIEVE THIS IS THE ONLY THING WE COULD DO TO CONVINCE THE IRAQIS WE ARE SERIOUS: WE MUST ALLOW THE SOLDERS TO BE TRIED IN IRAQ ON IRAQI STATE TELEVISION AND HAVE THEM SERVE THEIR SENTENCES IN A IRAQI JAIL.

[MoreYangThanYin]

I agree with torturing them as being bad and despicable but try them in Iraq? I think not. The people will let them lose because they will feel bad. Tough crap they did something to DESERVE being there. And there they will stay. I say call in a jury from somewhere that isnt Iraq or U.S. if your going to do a trial.

[ArchAngelKIng]

Saddam was fostering and supporting terrorists indirectly or directly is what I believe. Maybe he was bluffing about weapons of mass destruction but he shouldn't have bluffed. He should have come clean like the U.N. demanded. He was defying the world at large! The world knew it and should have forced him to comply, for the safety of us all.

I also think Saddam should have been removed from power for many crimes against humanity he did anyways. Mass graves, rape rooms, rape parties.

I do however think that the U.N. should do better to enforce the resolutions is passes or it will become a useless world forum. Just like any law a country passes it must be enforceable and enforced or it's totally useless.

I see no reason why United States should not reclaim their cost of this war by oil. I think the President should be up front and center on this issue. We are going to get as much oil as we need to account for our cost in this war. This would boost our economy and send a message that our enemies will not be held hostage to Terrorists ro Terrorism. It's very very important the we emerge stronger from 911 attack. Or it will happen again.

No, the United States should not pull out of IRAQ. It must be responsible for it's actions. There are millions of IRAQI's that deppend on a peaceful solution to IRAQ. It must be done right! It must see that IRAQ emerges from the ashes in a way that is friendly to the world and to the neighbouring Arab nations. It would a great dishonor all the men and women that have died in this war if a pullout is done at the wrong time for the wrong reasons.

I do however feel that there is not enough forces in IRAQ right from the very start. More forces need to stablize IRAQ until a government can train and hire security forces for it's country.

Cheers,

AAK