Military opinions and war experience

I agree with Edsinger. Noone, not even president Bush, would think that everything was done that quick. President Bush and other US officials did declare that our job in Iraq would take us a while to accomplish, and i don't know who ever thought that Iraq and Afghanistan were the only countries we would go after for supporting terrorists against the US and other nations.

Originally posted by edsinger

Mission Accomplished was Baghdad liberated and Saddam overthrown. If you remember on the deck of that carrier he also said there is much work to be done.

The initial mission was to take Iraq - we did that. Major combat operations WERE over and from then on it was a insurgency which got worse as time went on.

O.K. I can accept that. My problem is that when Bush started his war on terror, it only encompassed Afghanistan. It seems to me that we keep hearing "No, did I say it woul be over then? I ment a few months/years from now." from the administration. I have yet to see a timeline for US intrest in Iraq.

Another thing that gets to me is: Why are we still fighting insurgents? We fought Terrorist in Afghanistan that ere better trained and better funded than the insurgents. What is taking so long? We decimated the terrorist in Afghanistan, so what is the problem in Iraq?

That is my opinion only.

That is what we are here to discuss Everyones opinion. Its time we all realize that we all have em and everybodies but mine stink JK!

Originally posted by Muaddib
and i don't know who ever thought that Iraq and Afghanistan were the only countries we would go after for supporting terrorists against the US and other nations.

As I said above, the only nation we were ever told we were going to invade originally was Afghanistan. We were never told anything about Iraq or anyone else being invaded. Bush made mention of the Axis of evil, which we all know who he was reffering to, but never said invasion was an option for those countries.

Going to war, its advisable to know the enemy.

The Neo Cons who planned and pushed for this invasion did not know the Iraqis.

Iraqis historically have not been a people to accept any kind of occupation for long.

I can't see anything changing. Especially considering the quality of life in Iraq is worse now. (constant shortages of electricity, lack of security & work, lack of potable water..)

As for Msr. Cheney's comments.. perhaps he's consulting an astrologer..

I am a Army vetran and a combat vetran, The Gulf the first time and Somlia. I remeber in Somalia a Marine laying wounded on the deck of the blackhawk that was getting my squad out of the Black Sea/large market where we came under heavy fire. The Marine just cried and yelled for his mother like a small child would. I had seen and particiapted in death on a grand scale up to this point and it never hit home, but that day it did. I have no bad dreams of dead Skinnies/Somalies. But that Marine is with me everyday, i wish i knew his name but i don't. I wonder what the military said to his family because he died before we got back to the port. I sure they said your son died while in combat operations in Somalia, Not that your son screamed his last breaths for his mother.

I am not completely against war it has its place. But Iraq is so much like Vietnam was. I really wonder what we are really in Irag for, is it oil, democracy, control over the region, or movement to a NWO.

President Clinton pulled us out of Somilia when things got really bad and i respect him for it, because there was no goal. And the Skinnies/Somalies did want democracy or our way of life. They wanted to go on as they did before Tribal/Clan life.

Iraq is a rough diverse place that needs a Strongman/ Dictator to run the country. To many diffrent people. I think Democracy will fail. and the same for Afaganistan. We have many other foes who can cause more damge to us a s a country and the world, N Korea, Iran, China to name a few.

I guess i am against our current wars.

Jason

Reports from Iraq are saying US military deaths in Iraq the past two months are the worst since right before their election. Makes you wonder who Cheney & Co. are listening to.

“Things are getting worse by the day.”
Dahr Jamail
May 30, 2005

The mayhem continues in Iraq, with today at least 40 people dead, including five US soldiers in Diyala province as the meltdown of the failed US-led occupation continues.

Two suicide bombers detonated themselves after walking into a crowd of police officers in Hilla, south of Baghdad. The policemen were demonstrating outside the mayor’s office to protest a government decision to disband their Special Forces unit.

In yet another horrible PR move (or attempt to raise sectarian tensions?) by the US military the head of Iraq’s largest Sunni political party, Mohsen Abdul Hamid was detained from his home early this morning in western Baghdad. Of course his head was promptly bagged and his hands tied before he was taken away to be interrogated. His three sons were also detained with him. Stun bombs and bullets were said to be used during the raid, according to his wife.
www.infoshop.org...

US 'losing its grip' on Baghdad's political process
By Guy Dinmore in Washington

In the more sombre assessment of others in the administration, however, the US has long lost its grip on Iraq's political process. “We are losing control,” said one veteran Arabist in the administration who requested anonymity.

He described the US embassy in Baghdad, without an ambassador for about six months, as “out of the loop” and not involved in significant decisions taken by the new transitional government dominated by the Shia Arab majority.

Geoff Porter, analyst with the Eurasia Group consultancy, said US interests had been “stymied on most fronts”, with US officials frustrated with, and ignorant of, Iraq's fractious politics. “There is an air of resignation, with people throwing up their hands that this will be a long-term process.”
news.ft.com...

U.S. death toll in Iraq surges amid rebel violence
31 May 2005 20:45:59 GMT

Source: Reuters

By Will Dunham

WASHINGTON, May 31 (Reuters) - The death toll for American troops in Iraq rose in May to the highest level since January, with the U.S. military saying on Tuesday insurgents have doubled their number of daily attacks since April.

This latest spree of violence by insurgents, who rose up after the American-led invasion in 2003 toppled President Saddam Hussein, put a dramatic end to a period when attacks on U.S. forces had waned after the historic Jan. 30 elections.
www.alertnet.org...

Astroligiest huh? I'll have to remember that one

Originally posted by Jasestrong


I am not completely against war it has its place. But Iraq is so much like Vietnam was. I really wonder what we are really in Irag for, is it oil, democracy, control over the region, or movement to a NWO.

Iraq is a bad place to be a soldier, but Im not sure if it can compare to the mass casualties of Vietnam. The urban warfare alone makes it a quite different war than the jungle warfare of Vietnam. However I do think that some tactics never change. That is because they work. The insurgents are seeing this and using lessons learned by the Vietcong to fight our soldiers. Still doesnt make this war anymore palitable to me.

I commend you for your services to this country Jason I am very sorry about what you had to witness in Somolia on that Blackhawk. I think it is something that many of us can relate to.



[edit on 6/2/05 by Kidfinger]

Originally posted by Kidfinger
Astroligiest huh?

I'll have to remember that one

Hey, it worked for Nancy Reagan!

Jasestrong, were you with the 101st Airborne Division? I had friends from my unit in Somalia. That whole thing went down shortly after I got out.

Kidfinger, you are also aware that the Vietcong utilized women and children as suicide bombers, as well?




seekerof

Originally posted by Seekerof
Kidfinger, you are also aware that the Vietcong utilized women and children as suicide bombers, as well?




seekerof

I am very much aware of this. This is another reason I dont think that Iraq really can compare to Vietnam on a whole. It was a completly different war with a completly different set of rules. The only simillarities I see beteween the two are some of the insurgent tactics used agianst us in the urban warfare arena.

I guess Ill add my opinions.

I served from June 12, 1992- April 4th, 1996. I served in Saudi from Jan 95-June 95. The war was still going on, though covertly and mainly in the form of enforcing the No Fly Zone.

I am against the war. I am against Bush and his policies. But my motives are quite different from the peaceniks and rabid America haters.

I believe sometimes war is necessary. Its in the human genome to do it. But one must also realize that war requires action that to the uninitiated is brutal, horrendous, and evil, yet is is none of the above: its simply war. Its the way it must be. You dont fight wars with kindness and kidgloves on. You fight and do whatever it takes to utterly destroy the opposition.

War also requires sacrifices. Lives. War is an altar. War is a hungry god. It demands sacrifices of blood and pain. In otherwords, the lives of your sons, daughters, brothers, sisters, husbands, wives.

So now that we know that war is a machine fueled by "atrocity" and lubricated by blood, we now come to the big question: are the reasons for your war well justified? In otherwords, the lives and sanity that it costs, does your war purchase something of greater value?

In the case of Iraq, the answer is no. For many reasons. Iraq was not a threat to the US, period. I know from my time spent in its southern neighbor, we destroyed anything of any concequence they had. And my experiences also show me democracy is a sham in that part of the world. Those people still live in the mental equivilant of the old testament world. The mentalities have not changed. Religon and ancient customs still dominate their thinking. Democracy was born only when Europe and America sacrificed religous domination and divine right of governments, turning instead to science and reason to rule. The people in Iraq, its obvious, have not made it to that point as a whole. The few who do are either being blown up by terrorists, or live in the west.

I also do not believe the world is much safer now.

So the lives we lost, the souls we kill have bought us jack #.

It was mentioned that vets sometimes support war out of a sense of brotherhood for the troops there. This is true in many senses. While I oppose this war, i dont oppose what the soldiers do. When those who have never served squak about troops blowing away a journalist, or interrogating prisoners in a way that seems extreme, I shake my head. The troops, while doing things that may seem horrible, are not doing anything that is out of line with war. Thats the reality of it. They are doing what needs to be done to complete their missions and ensure the survival of their friends. They are doing what they are supposed to. They are doing what any successful army has done throughout the ages. To berate a soldier for shooting a car full of civilians who didn't stop at a checkpoint is like berating a cow for chewing grass or a mailman for bring your mail. Isnt that what they are supposed to do?

So Im in a rather difficult position. Just because I dont support the war does not mean I oppose the actions done by our troops. My position is that they shouldn't have ever been sent there in the first place. That is not the fault of the troops. Its the fault of the powers that sent them there, and as far as I am concerned, they should be the ones who should burn at the stake for their crimes. Unfortunately, as the Ministry song goes, its only Heroes who pay. That to me is the biggest crime of all. The guilty shall never spend a sleepless night, suffer a nightmare, or go through hell. Just the ones who did their devils work for them.

I think I can understand why Grady, a combat veteran, supports this war. His reasons are valid, however, his experience is different. He fought in Vietnam, a totally different war, with a totally different enemy, a totally different culture, for totally different reasons. People often overlook the fact that South Vietnamese government actually wanted the US forces there. They were more bitter that we quit the fight than they were any damage we had done there. many Vietnamese are anrgy with the US because we threw in the towel and left the Vietcong to rampage and pull another Cambodia. This is Grady's experience, thus, why he supports our current conflicts. His reasons and experiences are valid, yet I feel he lacks the perspective of knowldge of our current enemy. the tactics are the same, but its a totally different enemy and arena here. Things are totally different from Nam, but I wont deny him his opinions, he has earned the right to them.

Think about World War II. The Allies did some very nasty things, things most peaceniks today would scream for their heads for war crimes. We committed them in abundance, because thats what war requires if you want to win. yet 60 years later, does anyone demand justice for the "atrocities" committed by allies? No. Why? Because there is no question in anyone's mind that that war was just and necessary. Hitler had to be stopped, he his legions had destroyed much and would continue to do so. The Japanese had murdered probably more in Asia. No one questions the reasons why, and thus, 60 years later, we are willing to overlook the bad things we had to do to achieve victory, because we know we were right in the end, and the prize: end to fascism, end of conflict on Europe, and the end of genocide, were worth the price paid in the lives of some 10 million allied soldiers. The only people who think we were wrong to nail Hitler live in Idaho and Eastern Washington on compounds, and their heads are often quite bald.

But will we look upon this was with the same forgetfulness? No. The soldiers now arent really that much different than the ones bitch slapped Hitlers jackboot armies back across the Rhein and Oder rivers. What is different are circumstance, purpose, and goal, and my deepest regret is that when our armies return home, like in Vietnam, they will pay the price for the politicans who made the active choice to send them into a conflcit not worth the ultimate price. Those that are lucky enough to return home in something other than a pine box.

Just my two cents.

Welcome to the thread, Skadi. Glad to get your perspective.

I'm reading a book on the House of Saud right now. I can't think of a more evil perversion of religion than that of the Wahabbists. Their doctrine is pure poison. With their out loud, violent rhetoric towards the west, you'd think this administration would be all over them.

[edit on 6/2/05 by EastCoastKid]

Excellent post Skadi A very well written piece. I cant think of one thing you said that I dissagree with. Glad to have your opinion here Glad to have everyones opinion here actually

ECK, Whats the name of the book you are reading about the House of Saud?

ECK and Kidfinger,

since both of you were in the Gulf, you know very well what I am about to say about the Saudi society, regime, ect, and why I feel this way.

When I was there, I often chatted to the locals, the workers, who, surprisingly, most were not Saudis or even Arabs. ZAnd what I learned from them re-enforced my misgivings and disgust about defending "our Saudi allies". What I learned was that the Saudis were a bunch of arrogant, biggoted, petty, brutal, and Sadistic punks.

I learned of a local incident, where a Philipino woman who was going to go see a friend. She unfortunately found the wrong house, where a Saudi citizen, a young male lived. He dragged her into the apartment, brutally raped and beat her, and when she wouldn't stop screaming, he got annoyed, and threw her to her death in the street below. He was not narrested or charged with anything, since it was presumed the Philipina, by not covering her head and wearing the abbayah, drove him to his actions.

I learned that Saudis rarely ever were charged with crimes, and the majority of people beheaded, thrown from the tower, or had their hands cut off, were foreign nationals not of Arab descent, many of them fellow Muslims. I also saw that slavery was still practiced, especially towards women from Africa and Eastern Europe. The things I saw that were socially acceptable were disgusting. i could not believe these assholes were our "friends"?

And when it dawned on me that American blood was shed defending these lowlifes, it really pissed me off. it pissed me off being there. I felt that we should have never did the first Gulf War. In fact, we should have let Saddam have his way with the Saudis. They most likely were deserving of anything Hussein could have dished out. They were actually worse than Hussein in my book. Punks. especiall their royal family. But even the average citizen I learned was a very sexist, racist pervert. Honestly, the only people I enjoyed company from who were pretty descent were Palestinian, Syrian, iranian, and Afghani foreign workers who were horribly abused by both citizens and government. And ECK is right. Its that Wahhabiism that basically makes them that way, as they are the only country that is fully saturated with it. Thats the same crap that produced Bin Laden.

When I got out, barely a couple months afterwords, I remember hearing on the news my old residence, Khobar Towers, was bombed, 19 airmen killed. I had been in that building before. I knew 3 of em who perished. And I was furious. 19 good airmen died for the Saudi goverment and its sick society. We knew it was comming tho. When I lived here, everynight d lay awake wondering which of those cab drivers, chow hall cooks, or laundry personnel, all locals, was going to bring a bomb in and take us all out. The base was poorly guarded, given the fact we were living in a treacherous country full of hostile, insane fanatics. And none of us who had half a brain trusted the Saudis as far as we could see em in a sandstorm.

I still burn and seethe with the fact that we ever defended them, that we have done nothing to bring them to account for their criminal society, and most of all, for their part in 9/11, of which I have strong suspicons they played a big role.

I would trust Saddam with 10,000 gallons of nerve gas with my back turned then id trust a Saudi government offical with a smile on his face and an outstretched hand facing me.

Originally posted by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf
ECK and Kidfinger,

since both of you were in the Gulf, you know very well what I am about to say about the Saudi society, regime, ect, and why I feel this way.

The only real dealings I had with any Sauds was in Baharain mostly, and I had to 'interact' briefly with them in Kuait(My spelling sucks, sorry.). From the exposure I had to them I would have to say your description is quite accurate. It really got on my last nerve every time I had to deal with the complete pompus arrogance and blantent disregard for simple human civility. As I said before, I have not researched much on wahabbiism and the basic underlying thoecratic structure of Saudi Arabia but I met and dealt with enough of them to know what kind of people they were/are.

Originally posted by Kidfinger


The only real dealings I had with any Sauds was in Baharain mostly, and I had to 'interact' briefly with them in Kuait(My spelling sucks, sorry.). From the exposure I had to them I would have to say your description is quite accurate. It really got on my last nerve every time I had to deal with the complete pompus arrogance and blantent disregard for simple human civility. As I said before, I have not researched much on wahabbiism and the basic underlying thoecratic structure of Saudi Arabia but I met and dealt with enough of them to know what kind of people they were/are.

Oh, I envy you. We had to deal with them more often, and I would rather be rolled down a hill in a 55 gallon drum with nails in my head on a hot desert day than deal with them. Ill give you an example.

I was in a Patriot unit. I was a generator mechanic. The other mechanic was female, like myself, we had no male generator jocks in our unit. We had a tac site out at Lucky Base. While the Launchers, the ECS and the shop vans all ran on military generators, the semipermanent trailers ran on generators leased to the government by some rich Saudi dude. So, Mr Money decides he wants a tour of the site to see what all we do, and wished to talk to the generator mechanics about function, operation, and general shop talk.

Well, the man damn near had a seizure to find out...gasp....both mechanics were female. OH NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! He absolutely refused to speak to either of us. He was enraged that our command even suggested it without informing him of our affliction (having breasts). So instead, he demanded to be given a tour and such from our Warrant officer or some male, none of who knew any of the details of day to day operations, maintainence, ect, of the generators. But hed rather speak to someone who was male who knew nothing than reduce himself to even speaking to two females, especially white infidel ones who packed guns.

That was one of many such memorable and enlightening "cultural exchanges" I experienced there.

Originally posted by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf


Oh, I envy you. We had to deal with them more often, and I would rather be rolled down a hill in a 55 gallon drum with nails in my head on a hot desert day than deal with them. Ill give you an example.

Ow! Damn Skadi you really dont like them much do you?

That was one of many such memorable and enlightening "cultural exchanges" I experienced there.

The chauvinism of Saudis is world renown. There was a similar instance I observed that involved the money man Saud and a female Lieutenant. She was green and fresh out of class, but she gave him a ration of crap when he demanded to speak to her superior. The Saudi man got so flustered he could only stammer back in heavelly accented english "Y-Y-YOU WOMEN!"

It was friggen hillarious. I never heard what happened to the Lieutenant over that, but I have a feeling she was well respected amoung the ranks after that.

BTW, its good to hear from our femal service members, especially the ones who haved served our country. There are many of you gals out there but you never really hear what they think about our current situation. Thanks for contributing Skadi

8 years total, 6 years Pararescue

I was there.
Served in a number of operations in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and Iraq.
Aided and rescued 12 downed pilots from 4 joint Coalition Air Forces.

I can understand some of the perspective given by Skadi, but also disagree with some of it.

Perspective given, perspective respected, perspective of but one of many other varying Western perspectives. We were a Western born, raised, and accustomed society in a foreign society, totally different from our own.

Personally, I would guard/caution merging one's perspective into a political connection, though one definately has the right to do so. Perspective has nothing to do with foreign policy, policy makers, and implementation of those policies. One is subjective whereas the other is based more on an objective orientation.






seekerof

Originally posted by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf
That was one of many such memorable and enlightening "cultural exchanges" I experienced there.

Cultural exchanges... Love the way ya put that. Skadi, you crack me up!

KIDFINGER,
The book I mentioned is called Secrets of the Kingdom by Gerald Posner. I definitely recommend it. Here's a little bit about it:

ABOUT THIS BOOK

In its final report, the 9/11 Commission famously called the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia “a problematic ally in combating Islamic extremism.” To Gerald Posner, the bestselling author of Why America Slept: The Failure to Prevent 9/11, this is a gross understatement. In his new book, Secrets of the Kingdom, Posner exposes the undeniable truth about U.S.-Saudi relations–and how the Saudis’ influence on American business and politics poses a grave threat to our security.

The result of an intensive two-year investigation, Secrets of the Kingdom penetrates the innermost layers of the shielded House of Saud and presents indisputable evidence of complicity and deceit at the highest levels–evidence that the 9/11 Commission, either deliberately or negligently, failed to consider. Using bank records and other previously undisclosed information, Posner unearths many disturbing truths and shattering revelations about the ties that bind the Saudi and U.S. governments, including

• how countless failures in U.S. intelligence and law enforcement gave extraordinary preferential treatment to prominent Saudis living in the United States, including members of the bin Laden family, in the days after 9/11

• a likely close connection between a powerful member of the House of Saud and Abu Zubeydah, the highest-ranking al-Qaeda operative captured so far by the United States


• how the Saudi government has turned a blind eye to the role Saudi charities–including many controlled or supported by Kingdom officials– have played in bankrolling al-Qaeda and Islamic terror groups

• the never-before-revealed Saudi and U.S. emergency plans in the event of a national crisis in the Kingdom, plans that could affect the security of the United States and the entire Middle East

Secrets of the Kingdom is an explosive study that will have a profound impact on both U.S. policy and Americans’ perception of their government and its extensive ties to a foreign power. Posner uncovers a disturbing picture of how two nations, despite their differing agendas, have become inextricably entwined.

6 Years Navy. In and out before both Gulf Wars. Interacted alot with military folks from Bahrain, and even a tiny little bit with Kuwaitis and Iraqis. Iranians were the bad guys when I was there.

Never had the privilege of dealing with the Saudis (until after I got out and they came calling to buy Patriot systems), but the Bahrainis apparently despised them. You could never talk to any of the Bahrainis without hearing about how they hated the House of Saud. And the Bahrainis were, for the most part, very moderate Sunnis. Makes you wonder.

I still can't figure out why the Saudis were covertly helping the Iraqis in their war against the Iranians (presumably to contain the influence Shia Islam) when they let the Wahabi zealots flourish in their own house???

I ended up almost killing one of their religous police. The bastard started yelling at me and shaking his cane at me for unknown reasons, so I threatened to send him to Allah via death by milk crate beating. I could go on and on by the various "near death experiences, but I wont. You get the picture.

I disagree with you on that, Seekeroff. Personal experience and perspective have both helped me understand foreign policy a bit better. Its more than my personal experience with the Saudis: its also knowledge of what they did. It was well known even back then that saudi Arabia both produced and harbored terrorists. They shook our hand and smiled while the other hand held the knife to sink in our backs.

Foreign policy should be opposed when it is wrong and harmful to the US. Period. Our relationship to the Saudis is wrong.

And our foreign policy in Iraq is self destructive. Honestly, we would have been better off backing Saddam and keeping good relations with him. Morally, it wouldnt really effect us, since the Saudis are alot worse than the Baathists ever were. Sure, the Saudis didn't gas 100,000 Kurds, but then again, have you ever seemed their army? They would probably be more likely to end up gassing themselves.