Quite an "about-face" over Iraq

Yeah, that place out 'there'. Anything not really Cambodia related should go here.
HotRecruiter
Expatriate
Posts: 255
Joined: Tue May 27, 2014 10:38 am
Reputation: 0

Re: Quite an "about-face" over Iraq

Post by HotRecruiter »

taranis wrote:The problem is, America cant win, go in and get bogged down in a war, stay out and be labelled as leaving Iraq to fight a problem by itself. Its about time the west realised that some countries just cannot be successful, let Iraq fall apart and let the Kurds have their own country.

Better still, build a wall around the Islamic world and let them fight it out among themselves. And we can all sit back, watch and socialise with women without veils.
About the Kurds' independence: neither Turkey nor Iran, BIG neighbors, want to see that happen. They have large territories of them near the border with Iraq. It would incite their native Kurdish populations to possible do the same, even try to secede ...

Either another efficient strong man emerges, gets some alliances, or they keep on battling ... or the US imposes an artificial government in, as costly as that is. Obama-term: not likely. But in 2016-7...
User avatar
vladimir
The Pun-isher
Posts: 6077
Joined: Mon May 12, 2014 6:51 pm
Reputation: 185
Location: The Kremlin
Russia

Re: Quite an "about-face" over Iraq

Post by vladimir »

OrangeDragon wrote:You keep failing to define "success". With the middle east I really thing the GOAL is to keep them politically unstable. There's very little good that would come from a unified middle east run by extremists (who are inevitably the ones who will rise to power in that kind of an atmosphere). The US never really implied that it wanted them to like it... only to be too disorganized to do anything substantial ABOUT that dislike. In which case it's a grand success.
OK, now we're getting somewhere.

The problem lies in what effect that 'success' has on the US. I don't think most people would say 911 and so many other incidents were worth it.

The other issue you haven't mentioned is WHY the US wanted them unstable back in the day when they were NOT extremists/ before extremists had a global impact.

If the intention was to de-unify them to keep oil prices down from day 1, then we both agree, but you cannot then support the foreign policy as being anything other than prostitution, and you have to live with the results.
Jesus loves you...Mexico is great, right? ;)
User avatar
The Add Jay
Expatriate
Posts: 894
Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 8:10 pm
Reputation: 4
Location: Nung river
Libya

Re: Quite an "about-face" over Iraq

Post by The Add Jay »

What made Americans upset and especially 9/11 survivors and victims was when it happened we wanted to declare war on a nation(saudi arabia)...not a war on terror. People thought this is it the whole middle east is going down...But thats not what happened at all. How do you know when a war on terror is over? you dont. Now the terror in Obama eyes are the white christian male middle class. aka the tea party.
You're a nobody in the gutter with a Smartphone in your a hand.


Ordinem ad Imperium
User avatar
vladimir
The Pun-isher
Posts: 6077
Joined: Mon May 12, 2014 6:51 pm
Reputation: 185
Location: The Kremlin
Russia

Re: Quite an "about-face" over Iraq

Post by vladimir »

Well, if you had gone after the Saudis, I think a whole lot more people would have supported you, the evidence was overwhelming.But NO, let's get the Saudi family home and safe, and let's go into Iraq and upset a stable/closed Pandora's box.
Jesus loves you...Mexico is great, right? ;)
Post Reply Previous topicNext topic
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: AndyKK, angsta, Bing [Bot], Born-Confused, CEOCambodiaNews, clutchcargo, Cricket99, Ghostwriter, hanno, IraHayes, side, Stiliko and 201 guests