You are not logged in. Please register or login.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
Pages: 1
Re: Quick Yes/No question!
Just a simple question, because going through the HTGTH archives certain people here still thought Iraq was a good idea in the later 2000's.
If you don't want to discuss it, that's fine. There's not much discussion needed anyway.
Just add in a vote please.
- Smoking Guns
- Rep: 330
Re: Quick Yes/No question!
Short term it made the world safer because a fuck load of bad dudes were killed.
Long term the world became less safe and now the bad dudes have infiltrated almost every country.
During the war the US has no attacks.
After the war we got a lot of attacks
During the war not many attacks in Europe.
Post war and with the emergence of Isis, many attacks in Europe.
- Randall Flagg
- Rep: 139
Re: Quick Yes/No question!
I opposed the war from the start. My reasoning was Iraq was a sovereign nation and so long as they weren't attacking anyone or posed an imminent threat, they were free to own and create whatever their technology allowed.
Once we invaded, none of that mattered. We had an obligation to finish it through and leave the region stabilized. If that meant a permanent presence ala South Korea, Germany or Japan, so be it. Having military assets in the region was a positive for US interests and negating radical Islam.
Bush set the SOFA and timetable to end US offensive missions, but Obama failed to attempt to negotiate a defense force agreement and we all but left the country. Radicals quickly resumed power and rather than take them serious, called them the JV team. With a lack of US reprisal, they expanded to their current state. Assad's civil war allowed the climate for them to get a foothold in Syria.
Creating a battleground for radicals via Iraq was a sound strategic decision. Better to fight them there and have central intelligence than let them spread everywhere.
The power and influence of Radical Islam during and after the war is indisputable. 9/11, Madrid and London happened because Radical Islam wasn't centralized. Monitoring all their behavior was a challenge. Iraq fixed that. Now they're operating in a central location without real dispute, though progress has been made, and with that allow them to coordinate attacks while expanding their networks.
The only real solution is to start a light ground war to create a focus for radicals while using special forces and intelligent agencies to remove pockets that appear outside the designated area. Use the occupation and forced stability to bring in trade and modern conveniences. Remove the ignorance and poverty and you neuter radicalism.
Re: Quick Yes/No question!
The only real solution is to start a light ground war to create a focus for radicals while using special forces and intelligent agencies to remove pockets that appear outside the designated area. Use the occupation and forced stability to bring in trade and modern conveniences. Remove the ignorance and poverty and you neuter radicalism.
Fair point and you're probably right.
Having said that....
How far does it go? Where's the line in the sand? This isn't Iraq obviously. Russia is sitting right there. Is it worth the risk(however great or small) of a major war breaking out?
- Randall Flagg
- Rep: 139
Re: Quick Yes/No question!
Randall Flagg wrote:The only real solution is to start a light ground war to create a focus for radicals while using special forces and intelligent agencies to remove pockets that appear outside the designated area. Use the occupation and forced stability to bring in trade and modern conveniences. Remove the ignorance and poverty and you neuter radicalism.
Fair point and you're probably right.
Having said that....
How far does it go? Where's the line in the sand? This isn't Iraq obviously. Russia is sitting right there. Is it worth the risk(however great or small) of a major war breaking out?
We should try to shake hands with Russia and work to open trade with them. The US and Russia could act together outside of NATO and the UN and take actions to stabilize and control the region. Who's going to argue with them?
The EU is hurt by its loss of the U.K. They don't matter for anything outside of consumers. We have no problem doing business with Saudi Arabia. Europe has no problem dealing with Iran. No one gets to claim moral superiority. Give the US Iraq and give Russia Syria. Work jointly to remove ISIS, stabilize their country, return migrants. Everyone is happy and we can focus on China.
Re: Quick Yes/No question!
James Lofton wrote:Randall Flagg wrote:The only real solution is to start a light ground war to create a focus for radicals while using special forces and intelligent agencies to remove pockets that appear outside the designated area. Use the occupation and forced stability to bring in trade and modern conveniences. Remove the ignorance and poverty and you neuter radicalism.
Fair point and you're probably right.
Having said that....
How far does it go? Where's the line in the sand? This isn't Iraq obviously. Russia is sitting right there. Is it worth the risk(however great or small) of a major war breaking out?
We should try to shake hands with Russia and work to open trade with them. The US and Russia could act together outside of NATO and the UN and take actions to stabilize and control the region. Who's going to argue with them?
The EU is hurt by its loss of the U.K. They don't matter for anything outside of consumers. We have no problem doing business with Saudi Arabia. Europe has no problem dealing with Iran. No one gets to claim moral superiority. Give the US Iraq and give Russia Syria. Work jointly to remove ISIS, stabilize their country, return migrants. Everyone is happy and we can focus on China.
when you say focus on China....can you explain what you mean by that? Do you mean their powerful economy?
Pages: 1
