THE US, THE UN AND IRAQ, TENTH THREAD.

Ican, polls have shown that about 75 % of Iraqis want us out, and about 60 % want us dead. Moreover, our enemy in Iraq is somewhat undetectable. Our troops are under constant attack and find that the attackers quickly disappear among the population. What is your solution -- firebomb the population? The best solution is to quickly turn the war over to the Iraqis and the UN, and get out.

0 Replies

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Which tactics do you advocate to accomplish this? Specifically.

Cycloptichorn

Employ those tactics for killing rotters that will reduce by year end 2008 the rate non-combatants are killed by violence in Iraq to one-fourth the current rate.

0 Replies

And, what are those tactics?

You don't want to say out loud what you really think, do you? Or perhaps you just don't know.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Also, does the number of non-combatants killed by violence that you wish us to obtain include those killed by the tactics you propose?

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Advocate wrote:

Ican, polls have shown that about 75 % of Iraqis want us out, and about 60 % want us dead. Moreover, our enemy in Iraq is somewhat undetectable. Our troops are under constant attack and find that the attackers quickly disappear among the population. What is your solution -- firebomb the population? The best solution is to quickly turn the war over to the Iraqis and the UN, and get out.

I hope that this is true. If it is true it will reduce our problems when these alleged 75% / 60% cause their government to ask us to leave. Then instead of having to catch hell for trying to save the lives of Iraqi non-combatants, we'd only have to occassionally catch hell for trying to save the lives of American non-combatants. That would occur only whenever we detect al-Qaeda et al training sites in Iraq and temporarily invade Iraq to destroy these sites.

0 Replies

It should be relatively easy for you to outline the tactics neccessary to accomplish your plan, Ican. Why do you not do so?

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Also, does the number of non-combatants killed by violence that you wish us to obtain include those killed by the tactics you propose?

Cycloptichorn

Of course it does. Yes, the reduced rate of non-combatants killed by violence that I wish us to achieve includes those unavoidably killed by the tactics I have proposed?

0 Replies

What specific tactics would those be?

I keep repeating this, because I feel that if you really believe in your theory, you should have some way of explaining just how we are going to go about reducing the civilian casualties, and increasing terrorist and insurgent casualties, by said tactics.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Cycloptichorn wrote:

It should be relatively easy for you to outline the tactics neccessary to accomplish your plan, Ican. Why do you not do so?

Cycloptichorn

Patience my boy, patience. I was saving answering this question until I answered the others.

I'm not up on modern ordnance, what it can do and how accurate it can be made to be. So I must resort to general descritions rather than explicit descriptions.

I recommend the following tactics.

Whereever, whenever we find suspected rotters, kill them and destroy their ordnance. Do that by shooting them or by blowing them up, whichever is believed most effective at the time. Whenever we think we can accomplish that and avoid killing non-combatants we should do so. Whenever we think we can accomplish that and avoid killing non-combatants by moving non-combatants a safe distance away, we should do so. Whenever we think we cannot accomplish killing rotters without killing non-combatants, kill the rotters anyway.

0 Replies

WHICH OF THESE APPROACHES WILL RESULT IN THE LEAST NON-COMBATANT CASUALTIES IN IRAQ?

Cycloptichorn advocates that we first employ international diplomacy to help obtain an adequate size military to protect the lives of non-combatants and capture and provide court trials for suspected rotters. The unavoidable delays that will be encountered because of this approach will unavoidably delay the rate rotters are neutralized, and increase or maintain the current rate of non-combatant casualties there will be.

Ican advocates that we win the war much sooner, and thereby reduce the rate of non-combatant casualties sooner, by quickly starting the killing of rotters regardless of whether non-combatants who live in the same neigborhoods as rotters are killed also. The quicker we exterminate rotters, the fewer total non-combatant casualties there will be.

Cycloptichorn also advocates that in the event what he advocates we do first fails, America should remove its troops from Iraq, leaving it to the Iraqi people to by themselves reduce the number of non-combatant casualties in Iraq.

0 Replies

Cycloptichorn, it should be relatively easy for you to outline the tactics neccessary to accomplish your plan. Why do you not do so?

0 Replies

ican711nm wrote:

WHICH OF THESE APPROACHES WILL RESULT IN THE LEAST NON-COMBATANT CASUALTIES IN IRAQ?

Cycloptichorn advocates that we first employ international diplomacy to help obtain an adequate size military to protect the lives of non-combatants and capture and provide court trials for suspected rotters. The unavoidable delays that will be encountered because of this approach will unavoidably delay the rate rotters are neutralized, and increase or maintain the current rate of non-combatant casualties there will be.

Ican advocates that we win the war much sooner, and thereby reduce the rate of non-combatant casualties sooner, by quickly starting the killing of rotters regardless of whether non-combatants who live in the same neigborhoods as rotters are killed also. The quicker we exterminate rotters, the fewer total non-combatant casualties there will be.

Cycloptichorn also advocates that in the event what he advocates we do first fails, America should remove its troops from Iraq, leaving it to the Iraqi people to by themselves reduce the number of non-combatant casualties in Iraq.

Thanks.

I'll begin my next phase of this discussion with another question to you: Do you believe that killing innocents creates more insurgents and terrorists, or not?

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Cycloptichorn wrote:

...

I'll begin my next phase of this discussion with another question to you: Do you believe that killing innocents creates more insurgents and terrorists, or not?

Cycloptichorn

First, answer my question that I posted immediately preceding this one of yours. My answer to this question of yours may depend on your answer to my preceding question.

0 Replies

Alrighty, which aspect of my proposals would you like to know the specific tactics for?

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Alrighty, which aspect of my proposals would you like to know the specific tactics for?

Cycloptichorn

Please start with providing your tactics for accomplishing this aspect:

Cycloptichorn advocates that we first employ international diplomacy to help obtain an adequate size military to protect the lives of non-combatants and capture and provide court trials for suspected rotters. The unavoidable delays that will be encountered because of this approach will unavoidably delay the rate rotters are neutralized, and increase or maintain the current rate of non-combatant casualties there will be.

Then provide your tactics for determining how to determine if/when this aspect is required, and then provide your tactics for accomplishing it:

Cycloptichorn also advocates that in the event what he advocates we do first fails, America should remove its troops from Iraq, leaving it to the Iraqi people to by themselves reduce the number of non-combatant casualties in Iraq.

0 Replies

as i stated earlier , when WW II ended , the british forces provided for the security , law and order in the british occupied zone of germany .
german citizens didn't have to fear reprisals by renegade nazis , and they didn't have to fear the british forces either .

from what i've seen happening in iraq , the united states are not able to provide security , law and order for the citizens of iraq .
i can't see how the united states will be able to win 'the hearts and minds' of the iraqis unless they can provide such security .
surely , the u.s government must have had plans to adequately look after the citizens of iraq , or am i wrong here ?
hbg

0 Replies

You really should read this

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/10/6/214638/999

Hell of a turn of events, this war

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Containment is working. Ican is not posting elsewhere. Keep up the good work.

On the matter of responsibility and accountability...

Quote:

He [Blunkett] also discloses for the first time that he regrets the presentation of the intelligence dossier in the run-up to the invasion of Iraq. A member of the war cabinet, he reveals that Britain battled with the US vice-president, Dick Cheney, and defence secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, not to press ahead with dismantling "the whole of the security, policing, administrative and local government system on the basis of the de-Ba'athification of Iraq.

http://politics.guardian.co.uk/blunkett/story/0,,1889881,00.html

0 Replies

Quote:

Pentagon to Probe Gitmo Beatings Claim
By THOMAS WATKINS, Associated Press Writer
3:56 AM PDT, October 7, 2006

CAMP PENDLETON, Calif. -- The Pentagon said Friday that it will investigate a Marine's sworn statement that guards at Guantanamo Bay bragged about beating detainees and described it as a common practice.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/wire/ats-ap_top13oct07,0,7723237.story

0 Replies

Water board <> democracy board
Can I have another sir?

0 Replies

THE US, THE UN AND IRAQ, TENTH THREAD.

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know