AnimeSuki Forums

Register Forum Rules FAQ Members List Social Groups Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Go Back   AnimeSuki Forum > General > General Chat

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2013-03-20, 16:49   Link #661
mangamuscle
formerly ogon bat
 
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Mexico
Age: 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ithekro View Post
Do recall the general public opinion of Saddam Hussein by 2003. For the previous 12 years Americans had been wondering "why didn't we just finish him off in 1991?" and "How is that ass going to thumb his nose as us and the UN now?"

So going in to finish the job from 1991 was a popular idea. The method used to go in there might be questionable, but the idea of going in there to get him was not new nor was it unpopular. We wanted his ass on a pike. At the time we still followed more or less the rules about assassination of political leaders being off the table, but a war to get them was "fine".
Do please remember the whole story, back then Saddam wasn't alone in the list of most hated people by the gullible american, there was Iran's ayatollah, Libya's gaddafi, cuba's fidel castro, etc. The mass media played right into the hands of the government (the term "embedded" was coined to illustrate it). It not only had a huge cost in money and human lives, but it also depleted the diplomatic capital washington had amassed in decades. Bush jr. named an axis of "evil", do you believe the allies will follow a coalition to invade Iran now that the truth is so glaring that even CNN (a former ally of the effort) has admitted the truth? Has Iraq not been invaded Saddam would have fallen in the arab spring and maybe the effect would have gone as far as Iran.

In the end US citizens were played by big oil and got nothing out of it.
mangamuscle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-03-20, 16:53   Link #662
ArchmageXin
Master of Coin
 
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ledgem View Post
Thanks for sharing.


That's a bit of an oversimplification about how the Spanish-American War started. More to the point, there weren't any lies that were told. Slanted articles, sure, but no outright fabrications.
There were some pretty bad ones, In high school our teachers showed me two, one featured the drawing starving topless white girl (because black girls wouldn't garner sympathy), another had a "torpedo hole" even though later everyone knew the explosion came from inside out, not outside-in.

Hearst whipped the country into a frenzy.
ArchmageXin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-03-20, 16:54   Link #663
ArchmageXin
Master of Coin
 
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by ogon_bat View Post
Do please remember the whole story, back then Saddam wasn't alone in the list of most hated people by the gullible american, there was Iran's ayatollah, Libya's gaddafi, cuba's fidel castro, etc. The mass media played right into the hands of the government (the term "embedded" was coined to illustrate it). It not only had a huge cost in money and human lives, but it also depleted the diplomatic capital washington had amassed in decades. Bush jr. named an axis of "evil", do you believe the allies will follow a coalition to invade Iran now that the truth is so glaring that even CNN (a former ally of the effort) has admitted the truth? Has Iraq not been invaded Saddam would have fallen in the arab spring and maybe the effect would have gone as far as Iran.

In the end US citizens were played by big oil and got nothing out of it.
Ironically, some of the biggest oil contracts eventually went to China, which the neocons later used to justify "see, we didn't go to Iraq for Oil, we did it for the Iraqis!"

Also, FYI, Saddam used to be an US ally too
ArchmageXin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-03-20, 17:03   Link #664
Bri
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyuu View Post
Now this is a powerful read:

http://dangerousminds.net/comments/d...eds_to_be_read

To anyone claiming TL;DR, here's a short summary. Basically, it's a letter from a dying soldier addressed to Bush and Cheney.

In light of the 10 year anniversary to the Iraq invasion -- it is clear today, that it was a very very poor decision to invade Iraq.
Powerful and sad. You'd think it would take more than 30 years for the lessons of Vietnam to be forgotten.
Bri is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-03-20, 17:06   Link #665
Ithekro
Space Battleship
 
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Republic of California
Age: 36
Saddam wasn't alone, but he was the only one to have crossed the line to the point were the US public would be willing to send in forces to beat him down. (He was an ally only because he was fighting the American, British. and Arabs new enemy, Iran, who has also been an ally up to that point. The change was crossing the line into Kuiwat. Prior to 1978, Iraq had been a Soviet ally.)

What did the US get out of it? In the actual war part of it, things felt pretty good. The US military kick the ever loving crap out of a dictator we didn't like and we got some entertainment from that one public relations spokesman in Bagdad saying the US troops were no were around while things exploded behind him. The war part went pretty much how the Americans like their wars to go. Fast and victorious.

It was the aftermath that bogged down public moral as the US forces were not up to policing a country, nor did the reconstuction happen all that well (poor to no planning outside of pocket books). That is what turned us off. That and the reminders from casualties (still far less than Vietnam) from bombs mostly.

Hindsight is a wonderful and yet terrible thing. Especially the Arab Spring. Do we know if that would have even happened without the US invading Iraq? No one seemed to see it coming at all from what I recall. It just sort of happened.

For all we know, if we did nothing, today there would be a war going on between Syria and Iraq due to the Arab Spring, or if sanctions were still ongoing in Iraq, a combined set of problems as the news would still be going on about nukes in Iraq and Iran, with Israel's right-wing government hopping mad that we aren't doing anything about either of them.
__________________
Dessler Soto, Banzai!

Last edited by Ithekro; 2013-03-20 at 17:18.
Ithekro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-03-20, 17:19   Link #666
Archon_Wing
Sisyphean Crusader
*Author
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Making people too mad to respond
Age: 30
Send a message via MSN to Archon_Wing
It is much easier to attack an enemy area by proxy, then to hold that area while maintaining sufficient mobility elsewhere.

They really should have played the Brood War campaign. :/

Anyhow, I will just say that a lot of people died that we can feel good about ourselves. Though some good came out of it, we were just never up to the task of rebuilding a country when we can't even handle our own.
__________________
God damn, there's so much bad fanservice out there. Touch me and I'll beat the crap out of you!
You are about to move into areas of the anime industry with wonders you cannot possibly imagine. And terrors to freeze your soul.

Avatar and Sig courtesy of TheEroKing
Guild Wars 2 SN: ArchonWing.9480 (Stormbluff Isle)
MyAnimeList || Reviews
Archon_Wing is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-03-20, 18:38   Link #667
mangamuscle
formerly ogon bat
 
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Mexico
Age: 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ithekro View Post
Saddam wasn't alone, but he was the only one to have crossed the line
Up to this day it baffles me that U.S. citizens do not see how Saddam was played. He might have killed people on cold blood, but he stayed in power because he knew when to attack and when not to "Battles are decided by the quartermasters before the first shot is fired". US diplomacy deceived Saddam into thinking the USA would not support kuwait once it was invaded. Late 20th century was a time of satellite photographs on schedule and transatlantic telephone calls, there is no way the USA would not have known about saddam's plan (I read about Saddam tanks on the border in a local newspaper before the invasion) and warn him of the consequences. Bush needed Saddam to invade kuwait just like Roosevelt needed the japs to invade hawaii.

Quote:
What did the US get out of it? In the actual war part of it, things felt pretty good.
I have no doubt whatsoever that the news for local consumption make people feel good, even euphoric. But the mass media could not care less what it looked from the outside, it was a train wreck in slow motion.

Quote:
That and the reminders from casualties (still far less than Vietnam) from bombs mostly.
From the outside we look at the whole picture, the total number of deaths was staggering, "liberation" with that toll in human lives is not worth it.

Quote:
Hindsight is a wonderful and yet terrible thing. Especially the Arab Spring. Do we know if that would have even happened without the US invading Iraq? No one seemed to see it coming at all from what I recall. It just sort of happened.
No one knew it would happen, also, no one knew the nazis killed millions on the holocaust after the war, but nowadays it is pimped as a reason for going into WWII, it works both ways.

Quote:
For all we know, if we did nothing, today there would be a war going on between Syria and Iraq due to the Arab Spring, or if sanctions were still ongoing in Iraq, a combined set of problems as the news would still be going on about nukes in Iraq and Iran, with Israel's right-wing government hopping mad that we aren't doing anything about either of them.
but in the end many people would still be alive and the economy of the USA would be in a better position since they would not have wasted so much money on Iraq.
mangamuscle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-03-20, 20:22   Link #668
Solace
(ノಠ益ಠ)ノ彡┻━┻
*AnimeSuki Site Staff
*Moderator
 
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by ogon_bat View Post
Up to this day it baffles me that U.S. citizens do not see how Saddam was played.
Because they themselves were played. They're still being played. Do you really think Gaddafi was fighting a rebellion? One that had time to set up a central bank in the middle of fighting?

Believe half of what you see, and none of what you hear.
__________________
Solace is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-03-20, 20:31   Link #669
Ledgem
Love Yourself
 
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Northeast USA
Age: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by ogon_bat View Post
Up to this day it baffles me that U.S. citizens do not see how Saddam was played. He might have killed people on cold blood, but he stayed in power because he knew when to attack and when not to "Battles are decided by the quartermasters before the first shot is fired". US diplomacy deceived Saddam into thinking the USA would not support kuwait once it was invaded. Late 20th century was a time of satellite photographs on schedule and transatlantic telephone calls, there is no way the USA would not have known about saddam's plan (I read about Saddam tanks on the border in a local newspaper before the invasion) and warn him of the consequences. Bush needed Saddam to invade kuwait just like Roosevelt needed the japs to invade hawaii.
That's an interesting interpretation of events. The way that I heard it wasn't that Saddam was deceived, but rather than there was a cultural miscommunication. A relative of Saddam's was in America to talk with government officials, and the officials calmly stated that if Iraq attacked Kuwait that the American forces would get involved. The thing is, the Americans said this calmly and professionally, which lead the relative to believe that they weren't serious (because the culture of the Middle East is a bit more forceful; if you're not shouting and pounding your fist on the table, it must mean you don't care too much about what you're saying). As a result, Saddam felt that he had the green light to do what he wanted, and brought retribution upon himself just as the Americans had promised.
__________________
Ledgem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-03-20, 21:07   Link #670
mangamuscle
formerly ogon bat
 
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Mexico
Age: 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by Solace View Post
Because they themselves were played. They're still being played. Do you really think Gaddafi was fighting a rebellion? One that had time to set up a central bank in the middle of fighting?
I read somewhere (maybe it was a link on this forum) that Gaddafi wanted to establish an euro like gold dinar for westerners to pay for oil (driving oil prices "to infinity and beyond!") so in that sense the rebels having a goal of establishing a new central bank (to please their western supporters) would make sense.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ledgem View Post
That's an interesting interpretation of events. The way that I heard it wasn't that Saddam was deceived, but rather than there was a cultural miscommunication.
You remind me about a joke I read many years ago in a reader's digest. It was about how the Reagan administration send diplomatic messages i.e. the bombardment of Libya (there were other examples I forgot) and at the end of the joke someone tells Reagan their ambassador in Moscow is asking for a new luxury car because the soviets are starting to think the west isn't so rich, Reagan answers "We have an ambasador in Moscow? We have better methods to deliver diplomatic statements!". With all the experience the diplomatic history the USA has (remember how commodore perry "opened" trade with japan?) it would be quite unheard for a fumble of the size (and the kind) you mention, I would believe it from 21st century China, but not from 20th century USA diplomacy.

Last edited by mangamuscle; 2013-03-20 at 23:22. Reason: I'm very sory to have confused Saddam with Gaddafi, mind fart m(_ _)m
mangamuscle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-03-20, 22:24   Link #671
Solace
(ノಠ益ಠ)ノ彡┻━┻
*AnimeSuki Site Staff
*Moderator
 
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by ogon_bat View Post
I read somewhere (maybe it was a link on this forum) that Saddam wanted to establish an euro like gold dinar for westerners to pay for oil (driving oil prices "to infinity and beyond!") so in that sense the rebels having a goal of establishing a new central bank (to please their western supporters) would make sense.
I wouldn't be surprised at that. The dollar is a reserve currency and is the only accepted currency for oil. This makes the dollar extremely valuable, obviously. If a nation or nations were to seriously entertain the idea of shifting away from the dollar as a basket currency or to replace it with something else to buy oil, this would undermine and weaken the dollar and shift the economic balance in dramatic ways.

If you're heavily invested in dollar, and quite a few nations are, this is not a wonderful idea to pursue. It's an instance where politics and economics are basically the same thing, and if the political and economic deterrents fail, military style action kicks in. Sometimes it's your intelligence agencies instigating events, sometimes it's something with more muscle, and sometimes it's both.
__________________
Solace is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-03-21, 06:55   Link #672
Ledgem
Love Yourself
 
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Northeast USA
Age: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by ogon_bat View Post
With all the experience the diplomatic history the USA has (remember how commodore perry "opened" trade with japan?) it would be quite unheard for a fumble of the size (and the kind) you mention, I would believe it from 21st century China, but not from 20th century USA diplomacy.
I'm not really sure what you expect. Is it a fumble when we host conservative Arabic leaders and don't cover any women in their presence with a burka? I can think of at least one incident in recent years where there was a bit of tension because of that issue exactly.

Assuming the story is true, our diplomats weren't pounding on the table and screaming at the Iraqi diplomats, which caused the Iraqis to think that we were bluffing. The issue was not one of language, but of culture. Understanding another's culture does not mean that you must emulate that culture to communicate. Whether the American diplomats understood the Middle Eastern culture or not is also somewhat irrelevant; the Iraqis seemingly did not understand how business is conducted over here. Between the two that represents a serious issue for the Iraqi side. When negotiating with another nation that is making threats about armed force, a diplomat would do well to ensure that their own nation is the stronger of the two before so casually dismissing the threats, particularly based on the premise that the body language and behavior is not the same as it is back home.
__________________
Ledgem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-03-21, 10:38   Link #673
mangamuscle
formerly ogon bat
 
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Mexico
Age: 43
@Ledgem I have no doubt said incident was true, that is how deception thru mass media works. Please do remember that there was a huge window of opportunity to prevent the invasion, we aren't talking about a situation where Saddam's cousin grabbed a cell phone to tell what he saw to Iraq's dictator and then Saddam pressed a button, launched a missile and boom, end of story. Moving all of your tanks from the border with Iran takes time and can't be done without all of the world noticing. The USA has air bases all over the world and can deploy fully armed long range bombers in a jiffy, obtaining permission from the Saudi's to fly over their territory would be a given (since once Saddam had Kuwait his next target would be the whole peninsula). So maybe a pre-emptive carpet bombing would not have destroyed all of the tanks, but would have sent a clear message that would not be "lost in translation". To complete the message the US would only need to send some air carrier navy vessels to Kuwait (that would no doubt pay all the expenses to prevent an invasion). Saddam would not invade Kuwait if he could not keep it, but once he invaded he could not just leave since that would be akin to admitting he had become weak on his old age.

Mark my words, when a Republican president returns to the white house the first message he will send will be about the danger Iran represents blah, blah. Translation, our big oil overlords controls Iraq's oil and want to controls Iran's oil too and we are behind schedule, dammit.
mangamuscle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-03-21, 12:12   Link #674
Vallen Chaos Valiant
Logician and Romantic
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Within my mind
Age: 33
It's just so very hard to focus on Iran as a threat when North Korea is shouting about how they are going to kill everybody.

I mean, trying to manufacture unsubstantiated fears of nuclear proliferation is difficult when the US is blatantly ignoring a different nation who already have nukes and screaming out of loud speakers about how they want to destroy America.

Kim is wrecking the message damn it. How is the US army suppose to invade Iran under false pretenses if Iran is so clearly not the number 1 threat?
__________________
Vallen Chaos Valiant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-03-21, 12:49   Link #675
mangamuscle
formerly ogon bat
 
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Mexico
Age: 43
@Vallen Chaos Valiant In 2003 North Korea was starting a real nuclear program but guess what, the USA decided to invade the country with the fictional nuclear program (I will never forget Colin Powell outright lying at the UN council). If it worked back then why would a republican government not repeat the formula? In recent history is the only thing they do, repeat the same old formulas hoping it will work one more time.
mangamuscle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-03-21, 12:50   Link #676
kyp275
ZA ZOMBIE!!!
 
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Somewhere in the EVE cluster...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vallen Chaos Valiant View Post
How the US army suppose to invade Iran under false pretenses if Iran is so clearly not the number 1 threat?
I'm sure the evil empire will find a way

Why hasn't this thread been renamed to "Bash the U.S. thread" yet again?
kyp275 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-03-21, 13:07   Link #677
ArchmageXin
Master of Coin
 
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by kyp275 View Post
I'm sure the evil empire will find a way

Why hasn't this thread been renamed to "Bash the U.S. thread" yet again?
I will support a rename if you support re-name the Diayou Island thread to "Bash China" thread.
ArchmageXin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-03-21, 13:08   Link #678
Vexx
Obey the Darkly Cute ...
*Author
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: On the whole, I'd rather be in Kyoto ...
Age: 56
We do such a "bang up" job on foreign affairs, it is just an easy target (and sometimes it only makes sense if you view our antics from a "captains of industry" (robber baron) perspective)
__________________
Vexx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-03-21, 13:19   Link #679
kyp275
ZA ZOMBIE!!!
 
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Somewhere in the EVE cluster...
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArchmageXin View Post
I will support a rename if you support re-name the Diayou Island thread to "Bash China" thread.
naw, too much bashing in all directions in that thread, should be named Bashing Royale.
kyp275 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-03-21, 13:36   Link #680
Vexx
Obey the Darkly Cute ...
*Author
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: On the whole, I'd rather be in Kyoto ...
Age: 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by kyp275 View Post
naw, too much bashing in all directions in that thread, should be named bashing royale.
my dirt!!! Mine mine mine!!! See? I have a flag!!!
__________________
Vexx is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 17:57.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
We use Silk.