Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

Our shallow victory

Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

Our shallow victory

Old 9th May 2003, 02:31
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: New Jersey Shore
Age: 88
Posts: 601
Our shallow victory

Although many in this country have celebrated our military victory in Iraq
as some sort of awe-inspiring achievement, the fact is that the most
powerful military the world has ever seen, with all the latest, up-to-date,
high-tech weaponry, attacked a much weaker adversary crippled by over 12
years of strict economic sanctions, internationally supervised disarmament,
and constant low-grade warfare in the form of bombing sorties on select
targets in its southern and northern no-fly zones. For all practical
purposes, Iraq was a defenseless foe by virtue of having no air force and,
by comparison, crudely equipped forces. Did anyone really believe we would
not win this war?

Hundreds of innocent Iraqi civilians have been killed in this war, with many
more severely injured, disfigured and maimed. Homes, businesses and entire
families have been wiped out under a hailstorm of 20,000 bombs dropped on
Iraq in just under a month. For generations to come, many more will suffer
the debilitating consequences of radioactive debris left behind by our use
of depleted uranium weaponry. Several thousand Iraqi soldiers were killed in
a brave but futile effort to defend their homeland against an invasion by
the world's superpower. Yet, in all of Bush's speeches to pray rightfully
for our troops and mourn the deaths of our own soldiers, not once did I hear
him exhort us to pray for the Iraqi survivors and respectfully mourn the
many Iraqis killed in this war. Is such lack of compassion for non-
Americans really something of which to be proud?

Even before the announcement of the end of fighting, the White
House began spewing forth belligerent threats in the direction of Syria,
Iran and North Korea. With an ominous sense of déjà vu, unfounded
allegations of stockpiling weapons of mass destruction have now been
launched at Syria. Do we as Americans really agree with Bush's push for
never-ending war?

Our leaders' patriotic call to pummel weaker nations may be a real ego-
booster to some who otherwise feel powerless in life, but U.S. citizens are
paying the ultimate price in many ways. For one, this war has only served to
create more hatred and resentment around the world against the U.S., making
us much less secure in the long run.
I. M. Esperto is offline  
Old 9th May 2003, 03:59
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Quite near 'An aerodrome somewhere in England'
Posts: 25,432
Bad day, was it?


Yes, Bush and the Poodle probably decided to do it without much hard evidence - sorry about the Iraqi soldiers, tragic for the non-combatants - but how many thousands more would have been murdered by Saddam's thugs if nothing had been done?

But I also harbour certain doubts..........
BEagle is offline  
Old 9th May 2003, 04:49
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Portsmouth
Posts: 3
Whilst I see little to justify the war legally I have no doubt that the civilian losses were small in comparison to the deaths that Sadam's regime would have been responsible for in the next few years. A ruthless dictator was removed, the biggest question now is can the US/UK replace him with a significantly better government?
Anyface is offline  
Old 9th May 2003, 04:52
  #4 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: New Jersey Shore
Age: 88
Posts: 601
That is a civil affair, and none of our business. FYI, all Iraqi's have the right to bear arms. Baghdad had 45 gunshops that sold AK 47's etc. for $250 to practically anyone. Let them take care of the problem, not us.

It was a phony war.
It was fought for reasons not stated. These reasons are obvious to anyone
who is inquisitive to search the internet to read about it in foreign
newspapers.

Years before George W. Bush entered the White House, and years before the
Sept. 11 attacks set the direction of his presidency, a group of influential
men had the plan drawn up. The group, the Project for the New American
Century, or PNAC, was founded in 1997. Among its supporters were three
Republican former officials who were sitting out the Democratic presidency
of Bill Clinton: Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney and Paul Wolfowitz.

In open letters to Clinton and GOP congressional leaders the next year, the
group called for "the removal of Saddam Hussein's regime from power" and a
shift toward a more assertive U.S. policy in the Middle East, including the
use of force if necessary to unseat Saddam.

And in a report just before the 2000 election that would bring Bush to
power, the group predicted that the shift would come about slowly, unless
there were "some catastrophic and catalyzing event, like a new Pearl
Harbor." That event came on Sept. 11, 2001. By that time, Cheney was vice
president, Rumsfeld was secretary of defense, and Wolfowitz his deputy at
the Pentagon.

The next morning - before it was even clear who was behind the attacks -
Rumsfeld insisted at a Cabinet meeting that Saddam's Iraq should be "a
principal target of the first round of terrorism," according to Bob
Woodward's book Bush At War. What started as a theory in 1997 was now on its
way to becoming official
U.S. foreign policy.

Now there is a new and demonstrable connection, but it is not the kind that
the Bush Administration had in mind. In fact, it is more likely to fuel the
speculations of conspiracy theorists than it is to put their fears to rest.
It turns out that a money trail runs-albeit rather circuitously-from the
lucrative business of rebuilding Iraq to the fortune behind Osama bin Laden.
Bin Laden's estranged family, a sprawling, extraordinarily wealthy Saudi
Arabian dynasty, is a substantial investor in a private equity firm founded
by the Bechtel Group of San Francisco. Bechtel is also the global
construction and engineering company to which the U.S. government recently
awarded the first major multimillion-dollar contract to reconstruct
war-ravaged Iraq. In a closed competitive bidding process, the United States
Agency for International Development chose Bechtel to rebuild the major
elements of Iraq's infrastructure, including its roads, railroads, airports,
hospitals, and schools, and its water and electrical systems. In the first
phase of the contract, the U.S. government will pay Bechtel nearly
thirty-five million dollars, but experts say that the cost is likely to
reach six hundred and eighty million during the next year and a half.

When the contract was awarded, two weeks ago, the Administration did not
mention that the bin Laden family has an ongoing relationship with Bechtel.
The bin Ladens have a ten-million-dollar stake in the Fremont Group, a San
Francisco-based company formerly called Bechtel Investments, which was until
1986 a subsidiary of Bechtel. The Fremont Group's Web site, which makes no
mention of the bin Ladens, notes that "though now independent, Fremont
enjoys a close relationship with Bechtel." A spokeswoman for the company
confirmed that Fremont's "majority ownership is the Bechtel family." And a
list of the corporate board of directors shows substantial overlap. Five of
Fremont's eight directors are also directors of Bechtel. One Fremont
director, Riley Bechtel, is the chairman and chief executive officer of the
Bechtel Group, and is a member of the Bush Administration: he was appointed
this year to serve on the President's Export Council. In addition, George
Shultz, the Secretary of State in the Reagan Administration, serves as a
director both of Fremont and of the Bechtel Group, where he once was
president and still is listed as senior counselor.

Rick Kopf, the general counsel of the Fremont Group, which manages some
eleven billion dollars in assets, confirms that the bin Laden family
invested about ten million dollars in one of Fremont's private funds before
September 11, 2001. He noted that the bin Laden family has not enlarged its
stake since then, but he declined to provide additional details about its
association with the firm. He also chose not to discuss the origin or the
nature of the relationship between the bin Laden and Bechtel families, both
of which made fortunes in huge construction projects in the Arab world. The
Fremont Group evidently does not go in for connecting the dots. As Kopf
said, "Ownership is private and is not disclosed."

There were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, Iraq had no real
connection with al Quaida or Osama bin Laden. This will be looked at as the War of 1,812 lies.
I. M. Esperto is offline  
Old 9th May 2003, 04:52
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: earth
Posts: 1,398
What a load of drivel! An Arab nation oppressed for years by a despotic regime and unable to mount a civil war to rectify matters was liberated at great expense and risk by a coalition of countries that could no longer stand back and ignore the problem. That is what actually took place and whether or not it was a walkover in the end some of our forces came under fire and some gave their lives. Please do not belittle their efforts with the worthless sentiments expressed by this thread.
soddim is offline  
Old 9th May 2003, 05:01
  #6 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: New Jersey Shore
Age: 88
Posts: 601
Not drivel, just facts, ugly facts that the American public doesn't seem to know about.
I. M. Esperto is offline  
Old 9th May 2003, 05:17
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: earth
Posts: 1,398
I. M. Esperto - you may have given facts but I cannot agree that they ugly. The Bin Ladin family business is not tarred with the same brush as the son Osama and you cannot simply quote their involvement with the Bechtel company as an ugly fact. I have lived in a compound in the desert built by the Bin Ladin construction business and there are numerous examples of their work throughout Saudi Arabia. You will have to do better than that if you want to convince me that you have not put drivel on this forum.
soddim is offline  
Old 9th May 2003, 07:05
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: City of Culture
Posts: 218
Well, after finding this sickening site I have to agree with everything that IME said. If disgusting things like this are allowed to happen in America in this day and age then there is no hope left for them.

http://www.thankyoutony.com/aboutsite.html

Incitement to violence is not acceptable. Dtails deleted.

Last edited by Danny; 11th May 2003 at 22:55.
A Civilian is offline  
Old 9th May 2003, 08:23
  #9 (permalink)  

Prince of Darkness
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: USA and a Brit
Posts: 350
A Civilian, I take it your tongue is firmly lodged in yer cheek!

Ozzy
Ozzy is offline  
Old 9th May 2003, 08:43
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Saudi Arabia
Posts: 57
Thumbs down

Firstly, and very importantly, I do not want to take away the sacrifice the coalition troops have made over the years to "free Iraq" and their continuing fight to rid the world of scum. They have served as they are required to by their respective governments, and served well.

If you don't live in this part of the world (The Middle East), it is hard to grasp the reality of what is going on here unless you experience it first hand.

This war was not for humanitarian reasons, purely politics. By securing Iraq, the US has effectively broken the "Cartel" of the Saudi mafia and its motley OPEC crew. They now have the opportunity to hand mold the Iraq oil industry, with its reserves being the second largest in the world. If you want to consider human rights abuse and basically murder....look no further than the house of Saud and its corrupt hangers on in the Saudi government. The Americans have been at loggerheads with the Saudi's over quite a few issues lately and now have the opportunity to move on to new alternatives. These opportunities did not exist prior to the removal of the Saddam Government.

The Middle East is as corrupt and volatile as it was prior to the fall of Saddam, and this will not change in the near future. In fact watch this space, it may even get worse.

GLOC is offline  
Old 9th May 2003, 16:59
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: earth
Posts: 1,398
One regime at a time - you can bet the present one in Saudi will not remain long unless it reforms.
soddim is offline  
Old 9th May 2003, 17:53
  #12 (permalink)  

Rebel PPRuNer
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Toronto, Canada (formerly EICK)
Age: 46
Posts: 2,818
I think it's sad that lies had to be told... in order to justify taking out a vicious man and a horrendous regime. It shouldn't need WMDs to be there, the gassing of the Kurds should have been enough to take him out. If the lawyers had to be mollified with a few fairy stories, it doesn't make me sleep less and I hope it doesn't make President Tone sleep less either.
MarkD is offline  
Old 9th May 2003, 18:37
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: City of Culture
Posts: 218
...taking out a vicious man and a horrendous regime...
That we supported when it suited our purposes always remember that.
A Civilian is offline  
Old 9th May 2003, 19:24
  #14 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: New Jersey Shore
Age: 88
Posts: 601
Civilian - Correct. Hussein was our ally against Iran.

Pres. Bush Sr. engineered the Desert Storm war by assuring Hussein that we would maintain a hands off policy if Iraq invaded Kuwait for stealing Iragi oil by diagonal drilling along it's border.

See:

http://www.chss.montclair.edu/english/furr/glaspie.html

THE NEW YORK TIMES INTERNATIONAL SUNDAY, SEPTEMBER 23, 1990 19

Excerpts From Iraqi Document on Meeting with U.S. Envoy

Special to The New York Times

WASHINGTON, Sept. 22 -- On July 25,President Saddam Hussein of Iraq summoned the United States Ambassador to Baghdad, April Glaspie, to his office in the last high-level contact between the two Governments before the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait on Aug. 2. Here are excerpts from a document described by Iraqi Government officials as a transcript of the meeting, which also included the Iraqi Foreign Minister, Tariq Aziz. A copy was provided to The New York Times by ABC News, which translated from the Arabic. The State Department has declined to comment on its accuracy............................
I. M. Esperto is offline  
Old 9th May 2003, 21:02
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Oxfordshire
Posts: 37
Thumbs down

I M Esperto,

By god you are having a bad couple of days, aren't you?! Having got all that bile out of your system, I hope you feel better!

Most, but not all, of what you say is complete left-wing claptrap! Effectively, your hatred for Bush and the system is so all-consuming that I suspect that, to spite them, you would have preferred that Saddam and his clique had stayed in power and would have assuaged your conscience by confining yourself to telling the Iraqi tyrant he is a naughty boy now and again; and I'm sure he would have listened too, as he did to most appeasers over the years (that last statement is my attempt at 'irony' by the way).

Typically, like most left-wing, anti-war ranters, you embrace the blame culture, and that blame is nearly always directed at only one side. You contend that everything the Coalition has done, and will continue to do in the future, is a harbinger of doom for the future that will upset some deranged terrorist or cause some catastrophic economic or ecological disaster: your underlying message is that no good will come of anything; the words 'optimism' and 'goodwill' do not feature in your vocabulary. You have, in short, become incapable of seeing the wood for the trees.

I suggest you lighten up before you make yourself ill.
SOMAT is offline  
Old 9th May 2003, 21:56
  #16 (permalink)  

Rebel PPRuNer
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Toronto, Canada (formerly EICK)
Age: 46
Posts: 2,818
Is there a statute of limitations for "associating with bad company"? GWB and Tone can't be accountable for decisions back in the Carter/Reagan, Callaghan/Thatcher era - more power to them to set the record right.
MarkD is offline  
Old 9th May 2003, 21:58
  #17 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: New Jersey Shore
Age: 88
Posts: 601
SOMAT - Left wing? Moi? I was Pat Buchanan's 4th District NJ Comgressional Delegate when he ran for president. I am a member of the John Birch Society.

You are a Troll, and nothing more in this thread.

I have given documented evidence of the treachery in high places. You chose to ignore it.

Pres. Bush is your hero. He is not mine. He is damaging the USA, profiting from it, and we pay for it.
I. M. Esperto is offline  
Old 9th May 2003, 22:09
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 449
Can you offer any practical solutions to the problem then?
rivetjoint is offline  
Old 9th May 2003, 23:01
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Middle East
Posts: 1,183
Cool Practical Solution

Solar Power,

Then we won't need to be here in the sand pit and the place will cave in on itself......summers coming too so lets get on with it!

Fox3snapshot is offline  
Old 9th May 2003, 23:31
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: southern england
Posts: 1,650
Post Ah yes, Pat Buchanan!

"Patrick Buchanan's conservatism lies somewhere to the right of Ronald Reagan's, neck and neck with George Wallace. His ideology is a grotesque agglomeration of demagogism, facism, bigot-ism, and sore-headism. His vision of the ideal America is White and Christian, bristling with weapons, strictly regimented, DEFINITELY Drug-Free (except for cigarettes probably), English only, with prayer, biblical teaching and 'creationism' (cretinism) in the schools, and no abortions ever, for any reason. People who did not agree with these rules (in his dream world) would be deleted somehow, all Blacks, Mexicans, Jews, freaks and oddballs just edited out."
see also

http://www.realchange.org/buchanan.htm
newswatcher is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.