Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-05-2007, 02:17 PM
 
Location: Near Manito
20,170 posts, read 24,262,341 times
Reputation: 15285

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by madicarus2000 View Post
But those people also use words to express their ignorance and narrow-mindedness.



Usually people accomplish goals and then leave. Are you saying that you would consider the leaving after accomplishing those goals a defeat?

Of course the problem is new goals were set after the last ones were accomplished. Since the primary goals that were initially set were accomplished, I would consider it a victory and leave. The secondary goals set years after the fact would not then consider an exit a defeat. I guess I don’t have the defeatist attitude like many people have. I consider the accomplishments a victory.



The US withdrew without completing the primary objective so yes, I would consider that a defeat. The fact that the initial Iraqi objectives were met are a key distinction between Iraq and Viet Nam.
So for you, it was the moving goalposts that clinched it. Interesting analysis.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-05-2007, 02:19 PM
 
Location: Near Manito
20,170 posts, read 24,262,341 times
Reputation: 15285
Quote:
Originally Posted by bily4 View Post
Actually I said it. We have to leave Iraq at some point, I think....might as well be sooner rather than later. We leave now, remind the world we got rid of that Bad Guy Saddam, and claim "Victory!". Maybe have a parade or something.

If we get stuck policing the Sunnis and Shiites for years on end, at the cost of $Hundreds of Billions$, thousands of additional American lives, and the further straining of our military capabilities - that would be Defeat.
But suppose that those years resulted in a stable, democratic Iraq, allied to the US. If it took a long time....still a Defeat, in your eyes?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-05-2007, 02:21 PM
 
Location: Blankity-blank!
11,446 posts, read 16,149,024 times
Reputation: 6958
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yeledaf View Post
But suppose that those years resulted in a stable, democratic Iraq, allied to the US. If it took a long time....still a Defeat, in your eyes?
Keep on dreaming!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-05-2007, 02:32 PM
 
Location: Near Manito
20,170 posts, read 24,262,341 times
Reputation: 15285
Quote:
Originally Posted by Visvaldis View Post
Keep on dreaming!
I agree, it's a longshot. Keep in mind, though, that either Hill or Barack will probably have to at least give it a go.

Would you mind giving your opinion if they succeeded, instead of Smirky McChimpblossom?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-05-2007, 03:12 PM
 
16,579 posts, read 20,637,660 times
Reputation: 26860
Victory in Iraq would be to have the country function as well as it did under Saddam Hussein, only without a dictator, with civil rights being observed for all groups of people and without Iraq trying to take over any of their neighbor’s countries.

Defeat would be having the situation become even more chaotic than it already is, with all-out civil war, massive deaths, refugees and an atmosphere that nurtures people who want to blow us up.

Ooops. I think we’re headed for defeat.

In Vietnam we lost by most accounts, but now, 35-40 years, later Vietnam is more democratic than it’s ever been and we’re happy trading partners. Communism collapsed under its own weight. Is it possible that the current notion of terrorism will collapse or dissipate over time because most people just want to go about their lives and don’t want to be bossed around by dictators, whether they’re political or religious?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-05-2007, 03:16 PM
 
16,579 posts, read 20,637,660 times
Reputation: 26860
(Frankly, I am surprised at how few folks on this bbs are willing to contribute their definitions -- especially the um mature oracles).

That doesn't surprise me at all. No one answered when I asked what would happen if 12million illegal immigrants were shipped home at once. It sounds snottier than I want it to, but it seems like if most people haven't heard someone on television say it, they're not going to be able to articulate it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-05-2007, 03:17 PM
 
Location: Santa Monica
4,714 posts, read 8,445,750 times
Reputation: 1052
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marlow View Post
Victory in Iraq would be to have the country function as well as it did under Saddam Hussein, only without a dictator, with civil rights being observed for all groups of people and without Iraq trying to take over any of their neighbor’s countries.

It's too bad you've been drinking the neo-con/Dubya-flavored Kool Aid. Wasn't it Dubya (or was it Rumsfeld) who said at one point that "we don't do nationbuilding." Well, wasn't it pretty to think so.

What about all the other important nations, including key oil exporters to the U.S., who are run by dictators (Nigeria, Venezuela, even Russia)? When's Dubya going to do regime change there also?

It's all such a crock. You've got to learn to see through it.

Invading Iraq was about OIL and ISRAEL's security, and including CONTAINING IRAN.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-05-2007, 03:17 PM
 
Location: Near Manito
20,170 posts, read 24,262,341 times
Reputation: 15285
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marlow View Post
Victory in Iraq would be to have the country function as well as it did under Saddam Hussein, only without a dictator, with civil rights being observed for all groups of people and without Iraq trying to take over any of their neighbor’s countries.

Defeat would be having the situation become even more chaotic than it already is, with all-out civil war, massive deaths, refugees and an atmosphere that nurtures people who want to blow us up.

Ooops. I think we’re headed for defeat.

In Vietnam we lost by most accounts, but now, 35-40 years, later Vietnam is more democratic than it’s ever been and we’re happy trading partners. Communism collapsed under its own weight. Is it possible that the current notion of terrorism will collapse or dissipate over time because most people just want to go about their lives and don’t want to be bossed around by dictators, whether they’re political or religious?
I like your approach. You make victory sound inevitable.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-05-2007, 03:18 PM
 
Location: High Bridge, NJ
3,859 posts, read 9,948,777 times
Reputation: 3399
Nobody is quantifying victory in Iraq by control of the oilfields? Like it or not those resources are what makes the world go 'round and this is our window of opportunity. I'm not saying that we should give the Iraqis a raw deal, on the contrary, they should be fairly compensated, but it would be height of irresponsibility NOT to gain full control of the oil after all we've invested, rightly or wrongly. I didn't support this war from the beginning, but at this point, we can't be leaving empty handed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-05-2007, 03:22 PM
 
Location: Arizona
5,408 posts, read 7,778,986 times
Reputation: 1198
Quote:
Originally Posted by Badfish740 View Post
Nobody is quantifying victory in Iraq by control of the oilfields? Like it or not those resources are what makes the world go 'round and this is our window of opportunity. I'm not saying that we should give the Iraqis a raw deal, on the contrary, they should be fairly compensated, but it would be height of irresponsibility NOT to gain full control of the oil after all we've invested, rightly or wrongly. I didn't support this war from the beginning, but at this point, we can't be leaving empty handed.
Badfish are you implying we are not in Iraq just to beat down the Evil Doers? I do appreciate your point about "fairly compensating" the Iraqis for their oil. From their perspective they might feel this to be justified.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:52 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top