6 Years Later Iraq Better but Still Shaky

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Yeah I have a hard time calling any war a win, especially this one. What happened to Mission Accomplished anyway?

So the American Revolutionary War, was not a win?

World War II, not a win?

Sadly this war will probably be more of a WWI style win, because America, as is normal, is going to cut out before true stability takes place. The current government most likely will parallel the Weimar Republic, with a fanatical sect coming back into power once america backs out of the country, similar to the league of nations once america refused to join. It cost us around 4,000 good men and women, plus the 10's of thousands who were injured, and instead of honoring their sacrifices many mock Bush by asking "what happened to mission accomplished". Bush politicized that statement so he mocked it as well. But the sailors on that ship, had accomplished their mission, and our troops on the ground over there have toiled long and hard to make iraq a country where every sect can come to the political discussion without their wives and children being gassed or killed, so yes that is a win. In the noblest sense of American military(regardless of political mumbo jumbo) our soldiers gave their lives so that people in another part of the world could be free from tyranny, yes that is a win.

[Beemnseven]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

So the American Revolutionary War, was not a win?

World War II, not a win?

Sadly this war will probably be more of a WWI style win, because America, as is normal, is going to cut out before true stability takes place. The current government most likely will parallel the Weimar Republic, with a fanatical sect coming back into power once america backs out of the country, similar to the league of nations once america refused to join. It cost us around 4,000 good men and women, plus the 10's of thousands who were injured, and instead of honoring their sacrifices many mock Bush by asking "what happened to mission accomplished". Bush politicized that statement so he mocked it as well. But the sailors on that ship, had accomplished their mission, and our troops on the ground over there have toiled long and hard to make iraq a country where every sect can come to the political discussion without their wives and children being gassed or killed, so yes that is a win. In the noblest sense of American military(regardless of political mumbo jumbo) our soldiers gave their lives so that people in another part of the world could be free from tyranny, yes that is a win.

I wonder if the dead soldiers' families consider it a "win" ??

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

I wonder if the dead soldiers' families consider it a "win" ??

I served 5 years my friend, in the early 90's; if I had given my life, my family would have considered it a personal loss, but they would have known i joined with open eyes, and would have been proud of my contribution. No one forced me to join, and when i swore my oath, i did not say "but if i die it is a loss" I did not want to die, i did not even want to go to bosnia (and thankfully didn't, my unit left 1 month after i pcs'd to the states) but it was my duty, and one i would have done if called upon. to ask that question demeans our soldiers and their families. No one person will consider a lost life a win in any situation. If a man goes to jail, his family will consider it a loss, but if it upholds our country's laws it may very well have been a win. No one family, when focused on their child/sibling/parent will consider a death a win, but they may see the it as a part of a greater truth, and gain strength and peace in that vision.

My friend, every loss is tragic, 9-11 was tragic, the kurds who were tossed in the mass graves were tragic, our soldiers sacrifice is tragic, but if in the end a government is formed that prevents any more mass grave, allows free participation in the political process, and provides for stability in the region then our families will look on their personal tragedy with a belief that it was not in vain.

[wolfeskins]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

I served 5 years my friend, in the early 90's; if I had given my life, my family would have considered it a personal loss, but they would have known i joined with open eyes, and would have been proud of my contribution. No one forced me to join, and when i swore my oath, i did not say "but if i die it is a loss" I did not want to die, i did not even want to go to bosnia (and thankfully didn't, my unit left 1 month after i pcs'd to the states) but it was my duty, and one i would have done if called upon. to ask that question demeans our soldiers and their families. No one person will consider a lost life a win in any situation. If a man goes to jail, his family will consider it a loss, but if it upholds our country's laws it may very well have been a win. No one family, when focused on their child/sibling/parent will consider a death a win, but they may see the it as a part of a greater truth, and gain strength and peace in that vision.

My friend, every loss is tragic, 9-11 was tragic, the kurds who were tossed in the mass graves were tragic, our soldiers sacrifice is tragic, but if in the end a government is formed that prevents any more mass grave, allows free participation in the political process, and provides for stability in the region then our families will look on their personal tragedy with a belief that it was not in vain.

very good post.

[Beemnseven]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

I served 5 years my friend, in the early 90's; if I had given my life, my family would have considered it a personal loss, but they would have known i joined with open eyes, and would have been proud of my contribution. No one forced me to join, and when i swore my oath, i did not say "but if i die it is a loss" I did not want to die, i did not even want to go to bosnia (and thankfully didn't, my unit left 1 month after i pcs'd to the states) but it was my duty, and one i would have done if called upon. to ask that question demeans our soldiers and their families. No one person will consider a lost life a win in any situation. If a man goes to jail, his family will consider it a loss, but if it upholds our country's laws it may very well have been a win. No one family, when focused on their child/sibling/parent will consider a death a win, but they may see the it as a part of a greater truth, and gain strength and peace in that vision.

My friend, every loss is tragic, 9-11 was tragic, the kurds who were tossed in the mass graves were tragic, our soldiers sacrifice is tragic, but if in the end a government is formed that prevents any more mass grave, allows free participation in the political process, and provides for stability in the region then our families will look on their personal tragedy with a belief that it was not in vain.

Okay, there are several statements here I profoundly disagree with. First of all, here's the question Americans must ALWAYS ask whenever our troops are sent into harms way: is this conflict worth the life of the person that I love most? Casually tossing around the notion that "we won" without considering the families of dead or injured soldiers is what's demeaning. Especially when you know that they died when Iraq posed absolutely no threat to the United States.

Secondly, comparing the death of a soldier in an armed conflict to a criminal who breaks the law and is sent to jail is truly disgusting and certainly not what I would expect to hear from a former serviceman.

Finally, what "greater truth" are you talking about? Is it the truth that politicians have been sending Americans to their deaths in unnecessary, unconstitutional conflicts for far too long? The truth that no American should have to die to support some other country's political process? How about the truth that stability in the Middle East was shaken, not enhanced by our presence in Iraq?

Here's the real truth -- Iraq was not worth the life of ONE SINGLE AMERICAN.

[The Goat]

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

Okay, there are several statements here I profoundly disagree with. First of all, here's the question Americans must ALWAYS ask whenever our troops are sent into harms way: is this conflict worth the life of the person that I love most? Casually tossing around the notion that "we won" without considering the families of dead or injured soldiers is what's demeaning. Especially when you know that they died when Iraq posed absolutely no threat to the United States.

Secondly, comparing the death of a soldier in an armed conflict to a criminal who breaks the law and is sent to jail is truly disgusting and certainly not what I would expect to hear from a former serviceman.

Finally, what "greater truth" are you talking about? Is it the truth that politicians have been sending Americans to their deaths in unnecessary, unconstitutional conflicts for far too long? The truth that no American should have to die to support some other country's political process? How about the truth that stability in the Middle East was shaken, not enhanced by our presence in Iraq?

Here's the real truth -- Iraq was not worth the life of ONE SINGLE AMERICAN.

I think you hit the nail on the head Beem and here's why: when we look at Iraq or any war from that perspective things become crystal clear. I cannot count how many times i've been at parties, family gatherings or just typical conversations while someone carries on about the greatness of the war. I always ask whether they encouraged their son, daughter, brother, sister to sign up. It's actually pretty fascinating to see the response... nobody ever says yes. Nobody. If I'm feeling a bit grouchy i ask whether they would have encouraged it during WWII... some people are honest and say they get the idea but then again some just get f'n peeved. My favorite incident was a relative who berates anyone not supportive of Bush and Iraq. When I mentioned the military was really short on good soldiers and his oldest son would be a perfect fit his wife literally went rigid w/ terror... and he finally stopped w/ all the speeches.

[Beemnseven]

Originally Posted by The Goat

I think you hit the nail on the head Beem and here's why: when we look at Iraq or any war from that perspective things become crystal clear. I cannot count how many times i've been at parties, family gatherings or just typical conversations while someone carries on about the greatness of the war. I always ask whether they encouraged their son, daughter, brother, sister to sign up. It's actually pretty fascinating to see the response... nobody ever says yes. Nobody. If I'm feeling a bit grouchy i ask whether they would have encouraged it during WWII... some people are honest and say they get the idea but then again some just get f'n peeved. My favorite incident was a relative who berates anyone not supportive of Bush and Iraq. When I mentioned the military was really short on good soldiers and his oldest son would be a perfect fit his wife literally went rigid w/ terror... and he finally stopped w/ all the speeches.

I know exactly what you mean -- lots of Americans seem to be warhawks as long as somebody else's loved one has to fight.

[wolfeskins]

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

lots of Americans seem to be warhawks as long as somebody else's loved one has to fight.

thats really a jackass statement.

[wolfeskins]

Originally Posted by The Goat

I think you hit the nail on the head Beem and here's why: when we look at Iraq or any war from that perspective things become crystal clear. I cannot count how many times i've been at parties, family gatherings or just typical conversations while someone carries on about the greatness of the war. I always ask whether they encouraged their son, daughter, brother, sister to sign up. It's actually pretty fascinating to see the response... nobody ever says yes. Nobody. If I'm feeling a bit grouchy i ask whether they would have encouraged it during WWII... some people are honest and say they get the idea but then again some just get f'n peeved. My favorite incident was a relative who berates anyone not supportive of Bush and Iraq. When I mentioned the military was really short on good soldiers and his oldest son would be a perfect fit his wife literally went rigid w/ terror... and he finally stopped w/ all the speeches.

that's really a stupid question that you posed to the party goers. you ask it already knowing the answer, which makes you look like your making a good point but really your not. most people are not gonna encourage their child to join anything that raises the possibility of them getting injured or being killed. kinda like "hey son i think you should become a cop in the worse city around here so you can get shot at" or "hey daughter i think you should become a firefighter so you can run into burning buildings". joining the military should be a personal decision and the person joining should understand the possabilities of going to war.
just because someone supports going to war does not mean they should encourage their child to join the army. i support the chesapeake city police department but i'm not gonna encourage my son or daughter to become a cop.

[The Goat]

Originally Posted by wolfeskins

that's really a stupid question that you posed to the party goers. you ask it already knowing the answer, which makes you look like your making a good point but really your not. most people are not gonna encourage their child to join anything that raises the possibility of them getting injured or being killed. kinda like "hey son i think you should become a cop in the worse city around here so you can get shot at" or "hey daughter i think you should become a firefighter so you can run into burning buildings". joining the military should be a personal decision and the person joining should understand the possabilities of going to war.
just because someone supports going to war does not mean they should encourage their child to join the army. i support the chesapeake city police department but i'm not gonna encourage my son or daughter to become a cop.

I'll spell it out for u since u somehow missed the point... in WWII there was no question. People DID encourage their loved ones to join because the fate of the world rested in our hands. My parents and grandparents (when they we're living) can attest to this. Iraq is the opposite. People of a certain political persuasion r gung-go until it involves their loved ones. You might say this war doesn't pass the smell test, because people aren't willing to see their loved ones in harm's way. It's pretty simple.

[BleedBurgundy]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

I served 5 years my friend, in the early 90's; if I had given my life, my family would have considered it a personal loss, but they would have known i joined with open eyes, and would have been proud of my contribution. No one forced me to join, and when i swore my oath, i did not say "but if i die it is a loss" I did not want to die, i did not even want to go to bosnia (and thankfully didn't, my unit left 1 month after i pcs'd to the states) but it was my duty, and one i would have done if called upon. to ask that question demeans our soldiers and their families. No one person will consider a lost life a win in any situation. If a man goes to jail, his family will consider it a loss, but if it upholds our country's laws it may very well have been a win. No one family, when focused on their child/sibling/parent will consider a death a win, but they may see the it as a part of a greater truth, and gain strength and peace in that vision.

My friend, every loss is tragic, 9-11 was tragic, the kurds who were tossed in the mass graves were tragic, our soldiers sacrifice is tragic, but if in the end a government is formed that prevents any more mass grave, allows free participation in the political process, and provides for stability in the region then our families will look on their personal tragedy with a belief that it was not in vain.

Very well said.