Post A Reply
my profile
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
Allstocks.com's Bulletin Board
»
Off-Topic Post, Non Stock Talk
»
Kudlow & Company's Bush Poll
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by mjm2005: [QB] Here are some of his ramblings, if you care to have an interesting read----> ---------------------------------------------------- Professors... In my non-stop no sleep finals period, I just finished having a conversation with some friends during a break from the writing. Based on all of the readings I have done for the various research papers this semester, the following just formulated itself in my head. I want your opinions on this, because honestly, I feel as though it is entirely possible. Andrea will know about my recent ramblings on the possibility of reconstruction in both Iraq and Afghanistan. Essentially, I feel that there is no possibility of success in either state with the current policies of this government. Instead of treating our operations in the middle east as a war, as a war implies state v. state, we must alter this perception. We are not at war with a particular state like GWBco wants us to think. We are at odds with an ideology, the ideology of fundamentalist Islam. Therefore, I will call it: US at odds with Violence Incited by Fundamentalist Islam. Yes, the military actions in both Afghanistan and Iraq began as attacks against Taliban/Hussein. However, as you know, as soon as the govts fell, the battle changed completely. My greatest area of concern is Iraq. This is not to downplay Afghanistan, it is just that I feel the situation there is slightly more stable for the time being. In my opinion, Iraq poses the greatest threat the US has seen in decades; moreso than anything since WWII. Right now there are many factions of politicians in our government divided thanks to this conflict. Pull out, leave it be, put more in...all are ultra simplified summations of the ramblings in the US. To me, a few things become clear. Firstly it is not only impractical but idiotic to call for the immediate withdrawal of US troops. Second, it is equally ignorant to maintain the status quo. Therefore the only option I see is the deployment of more troops, with a catch. The immediate withdrawal of troops will not work for several reasons. Before the removal of Saddam, the Iraqi people lived in relative safety and security albeit not freedom. Since the "coalition" forces took the country, conditions have declined at a catastrophic rate. I believe it is safe to say that conditions for Iraqis are worse now than before. Living in constant fear for your life along with the stress of poverty and hunger many face is not an environ that is conducive to anything productive, let alone the creation of an effective and lasting govt. Even though the links to Al Qaeda/bin Laden have been proven false, Zawahiri now maintains a near constant barrage of attacks on "coalition" forces and the revived Iraqi security forces. In effect, we will have provided bin Laden something he desperately needs; a state that sponsors and protects terrorism and t-groups (Taliban anyone?). If we withdraw troops, it is easy to see that the Sunni majority would take power, oppress the Kurds and shi'a, and welcome the creation of Al Qaeda's brand now base of operations where they can start planning anew. Maintaining the status quo is equally ineffectual. We are loosing troops every week. The "order" we maintain is laughable. The govt we are creating will be seen as a puppet of the US/west. Not to mention it is easy to assume that US presence will be necessary for the better part of a quarter century. From that I am willing to say the only option is the deployment of more troops. Simple as it may sound, this action must be planned to a t so to ensure success. Mistake1 of GWBco: unilateral. Here comes my radical side. The world can no longer be viewed as a group of isolated independent countries. In my opinion, globalism is ringing the death knell of national sovereignty. Good or bad is not important, only how to move forward. Every state in the world is Dependant on another in some way, treaties, trading, military...the list is endless and every growing. America may be the strongest single nation in the world, but as our "coalition" has shown that means little. The policy of unilateral action must die. Thanks to that policy we are the laughing stock of the world. Our supporters include nations of such great power and influence like Luxembourg. Thanks for the moral support guys. Rhetoric like "You're with us or against us" reminds me of a John Wayne western, and infuriates the international community. Isolationism is dead. Only political ancients are holding onto that pathetic ideal. Mistake2: Much more fun that 1. Since the initial invasion of 2003, it has become obvious that the information and intelligence used to support the invasion of Iraq was shaky at best. Even so, GWBco treads forward stepping on every shred of truth and sliver of faith they may have had. They refuse to admit that things are going badly in Iraq. They refuse to admit the folly (gasp, farce, let alone purjory) of the intel leading the the war. The world must love us now. We told every person, state and group that they were essentially un/anti-American if they doubted that which they were told. There was no room for distention. The path for the US had been decided, praise the lord and Joe McCarthy. Solutions, possible (terrifying) outcomes. If we want to win in Iraq things must change starting yesterday. One, in recognition of the growing inter relationships of all states today, the UN must be fully reorganized (how I'm not totally sure, but hopefully you get the idea) and given the power it so richly deserves. Much like our Congress deliberates the declaration of war and other national issues, the gen assem should have that ability for the world. Give it the power to declare war. Not just Secur Coun resolutions, but decisive statements allowing the newly created UN security force, bolstered by troops from ALL member states, to take action against the offending state. International action solves unilateral blunder. This will require something I don't really see happened, an apology and admittance of wrong doing by GWBco. This will hopefully bring much needed support from our previous allies and take some burden off our military. Then this new UN can then start focusing on Iraq. Once enough troops are in place to seriously deter and impede the actions of the insurgents/terrorists, reconstruction of the infrastructure can begin. There is a reason why ancient Athenians were so involved in their democratic experiment: peace of mind knowing that they were safe, their govt was theirs, and they didn't have to be more concerned with eating than deciding policy. If the people of Iraq feel safe, those citizens who want change, who want security will come forward knowing that they will not be killed for doing so. This will allow the people to create a govt for themselves, a govt that stands a much higher chance of being accepted by the majority of the people and therefore successful. Its not very detailed, but its the general idea I have. My reason for concern is this: America continues to follow the path of GWBco, inciting rage in the hearts of Muslims with references to the crusades and his increasing cocky and statements with religious undertones. They are mad and worried, rightly so. We are at a cross roads. Pull out or stay in. As you can tell, I know what I think will work. But I am a lowly college student in a small town in NJ. Think about this. We pull out or just maintain our forces. Attacks increase, more public outcry to remove troops from harms way. Either way, I foresee military withdrawal. Chaos. Struggle for power. Usually leads to an oppressive regime a la Taliban, Saddam...etc. This regime would likely have no scruples allowing a newly empowered Al Qaeda/bin Laden (providing he's alive, if not the new face of the organization...maybe Zawahiri?) to get what they need to start planning and carrying out attacks on the scale of 9/11. Attack comes more public outcry. We attack again. At best the cycle continues, more likely in my opinion is escalation. We would be attacking a govt in the heart of Islam. Other govts would become involved, and I see the start of a never ending WWIII. Yes, we are terrific at destroying the infrastructure that the govt, and the people, need to survive. The govt may be gone, but the people are there. They are suffering. They are hungry. Needless to say, they are mad. Now, instead of those state v. state wars we are so damn good at, we have a major problem. Countless Muslims joining terrorist groups. They have nothing left, their countries in shambles thanks to western military might. When situations are most dire, the influence of the most radical increases exponentially (remember Hitler and 30's Germany). We are back to the war that with our current strategies is un-winnable. One important detail, though. WWIII, which involved the US, GB, hopefully France and Germany and a few others; and the Muslim nations of the middle east, assumingly ends with a "victory" by the west. Except now we must deal with a crippled area of the world. All the countries are without the infrastructure necessary to operate. The people have turned in droves to fundamentalist groups promising salvation and revenge. In my opinion, we are now finally, as many Muslims believe, at war with Islam. There is no force imaginable large enough to effectively occupy the entire middle east. We cannot rebuild the nations when we have just finished destroying them. There is no chance that we could ever hope to garner the support of the people. What option do we have? We have turned the entire middle east into a terrorist state, and it seems to me, there are no means to fix it. Thanks to our military might, we have knocked the region back thousands of years, the tribes of yore replaced now with terrorist groups. I admit this is slightly radical, and definitely not certain. However, I see it as very possible based on current trends and actions. The potential for disaster in the middle east is everywhere; and with history as our guide, if the potential is there, it usually happens. I am not intending this to be "scholarly." I didn't do research for this per say, just used the collection of info cycling through my head to brainstorm. Its not complete, its going be missing a thing or two and I'm sure I'm not developing the details as much as I should. Its really just ramblings that should be told in conversation, but being that its 4AM and I wanted to get it down before I lost it, it ended up in this form. Once I am finished with the equally radial amount of work I have to do for finals, I'll sit down and revise and add to this. I kind of like the idea. Hope you enjoy my radical and assumptive ramblings. [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
Contact Us
|
Allstocks.com Message Board Home
© 1997 - 2021 Allstocks.com. All rights reserved.
Powered by
Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.2