FK official war thread !!

[aversion]

Originally posted by TallGuyLittleCar
I appologize, the milk in my cereal this morning had gone over.

if you add vodka you can make a white russian, it's never too late

[aversion]

Originally posted by Nik128
I must state some facts and direct this post directly to you who immediately believe in everything media says.

I don't think there's anyone here who is dumb enough to think that one picture is anything more than that, and that one image rarely, if ever, sums up a whole situation without hindsight.




edit - Just saw one iraqi in baghdad on the excellent channel4 news in england. He said what I think will sum up what a lot of people are feeling there today, "...the americans are here, we don't want to be invaded or occupied, but if they are here just to liberate us a thousand thanks." (paraphrased a bit)

I think that's a pretty good measure of mood in the city in my opinion, they still don't know what to expect from the americans, they've been told everything from every angle, and iraqis are a very nationalistic people. If they feel like they are being liberated, being empowered, then they will be welcoming, if they feel like they are being occupied there will be no welcome.

they are a very proud people, an oppressed people, a people who don't know what will happen, they have been told that the coalition is an invading, occupying force, so there may be signs of jubilation that the bombing has stopped, that the fighting is over for them, and of course that saddam is 'gone', but they will also be wary of the coalition forces, and I think we need to reassue them that they will be in control of their own country asap. A lot of the people who fought against the americans weren't fighting for saddam they were fighting for iraq. Hopefully they will soon see that that was not necessary.

[Nik128]

No argument with your post aversion. I just wanted to make it clear that reports of groups of people (small or large) opposing their leader is insufficient to say that this war either right or wrong.

[gdstudios]

Originally posted by aversion
I don't think there's anyone here who is dumb enough to think that one picture is anything more than that, and that one image rarely, if ever, sums up a whole situation without hindsight.

Well, eh, you see, uh, I may not be that bright. Remember that. Nah, just kidding. Of course there are two sides to every story. I liked the quote you posted from the Iraqi and I think that is how most of them feel. Who actually thinks the US is going to occupy and bilk this nation of its resources? Is there a precedent for such thinking? Nope. Everyone just give it time and hopefully the rest of this will turn out as well as the military operation. I'm telling you, this operation will be talked about for decades to come.

[swampy]

Originally posted by Nik128
I must state some facts and direct this post directly to you who immediately believe in everything media says.

Pleeease... there are Iraqis opposing and supporting Saddam, just as there are Americans opposing and supporting Bush. In WWII, people of same nationality fought both against and for Germans. There are collaborators elsewhere. And this streches from centuries and centuries. It is nothing new.

Just because your media shows Iraqis cheering for foreign troops and speaking against their leader, it DOESN'T mean if we are doing the right or wrong thing. The message it sends is inneficient given all the circumstances of the war.
In addition, if your media only shows Iraqis opposing Saddam and not killed civilians in the bombing...er..ever thought of a word "propaganda" ?

I totally agree, I had a tear in my eye when I watched but I'm not so naive as to think that in a city as big as baghdad that it is indicative of how the majority are feeling.

All we see on te news is a microcosmic snapshot of what is going on, and that snapshot is only what the networks deem to be newsworthy and they play it to the hilt.

The majority of Iraqis may well be feeling the same at the thought of liberation, but we haven't seen it yet and some are still fighting on. time will tell.

[Nik128]

Originally posted by gdstudios
I'm telling you, this operation will be talked about for decades to come.

For once I'll agree with you

[gdstudios]

Originally posted by Nik128
For once I'll agree with you

Well that's nice. I am assuming you think it will be attacked for decades. I highly doubt that, unless the rebuilding fails dismally. Are you hoping that it is, or are you on the right side of history?

[gdstudios]

Originally posted by swampy
I totally agree, I had a tear in my eye when I watched but I'm not so naive as to think that in a city as big as baghdad that it is indicative of how the majority are feeling.

All we see on te news is a microcosmic snapshot of what is going on, and that snapshot is only what the networks deem to be newsworthy and they play it to the hilt.

The majority of Iraqis may well be feeling the same at the thought of liberation, but we haven't seen it yet and some are still fighting on. time will tell.

Just a question Swampster. A serious question, I'm not baiting. I want to hear your answer.

Isn't it enough just seeing one of these Iraqis grasping the freedom that we are all fortunate to have? After all, don't most of you think that even one civilian casualty is enough to undermine the operation?

[Nik128]

Originally posted by gdstudios
Well that's nice. I am assuming you think it will be attacked for decades. I highly doubt that, unless the rebuilding fails dismally. Are you hoping that it is, or are you on the right side of history?

Of course not. I don't want to assume or hope for anything in advance other than the peace in the region.
Speaking of history, based on previous wars such as Korea and Vietnam--this war is very likely to remain highly controversial for years to come. In contrast to other wars though, here we brought the future of UN to the question.

[gerbick]

Originally posted by gdstudios
Just a question Swampster. A serious question, I'm not baiting. I want to hear your answer.

Isn't it enough just seeing one of these Iraqis grasping the freedom that we are all fortunate to have? After all, don't most of you think that even one civilian casualty is enough to undermine the operation?

dude, I'm not swampy by no means, but there are some people on this board that would argue that is not enough.

one person embraces the freedom, while others cower in either fear, or dead due to the fighting, bombing, and war.

</devil's advocate>

you know, that stance is rather easy...

[gdstudios]

Originally posted by Nik128
Of course not. I don't want to assume or hope for anything in advance other than the peace in the region.
Speaking of history, based on previous wars such as Korea and Vietnam--this war is very likely to remain highly controversial for years to come. In contrast to other wars though, here we brought the future of UN to the question.

Interesting post. Here's reality Nik. Vietnam and Korea were controversial for specific reasons, and most of the population of the US thinks both were controversial. This one will only controversial to the 20 percent who were so deadset against it.

As for the UN, I think the UN brought their own future into question. Ask yourself, would these Iraqis be free if the UN was still in charge? The answer is no. And, in fact, I would venture to say that left up to the UN, the people of Iraq qould never have been free. Go ahead argue with this, fine with me. I'm secure and confident that what has been done is right.

[gdstudios]

Originally posted by gerbick
dude, I'm not swampy by no means, but there are some people on this board that would argue that is not enough.

one person embraces the freedom, while others cower in either fear, or dead due to the fighting, bombing, and war.

</devil's advocate>

you know, that stance is rather easy...

Of course, Gerbs. I'm sure that no one here at FK is a bad person, at least I hope not. And all of you have good intentions. I do believe that many on this board have an interest in weakening the United States, not necessary because they hate Ameirca, but because they feel it is our responsibility to prop up other struggling nations. A noble belief, can't attack that really. I know I'll get in trouble for saying it, but I believe that many of the people on this board are misinformed. Not uninformed, because you all seem very educated. I just feel you are misinformed. Many of you would argue that I am jingoistic and not open to what other nations think...etc. A fair comment. I accept the criticism, but again, history is on my country's side. Once again, the men and women of the US armed forces have liberated a country. And the fact remains that under UN control, Iraqis would have never been freed.

[swampy]

Originally posted by gdstudios
Just a question Swampster. A serious question, I'm not baiting. I want to hear your answer.

Isn't it enough just seeing one of these Iraqis grasping the freedom that we are all fortunate to have?

No. I think we take our freedoms for granted. I think some people proclaim it so much that they forget what it actually, really means.

I also think that your cheapening the situation by implying that we sent troops into a country so that we can feel better about our freedom

After all, don't most of you think that even one civilian casualty is enough to undermine the operation?

not sure how you are labelling me here, the post is directed at me specifically yet you seem to be grouping me with some other people. I'm a little confused.

I'm not personally not claiming that one civilian casualty isn't worth a free nation, never have.

I am claiming that the nation isn't free yet, there has been (best guetsimate) 1000 civilan casualties, there will be many more until the conflict is over and there will be many more after it has ended due to unexploded ordnance, depleted uranium and just plain old accidents that occur as a consequence of the campaign.

And I am claiming that the nation of Iraq will never be totally free when it owes a debt to the US.

Don't beleive me ? look at what happenned when France refused to join the coallition, everyone started crying about how they owed the US a debt from world war 1 and 2.

[gerbick]

swampy, I honestly think that GDS is just asking you a question due to your ability to answer with both sides of the story in mind.

that's my take.

[gdstudios]

Originally posted by swampy
No. I think we take our freedoms for granted.

I also think that your cheapening the situation by inplying that we sent troops into a country so that we can feel better about our freedom

[gerbick]erm[/gerbick], ok. No I am not cheapening anything, I was asking a question and I got my answer. Thank you.

not sure how you are labelling me here, the post is directed at me specifically yet you seem to be grouping me with some other people. I'm a little confused.

I'm not labeling you. My apologies for the plurality in my question.

I'm not personally not claiming that one civilian casualty isn't worth a free nation, never have.

I am claiming that the nation isn't free yet, there has been (best guetsimate) 1000 civilan casualties, there will be many more until the conflict is over and there will be many more after it has ended due to unexploded ordnance, depleted uranium and just plain old accidents that occur as a consequence of the campaign.

And I am claiing that the nation of Iraq will never be totally free when it owes a debt to the US. don't beleive me ? look at what happenned when France refused to join the coallition, everyone started crying about how they owed the US a debt from world war 1 and 2.

The point of my post is this (you missed it): I know that some of you will now be trying to insinuate that just because we saw a few thousands happy Iraqis, it doesn't mean the war is over and they are all free, something which we all know. As the battle went on over the past 3 weeks, many of you were in this thread making light of every single civilian casualty that occurred. To be fair and consistent, I would like to see equal time given to every single Iraqi that feels free today.

[gdstudios]

Originally posted by gerbick
swampy, I honestly think that GDS is just asking you a question due to your ability to answer with both sides of the story in mind.

that's my take.

lol, correct, Gerbs. i wasn't trying to be divisive, just asking a question. due to my lack of respect and rampant screaming earlier in the thread, i can accept swampy's resistence to discuss things calmly with me. justifiably, he feels as though i will snap and disrespect him at any moment. i just want to clarify again that i am a changed man and i want to discuss things properly now. can we be friends swampy?

[swampy]

my previous post came out harsher than it was meant to, I was typing too fast for my brain to build in the nuances of friendly discussion. Trust me it would have sounded different if I'd been talking to you face to face, Sorry.

Originally posted by gdstudios
[gerbick]erm[/gerbick], ok. No I am not cheapening anything, I was asking a question and I got my answer. Thank you.

I'm not labeling you. My apologies for the plurality in my question.

The point of my post is this (you missed it): I know that some of you will now be trying to insinuate that just because we saw a few thousands happy Iraqis, it doesn't mean the war is over and they are all free, something which we all know. As the battle went on over the past 3 weeks, many of you were in this thread making light of every single civilian casualty that occurred. To be fair and consistent, I would like to see equal time given to every single Iraqi that feels free today.

All I can say is that I was incredibly moved when I saw the celebrations today, but I was also incredibly moved when I saw the horrific photographs of children and babies after a coallition missile strike.

as for weighing the relative merits / worth of each against each other, I'm afraid I can't make a decision yet as I haven't come to a conclusion.

[japangreg]

Originally posted by gdstudios
As the battle went on over the past 3 weeks, many of you were in this thread making light of every single civilian casualty that occurred. To be fair and consistent, I would like to see equal time given to every single Iraqi that feels free today.

I don't think anyone 'made light' of civilian casualties; on the contrary I think almost each and every instance was comment on seriously and somberly. I assume this was a mis-type and you meant 'brought to light' or ‘brought up’, as that seems more in keeping with the rest of the post.

I don’t think any one here is going to sit down and type out that each picture they see of a cheering Iraqi makes them feel good; that’s a given. There’s no impact to the larger debate to notice that people are celebrating. No one ever suggested (as far back as I can recall) that the Iraqi people would not be happy with Saddam gone; in fact I think every one expected exactly this reaction. I don’t see what you think people should be posting.

Civilian casualties, on the other hand, do weigh into the debate because they are one of the true unknowns of war. Each instance enters into the cost/benefit analysis each of us do when we observe these things. Is the first dead civilian worth it? The second? Where do we draw the line? Each occurrence changes the nature of the conflict. We were lucky in that the numbers are as low as they are (unconfirmed, of course) Don’t forget that the elation of the Iraqi people can also be a temporary thing, depending on how the end-game is played out. The civilian dead are dead for good.

[gdstudios]

Originally posted by swampy
my previous post came out harsher than it was meant to, I was typing too fast for my brain to build in the nuances of friendly discussion. Trust me it would have sounded different if I'd been talking to you face to face, Sorry.

Understood.

All I can say is that I was incredibly moved when I saw the celebrations today, but I was also incredibly moved when I saw the horrific photographs of children and babies after a coallition missile strike.

It horrifies me too, Swampy. However, as has been stated already, war is war. War is hell in many ways. But war is also good. I know you don't accept that, but good things have, indeed, come out of war. Today is a perfect example.

as for weighing the relative merits / worth of each against each other, I'm afraid I can't make a decision yet as I haven't come to a conclusion.

None of us can at this point. All we can do judge the worth of the military action. There have been both positives and negatives as a result of the military action. For me personally, I am very interested in what happens from here. Obviously the battle rages on and there will no doubt be further horrors before it ends. As for what happens in Iraq after this war, we shall see down the road.

[gdstudios]

Originally posted by japangreg
I don't think anyone 'made light' of civilian casualties; on the contrary I think almost each and every instance was comment on seriously and somberly. I assume this was a mis-type and you meant 'brought to light' or ‘brought up’, as that seems more in keeping with the rest of the post.

No, I meant what I said and I think people in this thread made light/brought up each individual casualty to express their distaste for the operation. Period. Some more than others obviously.

Speaking of which, I am very curious to hear what DP's reaction is to the day's events. DP, come out, come out wherever you are.