Slashdot Mirror
Discuss the US Presidential Election & the War
With under a week to go, we're opening up discussions on the US Presidential Election. Yesterday we discussed
the economy. Today we take on one of the other major election topics: The War. From the actual wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, to foreign policy issues related to potential threats like North Korea, Russia, and Iran, how do the candidates stack up?
How much do you think the president actually does 'run' anything ? How much does George Bush actually run ? I don't think you need worry too much Obamas capabilities since he can at least string a sentance together and appears to be in control of his mind which is something neither Bush or McCain manage to appear to be capable of.
Americas enemies in the middle east are mainly terrorists and Afghanistan, their main goal is to recruit more terrorists and McCain is exactly the sort of recruiting sergant they're looking for. International terrorism has increased dramatically under George Bush and with more of the same expect it to increase even further.
Afghanistan is not really about terrorism but the failure of the US to properly conquer the country in the first place. The war there is escalating with western forces pinned down and trapped in strong points whilst the country is actually ran by the Taliban around them. On the one hand how Afghanistan is governed has nothing to do with the USA but on the other it really won't do your street cred much good to retreat with your tail between your legs after being unable to achieve victory after all this time.
Again, another statement that doesn't understand military operations. "One career general" actually means "one career general and his ENTIRE staff". You are crazy to think the people are remotely qualified to judge the situation on the ground...unless Brittney and Paris somehow start working in Baghdad. Maybe High School Musical 4 and Dancing with the Stars can be flimed on location? Miley Cyrus as our war correspondent? That's about the only way the average citizen would even be able to point to Iraq on a map, let alone make sound judgment about the situation on the ground.
Well I have a 15 year military background, and I took the whole "Mission Accomplished" thing as it was intended--the end of a military operation (i.e. the defeat of Saddam Hussein's traditional military). Anyone who wants to take it differently just doesn't understand the nature of military operations, or are exteremely cynical/partisan.
Just out of curiosity, how many places outside of the US have you lived in?
Lol estimates for dead civilians in iraq top 1million easily. Number of reported hand counted civilian bodies is 100,000. Though thats not what he was referring to.
Also, what lesson might nations like Iran and Syria take away from the present wars if the US suffers a humiliating defeat at the hands of guerillas funded and equiped by them?
That's already happened. Twice.
1) Viet Nam
2) Iraq
And that's just with US. The world has already seen massive, powerful armies being defeated by small guerrilla forces all throughout history, including the Greeks at the Battle of Thermopylae, the American Revolution and the Russian Occupation of Afghanistan.
We're not losing the war. The war is lost.
If you want to get technical about it, we kicked ass in the war, of which is over. The occupation of Iraq is a total fucking disaster from which there is no "winning". We need to get out. Now.
A US defeat in either Afghanistan or Iraq, perhaps preceded by a precipitous and ill-advised early withdrawal, would embolden all of the insurgents in those regions and have disastrous consequences and implications for Israel, Europe, and the United States for decades to come.
That's just ridiculous. It was ill-advised to go in in the first place. Getting out asap will only help us. Insurgents will be "emboldened"? They're already emboldened. Staying == a perpetually losing situation. Getting out asap at least lets us take a breather and try to recover a bit. Stop listening to your right winger friends for five seconds and come back down to reality.
I believed and still believe that the entire affair was a strategic mistake
Wrong there too. It wasn't a mistake, it was intentional and achieved it's goal: to destabilize the region for two main goals; incredibly lucrative defense contracts and to raise oil prices. Remember the whole thing was based on a fucking lie. There was no "Oops, we didn't really mean to do that". There was also the "Expand American Imperialism" concept floating around too, but ultimately our friends, kids, and countrymen died and are dying for fucking money, pure and simple.
now that we are there we cannot substantially reduce troop numbers until a friendly Iraqi government, which can control and contain the insurgent groups, has been fully established
This will simply never happen. For one, any friendly Iraqi government will be seen as a puppet government of the U.S. with NO support from the people of Iraq. Secondly, there aren't really insurgents anymore, that was only the first couple of years after the war. What's goin on now in Iraq is (repeat after me) a civil war. There's no suppressing that. We're just targets in a crossfire of chaos and staying only hurts ourselves.
[...] probably with semi-permanent US bases
Sure. Let's establish more of what caused all this in the first place.
Seriously, stop listening to political talking points regurgitated by the mass media and try doing your own research and (SCARY!) thinking for yourself for once.
(and don't EVER run for office... please!)