death/casualty rates of US soldiers in iraq suspected higher than reported

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by zimv20, Aug 5, 2003.

  1. macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    chicago
    #1
    http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/08/04/1059849347169.html

     
  2. macrumors 65816

    Ambrose Chapel

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2002
    Location:
    Massachusetts
    #2
    here's an op-ed written by a former military semi-big shot:

    http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/story.hts/editorial/outlook/2023830


     
  3. macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2003
    Location:
    Terlingua, Texas
    #3
    Now, now. There is a publicly stated exit plan. The big problem is whether or not such political stability can be achieved such that it works and we can then leave. We'll have a lot better idea in six months to a year, I imagine.

    Strategically, we don't really want to leave Iraq. We'd want to create a base or bases in the western part, and remove troops from other parts of the mideast. With a stable and "tame" political structure in Iraq, this would be possible. Removal of troops from other areas would reduce the U.S. presence and possibly improve their political stability via a lower U.S. profile.

    'Rat
     
  4. macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #4
    How does building bases in western Iraq and then positioning our troops there constitute a reduced US presence in the region? And another way to describe a "tame" government is a "puppet" regime, which is what any Iraqi government that bends over backwards to accomodate the US will be called in that part of the world. I'm not disagreeing with you that this is the US plan, just the potential downside to the approach. The bases in Saudi Arabia were seen as a great idea at the time, but now we find ourselves being attacked by people we previously funded because (in part, I know) of those very bases. We are still dealing with a fundamentalist Iranian regime because of our attempts to install a "tame" regime there. I understand that this is not a black-and-white issue, but I see an appalling lack of concern for the previous failures, and an over-reliance on previous successes (Japan and Germany most notably are cited often). In addition, there is already pressure from the left and the right to get our troops out of Iraq ASAP, which IMHO would leave Iraq in the same situation Afghanistan found itself in after years of proxy war between the USSR and US, when they were essentially abandoned by the world community, and subsequently became a hotbed of illegal activity.
     
  5. thread starter macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    chicago
    #5
    had bush stated any of this before the war, i bet public support for it wouldn't have been nearly as high.
     
  6. macrumors 68040

    pseudobrit

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Location:
    Jobs' Spare Liver Jar
    #6
    Huh? I thought we were there to get rid of Saddam's WMD. They're gone now, so why are we still there?
     

Share This Page