Is Saddam’s Hanging Iraq’s Tet Offensive?

I have not looked at the video of Saddam Hussein’s hanging. Ever since I saw on evening tv, the young Vietnamese man, unarmed and bound with arms behind his back, shot in the head by South Vietnam’s Security Chief, I try to avoid watching other people die. I also knew American people would not support that kind of government. I do not believe the American will people will support an Iraqi government incapable of doing what must be the simplist thing in the world to do, to hang a helpless man by the neck until he is dead. None of the Iraqi government have stepped forward to say they were in charge. Prime Minister Mr Maliki has already said he, like Tony Blair, will not stand for reelection. Yet another casualty in B43s rush to war!

The Iraq Civil War. 2005-20xx. America has lost the war in Iraq. The hand picked government we have given to Iraq has failed to prevent a violent sectarian war where the favorite torture is to run a Black and Decker drill bit through your knee-caps. Before shooting you in the head.

We face the same issue in Iraq we faced in Vietnam. What good can come of us staying longer? Contrary to what Colin Powell said in 2003, we broke it, but we can’t fix it and we don’t want to buy it.

Who wants to be the last American to die in Iraq?


[edit on 1/3/2007 by donwhite]

Hi Don, I'm not quite sure if this is what the US wanted, that is to destablise the country. If you embark on such actions one must have a clear plan from start to finish. After the initial battles it seems Iraq has turned into a free for all, unless the occupying power takes complete control this is what happens.

If the US goes or stays in the region there will be sectarian violence for years to come. If Iran is attacked it will only get worse and their is a real danger of a widening conflict. Also there is a possibility that others are trying to bleed America dry by impaling its self on ME countries. War can make great nations but it can also break them.

I have a strong feeling that those who are controlling these events are doing it with the sole intention of removing the US from its current position.
A widening of the conflict would mean a greater drain on the Us's resources, a point will be reached where the economy will collapse. Americans do not realise that while they boast of their armed forces able to beat anyone they are more vunerable to a finacial disaster as happened with the Germans in ww1 and the British Empire.

How do we get out of this mess in the ME, I dont really know, we have been their since the early 1900's and taking the resources of these countries. How do we placate a people who we have robbed, murdered, tortured, destroyed their homes, their infastructure et. The right thing to do would be to get out of there, make reparations, stabalise the country and hope that this will improve the situation.

posted by magicmushroom

Hi Don, I'm not quite sure if this is what the US wanted . . After the initial battles it seems Iraq has turned into a free for all, unless the occupying power takes complete control this is what happens. [Edited by Don W]

I believe we - all of us, government and people - were beguiled by our quick and easy success in Afghan. Technology triumphs! We learned enough from Gulf War 1 to know the Iraqi Army was a paper tiger. I am satisfied the initial concept (purpose) of our intrusion into Iraq went according to plan, as was exemplified by the “Mission Accomplished” welcome B43 received on the USS Abraham Lincoln on May 1. Albeit staged, it did reflect the popular impression of reality.

Yes, there were cracks showing in our armor by May 1, especially visible over the looting of antiquities the US apparently “permitted” by dismantling the police and refusing to send guarding units to the sites. This is symptomatic of people who have no regard for culture or history but not necessarily otherwise bad actors. What I’d call semi-literate. Boorish.

Obviously we - Central Command - had no concept the Shi’ite would harbor such deep resentment towards the Sunni. And we also lacked appreciation of how seriously the Turks and Iranians take the issue of the Kurds and their dream of an independent Kurdistan. But over here, if you say “the -stans” you get back a blank stare.

One of our generals said it would take 300,000 soldiers to “pacify” Iraq. Maybe yes, maybe no. I recall when General Westmoreland asked for 100,000 more men. 1966. Then he came back here and asked for 125,000 more men. 1968. By then we had 550,000 men in Vietnam and as you know, they ran us out of town. Pajama and shower clogs and all that. Proof? You cannot kill a good idea. Causes survive bombs. Just look at Jim Crow in America.

If the US goes or stays there will be sectarian violence for years to come. If Iran is attacked it will get worse and there is a real danger of a widening conflict. Also there is a possibility that others are trying to bleed America dry by impaling its self on ME countries. War can make great nations but it can also break them.

I don’t know why so few of us see this, whipsawing. I’ve pointed out how the al Qaeda spent perhaps $2-3 million on the Nine Eleven Event, but we have spent $6-700 billion in response.

One old example: A dvd was “discovered” during the 2004 campaign which showed Wall Street and the White House. Supposedly this was hot stuff just captured in Afghan. Bush43 “leaked” it to the press. NYC and W-DC spent $70 million in extra police overtime. A man who saw the parts of the dvd the CIA or FBI deigned to show us, recognized his own building in the picture. He realized the picture was more than 3 years old, as he had remodeled the building that long ago. A minor snafu, but again, al Qaeda spends a few hundred bucks and we respond with 10s of millions. That is why I say, stop fighting dumb, begin to fight smart.

I have a feeling those who control these events are doing it with the sole intention of removing the US from its current [sole superpower] position. Americans do not realize that while they boast of their armed forces able to beat anyone they are more vulnerable to a financial disaster as happened with the Germans in WW1 and the British Empire [post War2].

How do we get out of this mess in the ME? I don’t know, we have been there since the early 1900's and taking the resources of these countries. How do we placate a people who we have robbed, murdered, tortured, destroyed their homes, their infrastructure etc. The right thing to do would be to get out of there, make reparations, stabilize the country and hope that this will improve the situation. [Edited by Don W]

Yes. But sometimes it is so hard to do right. I often pose the question, relative to the Germans and the Holocaust,”What makes good people do bad things?” It seems the Germans were the first in Iraq, around 1890. Converting their ocean fleet from coal to oil. They made a deal with Persia to extend the Berlin-Baghdad RR to Tehran but WW1 intervened and that never came to fruition. After War 1, the British took the German investments in the region as part of the spoils of war. In 1935, the Shah, favorably impressed with Hitler and the Nazis, changed the name of the country from Persia to Iran, an anglicized version of the Farsi for Aryan. I am somewhat surprised the natives have not changed it back to Persia.

Lesson from Iraq: Americans do not abhor war, on the contrary, we love a winning war. It is losing we cannot tolerate. That is why I named this thread in honor of “Tet.” We constantly plead our humanity and our generosity, but we never complain when a Daisy-Cutter is dropped or a bunker-buster. And cluster bombs. Sweet Jesus. We know not all bombs hit the intended target . We are comfortable in denominating those people killed by mistake or a technical glitch as collateral damage. Beware of any people who can call their fellow man killed at their hands collateral damage.

Cruise missiles ramming down a chimney! Laser guided bombs. Night vision. Infra rad vision. Technology. We love it, we worship at its feet. Compare how many hours a typical American sits in front of his tv as opposed to how many hours he spends in church or in other religious activities. That’s probably a bad example, because 80% of America’s churches are 100% behind war.

[edit on 3/1/2007 by donwhite]

Hi Don, Very good points you raise, Do you think that a possible American weakness is their reliance on technology. The American public may be lured into a sense of false security because of technological superiority, a case of our weapons will win the day irrespective of the adversary.

As you rightly pointed out the hardware is very expensive and again can be taken out by improvised munitions or cheap anti tank weapons etc. Although their is much boasting of America's military prowess and I can understand some of it to a degree, will the American public be able to withstand the trauma of seeing a carrier going down or a large loss of life on the battlefield.

A British politician discussing the merits of the Argentine Airforce and the British Harrier said that they have Blackbirds and we have Falcons, well even Blackbirds can be dangerous. (Falklands War)

posted by magicmushroom

Don, Do you think that a possible American weakness is their reliance on technology. The American public may be lured into a sense of false security because of technological superiority - a case of our weapons will win the day irrespective of the adversary. [Edited by Don W]

Yes. Definitely, Mr M/M. Well, the worst example I can think of right now are the brown outs or black outs we have from time to time when the national electric grid fails. The EMP fans constantly remind us of that vulnerability. The last black out happened when a small competent in a Canadian substation failed and ultimately blacked-out much of the Northeast US. As devices get more complex, the formula for determining reliability shows us we are more and more dependant on gadgets working as promised. Perhaps it is inevitable.

You pointed out the hardware is very expensive and again can be taken out by improvised munitions or cheap anti tank weapons etc. There is much boasting of America's military prowess [but] will the American public be able to withstand the trauma of seeing a carrier going down or a large loss of life on the battlefield?

The USS Cole figured in the 2004 election although it was in 1997. The US KIA toll was in the high 2,900s just before the November 7 election. It is now 3,150+ but no one seems to get much agitated. I predict that if this toll continues to rise through this summer, there will be irresistible pressure on Congress to stop the funding.

A British politician discussing the merits of the Argentine Air Force and the British Harrier said they have Blackbirds and we have Falcons, well even Blackbirds can be dangerous. (Falklands War)

Of course, the USMC uses large numbers of American produced Harriers. I thought the air to sea missile that sank the Brit’s destroyer was an Exocet fired by a Dassault Mirage III? By Falcons are you referring to the F16? And “Blackbird” leaves me with a blank. Our Blackbird was the SR71, long ago retired. What’s the Argentine’s “Blackbird?” Or was the general speaking tongue-in-cheek thinking about the random blackbird causing a catastrophic jet engine failure and the loss of the plane?

[edit on 3/1/2007 by donwhite]

Hi Don, no I meant birds of the natural variety, Falcons being a bird of prey and the blackbird not. What the politician was trying to say was out techno was far superior to the Argies but has we have seen those with inferior weapons can still cause harm.