Unpopular Populist

[Arizwx]

Good Morning,
And so what of this 80Billion Dollar War?
I enjoy a point-counterpoint discussion with substance and honesty.I understand that the vast majority of posters here have very strong views with regard to this War.I am also aware,that underneath there maybe those that have some questions,and well founded concerns.This is not unpatriotic by any stretch of the imagination.Rather it is our responsibilty to ask reasonable questions.Therefore,as unpopular as I may become...here then some thoughts this warm April morning.
I will not use an agenda based format,that would be much to clinical.I will just throw some observations out,and let them speak for themselves.
How many of you honestly believe that the Saddam regime,as bad as it is/was...is or was a real threat to the US?IOW,could or would Saddam sustain a Military offensive against the US,or for that matter,his neighbors?It appears not the case.
From the end of Gulf War 1,we knew that we destroyed most of the best equipment he had,and at best was 10-15 yrs behind in technology,ill equipped to compete with the likes of the US Military.After 12 years,much of his 'Military' was ill trained,poorly equipped and realistically not even paid.Much of his Regular Army were conscripts or forced into service.Saddam's goon squads,threatening retribution against their businesses and more importantly,the families.Not a good way to garner loyalty or conviction.Imprisoning those children that refused.Some as young as 12years.Still,this also goes on in many other repressed countries.Should we invade them as well?
The vaunted Republican Guard has hit us hard,with light RPG/AK-47 Fire against our Hvy Armour..very impressive.NOT.No C&C to speak of.No coordinated offensive.No Air Force reprisals..remember,most of his AF flew off to Iran of all places in 1991.The rest of his Fighters are exposed to our firepower,and most not airworthy,and even if they were..very few Iraqi 'Aces' grace the anals of History.MiGs are decent aircraft,the Mirage is also acceptable,against a Second Rate opponent.Certainly not the US.
It's a Turkey shoot.As were the tank formations that some young Iraqi Kid Officers decided to take out on a Sunday drive.Brilliant.NOT.
Sure,some guerilla tactics were somewhat effective in slowing our advance,however the haboob(Sandstorm)posed more of a threat and crippled thier efforts as well.Otherwise,we owened the skies.
A Counter offensive never materalized..even to defend the Capitol.We rolled in from the Airport on thier Fwy with little resistance.We took some fire,yes and they paid in spades.We lost more Aircraft to bad Wx and friendly fire than to thier antiquated Triple A,designed in the 70s.
A lucky Scud or SUN4 did make it into Kuwait,disrupting the shopper's ability to take advantage of the Sales at the Eddie Bauer or Nike Stores.
Our Pac2 and Pac 3 Patriots took care of the rest of the 'Flying Trashcans'.
Even the Al Samoud IIs were rendered useless.Pathetic.
The Iraqis did not even bother to defend the airfields in W Iraq,a Prime launch area for an offensive against Isreal.
In comparison to '90 and '91,very few oil fields were set ablaze,thanks to our Sp Ops intercedeing early on.The mining of the Port of Umm Qassar was more of a nuisance..and the uprising at Al Basrah could have been handled better,IMO..however,in the scheme of things,it has turned out well thusfar thanks to the Brits.
The Kurds have been MOST impressive in the North,with little support from Coalition forces.Even Turkey backed off!Mosul has been thier deal,and have handled it well.Ditto Kirkuk,with our Airpower quelling any Rep Guard thoughts of an offensive.
Speaking of offensive,the conscripts by in large have surrendered in their underwear,the best they have wear civilian clothing and drop thier weapons and run.We let many go.
By any Miltary standard,notwithstanding the suffering of our POWs..which I take seriously..this has by in large been a laugher...a joke.Think about it.We took over the Main Palace in Baghdad..and spoke tongue in cheek of taking a shower in Saddams' watercloset,bare light bulbs and all!We took down his Statuary.We,in short kicked azz.No WMD salvos.No serious coordinated counteroffensive.WMD Suits,masks,etc left behind,giving us pause.Psychological.'Baghdad Bob',aka 'Elmo' spewing utter nonsence.
Still,Tikrit,Sadman's home is underestimated,and we MUST take it soon to finish the job.
Is the looting more of a threat?Possibly.
Is North Korea a much more viable force to reckon with?Of course.
A regime change needs to be the Priority in both places.Can we?Should we.You bet...but for 80billion Bucks I expceted a btter fight.
Opinions are just that,and this then is mine.Take it with the beleif that I am sincere and in my way of thinking,I ask,what were we expecting?Not much thusfar obviously.

[M2]

Arizwx: Playing devil's advocate this morning...? Again as you know, we are there to 1: Liberate Iraq from the dictatorship as his oppressiveness stifled not only the Iraqis themselves or a better term may be 'snuffed' since he blatantly killed his own countrymen and civilians plus others without regard to human life - like Hitler. He had a greater opinion of himself than reality - a megalomaniac. He'd do anything to anyone, any country. He was/is a rogue ticking explosive device himself.

2: Rout out terrorism. He's been working with Al Qaeda and our Special Forces were on the ground in Northern Iraq months ago talking to the locals and gathering evidence of his AQ alliances, et. al. Why do you think we were prevented from coming in from the North? Because alot of the 'hard evidence' was booking out via the North as we were streaming in from the South. How do you think all the beautiful palaces as you say were cleaned out down to the nap...no Persian rugs, no food, clothing - anything! Only a few pieces of furniture left behind...it all had to go somewhere -somehow. By truck! He has his 'stuff'. Still think all is not what it seems on CNN/FoxNews - that's only the forward face of reality.

Again...just my opinion and everyone has one. ....Coffee.....

[Guest]

M2 - I couldn't agree with you more - thats the primary objectives of this war. Will we succeed - only time will tell and as with everything it takes time.

As for Arizwx's statement that this is an 80Billion$ War - yes it is - but WHAT PRICE CAN YOU PUT ON FREEDOM. In my opinion this is money that we are investing to keep our kids safe and their kids safe too.

Patricia

[Arizwx]

Arizwx: Playing devil's advocate this morning...? Again as you know, we are there to 1: Liberate Iraq from the dictatorship as his oppressiveness stifled not only the Iraqis themselves or a better term may be 'snuffed' since he blatantly killed his own countrymen and civilians plus others without regard to human life - like Hitler. He had a greater opinion of himself than reality - a megalomaniac. He'd do anything to anyone, any country. He was/is a rogue ticking explosive device himself.

2: Rout out terrorism. He's been working with Al Qaeda and our Special Forces were on the ground in Northern Iraq months ago talking to the locals and gathering evidence of his AQ alliances, et. al. Why do you think we were prevented from coming in from the North? Because alot of the 'hard evidence' was booking out via the North as we were streaming in from the South. How do you think all the beautiful palaces as you say were cleaned out down to the nap...no Persian rugs, no food, clothing - anything! Only a few pieces of furniture left behind...it all had to go somewhere -somehow. By truck! He has his 'stuff'. Still think all is not what it seems on CNN/FoxNews - that's only the forward face of reality.

Again...just my opinion and everyone has one. ....Coffee.....

You and Ticka respectfully,missed the Points,both mine and that of the intentions of Res 1441.
Both of you remarked that our #1 Objective is to Liberate the Iraqi people.
Since when?Last week?Fine,it is noble,however...that was not the #1 Objective.
This War has more faces than the Phantom of the Opera.The #1 Objective was/is to DISARM Saddam,NOT to liberate.Interesting how this War has taken on many causes...again,all noble..however it is very fluid in nature.
So,Let us liberate North Korea.Let us Disarm North Korea.They have Nukes..not maybe...not someday.NOW.That is my point.They are a viable threat.They said as much.They had the gall to test ICBMs with Powell as thier 'guest'!That is a threat.
How thin can we spread our Military?I am not sure.I am fairly confident we can resolve the situation however.I simply wish we could liberate the poor folks and ..BTW,Ticka..I have 3 sons.I want them safe.ICBMs and Nukes make me just abit uncomfortable is all.
I am playing Devils' Advocate to be sure.The reason?To avoid tunnelvision in the wide scope of world affairs.
#2 Terrorism.YES.Let's get bin Laden...or his one eyed freak friend.The we can talk.
North Korea..again..are Nukes with intent to use Terrorism in your book?
I would consider it so.
Liberation of an oppressed people is very noble.Invading a Middle Eastern Nation also makes us one juicy target for fundamentalists in the Region.
Let us not forget...Freedom can come at a heavy cost,and I do not refer to the 80Billion.I agree...the cost is justified.
There a monies also that still need distribution within this country to local and state agencies for Quick Response via Homeland Security.Let's free that up as well Pronto!
We are still quite vulnerable to attack from Terrorist Sleeper Cells.Border issues,et al.
I am playing Devils Advocate to stay focused not just on Iraq..but what our President has warned us of.
Again,I have 3 sons..and want them safe.This is a different world now,and liberating Iraqis,or disarming Saddam,or a regime change is/are a small piece of the pie.That is my point.

[mf_dolphin]

The liberation of the Iraqi people is a direct result on the enforcement of 1441 and prior UN resolutions by the coalition. This includes resolutions that are still in effect from the 91 war. Saddam had years to comply with the resolutions and avoid this war and chose not to. The President decided that the only way to achieve the results demanded by 1441 was to change the regime. That's when the liberation became one in the same goal as the disarmament.

The North Korea situation is currently in the hands of the UN. Not that I think they will do anything to resolve the situation, but that's the path we have decided to take. I'm sure that our President will do what he feels is required in this respect jsut as he has with Iraq. As far as the missile test when Powell was there, it was short range missile not an ICBM if I remember right. Mr Powell wasn't a guest of North Korea, he was a guest of South Korea. The recent tests by North Korea have only had a 50% success rate and these were on proven systems. Their ICBM threat is suggested but noot proven by any means. North Korea is a threat, but it's a threat that will be handled when and how our Commander in Chief decides.

The war on terrorism has not been forsaken by any means. The fact that the news coverage has been pre-empted by the Iraqi war doesn't mean that things have stopped there. I have a lot of confidence that our Government/Military are fully capable of doing more than one thing at a time.

[vbhoutex]

Great discussion so far everyone!!!

Was Saddam a direct threat to the US? NO, but due to his documented support of terrorism he is a "threat". Does this justify an $80 Billion war? Not in and of itself. Does the "liberation" of the Iraqi people justify this? Not unless that "liberation" is COMPLETE!! By that I mean that the Iraqi people are in control of their country including their economy and the ceasing of 2000 yr old tribal fueds. Until there is some sort of united government without tribal fueds being the forefront of the discussion, ie an Iraq for all Iraqi's free and unencumberd by ethinic divisions within their own country it will not be COMPLETE. Was it worth it? That remains to be seen. The Coalition and President Bush have a LONG ROAD to drive down before this is "OVER". Do not get me wrong, I do support what we have now done, but THERE IS MUCH MUCH MORE TO DO!!

Meanwhile we have been all but ignoring an increasingly unstable Afganistan, and a TOTALLY UNSTABLE NORTH KOREAN situation whom we gave money to just weeks ago to placate them while we were occupied elsewhere. Meanwhile they do an "in your face" and test long range missles capable of hitting Denver!!! NOT GOOD imo!!! The are spitting in everyones face and laughing. Does that justify war? It is the same thing Saddam did. Think about it.

I do not know the answers. What I do know is that we certainly are not free of "THREATS" to our freedom and will not be for many years to come. What is the answer? More war? More and tighter Homeland secutiry? I do think that we MUST STRENGTHEN our own security much more than it has been. The borders to this country are still wide open and many still cross illegally and they are not all our neighbors from the south by any matter or means. If OBL is still alive, and he does appear to be much more alive than Saddam, I feel we are still in big trouble security wise. We may be talking small amounts as far as people killed and wounded by suicide attacks, but one is too many!! If these attacks do begin, and I fear they will, an already unstable economy will become a shambles I fear.

As Arizwx does, I also welcome respectful discussion and posting of opinions concerning all of this. None of us have all the answers, but we do all have opinions.

[Arizwx]

The liberation of the Iraqi people is a direct result on the enforcement of 1441 and prior UN resolutions by the coalition. This includes resolutions that are still in effect from the 91 war. Saddam had years to comply with the resolutions and avoid this war and chose not to. The President decided that the only way to achieve the results demanded by 1441 was to change the regime. That's when the liberation became one in the same goal as the disarmament.

The North Korea situation is currently in the hands of the UN. Not that I think they will do anything to resolve the situation, but that's the path we have decided to take. I'm sure that our President will do what he feels is required in this respect jsut as he has with Iraq. As far as the missile test when Powell was there, it was short range missile not an ICBM if I remember right. Mr Powell wasn't a guest of North Korea, he was a guest of South Korea. The recent tests by North Korea have only had a 50% success rate and these were on proven systems. Their ICBM threat is suggested but noot proven by any means. North Korea is a threat, but it's a threat that will be handled when and how our Commander in Chief decides.

The war on terrorism has not been forsaken by any means. The fact that the news coverage has been pre-empted by the Iraqi war doesn't mean that things have stopped there. I have a lot of confidence that our Government/Military are fully capable of doing more than one thing at a time.

Marshall,
My response was to Ticka and M2,who said the #1 Objective was Liberation...not indirect or a result of.If I recall in Speeches over the past months,Liberating was not a major portion of the rhetoric,a regime change was avoided like the plague..Disarming was the #1 issue..WMDs.
One could carry out a linear argument and say yes,Liberation is a direct result of...Fine.Then why did Mr Powell not emphasise this to the UN Security Council?Because,IMHO,it would have smacked of Regime Change.I believe it would have flown better if Liberation was the topic along with disarmament.20/20 hindsight.
Moreover..I am well aware of the 91 Resolution.I know Saddam had 12 years,this is academic.
Furthermore,with issue to Korea.I mentioned mr Powell was a guest..I should have clarified that he was in S Korea..I assumed that too was academic.I mentioned it as thier 'guest' sarcatically,as he was there to calm nerves in the region.The Missile test,may not have been an ICBM.I believe it was a SR or Mid Range Anti-Ship Missile.The point was,the intent to intimidate was clear.
Your assumption of 'Only' 50% is 50% too much.Any percentage raises the bar.With each test,comes new results,supposedly buy logic to improve the 50%.Still,a threat.
We chose the path to seek the UN just before we invaded Iraq as well.We chose a similar path with N Korea.I agree,the toothless org will pander.
I do not question our President's authority.He is our Commander in Chief.Never did I in any way question this.Let me make this clear.
David,I doubt we gave monies to N Korea..or not just yet.An Aide package which would include such presumeably has been discussed,which World Opinion has it,is why N Korea is acting up.Their economy is a shambles.Conversely,thier Southern nieghbor is thriving.This makes a Dicator nervous,as his half starved populace sees the benefits of a healthy nation investing in Western Style capitolism.Japan..ditto.This is why I believe the real threat to be aimed at Japan and/or S Korea..at which time we would be held responsible for thier defense...Morally and ethically.
I trust this clarifies further my aforementioned remarks.

[Stephanie]

I agree DJ, the first resolution was for Saddam's regime to disarm. The second resolution that we sought, but never received support for was to go and "disarm Saddam" and eliminate his WMD's (obviously not a direct quote) if he doesn't comply with the original resolution. To me, that also implied a regime change. When we didn't have the support, we took it upon ourselves to do it. Fortunately, the "war" has been nothing but and it looks like Saddam was all bark and no bite, except to his people. What I'm afraid of now is that since this seems to be going exceptionally well for us and it's only a matter of time when all of Iraq will be under the coalition's (and then Iraqi people's) control, is that the potential WMD's that we went in for in the first place which still have not been found and/or identified will be swept under the rug as if they were dust bunnies. We have done a wonderful, noble thing by liberating these people, but it was not the initial goal.