One thing I have to know, should we stay or should we go?

A story of an innocent 17 year old girl being stoned to death as an honour killing in Iraq. She was kurdish. She fell in love with a sunni boy and was dragged from a tribal leader's house and stoned to death as Iraqi security forces looked on.

http://www.dailymail...in_page_id=1811
http://www.foxnews.c...,270111,00.html
http://www.thenation...0070528/pollitt
http://news.independ...icle2519070.ece <---Best Read

Seems the US has opened up a serious can of worms by "liberating Iraq." Now that the tribes are free to practice thier culture, we can now watch the desintergration of modern society back to the good old days of the ancient books of the quran.

See the Iraqis, it appears, don't want liberation.
They don't even understand the meaning of liberation. What they want, is to drag thier society back to bibical (quranian?) times.

Now I'm one who has stood by the idea of not pulling out of Iraq due to an obvious case of mass genocide happening. Such as great or greater extent as to what happened in SE asia after the US pulled out of Vietnam.

One may first think, well just pull out and let the crazies kill each other in any fashion they choose. While I'm tempted to support this idea, I know better. Simply because then terrorist training camps will boom. And we all know the ultimate target of active terrorists training camps... the West.

So what should the West do? Pull out and let the slaughter begin, which will eventually lead back to attacking the West, or do we continuie to try to maintain some sorta discipline in the region with the use of occupying forces? Which will cost the lives of troops, innocent civilians, as well as ALOT of money to fund the "continued" operation. This could last 20-30 years and STILL fail.

What are the thoughts of my fellow Revorians on this matter?

I would say pull all coalition forces out of the cities and have them guard the borders and the oil fields. The Iraqis have had more than enough time to get their act together, and while I still fully support the War in Iraq, enough is enough. Use the coalition forces to maintain the Iraqi borders and their oil supply which might help them get back on their feet eventually, that is, if they ever stop fighting long enough to do so. In the mean time, let the Iraqis duke it out. From what I have seen, a larger percent of the population would like peace rather than war, so either they will finally step up and take control of their fellow country men who are hell bent on killing their own people, or the smaller minority will win and take over. Either way, we then deal with whoever is left over, whether it be the radicals or the conservatives, Shites or Sunnis, whoever.

I say let them wear themselves out, and then start over with the rebuilding, this time not making the same mistakes as before. I would also say that Iran and Syria should be brought in this time, just so they can share either the blame or the glory with us.

While my grand scheme is unfolding, there would still be UAV's and such keeping tabs on things, and if a terrorist camp pops up, then the F-16's go in and take it out. I would also use human intell on the ground to keep a handle on things. Instead of using guys like MI6 and CIA, I would get someone like the UAE to help out, who has a better understanding of the culture.

I would also implement a policy of retaliation like in the movie Swordfish. If they blow up a bank, we blow up a bank, they hit a church, we hit a church, and on down the line of targets. Since terrorists always claim their attacks, there wouldn't be a problem with where to retaliate. And since Russia and China both already kind of have brutal policies like this, I can see them going along with it and supporting it. This would keep the US out of another long drawn out war, because instead of invading, you just hit one target and leave. Of course, all the die hard pacifists in the world who refuse to recognize that there are a lot of bad people out there trying their damnedest to attack western civilization will probably think I am as bad as the terrorists for suggesting this, but IMO, the moral high ground does not always work.

Edited by narboza22, 18 May 2007 - 04:24 AM.

While not bad notes. Please note. Like any bad situation. Most people want peace. Most people are under the control of powers above thier influence.

Common folk can't make changes in thier country without taking arms. Something that is already in effect but not legimitized for obvious gun toting reasons in Iraq.

And while you're point on the UAV's makes sense, you do know they also require boots on the ground. If we pull out of Iraq, so do the UAV's.

Hypothetically we could allow the Iraqis use of our UAVs, then we run the risk of having them captured, shot down, and then taken apart to reversed-engineered how the work.

I'm not saying pull all the way out, I'm just saying get out of the way. There would still need to be bases to house the troops guarding the borders, and the UAV's and stuff could operate out of those.

theres no simple solution to the troubles in Iraq. stay and dont try to get help from the neighbors and people will continue to die and the situation will get worse.

run away and the neighboring countries will do their best to turn Iraq into a puppet-state to do things for themselves.

the best compromise would prolly be to get out of the areas where people live and guard the borders and blow up people doing illegal stuff, but i think thats how it is these days anyway.

it might have helped to get the troopers out of the country, but i doubt it. i think some general said that to completely dismarm the insurgents in iraq, you would need 2 million troopers in an invasion. if the us brought over enough to get that many troopers and wiped through the country before they left, it might have been the best way to get out of it.

And once again you view people based on your own cultural standpoint.

Have you Americans learned fucking nothing from your ancestors' similar prejudices?

I can't wait until someone invades and takes over the US and then shits on you the same way you've shit on everyone else.

"Pah look at this American culture. So neanderthal. Let's enforce our own ways on them, see how they fucking like it!"


Oh, and Hostile, next time you make a poll, make an UNBIASED fucking poll.

Edited by Paradox, 18 May 2007 - 01:17 PM.

Methinks your poll answers are a wee bit presumptuous.

And once again you view people based on your own cultural standpoint.

Have you Americans learned fucking nothing from your ancestors' similar prejudices?

I can't wait until someone invades and takes over the US and then shits on you the same way you've shit on everyone else.

"Pah look at this American culture. So neanderthal. Let's enforce our own ways on them, see how they fucking like it!"

You'd probably save yourself from carpul tunnels if you just posted america sucks in every thread... seriously, was there an actual point relating to the topic at hand in there?

I would also implement a policy of retaliation like in the movie Swordfish. If they blow up a bank, we blow up a bank, they hit a church, we hit a church, and on down the line of targets. Since terrorists always claim their attacks, there wouldn't be a problem with where to retaliate. And since Russia and China both already kind of have brutal policies like this, I can see them going along with it and supporting it. This would keep the US out of another long drawn out war, because instead of invading, you just hit one target and leave. Of course, all the die hard pacifists in the world who refuse to recognize that there are a lot of bad people out there trying their damnedest to attack western civilization will probably think I am as bad as the terrorists for suggesting this, but IMO, the moral high ground does not always work.

so... for every target they bomb in Iraq... we bomb another target in Iraq? Or are you saying we should bomb the terrorist's home country... right...

Iraq is a catch 22, there is no viable solution. The question is not how many die, but more of who is going to die and what values are to be instilled once it's over.

I'm of the opinion that the US cannot withdraw from Iraq until the situation is stable.
I don't mean that we shouldn't pursue a new strategy, which would probably help, but we do need to stabilise Iraq since we're the reason that it's become so unstable now.

Edited by Nemoricus, 18 May 2007 - 07:17 PM.

I don't know what to do :( .

so... for every target they bomb in Iraq... we bomb another target in Iraq? Or are you saying we should bomb the terrorist's home country... right... huh.gif

Iraq is a catch 22, there is no viable solution. The question is not how many die, but more of who is going to die and what values are to be instilled once it's over.

I meant against other terrorist attacks on targets outside of Iraq, like say in the US or Europe, or an embassy somewhere. Sorry for not being clear on that.

Edited by narboza22, 18 May 2007 - 07:46 PM.

Actually, yes, there was a point. Read up on 'ethnocentrism' and 'cultural perspectives'. You might also want to think of 'outsider looking in'.

While, yes, I don't condone killing people based on who they love, but somewhere down the line that has been culturally acceptable at virtually every point in the globe. I imagine there has been more than a few mob killings based on that very motive...

I can guarantee you unequivocally that such shit would sort itself out eventually. It does not need your persistent ethnocentric meddling. Let's bring good American values to Islamic nations. Because they and their heathenous ways need to be cleansed.

Sounds either very Dark-age Christian, or very Nazi. Kill or oppress all who disagree. Why not stomp on African tribes which practice various forms of voodoo or other magickery or mutilatory rituals (they have done for, like, thousands of years, and they're doing just fine thankyou very much) while you're at it?

You should maybe look within your own borders and your own goddamn culture before you self-righteously start bashing those of other nations. Your own culture is pretty fucked up and dog-eat-dog itself. "Oh, we have gangs that recruit kids and do drive-bys, but that's OK because we abhor Iraqi religious cultism! DIE HEATHEN SCUM!"

Edited by Paradox, 18 May 2007 - 09:57 PM.

Let's bring good American values to Islamic nations. Because they and their heathenous ways need to be cleansed.

You're right, I don't know what everyone is thinking. Obviously stoning people people and giving women almost no rights is the way to go. I can't figure out why all of us naive westerns don't seem to understand that. I mean, since we live in a society with these terrible values, you'd think we would get the picture and straighten ourselves out. I'm just glad there are always people out there in the world reminding us how terrible all the freedoms are that we enjoy

Edited by narboza22, 18 May 2007 - 10:01 PM.

I don't advocate imposing Western values on another country.
That's probably a part of the problem in Iraq. The current government was not designed around the Islamic faith. It is merely a short sighted attempt to force a democracy upon a people without considering their beliefs when making it.

I don't advocate imposing Western values on another country.
That's probably a part of the problem in Iraq. The current government was not designed around the Islamic faith. It is merely a short sighted attempt to force a democracy upon a people without considering their beliefs when making it.

And the previous government of Iraq "was" designed around the Islamic faith? I'm not a fan of the current set up, but come on, Saddam did not run an Islam-centric regime, and I do not think that an Islamic government is the answer to the problems in Iraq, one of the main reasons being that religion is one of the causes of the fighting in Iraq right now.

What if one country tried to invade the US because that country thought the people in the US were being opressed? What if they succeeded? Surely you'd embrace the freedom and democratic values of that country, right?

You should maybe look within your own borders and your own goddamn culture before you self-righteously start bashing those of other nations. Your own culture is pretty fucked up and dog-eat-dog itself. "Oh, we have gangs that recruit kids and do drive-bys, but that's OK because we abhor Iraqi religious cultism! DIE HEATHEN SCUM!"

Talk about being brainwashed and presumptuous, man! Do you believe that everything anti - Americans tell you is true? Do you think that every single American thinks the same, that we're all obsessed with "wasting the ragheads?" Does it never occur to you that some of us were out in the streets of Washington and New York protesting this? That some of us fucking hate this war and know that this semi - Fascist Bush regime will be remembered as the worst administration in U.S. history? That's like me saying every single one of you British was cheering on Blair as he sent the army in with the U.S.

And the previous government of Iraq "was" designed around the Islamic faith?

Obviously not. However, I never suggested that it be based on Islam. I was just saying that it should have been considered during the formation of the government. As you said, part of the problem is religion. Perhaps if it had been considered there may be less of a problem today.

You should maybe look within your own borders and your own goddamn culture before you self-righteously start bashing those of other nations. Your own culture is pretty fucked up and dog-eat-dog itself. "Oh, we have gangs that recruit kids and do drive-bys, but that's OK because we abhor Iraqi religious cultism! DIE HEATHEN SCUM!"

Talk about being brainwashed and presumptuous, man! Do you believe that everything anti - Americans tell you is true? Do you think that every single American thinks the same, that we're all obsessed with "wasting the ragheads?" Does it never occur to you that some of us were out in the streets of Washington and New York protesting this? That some of us fucking hate this war and know that this semi - Fascist Bush regime will be remembered as the worst administration in U.S. history? That's like me saying every single one of you British was cheering on Blair as he sent the army in with the U.S.

Shhhh! You might disturb his blissful ignorance.

You should maybe look within your own borders and your own goddamn culture before you self-righteously start bashing those of other nations. Your own culture is pretty fucked up and dog-eat-dog itself. "Oh, we have gangs that recruit kids and do drive-bys, but that's OK because we abhor Iraqi religious cultism! DIE HEATHEN SCUM!"

How many people die everyday in the United States from drive by shootings? Like 2, maybe? If you are really crazy enough to equate having gangs in the US as the same as having a government run by a maniac dictator that used chemical weapons on his own people, or a culture that promotes the use of violence to keep people in line(ie. stoning, raping...) then you need serious help my friend. If the only faults you can find with western culture are gangs and drive by shootings, then I would say western culture is doing very well compared to others in the world.

You're right, I don't know what everyone is thinking. Obviously stoning people people and giving women almost no rights is the way to go. I can't figure out why all of us naive westerns don't seem to understand that. I mean, since we live in a society with these terrible values, you'd think we would get the picture and straighten ourselves out. I'm just glad there are always people out there in the world reminding us how terrible all the freedoms are that we enjoy

I didn't say those things were necessarily 'right' (although right and wrong are precepts laid down by culture and government). I said you have enough going on within your own borders to deal with. And you're still looking at it through your own culture's glasses. Yes, you may think they're wrong. They may think you're wrong. Who is to say whose way is better, whose is right?

If a culture is to change, my argument is that it should do so of its own accord, through its own people. It should not be forced to change by some outside force using force on it.

Since America is the most prevalent perpetrator of this crime of cultural oppression, it is pertinent that I should use them as an example.

Bear in mind, however, that I do not necessarily encompass all Americans under that umbrella. I do understand that there are Americans whose school of thought differs from "our way is the right way!". I do apologise for umbrella-ing those sane individuals with the "look mommy, I'm conforming!" group...

...a culture that promotes the use of violence to keep people in line(ie. stoning, raping...)

Oh, so sending your troops to invade, conquer and subsequently police a foreign nation or three (on, let me remind you, false pretexts, lies, bullshit and wild-goose-chases) doesn't count as a culture that promotes the use of violence to keep people in line. While I do agree with the right to bear arms, I can also cite that as an example of a pro-violence culture.

If the only faults you can find with western culture are gangs and drive by shootings, then I would say western culture is doing very well compared to others in the world.

For Christ's sake, must I quote EVERY example and fault with Western culture? Am I not permitted the right of paraphrase?
And again, by your own standards your culture is superior. Go down your local reservation and shoot a few more of THOSE poor bastards. P'raps join your local neo-Nazi society while you're at it.

While I don't personally believe in killing someone for their faith or partner choice, clearly another culture does. I am free to disagree, and so is anyone of that culture. Get enough people to see the fallacy, and before long you've got a cultural revolution. Trust me, it happens. Or have you all forgotten people like Martin Luther King, Nelson Mandela, Gandhi, or, more historically, Pinel, Moses, Abraham, Jesus et al...
Cultures do change over time. All they need is a spark. Until that spark comes by, they won't change. They need a SPARK, not a US-made 3000lb bomb.

Edited by Paradox, 19 May 2007 - 01:24 AM.