F-22 production termination is premature
An occupation is never easy.
My people learned that in WW2. Time your people learned it too, I guess
It is just very difficult to discuss history with people that are constantly rewriting it.
My people learned that in WW2. Time your people learned it too, I guess
Oook. Whatever you say. I am starting to feel tired of this discussion.If you read through it, there is little actual support detailed there beyond a few advisers and some kind words, and many of the links are dead or go to sites that are not considered credible.
It is just very difficult to discuss history with people that are constantly rewriting it.
Ok, when we did the same thing when our heir to the throne was actually murdered at the beginning of the 20th century, the whole world went to war with us and everyone until today defends doing so.Just call it delayed payback for WTC 1 and the attempted murder of ex president Bush.
I see that things are evaluated with two kinds of measures here.
I don't know, the Japanese occupation went pretty smoothly.Skipjack wrote:An occupation is never easy.
My people learned that in WW2. Time your people learned it too, I guess
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupation_of_Japan
Yes, that was exactly my point.It is just very difficult to discuss history with people that are constantly rewriting it.
-
alexjrgreen
- Posts: 815
- Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2008 4:03 pm
- Location: UK
Because they were done fighting and were actually behaving orderly as ordered by their leaders before the end of the war.I don't know, the Japanese occupation went pretty smoothly.
As you can see, the occupation of Iraq is not going quite so well. As soon as you are facing partisans, things are not so easy anymore.
Yes, right now it is. I am more concerned about what is going to happen 10, 20 years down the road. As it has been in other middle eastern countries, I am affraid of a islamic radicalisation that might happen there, once the US troops leave the country.OTOH, we didn't have to nuke Tikrit or firebomb Baghdad, and they got to write their own Constitution. And at this point it is going quite well, all things considered.
The downside of democracy is that sometimes people might win, that you dont like and that dont like you.
What if Iraq turns into yet another Iran, or worse another Afghanistan?
As you know, Lebanon used to be a Christian democracy, the "switzerland of the middle east" until it was taken over by "fast breeding" moslems within a couple of decades. Then it was chaos and anarchy and lots of killing and diing.
Now it is kinda, somewhat returned to inhabitable, inbetween Hispollah terror attacks and Israeli bombings that is.
-
kunkmiester
- Posts: 892
- Joined: Thu Mar 12, 2009 3:51 pm
- Contact:
Look, when we went into Iraq, every major intel agency was convinced there was WMD there. Saddam certainly acted like he did when he wasn't telling people he actually had them. He was playing a big bluff game, at best. At worst, the huge convoy of 18 wheeler tankers and cargo trucks seen leaving Iraq for Syria at the beginning of the invasion is where all that stuff went, which was later bombed by Israeli warplanes at their storage site. Either way, hindsight is 20/20. Really now, I suppose you want to ban bluffing in poker too. That's how the game is played, just cause he may have been bluffing doesn't mean we were wrong to not take his bluff as credible.Skipjack wrote:Ok, when we did the same thing when our heir to the throne was actually murdered at the beginning of the 20th century, the whole world went to war with us and everyone until today defends doing so.Just call it delayed payback for WTC 1 and the attempted murder of ex president Bush.
I see that things are evaluated with two kinds of measures here.
He always denied having them.Saddam certainly acted like he did when he wasn't telling people he actually had them.
I think it takes more than a few trucks to transport a WMD- infrastructure off site. You need lots of equipment, much of it stationary, or at least semi stationary. You need workers too. Were they transported to Syria as well?At worst, the huge convoy of 18 wheeler tankers and cargo trucks seen leaving Iraq for Syria at the beginning of the invasion is where all that stuff went, which was later bombed by Israeli warplanes at their storage site.
Sorry, it just seems unlikely to me and it seemed unlikely to the rest of Europe who therefore refused to go to war with you (other then England, but they are forever in your debt anyway).
Oh well, why bother. What happened, happened. You can not make it undone now. It cost the US dearly though. I doubt you will ever get that money back in any way.
Actually, my understanding is that for both chem and bio you don't need a lot of specialized equipment - pharm production lines and breweries could be repurposed for bio - and as easily changed back - and a lot of chem agents (especially the nerve agents) aren't much more than glorified (and exceedingly potent) insecticides which can be made in anything from small lots to tankerloads. (See the Aum Shinrikyo group, who released Sarin nerve gas in the Tokyo subways in '95). And there were lots of reports of 'insecticide' stockpiles found along with ammo stockpiles in the early days of the war. It always struck me as kind of odd that there was such a bug problem in Iraq that they needed to keep insecticide stockpiled with ammunition. One normally doesn't stock RAID(tm) next to empty howitzer shells.Skipjack wrote:He always denied having them.Saddam certainly acted like he did when he wasn't telling people he actually had them.
I think it takes more than a few trucks to transport a WMD- infrastructure off site. You need lots of equipment, much of it stationary, or at least semi stationary. You need workers too. Were they transported to Syria as well?.At worst, the huge convoy of 18 wheeler tankers and cargo trucks seen leaving Iraq for Syria at the beginning of the invasion is where all that stuff went, which was later bombed by Israeli warplanes at their storage site.
Nuclear's a lot harder as far as mobile infrastructure goes, you bet. But the Dulfer report and the IAEA both came to the conclusion that Saddam WAS attempting to develop a nuclear infrastructure - and if sanctions had been lifted would have gone ahead full speed on it.
This article over at How Stuff Works is a decent overview of chem and bio. As far as the workers go, Saddam was no stranger to mass graves, and how many people does a small brewery need to operate in the first place?
When opinion and reality conflict - guess which one is going to win in the long run.
All in all the insurgency in Iraq got sorted out in a remarkably short time given Iraq's state of development.
The average is ten years. Iraq was done in five years or less.
Can they hold it? The government has oil money and an American trained army. I'd say they had a good chance.
The average is ten years. Iraq was done in five years or less.
Can they hold it? The government has oil money and an American trained army. I'd say they had a good chance.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.