Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Neocon who wrote (117008)	10/16/2003 10:23:52 PM
From: Bilow	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

Hi Neocon; Re: "We sent a relatively light force ..." Light for us, heavy for Iraq. Here's the figures: Iraq GDP: $ 58 billion US GDP: $10,400 billion US military budget: $ 396 billion Our military budget is about 8x the total GDP of Iraq. The President just asked for $87 billion to pay for occupying Iraq, of which about $67 billion is for the occupation and $20 billion is for the rebuilding. That's right. It costs the US more to occupy Iraq than Iraq's entire GDP. Those rebels are fighting pretty damned hard to make it that expensive for us. Hardly a humiliation. The humiliation was going into Iraq and then discovering that the locals didn't want us there, would continue to shoot at us no matter what else happened, and that the world community would give us little assistance. Re: "Indeed, some generals negotiated terms of surrender with clandestine agents before we even got there. You do not think this was a humiliation for the regime?" The historical fact is that almost no Iraqi troops surrendered. Instead, as is normal in this sort of situation (and as I predicted long before the war), the soldiers and generals removed their uniforms and went home. Nor is the fact that generals negotiate with the enemy in the face of overwhelming strength a "humiliation" for the country they are a member of. Or do you recall what happened during WW2? On the island of Corregidor? Do you recall the American general Bennedict Arnold? None of these things are humiliations. Re: "I see plenty of Iraqis lining up to join the new police and militia." The economy in Iraq is so bad that they have 30% unemployment. Everyone wants jobs, so of course they sign up. But do they put their heart into hunting down Iraqis at our bidding? Hell no. It's only in your dreams that the Iraqi police are going to police Iraq in such a way as to make the country into what the US wants. Re: "I have seen children swarming around GIs, smiling and friendly, seeing if they can get a stick of gum, not hiding away in terror." BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! LOL!!! BWAHAHAHAHHAHAHA!!! Re: "I have seen people demonstrate against various American actions, not shooting at Americans, which is not the activity of people who are terrified of the occupiers." Right, all those dead Americans were killed by accidental explosions celebrating the New Year, and by guests at those bizarre marriage ceremonies. Re: "I have heard both criticism and praise of the occupation, in man on the street interviews, but even the critics acknowledge that they are better off without Hussein." Our problem in Iraq is NOT what people are saying publicly, but instead what they are DOING in private. The simple fact is that we are continuing to take casualties, the UN has been forced out, and we're now taking casualties in other Arab regions. Your putting a happy face on the situation doesn't make all those dead Americans alive again. If the Iraqis were so damned in love with us, then why don't they protect us from those who are attacking us? Your version of reality is inconsistent with the observed actions of the Administration. If the Iraqis truly were wishing us well in Iraq, the Administration would be falling all over itself to give the Iraqis guns and ammunition so that they can take over the duties of keeping the peace. There's no question that the Iraqis, being more familiar with the place, would be far more effective at it than us. If this were going on, we wouldn't continue to see desperate Administration attempts to get other countries, (i.e. Turkey) to send troops into Iraq. No, the few examples you "see" (the truth is that you've never been in Iraq) are Ptomekin villages set up by the Administration in order to lull you. If reality in Iraq were as you say it is, then why are Americans continuing to die there? If the Iraqis truly did support us at the 90% level, we wouldn't have to have 140,000 targets there regularly shooting up unarmed civilians. Re: "I have seen no evidence that Ba'athist opposition continues to increase." The number of attacks per day has continued to increase over the last 4 months. Maybe it's Baathists, maybe it's someone else. My guess is that it's a complicated combination. But whatever it is, the simple fact is that the level of violence in Iraq continues to climb. -- Carl