If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
Essential support for under 25s
Essential support for under 25s
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
Its just the other day I was thinking about Iraq and obviously what they realy need there are more bombs, frankly they havnt had nearly enough explosions there. Some people would maybe disagree with me but then theyd be just commies, pinkos, homosexuals and anti-Americans.
The sooner Iraq's wake up and realise the selfless actions of the Americans are only for their benefit, to bravely bomb a country and dispose of its evil dictator, some of the far left comentators might think thered be other reasons for this action, but what do you expect from people who dont watch exclusivly Fox News.
Those Iraq's who arnt gratfull for the American presence in their country clearly deserve to die.
This will be the last push as the insergency is just the reminents of Sadam's regeime and a few forign fighters put there by the evil state of Iran, who isnt selflesly thinking of only the Iraqie people but just want to further their own power and they dont care how many people they kill to get it. They couldnt be more different than the saintly christian administration of George Bush
It was all ground assault apperently.
Thye aren't fighting for the country. I think its dangerous to think these people are fighting for their nation in some brave cause againts the evil foreging invader.
They seek it for their own ends, to put their part of the rleigious pie back on top, as part of terrorist movements such as al-quida, as part of criminal movements and some, well some just like the violence.
there is nothing brave about it.
If they took on the army in a an actual battle instead of creeping into quesue of people and setting off bombs, then they'd be brave but suicide bombing is cowardly.
Hell the nazi's were evil bastards but at least they had the decny to fight properly.
Hilarious :yeees:
They're Iraqis, mostly, they're in Iraq, and the Americans *are* foreign invaders and occupiers.
There's dozens of different insurgent groups, with different and conflicting goals. Some of them are even fighting each other - one group of Iraqi Sunni insurgents has started assassinating foreign fighters from Zarqawi's group.
I don't agree with most of their goals and certainly not with their methods - but I think if I was an Iraqi, particularly a Sunni, I'd want the Americans to get the hell out of my country as well and after living under three years of occupation I'd more than likely start to feel like doing something about it.
doesn't make them right or brave though.
Those yanks can get pretty crazy in thoe war situations.
The fight for Sammarrah is against insurgents, no tthe civilains there. People should remember that.
Doubt they will though.
Always easier to blame the big bad western yankees.
But what good are they doing the country?? I mean people balme america and sure they made mistakes but its the insurgents targtting civilians, and trying to de-stablise the re-building of Iraq, and the constructing of their own government and systems that would allow the allies to leave Iraq pretty much.
they are hindering the process of withdrawal rather then aiding it.
So you see why they'd rather this conflict drags on for as long as it takes.
And the scary thing is they have a much better realistic chance of winning than the US.
The point is, they don't have to do anything. they are choosing to bring chaos and death not just to the so called "invader" but to their own people, so no 1 can say they have their countries interests at heart.
I knwo they want the conflcit to drag on, its an admirable aim.
Possible and even probably they do stand a good chance of winning. Doesn't help the lack of support the USA etc gets from people over the subject and people still seeing them as some brave freedom fighters.
I don't think the USA are doing any good being there either - if they were genuinely concerned about the welfare of Iraq and Iraqis they would have handed over their power there to a UN peacekeeping force long ago.
They just stand around and do nothing while people are slaughtered, Bosnia and Rwanada cases in point.
I wouldn't write them off completely - they've learned something, hopefully, from events in Rwanda and Bosnia and have performed successful peacekeeping missions elsewhere since.
If not a UN mission with soldiers from Muslim countries then maybe the Arab League, or some force that'd stand a chance of being acceptable to most parties within Iraq.
The Americans and British are doing no good by being there, they should never have been there in the first place, most Iraqis and most of the world don't want them there. Their commanders ought to have the balls to admit they fucked up, and then get out.
The problem is the American military is a Cold War relic. It was designed for war against the USSR, thats get in, break shit and leave. Unlike the British, who have a history of colonialism (and so working with local leaders to supress resistance) the American army is purely a fighting machine.
An Arab league military sounds like a good idea, but I can't see them being too happy with it. Firstly that will mark them even more as terrorist targets, in their eyes. Secondly, Arab troops are badly trained, usually along Soviet models, with low morale. They aren't good at peacekeeping, unless its the sort where you haul dissenters off to the nearest dungeon to break their fingers.
Also just becuase there are lot of westner protestors and such about Iraq, you can't say most people and most Iraqis don't want them there.
A sizable amount in American do and a sizable amount in Iraqi do, and I knwo for certain a hell of a lot of exiles were pleased about the US and Uk going into Iraq and sorting out Saddam, so lest keep things in perspective.
I don't think peace keeping forces would do any good. Just be softer targets for the insuregent and terrorists.
The insurgents want occupiers out they should work with the Iraqi government and take a political stand not a violent stand. Learn from the PLO and Hamas, 2 very terrorist based organisations that have turned to politics to further their aims.
This strike on the insurgents may actually prove affective, they are striking an area with practically no non-insurgents in it, it is like the hub of anti-occupation in Iraq. Maybe this tactical strike will prove the corner stone to peace...maybe not.
As far as I can see, all the choices are bad. Leave Iraq and it will collapse. Iran will only benefit from that and there is the possibility of it turning into a regional conflict.
Stay and watch as the insurgency grows. Its already well within the second stage of a classical guerrilla war, I give it 8 months before the US cannot go outside of the cities at all without courting attack. Unless the USA is willing to commit a hell of alot of troops, material and intelligence to Iraq, it may fail anyway.
NATO wont help. The UN wont help. The Arab League wont help. Its all or nothing.
Jordan has already been targeted by Zarqawi, with chemical weapons no less. If they send troops in, they will be decreasing their security in return for...less security. Same for Egypt too, home of the Muslim Brotherhood and Islamic Jihad, the group Zawahiri ran. I'd like them too, but I just cant see them decreasing their security for no gain.
So in that case there is nothing to stop them except hunting them all down and eradicating them???
WE BROKE ITS BACK! STAY TEH COARSE!!!
\
Perhaps. The solutions are never easy. It requires a long haul, committed economic, military and intelligence assistance and some good luck. The insurgents have perfected systems disruptions, so they may not need to even attack US forces anymore. By concentrating on oil, electricity and communications, they can cause an economic collapse which will kill a democratic Iraq better than 100 assassinations. I think short of turning back the clock, its going to be very hard to build a successful Iraq. Maybe I'm wrong. I hope I am.
I mean the sugegsting is it could be a about 10 years ebfore we see a stable, peaceful, functioning, independant Iraq but it would be all them things.
Do we all think its worth it tho is the question I guess?
I don't think that's an option - the effort so far by the Americans to hunt down and eradicate the insurgents appears to have created a lot more insurgents than it's destroyed.
Tell the Exiles that.
Well are they hunting them down though? Or are they just patrolling around without a clue??
Effective sqauds for eradicating the insurgents, if they are in these small cells would be effective I would think.