Topic awaiting preservation: The Crystal Ball

There's a whole mess of stuff going on in the world today, as the many, many threads on the Phil board would testify to. So I was sitting at Starbucks today (how prep!) talking about the outcome of the whole War on Terror thing is going to play out. Needless to say, we have opposing views on the subject though that hardly killed the interest of the conversation.

He seemed to think that we were going to cave here pretty soon, seeing our premature handing over as a way to begin withdrawing troops. Of course, naturally, this would lead to the resurgence of al Queda back in Iraq, corruption of installed governments, coup de tas, violence.

So I asked him if this was what he honestly expects to happen, or what he wants to.

The blank stare was worth every cent in that Venti Mocha. Another cigarette later and I spilled my theory:

Basically it all boils down to this: how much we're looking to invest in this big show is equal to what we'll eventually accomplish, though it'll have more and more serious retorts as it goes. Okay, it's a catch twenty-two. On one hand, if we invest more man power and start cracking down on the insurgents, I believe it's likely we'll start seeing more and more 'underhanded' techniques being used against us. All of these beheadings aren't meaningless here, they're getting a message across. If we continue to apply pressure, they'll start ambushing more and purposfully trying to get WIA troops.

Though on the other hand, if we completely pull out I feel that we're going to leave behind an infection. And infections never go away on their own, they get worse. It's also a question of, dare I say at this point, hopelessness as far as the popular opinion of the rest of the world, whatever we do. We stay, we're just those bully Americans pushing everyone around and putzing with things that aren't ours... playing 'police' again. If we leave, we're essentially mucking with forgein matters and leaving when the heat gets a little too hot. Weak, easily retreated. Perhaps, in a few eyes, we would 'lose' the war, and Iraq would be the new bastard poster child for anti-US sects and nations worldwide.

... I may have taken slight advantage of this post to explain a bit more than I did at the exact moment. I must be rambling again, hehe

So, I offer the discussion open to all. How do you think it's going to end, as opposed to how you want it to end? Will it ever end? Does a series of questions at the end of an open ended poll always have to end with a pun?

njuice42 Cell # 551
icq 957255

All things end, one way or another.

"And this, too, shall pass" - Ancient Proverb.

How I want it to end? Successfully, with Iraq a strong, sovereign nation, with an intact infra-struckture, a stable economy, and a democratic system that works.

How it will end? That is the call of the century, I believe. Soon, US troops will have to leave. Having US troops there is a large part of the problem, IMHO. Being able to replace them with another force would be preferable. Ideally, I think a force from the region itself would be the best solution (although maybe not that practical). UN involvement, maybe even NATO involvement (though it is somewhat out of traditional NATO areas) is probably more realistic, and by far more preferrable than what is now there. Whether or not that will happen, is largely unknown. If Bush loses the election, I think that the cards will be "mixed anew" with the other Major players on the Security Council, giving the US a new chance at UN involvement in Iraq. I think that the other Security Council members have stated their views solidly against the Bush Administration time and time again...the latest blow was the "shooting down" of the Immunitsy to Prosecution that US troops have enjoyed in UN deployments. I think most do not realize the severity of this loss, and what it means for the US in the future.

I do feel, that we OWE the Iraqis a complete re-build of their land (after all, we just reduced it to rubble). I also feel, that we have a commitment to keep, that we made. That does not necessarily mean keeping troops there...commitment means not forgetting what has to be done, and doing it, all the while not forgetting what has been done.

Up to this point, The US track record in Iraq is...lacking, to say the least. Of course, the election year is not helping matters, and neither is the Bush Administration. Some things can't be solved with force.

quote:

---

talking about the outcome of the whole War on Terror thing is going to play out. Needless to say, we have opposing views on the subject though that hardly killed the interest of the conversation.

He seemed to think that we were going to cave here pretty soon, seeing our premature handing over as a way to begin withdrawing troops. Of course, naturally, this would lead to the resurgence of al Queda back in Iraq, corruption of installed governments, coup de tas, violence.

---

I personally hold, that the War in Iraq has nothing to do with the War on Terror. The War in Afghanistan, on the other hand, does. The situation in Iraq may become something to do with the War on Terror...that is a possiblitlity, if Al Qaida makes it so. But I personally don't really see this happening at the moment. I think Al Qaida is busy with Saudi Arabia, which is more troublesome, as activities in Iraq, IMHO.

WebShaman | Asylum D & D | D & D Min Page

Something inside of me believes that the War on Terror was merely a smoke screen to invade Iraq (and possibly Iran in the near future), through the elimination of al Queda. Now Saudi Arabia, on the other hand, well that's a whole new ball of wax. I think we're vesting a lot of interest into keeping them allies, when they're just a few incidents away from being another big red X on the world map of places to invade. Err... liberate. From the terrorists.

quote:

---

WebShaman - commitment means not forgetting what has to be done, and doing it, all the while not forgetting what has been done.

---

America, as you well know, is not to good at upholding commitments, what makes you think the US Gov't would in this case?


< Ozone Quotes >

I think the whole thing is an attempt to quell some sort of percieved threat; to stop what various figures in the mechanisms of authority believe to be an inevitable global war, as world issues approach a cataclysmic culmination - one already agitated by many previous underhanded and bungled operations by these same self-proclaimed crusaders.

...and ]now I sound crazy, dammit!