|
|
Post by rick1776 on Jul 18, 2003 0:13:49 GMT -5
On the ABC last night: They interviewed several John Doe privates as well as a high ranking officer. The officer with somber face said, "Being part of the military I am not in a position to criticise the Bush administration over the invasion of Iraq". He said it all without saying anything. I suspect he is no longer an officer today. LOL
The privates basically said we all want to go home. There have been 5 suspected suicides by military personnel due to the low moral.
The reported stated that it was originally anticipated that the "policing action" would take 6 months, before an Iraqi infrustructure capable of holding together under its own weight could be formed. That estimate was now out to four years. Ironically said the reporter the cost to keep 160,000 American troops in Iraq for that long will be horrendous. It will probably mean going to the UN cap in hand and asking other countries to help out. India who originally said they would help with 20,000 troops have pulled out. France has said a flat no.
It intrigues me how one nation, whos everyday people in the street I find quite frendly, can have a political system that generates so many enemies!!
Of the 33 battalions that the US have, 21 are currently actively deployed, protecting the interests of the US.
Insane really, isnt it? Reminds me of the Salem witch hunt.
cheers
rick1776
|
|
|
|
Post by TC away on Jul 18, 2003 11:48:22 GMT -5
Moral is low becuase it is hotter than hell in Iraq. Unless you are in Centcom you are stuck outside drinking 100+ degree water. As for the guys that are getting shot, Most of them were in places tehy should not have been.
|
|
|
|
Post by DeadCat on Jul 18, 2003 12:16:39 GMT -5
Moral should also be low in the US, hell, the taxpayers are the ones paying for all of this....
Now correct me if my math’s is a little bent, but have a look at the following:
Approx. population of the US : ~280,000,000
Approx. cost of the war with Iraq : ~100,000,000,000
Now if we consider that this is just an estimate, and that the average US family has 2.5 children. That must mean that there are an average 4.5 people per family (broken or not). This makes ~62,222,222 families.
Now ~100,000,000,000 divided up into ~62,222,222 families makes a bill of about ~USD$1,600 per US family for the war.
On the opposite side of things, if US just decided to bypass the whole war thing and just gave ~100,000,000,000 dollars to the Iraqi people they’d each get ~USD$4160 or 208 times the average yearly salary. (I waged the average salary high at USD$20 per month...)
Lets just say that USD$100,000,000,000 is a shit load of money....
(DeadCat)
|
|
|
|
Post by Wycco on Jul 18, 2003 12:18:33 GMT -5
As for the guys that are getting shot, Most of them were in places tehy should not have been. Waiting for someone to reply... "Yes Iraq"  (Sorry- Humor perhaps not appropriate) Re: The deaths- it seems everyday at least one more soldier gets killed and a dozen get wounded. Such a waste of life. The soldiers are sitting ducks getting picked off one by one.  The worst part is- wheter you believe the war is justified or not- these soldiers believe they are in Iraq to help the Iraqis: the same people that are killing them hand over fist. Irony isn't always sweet- sometimes it's bitter. |
|
|
|
Post by Wycco on Jul 18, 2003 12:22:38 GMT -5
Now ~100,000,000,000 divided up into ~62,222,222 families makes a bill of about ~USD$1,600 per US family for the war. That is a low estimate. I've heard mentioned over the last few months values ranging from $1000 - $3500 per household as the overall bill for the war. ($1000 being what the Republicans say, $3500 being what the democrats say... the truth is most likely somewhere in the middle). |
|
|
|
Post by DeadCat on Jul 18, 2003 17:26:27 GMT -5
Wycco,
I was actually trying to be a little conservative in the figures as not to get shot down in flames… But thanks for the figures from your media, I’m glad (see surprised) I wasn’t too far off…. (Thou I did fuck up the Iraq salary calc, it should read 208 times the average monthly salary)
And I’m pretty damned sure the answer from the American public would’ve been quite different if they were asked the following:
“Do you support the war in Iraq if it cost your family personally at least $1,000?”
But as you and me both know, the US only invaded Iraq purely for the sake of liberating the Iraqi people and that the American people are glad to pay this money out of their own pockets to support this act of good will.
I’m also so surprised that the media is even making a fuss about these 100’s of tonnes of WMD deployable in the field in 45 minutes; they were never even a consideration for the motivation to go to war, it was always about the people…
Sarcastically Yours,
(DeadCat)
|
|
|
|
Post by Wycco on Jul 21, 2003 8:40:13 GMT -5
My stance on the war was always...
Its not the best solution, but it beats what we have been doing...
So I guess in a way I was tentatively for the war- for the sake of the Iraqi people, and the fact that another Arab-Israeli war (highly possible since Saddam was very warlike) would cost us more anyway. (And if we left our troops in the gulf surrounding Iraq for another decade we would have been spending lots of money anyway).
WMD was never an issue for me. Stability was.
|
|
|
|
Post by Topcontender on Jul 21, 2003 9:31:50 GMT -5
DC - their is no price for freedom. We were spending billions just sitting and "containing" Saddam. We were better off investing some more cash and getting rid of him.
|
|
|
|
Post by DeadCat on Jul 22, 2003 16:18:13 GMT -5
Wycco,
“Its not the best solution, but it beats what we have been doing...”
Whilst not going into the broader problems, how about every family in America donating another USD$1500 per family to get rid of that dickhead currently running Burma? (Considering of course that WMD or any evidence of such weapons aforthmentioned has absolutely nothing to do with the American peoples plight to rid the world of fuckwit dictators). – Or is it just about terrorists again now as it was with Afghanistan?
TC,
“DC - their is no price for freedom. We were spending billions just sitting and "containing" Saddam.”
Billions in sanctions you mean. Just how many people died because of those sanctions that you claim cost America “billions”… (Oh, we are poor America, we can actively support the UN in staving a nation and then claim it cost us money)
And what about the freedom of the Taiwanese people, why did the US withdraw their support for Taiwan in their efforts for a democratic government and rather consolidate support for trade relations with China. (This was the first move I noticed from Dubya that totally contradicted America’s historic stance for world peace and more importantly democracy for the people….)
It made me sick then and it makes me sick now.....
|
|
|
|
Post by smokingun on Jul 27, 2003 3:05:02 GMT -5
i don't think those figures tell the whole story in the sense that we'll actually see US citizens charged that amount when the tax man calls. dubya would have to be a friggin manialc to pull that off with elections not far off
besides a lot of the munitions used would count as surplus or old stock that i figure would need to be disposed of anyway. this is a win-win situation for bush. get rid of old/surplus stock of munitions, test new weapon systems on real people on a real battle field, grab the oil while he is at it.
shame people needed to be killed in order to satisfy the greed of a few. but then again their deaths don't mean squat, they are after all just "collateral damage".
smokingun
|
|
|
|
Post by justin on Jul 27, 2003 9:03:59 GMT -5
DC - their is no price for freedom. We were spending billions just sitting and "containing" Saddam. We were better off investing some more cash and getting rid of him. Agreed how much money was being spent with the fly overs in the so-called no fly zones, maintaining the bases in Turkey Saudi etc. At least now they're mostly based in Iraq. It will take some time but I'm sure that things are going a lot better in Iraq than the media is showing us or reporting. If I just knew any major city by it's newscasts I would be sure that there was just murder and mayhem out on those streets. |
|
|
|
Post by DeadCat on Aug 5, 2003 18:17:26 GMT -5
Justin,
Given that the whole Uranian procurement and 500 tons of WMD in 45 minutes threat that the US claimed to have undeniable evidence above and beyond what was available to the UN on these types of weapons as a reason to pre-strike a non-aggressive sovereign nation is definitely questionable in the least.
I agree that Saddam is a bad man, but my opinion is (as always been) that the US should have listened to the UN in that there was a peaceful solution available.
What is it now? Over 6,000 certified civilians Iraqi dead caused by American munitions. (Who knows how many more civilian deaths were not recorded or just classified as combatants) – It was the US who said they were not counting civilian deaths as it was not important to them before getting a stern warning from the Red Cross about their responsibilities…
And we are now hearing that the justification for war was a regime change and to free the Iraqi people and that it is justified. What an absolute crock of shit….
The US is only hurting now in the war because the UN who used to bow down to America in these situations in the past, has not… (And all the big US companies are securing long term contracts with a US defined local government) – As a said before it is a bombs for reconstruction campaign….
I mean FFS, MCI-WorldCom of all companies (you know that US company who lied about a $12US Billion loss that spurred on a big IT stock market crash in which many normal folk lost a lot of money) has without even bidding got the contract to build a telephone network in Iraq…
As I said before, what a crock of shit….
(DeadCat)
|
|
|
|
Post by justan on Aug 6, 2003 11:46:10 GMT -5
DeadCat
I am not a fan of Bush and his boys. As far as I'm concerned he wasn't elected but he is still the president of the USA. The way I felt didn't change a thing about the out come.
Iraq was in trouble as soon as Bush took over. It was just a matter of timing. 9/11 was the turning point/excuse.
The plans for the invasion of Iraq and the change in policy from containment to prevention were made back in the 90's and adopted by the current admistration. I can't blame them for that.
The fact that they may have fabricated evidence for their actions is nothing new for the States or for that matter other countries. What is new is that we are finding out about it so soon after the event
Regarding the contracts given I would be surprised if they went to groups or concerns who did not support.
the repubs.
IMO opinion this whole affair was about
A: controlling the price of oil
B: slowly weaning the States out of being so dependant on Saudi oil
C: Put pressure on the other countries in the Gulf, re democracy and peace with Israel
D: finish the Gulf War of 90
E: WMD
F: The people of Iraq
The sad part for me(and I agree with you) is that the ordinary people have to pay the price with their lives for all of this geo-political crap.
That unfortunately for most of the people on this planet is the way it has been in the past and will be for the near term future as I cannot see things changing.
|
|
|
|
Post by justan on Aug 7, 2003 10:05:08 GMT -5
Just to add a bit.
IMHO The US is only the latest in a long line of "world" powers to act in such a manner. What they are doing is nothing new or hasn't been done before.
The only difference is as Marshall M said "The world has now become a global village" so we the ordinary people are more aware of the practise and it's effects.
The good thing for me is that I just happen to live in the middle class part of the village at this moment in time.
regards
Justin
|
|
