What should the next administration do in Iraq?

[Darth Raptor]

But hey, it's entirely fair that I be expected to fight and die for the crimes of a country I was born in and have come to fucking loathe in recent years. That's some real moral superiority there, brian. Don't like it? I should just move! YEAH! That's totally feasible and not impractical in ANY way! Also hilarious, considering the ruling mob here has been telling me the SAME FUCKING THING since this clusterfuck began.

[Darth Wong]

But hey, it's entirely fair that I be expected to fight and die for the crimes of a country I was born in and have come to fucking loathe in recent years. That's some real moral superiority there, brian. Don't like it? I should just move! YEAH! That's totally feasible and not impractical in ANY way! Also hilarious, considering the ruling mob here has been telling me the SAME FUCKING THING since this clusterfuck began.

Nobody said it's ideal, or moral. But your country is at war, and that's what happens during war: the entire population suffers. That's why war is supposed to be a bad thing.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

It would not be remotely practical to supply 150,000 men completely from the air; the US cannot fight a major war without some nice paved roads or railroads running in from a port. The Iranians wouldn’t deploy concentrated forces; they’d sends thousands upon thousands of commandoes to fight an irregular war, only with much better weapons and training then the current insurgents.

Are there any refineries in the Mosul area?

We could actually trim the air supply requirements down to just ammunition if that was the case, and I was calculating that to be the case. Obviously things would have to be changed otherwise. But remember that we don't need to ship in things like food to our troops when we're in an area with a friendly population; the locals can supply it.

[Starglider]

It would not be remotely practical to supply 150,000 men completely from the air; the US cannot fight a major war without some nice paved roads or railroads running in from a port.

Quit giving the neocons more reasons to invade Syria.

The Iranians wouldn’t deploy concentrated forces; they’d sends thousands upon thousands of commandoes to fight an irregular war, only with much better weapons and training then the current insurgents.

Would they be able to infiltrate them across a guarded and presumably mined border? If this would work against US-reinforced Kurdistan, why didn't they use it against Iraq in the Iran-Iraq war? AFAIK they used a combination of conventional combined arms forces and human wave attacks, no huge commando deployments.

Nobody said it's ideal, or moral. But your country is at war, and that's what happens during war: the entire population suffers.

Sometimes. The US has had a remarkable run of wars with minimal impact on the home population; WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam, Gulf War, Afghanistan and now Iraq. The UK population didn't suffer much in WWI or at all in various previous adventures (e.g. the Boer War); it took a beating in WWII but nothing like what the central European countries took.

[Yogi]

But hey, it's entirely fair that I be expected to fight and die for the crimes of a country I was born in and have come to fucking loathe in recent years. That's some real moral superiority there, brian. Don't like it? I should just move! YEAH! That's totally feasible and not impractical in ANY way! Also hilarious, considering the ruling mob here has been telling me the SAME FUCKING THING since this clusterfuck began.

It WOULD be a good way of getting money, employment, employment prospects, education, and healthcare (though the last one is rather questionable). It's very far from idea, but according to you there is absolutely nothing else you can do about your situation.

[Darth Wong]

It would not be remotely practical to supply 150,000 men completely from the air; the US cannot fight a major war without some nice paved roads or railroads running in from a port.

Don't worry, the air-mobile Stryker will solve everything!!!!

Sorry, I couldn't help it

[Starglider]

It would not be remotely practical to supply 150,000 men completely from the air;

Actually how comparable would such an effort be to the Berlin airlift? Apparently that shifted 2.3 million tons of supplies (of which the majority was 1.5 million tons of coal) over 278,228 flights (spread over 15 months) and using several hundred aircraft, at the cost of 70 lives (source: 'Airbridge to Berlin - The Berlin Crisis of 1948'). I don't know how current US airlift capability and supply requirements stack up to that, but I'd be interested in hearing the numbers.

[Vympel]

Don't worry, the air-mobile Stryker will solve everything!!!!

Sorry, I couldn't help it

*note to self: Mike actually reads our belly-achin*

[ray245]

And most of you americans SEEM to forget WHAT was the UN resoution? Which means a majority of the world TRIED to tell the US not to invade. But no...you guys all went nuts after 9-11 to LISTEN .

So when the trouble FINALLY become noticeable to you guys...well you guys simply say OPPS and go home?

WHich COUNTRY screw up Iraq in the first place? You should bear the responbility, and how many of you people at this forums supported the war in the first place?

I seem to remember quite a number...

Comment all you want, but somehow...I do find that some of you supported george bush in the 2000 election right or the stupid war on terror which aim towards the wrong target.

ADMIT it, US makes a mistake, screw the innocents on iraq...then you bloody hell help them!

[Chris OFarrell]

Are you finished ranting from your high horse now?

WHAT pray tell do you think the US SHOULD do then? ANd don't just wave your hands and say 'well fix it all up!'

The US is where it is. RIGHT NOW. Which is a fucking mess which all indicators are that it doesn't have any hope of salvaging without extreme measures of one kind, or another.

So please, do tell.

[Kane Starkiller]

Like I said six months ago in "Who do you want to win the Iraqi civil war?" thread if the US decides to pull out it should at least divide country in 3 parts: Kurd, Shia and Sunni. Sure many members of aforementioned ethnic and religious groups would end up on a wrong side of the border but it is still better than having entire populations go at each other throats.

I certainly don't agree that US is "only responsible for Kurds". They are responsible for everyone in that country including Shia and Sunnis.

[Fingolfin_Noldor]

And most of you americans SEEM to forget WHAT was the UN resoution? Which means a majority of the world TRIED to tell the US not to invade. But no...you guys all went nuts after 9-11 to LISTEN .

So when the trouble FINALLY become noticeable to you guys...well you guys simply say OPPS and go home?

WHich COUNTRY screw up Iraq in the first place? You should bear the responbility, and how many of you people at this forums supported the war in the first place?

I seem to remember quite a number...

Comment all you want, but somehow...I do find that some of you supported george bush in the 2000 election right or the stupid war on terror which aim towards the wrong target.

ADMIT it, US makes a mistake, screw the innocents on iraq...then you bloody hell help them!

Considering that our PM is as an idiot as usual, supporting Bush publicly despite the current climate, we aren't exactly in a position to say anything.

[Alan Bolte]

If we pull out of Arab Iraq, we should consider lending assistance that the resulting government(s), if any, ask for, but we sure as hell shouldn't stay in some misguided attempt to keep the peace. If chaotic slaughter is what they want, then there's not a damn thing we can do to stop it. Consider this another vote in support of the Duchess.

[Kane Starkiller]

Who is "they"? Any Sunni or Shia muslim? Now they ALL "want to slaughter"? Give me a fucking break. This is nothing but an attempt of US to wash it's hands of the responsibility: well we tried but the damn Ah-rabs want to slaughter each other.

[Enforcer Talen]

I quite cheerfully wash my hands of responsibility. The genie is out of the bottle on this one, and we will be feeling its repercussions for a generation. However, we are getting blown the fuck up because 80% of Iraqis dont want us there. I see a lot of bleedinghearts who seem to want us to fix the mess - well, the Iraqis dont want us to, and they are quite vocal in showing what they do and dont like.

Its not in our interest to stay. From a human rights point of view, it encourages a police state as well as increasing terrorism. From a realpolitik point of view, its not worth the expense.

[Coyote]

Eh, when we try to fix the mess someone chanting "Allahu Ackbar!" comes along ten minutes after we're gone and blows it up and brutalizes everyone that looked at us. Maybe it is best to just pack up and go-- at least one source of the burn will be removed.