U.S. faces prospect of defeat in Iraq

ThighMan

It's in the name
Jan 19, 2005
345
0
0
Everywhere
http://www.canada.com/topics/news/world/story.html?id=f4d79309-ebc2-44fd-8923-c34aaeb88bfe&k=53244

BAGHDAD -- The United States faces the prospect of defeat in Iraq, according to an active duty U.S. officer who blames American generals for failing to prepare their forces for an insurgency and misleading Congress about the situation there.
So, who is suprised about this. It reminds me of what one Bagdad resident said in an interview with CNN on the day the US forces took Bagdad. He said "We are greatful to the United States for coming here and getting rid of Sadam Hussain, but if they are still here in 6 months we will fight them as the enemy".

While this may not be 100% word for word of what was said, it is damn close.
 

ThighMan

It's in the name
Jan 19, 2005
345
0
0
Everywhere
What is their objective?

I thought it was to get rid of Saddam, and now he's dead, so, haven't they already won?
That is a really good question as the objective has changed several times.

The first objective was to "rid Iraq of Al Qaeda" and everyone, including the US government now admit that there was no real Al Qaeda presence in Iraq (who and how many in the US government knew this at the time of the attack on Iraq will always be open to debate).

After the lack of Al Qaeda presence in Iraq became obvious to everyone, the objective was changed to "get rid of Saddam and bring democracy to Iraq". - This objective was achieved if you want to admit that the current government in Iraq is democratic (it was elected).

The objective then became to stablize Iraq while an elected democratic government gets established to the point that it can effectively govern and control Iraq. - This objective has not been met and is perhaps the one the article is refering to.

Of course, there are those who feel that the real objective all along was for the US to get control of Iraq's oil fields.

I think Iraq is now in a bit of a 'what the heck comes next' kind of state.
I doubt there are few who would disagree with this statement.
 

sdw

New member
Jul 14, 2005
2,189
0
0
One has to ask the question, what exactly does 'win' or 'lose' in Iraq mean?

What is their objective?

I thought it was to get rid of Saddam, and now he's dead, so, haven't they already won?

I think Iraq is now in a bit of a 'what the heck comes next' kind of state.
What happens now is that Saudi Arabia invades to "protect" the Sunni minority and Iran invades to "protect" the Shia majority. The end result will be the loss of independence for Kuwait, the partition of Iraq and a few decades of tension between Saudi Arabia and Iran.

Both Saudi Arabia and Iran will nationalize what oil facilities they procure to pay for replacement of the infrastructure that the USA led "coalition of incompetence" destroyed.
 

littlejimbigher

New member
Jun 21, 2006
1,440
4
0
surrey
What happens now is that Saudi Arabia invades to "protect" the Sunni minority and Iran invades to "protect" the Shia majority. The end result will be the loss of independence for Kuwait, the partition of Iraq and a few decades of tension between Saudi Arabia and Iran.

Both Saudi Arabia and Iran will nationalize what oil facilities they procure to pay for replacement of the infrastructure that the USA led "coalition of incompetence" destroyed.
And the Kurds end up with the short end of the stick once again.
 

jjinvan

New member
Apr 4, 2005
689
0
0
The thing is, Iran and Iraq have been in conflict for hundreds and hundreds of years, I really doubt that it will end anytime soon.

I also doubt that Saudi Arabia will get directly involved.

Maybe the UN will declare Iraq as a new homeland for the palestinians and put the Iraqis in refugee camps? Hey it worked before...
 
Ashley Madison
Vancouver Escorts