Dispelling a few myths

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by solvs, Mar 9, 2008.

  1. solvs macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA
    #1
    There are a lot of myths out there about what's going on in the world, so I figured I would just take a minute to attempt to dispel some of them based on what I've been reading:

    The Myth of AQI

    Despite what people like Bush and McCain have been touting...
    Estimates peg AQs percentages in the single digits.

    As for the surge, we've been over this, but still keep hearing that it's working, even though it actually isn't:

    The Myth of the Surge
    At least not for the reasons that have been portrayed. Not to mention the lack of self sustaining security and the lack of gov reform. It's a long article, but a good read.

    I know I'm preaching to the converted on this (I'd hope), but I also wanted to post a couple of articles on Islam and Muslims. I didn't see anywhere that would be good, and don't think it needs it's own thread, so I guess I'll just toss it in here:

    Who Speaks for Islam?
    Sharia Law: Gallup Poll 50,000 across Muslim World

    And finally, the media:

    The Myth of Objectivity
    Also a long read, but it raises some good points.

    Enjoy.
     
  2. stevento macrumors 6502

    stevento

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2006
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    #2
    Here's a myth: that obama was in stronger opposition to the war than hillary.
     
  3. Thomas Veil macrumors 68020

    Thomas Veil

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Location:
    OBJECTIVE reality
    #3
    Not bad...second post and we're already off-topic.

    Hillary! Hillary! Hillary! :rolleyes:

    Anyway, back on topic:

    I knew about AQI being total bull____, but this stuff about the US bribing -- excuse me, funding a militia in Iraq...how totally Machiavellian.

    I think for the sake of clarity we should mention that the "Osama" reference in the article is not bin Laden.

    So we are now doing what we should have done initially, when we were supposed to take over Saddam's army and turn it into a security force. Now we are bribing people to do the same job, knowing full well we are hiring murderous criminals who've attacked our own troops, with no guarantee that they won't turn on us again when the money stops.

    Not to mention we may have just armed the very people who could overthrow the Iraqi government we set up.

    One question: why isn't this in the mainstream media?????
     
  4. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #4
    Machiavelli had a clue.
     
  5. obeygiant macrumors 68040

    obeygiant

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Location:
    totally cool
    #5
    What's not working? The sunnis LOST the civil war? Wow lots of news, and from a rock and roll magazine no doubt.

    The common Iraqi is still a capitalist. $100 US will support his family for more than a week. If that $100 comes from a insurgent group to plant and IED or if it comes from the US government to rat out an insurgent. Guess who has more money.

    The surge, troops or money, is working in the favor of the US. Myth dispelled. :)
     
  6. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #6
    Wasn't it supposed to be working for Iraq? :confused:
     
  7. Peace macrumors P6

    Peace

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2005
    Location:
    Space--The ONLY Frontier
    #7
    Mythbusters..

    Obama voted nay on the Senate resolution. Clinton voted yea.

    Talk is cheap. What matters is how one votes.
     
  8. obeygiant macrumors 68040

    obeygiant

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Location:
    totally cool
    #8
    Excellent point, skunk. :)

    As far as the game plan goes goes in Iraq, I think the US is trying to provide a more stable environment for a secular government to emerge. The methods or reasons to enter in the first place are, of course, are up for debate. Working for a free, safe, society is in everyones best interest.
     
  9. Zwhaler macrumors 603

    Zwhaler

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2006
    #9
    I don't see why our goal is to "rebuild" Iraq when we spent years destroying it. We took out their government... but we claim that one of our priorities is to provide Iraq with conditions for a stable government to come in and regain control of the country. I would like to know why we went to Iraq in the first place...
     
  10. Desertrat macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2003
    Location:
    Terlingua, Texas
    #10
    The reason the surge is working is that Petraeus has delegated authority down to company levels for our troops to interact with local leaders: Sheikhs and mayors and such. It's a change to building from the bottom up instead of trying to give orders from the top down, from a weak government. IOW, a grassroots deal to create a stable base.

    So, with the present mix of our troops working with their police and military, in smallish units, stability is increasing throughout most of the smaller villages and towns/cities. Iraqis are now secure enough in many areas to snitch out the "insurgents", which further enhances stability.

    Local business and trade are increasing, along with international business activities. It is expected that major expansions of oilfield production will get underway, soon; BP and (IIRC) Total, among others. That will enable more construction and reconstruction of potable water systems, schools and hospitals--which have already been underway for some time.

    It's not any sort of uninterruptedly smooth path, but it's indeed an upslope in the curve...

    'Rat
     
  11. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #11
    You are clearly making the common mistake (which the Administration wants you to make) of thinking that "the insurgency" = Al Qaeda in Iraq, that all-too-emotive invention of the occupying coalition. The foreign element is minuscule, if indeed it still exists at all. Meanwhile, the minute the US turns its back, all hell will break loose as the newly rearmed and refinanced Sunnis re-emerge from the temporary cover of their "Iraqi Security Volunteer" disguise. The whole exercise is an object lesson in political naivety.
     
  12. Desertrat macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2003
    Location:
    Terlingua, Texas
    #12
    Well, skunk, I hate to tell you, but nowhere did I mention Al Qaida in my post. Nor did I imply domestic or foreign origin among "insurgents". And, according to letters/emails from grunts, and articles by combat-vets who've been with our units in Iraq, Sunnis are snitching as well as are Shiites. Both groups, in the main, are thoroughly fed up with the killing.

    FWIW, I pay little attention to what folks inside the Beltway say about Iraq, whether Administration or anti-Administration. Like a lot of folks, I have friends and acquaintances who've served there or who have friends or family serving there. Politicos and newsies aren't worth squat for unbiased info.

    As far as Al Qaida is concerned, I've read commentaries that overall, it's pretty much in a shambles as an organization. We've killed way too many of their experienced leaders and of their trained operatives and apparently interdicted quite a few of their plans or efforts. The writers comment that unless they manage to do something notable between now and our election, their credibility is seriously on the wane. I dunno; that's just what I'm reading...

    'Rat
     
  13. stevento macrumors 6502

    stevento

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2006
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    #13
    two years ago we were at huge violence levels then we went up to HUGE HUGE violence levels and now (due to the surge) we are back down to huge violence levels
    we've gone in a circle.

    barack and hillary are right: the surge is a minor tactical victory in an overall failed strategy

    theres this one political cartoon where bush says "we've turned the corner in iraq" and he's walking on those MC escher stairs that go in a circle

    [​IMG]
     
  14. solvs thread starter macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA
    #14
    There's still no sustainable security without our troops (in levels we can't sustain) or other self sufficiency and little to no gov progress... the things the surge was supposed to give them time to accomplish.

    Pretty much, and that just isn't enough.
     
  15. Desertrat macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2003
    Location:
    Terlingua, Texas
    #15
    "There's still no sustainable security without our troops (in levels we can't sustain) or other self sufficiency and little to no gov progress."

    That's not what the guys on the ground are saying...

    'Rat
     
  16. NAG macrumors 68030

    NAG

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2003
    Location:
    /usr/local/apps/nag
    #16
    Hah, thats actually pretty cute. Need to find a link to that comic.
     
  17. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #17
    The reason the splurge is "working" (haven't seen any of those benchmarks met yet, have we?) is because al-Sadr is benefitting from being a power-broker at the moment. The second he sees more benefit from going back to being a warlord, all hell will break loose, surge or no surge.

    But, stipulating that your vision of victory being just around the corner, how long do you predict it will take to get these oilfield expansions underway? How long before that translates into the "more construction and reconstruction of potable water systems, school, and hospitals -- which have already been underway for some time"? Do you see this happening in one Friedman Unit? Perhaps two? Or is this a long term prospect, with US troops and dollars being poured into Iraq for another decade?

    Here we go with the he said/ he said BS. You know as well as I do that we can all talk to different "guys on the ground" and get views supporting whichever political viewpoint we hew to.

    This is such a classless tact...
     
  18. solvs thread starter macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA
    #18
    I have anecdotal stories too, but figured links would work better. I can also give links from those on the ground, those in command and those just doing the real work, who will also say the same if you'd like. The fact is, there is little to no progress in their gov. They also aren't ready to be self sustaining, whether we continue to pay them or not. Nor can we sustain the troop levels. It's also still having a negative impact on the 'stans, which we've posted several times. Including several of those in command actually coming out and saying we need more resources there, but aren't getting them because of Iraq.

    It's great that violence is down slightly in some areas, even if it is only back down to where it was before, but none of the other goals the surge was supposed to allow for have been met. Nor does it change just how badly things have gone so far. Kinda why it's hard for us to look at the reality of the situation, and believe more talk about how we're making progress, like they've been saying for the past couple of years, all evidence to the contrary.

    We're not leaving any time soon, and that should be the ultimate goal, no?
     
  19. solvs thread starter macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA
    #19
    Here's another one that, sadly, far too many people still believe:

    Exhaustive review finds no link between Saddam and al Qaida

    I thought we knew that already. Guessing this won't get much play either though. Maybe the part where it says he provided some indirect support for groups considered terrorists. Certainly worth that estimated $3 trillion. Meanwhile, Bin Laden is still "not a big concern".

    As for how things are going in Iraq, those soldiers on the ground tell you about this?:

    Halliburton subsidiary Kellogg Brown & Root provided inadequate water treatment to our troops in Iraq
    Universal Rot
    Utter Scum
    Faulty Helmets? Here's Another $74 Million

    Support the troops? :confused:
     
  20. Thomas Veil macrumors 68020

    Thomas Veil

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Location:
    OBJECTIVE reality
    #20
    You misunderstand. Nowadays when a Republican says, "Support the troops," he means:

    [​IMG]
     
  21. hulugu macrumors 68000

    hulugu

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2003
    Location:
    the faraway towns
    #21
    'Rat, could you provide a few links, I'd love to read some of the commentaries, and more importantly some of the letters/emails (whatever you feel can be posted), from grunts.
     
  22. solvs thread starter macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA
    #22
  23. solvs thread starter macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA
    #23
    Well, maybe McCain and Cheney can, but as they visited, attacks spiked.

    Not that I would consider Cheney a reliable source.

    :rolleyes:
     
  24. shikimo macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2007
    Location:
    Lyon, France
    #24
    Yes...and this is a recurring pattern in recent US military/diplomatic history. I teach 'American Civilisation' to French college students, and the other day one of them asked me why the US keeps arming people for political reasons when it keeps coming to back to haunt them (we had just gone over the American origins of Iraq's military infrastructure during the war with Iran, and the same story of the 'Mujahadeen freedom fighters' of Osama bin Laden, to quote Ronald Reagan). "I don't know," I said, "but if you want to see into the future you ought to look and see who we're arming now."

    'Rat, can you post a link that says Total is or will be involved in the oilfield production in Iraq? That would really be something, considering that these are the same folks who lost billions when Saddam was dethroned...and I would love to be able to document that a French company is making money off the Iraq war. That would really put a dent in the theory that the war was really an power play by American oil companies against the French companies that had just signed a bunch of deals with Hussein right before the invasion. Some say that was the primary reason behind Jacques Chirac's tirade against the invasion, and that the whole Freedom Fries Incident was political cover for a giant oil-money grab...
     
  25. solvs thread starter macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA

Share This Page