View Single Post
      03-22-2008, 10:35 PM   #46
Negotiator's Avatar

Drives: 07 GTI
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Fairfax, VA

iTrader: (0)

You really should take the time to actually read what were Iraq's obligations under the ceasefire resolutions.

"The UN Security Council imposed comprehensive economic sanctions against Iraq on August 6, 1990, just after the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait. When the coalition war had ousted Iraq from Kuwait the following year, the Council did not lift the sanctions, keeping them in place as leverage to press for Iraqi disarmament and other goals. The sanctions remained in place thereafter, despite a harsh impact on innocent Iraqi civilians and an evident lack of pressure on Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein. A UN "Oil-for-Food Programme," started in late 1997, offered some relief to Iraqis, but the humanitarian crisis continued."

elieve it or not, the US military is capable of doing two things at once. I find it amazing that people will constantly complain (incorrectly) that we have "gone it alone" in Iraq and then also complain that in Afghanistan we should not rely on our allies to do what they committed to.
I have full confidence in the US military. I'm sure we CAN send troops to hunt down terrorist cells in Pakistan. However, we aren't. We are also in Iraq for no reason. That was kind of my point.

Withdrawing from the field of battle is surrender.
There is no field of battle. There is no opposing standing military. What's your point?

I have led and served with thousands.
I commend you for your service, I'm sure it's been exemplary and you're obviously a true patriot, I'm not challenging that. What I am challenging is your views on the current international policy, which is extremely short-sighted.

They believe in what they are doing and the re-enlistment rates prove it. The war in Iraq has been going on for 5 years now. Virtually every soldier who is currently serving has either enlisted or re-enlisted since it began. They know what they signed up for and their sacrifice should never be used to make political points.
I'm NOT using their sacrifice to make a politcal point. What I am saying is their sacrifice proves patriotism and integrity of our soldiers, not their fanatisism or convictions. Claiming they died for a political cause is doing them a disservice, they died for their country.

Yes, not a spot of success. How successful were UN forces in the Sinai in 1967? How about Lebanon? Rwanda? Srebrenica?
UN forces have been capable, especially during the initial deployment. However, UN regularly limits their power, and withdraw them after they are unsuccesful.