Interesting perspective on Iraq from a Soldier

[Keithscatch]

This is a good read and gives you a better view of what it is like over in Iraq then what the media portrays.

http://www.jacksonvilleprogress.com/homepage/local_story_346164633.html?keyword=leadpicturestory

[justfishin]

Keithscatch,

My son just got back from Baghdad. He is now in a debriefing process at a base in Alaska. Over our communications over the last, almost two years, that he served there he painted a picture of the place for me. Bottom line---You are not going to change a way of life that grew into what it is over thousands of years in a few years. The culture is completly different than ours and you will never inject our way of life into theirs.Period.

[Troutfisher]

So, I assume if we would have left Saddam Hussein in power to do what he wished, that all would be fine, and he wouldn't have done anything?  Right?

[justfishin]

No, that is not what my point was at all. I agree that Saddam needed to be removed. Anyway, my point is that I do not feel that you are going to stabilize the region by attempting to put a democracy in place that does not fit their culture and values. Giving them the tools to create the government they want to live under is one thing but, the US has too much of a personal agenda to be involved in setting up a democracy created in our image. I would like to see the new Iraq take more of a lead in establishing a new system. They just, are not doing that. We need to give them the tools to work with and let them take it from there. We have cleared the path and gave them the opportunity but, that should be the extent.

[roadwarrior]

Jim B.,

In 1945 the Japanese culture had never had a taste of anything approaching a democracy. People can develope and societies can adapt.

[justfishin]

I agree RW. They could adapt as Japan did. I am just not forseeing it. Hell, McArthur was practicaly a king for awhile in Japan until our president fired him. I just feel that we are expecting too much from a culture as diverse as they have. There are three main factions we are dealing with in Iraq, not counting the outside insurgents . Its a little different in this situation. It is unique in you are attempting to resolve issues for all the different factions that have been rooted in Iraq for thousand of years. They have never resolved their issues in thousands of years so what makes anyone think that we are going to go in and implement our style democracy. I just do not think that this is a quick fix situation. I think we made a grave mistake, not in going into Iraq ( with our agenda, oil, bottom line ) but, in the way we have handled it since. Why do you think Colin Powell and SwartzKoff bailed? They knew it was a situation presented to everyday americans as "we are going in and make it all better" and then come home task. They also knew that it simply was not possible as it was presented. My opinion. Good fishing, and you never did present your case for G. Loomis to me, LOL. Have a good one.

[Dan:]

I think it's important that we try to make better situations for people around the world and in this case, democracy would create a better situation for the oppressed people in Iraq. That being said, I agree with Jim, the Islamic world is very different from democracy. Their integration of religion into government is a very difficult cultural obstacle to democracy. You can never really have democracy if you allow their imams to rule the government; unfortunately that is exactly what their religion prescribes and of course they want to follow what their religion says because they think God will reward them if they do. This isn't just with Iraq either, there are similar limitations on human rights that result from the Islamic religion in many other countries around the world, specifically Iran and Saudi Arabia. I don't think they'll be able to fully acheive a functioning democracy unless they can get to a point where they realize they can exercise their religion in a accordance with their beliefs without having to build the government around religion.

[Catt]

No culture is more steeped in religion and traditions than were the Japanese

Allah will reward them not God, the two are not the same  

[senile1]

I'm going out on a limb here.  The soldier in the article asked, "How do you fight people who are so prepared to die?  I can answer that but most of us, including me, don't like the answer.  

In WWII, the Japanese were willing to die to the last man.  Projections of how many soldiers we would lose in taking the Japanese Islands ran in the millions.  Our President, Harry Truman, decided that dropping the atomic bomb and annihilating two cities would save more lives than attacking the islands.  I'm not saying we should nuke Iraq.  What I am saying is that you can't defeat those who hide among civilians without killing a number of those civilians.  In WWII, our soldiers did their best to protect civilians, but they weren't expected to die to protect them.  So we destroyed whole cities with numerous bombing raids to weaken our enemies.  Now, it almost seems like we expect our soldiers to pick out the one or two insurgents among a group of, say,  20 people and only kill them.  If they can't pick them out then they can't shoot and are sitting ducks.  It is high time, that Americans stop expecting our soldiers to do the impossible.

I'm not saying our casualties reach the level where we need to consider such actions yet.  I'm not sure where that point is because I don't have a son or daughter in Iraq.  But there is a point in a war, where you have to choose whether the lives of your own sons and daughters are more valuable than civilians in another country.  At that point, you do your best to protect civilians, but you don't sacrifice your mission to do so.      

[justfishin]

I know I should not go into this subject any further but, Catt. I felt the same way as you. I had no idea what Islam was. Heck I am just a hospital employee in a local ER, 50 years old and paying on a student loan, single and attempting to keep the mortgage paid, ya know? I am friends with a lot of physicians in the area and some of them are of middle eastern decent. I was lucky to be invited to a grand opening to a Mosque. You know, a PR thing. I am a Catholic. I did go just to talk and to enjoy some different culture and food. I was surprised to say the least. I really enjoyed myself. I will make this short,sweet and to the point in order to give you a reference point on Islam. When they reference Allah it is the same God as we know God, it is their name for God. They follow the old testament. Jesus was sent by God as a prophet. They actually pray to Jesus. They pray to the Virgin Mary and believe that Jesus was born of a Virgin birth. I as a Christian believe that Jesus is the son of God and the Messiah. They believe he was just a prophet along with Muhammad in a long list of, Noah,Abraham,Ishmael,Isaac, Jacob, Joseph,David, Moses, and Jesus. We as Christians follow the new testament as Islam follows more of the old testament, to a point. " Them and us " are more similar than you would think. It is the radicals and extremist that seperate us. I have friends that are Muslim and I can respect that, I am a Christian and they respect my beliefs. We agree to disagree. I am not going to change their beliefs and they sure will not change mine but we do have some very similar beliefs and that is what shocked me. I allowed my ignorance in the subject and the media form a opinion for me.

[Dan:]

No culture is more steeped in religion and traditions than were the Japanese

Allah will reward them not God, the two are not the same  

That is more of a personal opinion than fact.

Religion was not the basis for government in Japan. Japan had a parliament before WWII so the at least the beginnings of democracy were there. Islamic countries are different. Not to mention there are historic and idealistic differences between Islam and Buddhism. Islam being the more aggressive and forceful of the two.

And to Muslims, Allah=God

[Keithscatch]

Jim, I beg to differ with you. Allah is not the same God as Jesus. The very fact that they do not believe Jesus as the Son of God means they are not worshipping the SAME God as in Christianity. After all it is God that said this is my belloved Son in whom I am well pleased, refering to Jesus.

I personally think the media has turned this nation against our soldiers and our military. All the democrats are whinning about coming home with our tails firmly tucked between our legs and that certainly is not the answer.

But as usual the leftist media and the leftist polititions DON'T have a single PLAN other then cut and run. It is so easy to criticize what is being done but a whole different ballgame to suggest another plan of action.

If the plan we are doing now is not working in your eyes then what is YOUR PLAN?

Why is it in Vogue to criticize our government, or military? our leaders? Seems all we do is complain about this or that and tear down our government and our leaders. Do Democrats really think George W Bush is evil and that a Democrat if in office would be allot better? Do Republicans believe this? While I did not like Bill Clinton and thought he made a mockery of the Presidency I thought he did allot of things good.

I guess it just bothers me to see how the media attacks our leaders like they are a bunch of jealous school girls. Does anyone on this forum actually think they know more about the situation in Iraq then our Military leaders? Huh? HELLO!!! How idiotic is that to ASSUME that we know the situation and all that factors into it so that we are smarter then our President or our military brass who are constantly briefed about such things.

C'mon guys lighten up on this stuff. Turn off CNN, and all the rest of the media and put yourself in their shoes. What would you do instead?

[Catt]

Thank you Keith

Fact: Jesus was not a prophet

Fact: Allah does not have a son named Jesus

Fact: Jesus was God in the flesh

Fact: Jesus and God are one

[Dan:]

Some say that Islam, Judaism, and Christianity share the God of the Old Testament but they differ in the way they view the relationship between that God and Jesus, I think that is probably the most accurate description of the situation. They are technically the same being but they are not related in the same way which creates vast differences between the religion. The basic distinction between Christianity and Islam or Judaism is the role of Jesus.

[Dan:]

Thank you Keith

Fact: Jesus was not a prophet

Fact: Allah does not have a son named Jesus

Fact: Jesus was God in the flesh

Fact: Jesus and God are one

But those are not facts to Muslims.

Or even much of the world for that matter.

[roadwarrior]

************************* Moderator Note *************************

Once again, we are drifting off topic. I realize that many members have very strong religious beliefs, but...

Please stay on topic.

-Kent a.k.a. roadwarrior

Global Moderator

[Troutfisher]

But those are not facts to Muslims.

Or even much of the world for that matter.

This is just some numbers.

http://www.adherents.com/Religions_By_Adherents.html

Going back to what KeithsCatch said, I agree with what he said. The media portrays the President as if he is some sort of dumb animal. They make him sound ignorant, and belittle him in any way they can. There is such a thing as respect for authority. A while back, the President was having a press conference with several members of the media. One of the reporters stated, "Mr. Bush, can you answer a question for me?" He turned and said to them, "I will not answer you if you do not address me by my proper title." I have noticed since then that several news stations call the President "Mr. Bush." Anything to challenge him.

[senile1]

I'll stay away from the religious debate, but, Keithscatch, I agree with you about it being in vogue to criticize our government.  I believe in free speech and the right to criticize, but the criticism these days has reached an extremely ugly level.  I don't hate George Bush nor do I like everything he has done.  I don't especially appreciate the democrats or the republicans as I think both are influenced too much by money.  Having said that, I still support our government, no matter who is in office.  These are Americans.  I can agree to disagree with them.  Sometimes, I may be wrong, and sometimes, they may be wrong.  This doesn't mean I denigrate everything they do just because I disagree.  Just because I disagree with one of our leaders doesn't make them a bad or evil person.  These days, if a governmental leader does something that some people disagree with, he or she is ripped to shreds with libelous and slanderous comments.  This is not needed.  One thing many have forgotten is how to disagree respectfully.  

[Dan:]

I've met President Bush before. He seemed like a good man. He was extremely kind hearted towards children with special needs.

[Troutfisher]

That's cool. I saw him in 2000 when he was still Governor of Texas....he was on the campaign trail and stopped at Charleston.  He gave a good speech about West Virginia. Since then, he's been back several times.

[justfishin]

RW is right, we, or I, drifted off the subject. Suffice to say I am a Catholic. Also, you made me think a little more about what I was saying Keithscatch. I see what you are saying in that it is not the same. I have to reflect on that some more as I think you are right. Anyhow, back to the topic. I stand by our government 110%. I never meant to sound like a administration basher. I just think that our president and his staff should step back and regroup on what we are doing in Iraq and look at other potential avenues, that is all. I think they are in this process now. As far as the media. Well, we do not need to attempt to make them look like a bunch of clowns, they reinforce that everyday in how they handle their reporting. Not everyone in the media but, a large number. There is some excellent reporting going on out there as well. I really like the BBC. So thanks for the stimulation, it was fun everyone. Back to that money pit we call fishing, lol. Have a good evening everyone.

RW, you sure are a good ref. Thanks.

[Troutfisher]

And a good evening to you.    Good to see everyone here can be mature about a little honest debate and differing viewpoints.  Man, at another forum I used to belong to, if you so much as tried to give your opinion, you were looked on as "outcast".

[Guest avid]

I know I should stay out of these things but ......

We are losing in Iraq.

The American people by their votes and their poll numbers have made it absolutely clear that do not support the war.

It is an insult to the American people to proclaim that the media has distorted their view

The president has made it clear that his policy has failed and he will be announcing a new direction in January.

I have yet to hear anyone denegrate the military and especially the soldiers. If you recall it was the military who said they needed more than double the troops allocated by the DOD (Rumsfeld) to do the job they were charged with. They were right.

The soldiers have the respect and admiration of all the American people I have ever spoken to or listened to.

The only issue now, is how do we disengage from this quagmire without handing the mideast over to the militants. The president will present his decision in January. This will be the most important announceement he has made since 9/11. Will the American people support it? Will congress fund it? Or, as I guess will some comprimise be worked out. It is clear that we can't just fold up our tents and go home. Other options must and will be found. I hope that they lead to something positive for the USA, the region and the world.

time will tell.

Avid has spoken  

[Keithscatch]

As always good hearted debate to stimulate ones mind. I will listen to the January address and support this country and our President. I believe he will do the thing that is best for all concerned.

Thanks all.

[Troutfisher]

The American people by their votes and their poll numbers have made it absolutely clear that do not support the war. The president has made it clear that his policy has failed and he will be announcing a new direction in January.

Two sentences I disagree with, Avid. Poll numbers can be very deceiving. The media will send out a poll, such as, "Do you like war?" Of course, no one "likes" war, but sometimes, war is necessary. However, they will use the line "do you like war?" when they release a new poll on Iraq. Iraq was a ticking time bomb.

July 16, 1979: Takes over as president of Iraq after pushing his cousin, President al-Bakr, to resign. Purges the Baath Party, eliminating his rivals in a power grab captured on videotape. (The chilling video shows a meeting of Iraq's Revolutionary Command Council where members identified by Saddam as having suspect loyalty are removed from the hall to be shot.)

Sept. 22, 1980: A year after the Islamic revolution in neighboring Iran, tensions rise between Iran and Iraq. Saddam orders his troops to invade. The inconclusive eight-year war impoverishes Iraq and kills hundreds of thousands of soldiers on both sides. (Washington and its allies supported Saddam to help stave off victory by Iran.)

July 8, 1982: Survives assassination attempt in Dujail, a mainly ****e Muslim town 25 miles north of Baghdad. In retaliation, Saddam's security forces attack the town, arresting about 1,500 residents. (Many faced torture, and nearly 150 Dujail residents were later executed on Saddam's orders. The events in Dujail are the subject of the criminal charges in Saddam's initial trial.)

March 28, 1988: Uses chemical weapons against Kurdish town of Halabja in northern Iraq, killing an estimated 5,000 civilians. (The attack is part of the government's campaign to suppress rebellious Kurds across northern Iraq. The campaign leaves 180,000 Kurds missing and presumed dead.)

Aug. 2, 1990: Saddam demands that Kuwait forgive the debts taken on by Iraq during the Iran war, then invades his tiny, oil-rich neighbor.

Jan. 17, 1991: Gulf War starts with aerial bombing of Iraq and Iraqi troops in Kuwait by U.S. and allied militaries under the name Operation Desert Storm.

Feb. 24-27, 1991: Iraqi troops are ejected from Kuwait after a brief ground war with a U.S.-led coalition. Saddam survives the greatest threat yet to his government when coalition troops advance into Iraq, but decide not to besiege Baghdad.

March 1991: In the north, the Kurds rise up against Saddam's rule. In the south, ****e Muslims do the same. Saddam unleashes his military on both. (Although President George H.W. Bush encouraged the revolts, the U.S. did not intervene and Saddam retained power in Baghdad.)

Feb. 20, 1996: Orders killing of two sons-in-law who had, in 1995, defected to Jordan and revealed details of Saddam's weapons programs. (They had returned to Baghdad after receiving guarantees of safety.)

Sept. 12, 2002: President George W. Bush challenges U.N. to confront the "grave and gathering danger" of Iraq -- or stand aside as the United States and like-minded nations act.

March 17, 2003: President Bush gives Saddam Hussein and his sons 48 hours to leave Iraq or face "the full force and might" of the American military. Iraq's leadership rejects Bush's ultimatum.

March 20, 2003: U.S. forces open the war with a military strike on Dora Farms, a target south of Baghdad where Saddam and his sons are thought to be. Saddam appears on Iraqi television later in the day. Further air bombardment is followed by a ground invasion. U.S. forces advance rapidly toward Baghdad.

April 9, 2003: Iraq's regime collapses as U.S. forces enter central Baghdad. Residents cheer as a huge statue of Saddam is toppled.

July 22, 2003: Saddam's sons Uday and Qusay die in a fierce gun battle with U.S. troops.

Dec. 13, 2003: Saddam is captured by U.S. forces at 8:30 p.m. in the town of Adwar, 10 miles south of Tikrit. He is hiding in a specially prepared "spider hole."

December 2003: The U.S.-appointed government, the Iraqi Governing Council, establishes the Iraqi Special Tribunal to prosecute war crimes committed during Saddam's rule. The law calls for Iraqi judges to hear cases presented by Iraqi lawyers, with international experts serving only as advisers.

June 30, 2004: The U.S. symbolically hands Saddam over to Iraqi authorities, but maintains physical custody of the deposed leader. The legal transfer means that Saddam is no longer a prisoner of war. He is now a criminal defendant whose treatment is governed by Iraqi law. The change in status gives him the right to legal representation.

This guy was a madman. Do you merely think if we would have let this guy do his own will that everything would be fine? Look at Iran.

The President has made no such statement that Iraq was a failure. He has stated that removal of troops may begin as early as late 2007.