Volkswagen Passat Forum banner

1 - 14 of 14 Posts
2

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
US forces offer truce in Falluja

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3615703.stm

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/04/10/iraq.main/index.html

Is it me or when you think of two sides pretty much equal, that have reached a stalemate. when did we becom equal to these guy. they have hostages possibly an american one as well and where going to sit and talk with them. All i know is that is not a good look, thats almost as bad as pulling out. I think this thing is about to go really wrong really really fast!

:(
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,172 Posts
It's already really wrong really fast! War, and everything that comes with it, never looks good. Leaving them there to suffer under Saddam's regime looks to have possibly been a better idea.
And it's not like they're equal to us anyway; we're obviously trying to take it "easy" on them over there for politcal reasons. (Which is why we just sent a third battalion in there in case the cease-fire fails, which it probably will.)

Still, don't decide fully one way or the other until all is said and done...
 
2

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
SDPassatT said:
It's already really wrong really fast! War, and everything that comes with it, never looks good. Leaving them there to suffer under Saddam's regime looks to have possibly been a better idea.
And it's not like they're equal to us anyway; we're obviously trying to take it "easy" on them over there for politcal reasons. (Which is why we just sent a third battalion in there in case the cease-fire fails, which it probably will.)

Still, don't decide fully one way or the other until all is said and done...
Speak that gospel!
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,172 Posts
20vvillian said:
SDPassatT said:
It's already really wrong really fast! War, and everything that comes with it, never looks good. Leaving them there to suffer under Saddam's regime looks to have possibly been a better idea.
And it's not like they're equal to us anyway; we're obviously trying to take it "easy" on them over there for politcal reasons. (Which is why we just sent a third battalion in there in case the cease-fire fails, which it probably will.)

Still, don't decide fully one way or the other until all is said and done...
Speak that gospel!
Being opinionated is fun! Wakes me up in the morning, and keeps me up throughout the day! It's like coffee to me since I don't drink it. ;) I'm just blessed to have all you fine fellows to be opinionated with, and to sit around constantly arguing aimlessly with about things that I may or may not even believe in. Stimulates the mind! :p

Preach on brotha, preach on... :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,788 Posts
It's so bad that the Sunnis and Shiites are now combining efforts against us.
Our brave soldiers and Marines are now caught in a fubar situation where they have to fire on young boys throwing rocks.
Sound familiar, like some kind of Israeli occupation of Palestine?!

Shrubie still says we're going to handover on June 30, but he can't say to whom. :nervous:
 

·
Founder
Joined
·
18,442 Posts
20vvillian said:
US forces offer truce in Falluja

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3615703.stm

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/04/10/iraq.main/index.html

Is it me or when you think of two sides pretty much equal, that have reached a stalemate. when did we becom equal to these guy. they have hostages possibly an american one as well and where going to sit and talk with them. All i know is that is not a good look, thats almost as bad as pulling out. I think this thing is about to go really wrong really really fast!

:(
If they dont wanna get shot at, why dont they just leave?
 

·
Retired PassatWorld Staff
Joined
·
6,165 Posts
One word. martyr. They don't want a town full for others to rally around. Cutting them off (they pulled out the young old and women) and letting them sit ain't a bad idea. as SD said, you can't judge until it's all done.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,378 Posts
It's great that we went in there and wiped out that Tyrant Saddam in order to install a democratic government. Now we just need to come to terms with the fact that the resulting democratic government might just collectively decide to declare Jihad (holy war) on the U.S. and its citizens.

I take no comfort from the statements being released by Bush that this uprising is "just a small faction." Just two days ago a ranking CIA official contradicted this statement saying the "insurgency is quite broad and widespread."

Who the F&%#$ are we supposed to believe :???:

Why are the President and the CIA not speaking with the same voice?

One of them is lying to us.

I know what my guess is... :roll:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,763 Posts
Its actually better that its FUBAR now when we have troops in there to quell the violence. It seems as though we waited long enough to 'transition the power' so that all the people waiting to avenge and capture the power are now starting to come out of the wood work. It would have been a major disaster if this violence erupted after we left and then some crazies took over Iraq and it would have been worse off then it was before...
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,172 Posts
Who said this was going to be something that happens overnight anyway? :???: I think some people are expecting results TOO quickly. Last I checked, we're completely switching around the ways that they "ran business" over there.

There will be the Saddam loyalists, there will be the people who just hate us out of jealousy, there will be the people who are just tired of it all and don't care which way it goes now, and there will be the people who are glad we are there to help instill some fairness into their country in the long run.
I have seen all of the types listed above ^^^ on TV while watching the news during the past year; the funny thing is that you only know what you see, the rest you actually have to use some logic to imagine.

That said, the media just puts the violence on b/c, let's face it, that's what gets the ratings! There's no trick to it! People are attracted to drama. Just look at your local news... :roll: The trick is being able to use your brain to filter through the overload of drama... It's sort of an illusion.

...which is why I say, "Wait until all is said and done." Then critique.

-Harry :beer:
 
2

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
Im get what your saying, but its been feeling really urgent this week, so i cant even imagine how the troops feel, i just hope they are safe as possible!
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
14,051 Posts
http://www.suntimes.com/output/steyn/cst-edt-steyn11.html

April 11, 2004
BY MARK STEYN SUN-TIMES COLUMNIST

The coalition approach to Iraq was summed up a year ago by a British
colonel. Explaining how they were trying to secure Basra without blowing
up buildings and causing a lot of death and destruction, he said, "We
don't want to go in and rattle all their teacups."

The avoidance of teacup-rattling remains a priority. Last week in
Fallujah, American troops had rockets fired at them from a mosque. So they
fired back, but with the state-of-the-art laser-guided weaponry that kills
the insurgents but leaves the mosque virtually untouched. I'd have been
quite happy to see it blown up with the old-school non-laser imprecise
munitions. But leveling mosques is felt to be insensitive, so on we go,
avoiding the rattling of teacups, whether Sunni or Shiite.

The problem with this deference to the locals is that, partly in
consequence, most of the folks who are getting rattled are on our side.

So how bad are things in Iraq?

Answer: not very. Fallujah is not the new Mogadishu, Muqtaba al-Sadr is
not the new Ayatollah Khomeini and, despite what Ted Kennedy says, Iraq is
not "George Bush's Vietnam." Or even George Bush's Chappaquiddick.

Here's a good rule of thumb: The Pentagon's demonstrated in two wars now
that it's got beyond Vietnam. If a politician or pundit can't, pay him no
further heed. If Sen. Kennedy wants to give rhetorical aid and comfort to
the enemy, he could at least be less lazy about it.

Now here's the more important question: Are the Iraqi people on the
American side?

Answer: No.

Let me flesh that out. Eleven months ago I was in Fallujah. What a dump --
no disrespect to any Fallujans reading this. I had a late lunch in a seedy
cafe full of Sunni men. Not a gal in the joint. And no Westerners except
me. As in the movies, everyone stopped talking when I walked through the
door, and every pair of eyes followed me as I made my way to a table.

I strongly dislike that veteran-foreign-correspondent look where you
wander around like you've been sleeping round the back of the souk for a
week. So I was wearing the same suit I'd wear in Washington or New York,
from the Western Imperialist Aggressor line at Brooks Brothers. I had a
sharp necktie I'd bought in London the week before. My cuff links were the
most stylish in the room, and also the only ones in the room. I'm not a
Sunni Triangulator, so there's no point pretending to be one. If you're an
infidel and agent of colonialist decadence, you might as well dress the
part.

I ordered the mixed grill, which turned out to be not that mixed. Just a
tough old, stringy chicken. My tie would have been easier to chew. The
locals watched me -- a few obviously surly and resentful, the rest wary
and suspicious. But I've had worse welcomes in Berkeley, so I chewed on,
and, washed down with a pitcher of coliform bacteria, it wasn't bad.

Why didn't they kill me? Because, as Osama gloated after 9/11, when people
see a strong horse and a weak horse, they go with the strong horse. And in
May 2003, four weeks after the fall of Baghdad, the coalition forces were
indisputably the strong horse. And so, even when a dainty little trotting
gelding of a newspaper columnist comes in through the door, they figure
he's with the strong horse crowd and act accordingly.

Would they have liked to kill me? Well, I'll bet one or two would have
enjoyed giving it a go. And, if they had, I'll bet three or four more
would have beaten my corpse with their shoes. And five or six would have
had no particular feelings about me one way or the other but would have
been generally supportive of the decision to kill me after the fact. And
the rest might have had a few qualms but they would have kept quiet.

That's the point to remember: The Iraqi people don't want to be on the
American side, only on the winning side. Right now, those two positions
happen to coincide; 99.99 percent of Iraqi Shiites aren't involved in the
troubles of the last week. This guy Sadr is a junior-league blowhard. "If
they come for our leader," says one of his commanders, "they will ignite
all of Iraq." No, they won't. The vast majority of Iraq will remain
un-ignited.

Look at those pictures of the atrocity in Fallujah: the remains of four
corpses, and a bunch of savages dancing around them. In all those
photographs, can you add up more than a hundred men? And half of them are
punk kids under 11. There are 300,000 people in that city. A few score are
depraved enough to cheer on the killers of four brave men; 299,900 of the
town's population were either disapproving or indifferent.

And in the Arab world, the indifferent are the biggest demographic. They
sit things out, they see which strong horse has jostled his way to the
head of the pack, and they go along with him. The Turks. The British. The
British-installed king. The thug who murders the king. The thug who
murders the thug who murders the king.

The passivity of the Arabs, the sensitivity of the coalition and the
defeatism of the media is a potentially disastrous combination. Rattling
teacups gets you a bad press from CNN and the BBC. But they give you a bad
press anyway. And in Iraq, the non-rattling of the teacups is received by
the locals not as cultural respect from Bush and Blair but as weakness. In
that cafe in Fallujah, as a parodic courtesy, the patron switched the
flickering black-and-white TV from an Arabic station to the BBC, which as
usual was full of doom and gloom.

The Iraqis will go with the winning side. And, though the Americans had a
bad week last week, the insurgents had a worse one, losing as many men in
seven days as U.S. forces did in the last year. The best way to make plain
you're the winning side is to crush the other guys -- and rattle their
teacups so loudly even CNN can't paint it as a setback.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,468 Posts
Good article! That may also explain why Saddam was so sucessful in running Iraq, considering the country was pretty politically stable. He was brutal, but maybe that's what the Iraqis respect. I think if the occupation should stay, they ought to def consider a more offensive approach, and take no bs from the insurgents.

Either way, I'm really curious how things will work after the US occupation leaves. In any case, I don't think the country is ready for a democracy.
 
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
About this Discussion
13 Replies
10 Participants
ronaldmcdonald
Volkswagen Passat Forum
Passatworld is a forum dedicated to Volkswagen Passat enthusiasts to discuss mods, Quattro, Turbo Diesel, reviews and more!
Full Forum Listing
Top