View Full Version : Last US Combat Brigade left Iraq
ChunkyMonkey
08-18-2010, 19:55
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2010/08/18/seven-years-final-combat-brigade-leaves-iraq/
Rest in peace to those who have sacrificed and thank you to those who serve. Let's hope the new Iraqi don't waste away its freedom. Too many honorable women and men have died for it.
mikedubs
08-18-2010, 19:59
Iraq might have a chance, seeing as it sits somewhat in the current times and is considerably more modern than Afghanistan, which might as well still be in the 1400s
In a few years iraq will be a haven for terrorists again and obama will blame it on the failed policies of his predecessor.
mikedubs
08-18-2010, 20:03
Just looking for the silver lining thru all the blood in the sand...
Hitman 6
08-18-2010, 20:13
In a few years iraq will be a haven for terrorists again and obama will blame it on the failed policies of his predecessor.
+1, and people will believe him, and re elect him in 2012. [Bang]
ronaldrwl
08-19-2010, 08:17
Are they just playing name games? What good would 50,000 noncombat U.S. troops be to Iraq? And private security is going fill the void? I'm far from an expert but that sounds like trouble.
Anyways, a job well done by our troops. God Bless all of them!
StagLefty
08-19-2010, 10:28
Are they just playing name games? What good would 50,000 noncombat U.S. troops be to Iraq? And private security is going fill the void? I'm far from an expert but that sounds like trouble.
Anyways, a job well done by our troops. God Bless all of them!
^ Exactly what I was thinking this morning !!!
Personally I'm glad to see them all coming home, but sad that Iraq will probably be a major terrorist hub in the near future and that there is a good chance that democracy may not stick there. For now, it's good, but they could end up being well funded US trained terrorists. Make no mistake, factions have been laying it wait for the US draw down in Iraq, it's very nice to put an exit date on things for them!
Byte Stryke
08-19-2010, 10:40
Are they just playing name games? What good would 50,000 noncombat U.S. troops be to Iraq? And private security is going fill the void? I'm far from an expert but that sounds like trouble.
Anyways, a job well done by our troops. God Bless all of them!
Being a former DoD Civilian Contractor I have a bit of insight on this, But as it would just cause more confusion and probably erupt into a verbal dispute, I would urge each of you to do some independent research on the subject.
Being a former DoD Civilian Contractor I have a bit of insight on this, But as it would just cause more confusion and probably erupt into a verbal dispute, I would urge each of you to do some independent research on the subject.
Well put. [Tooth]
...probably erupt into a verbal dispute, ...
So, we're over due for one of those anyway.
Byte Stryke
08-19-2010, 15:03
So, we're over due for one of those anyway.
well as long as I'm not the target,we are good.
for our google-aphobes
As of early 2008, at least 190,000 private personnel were working on US-funded projects in the Iraq theater, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) survey found. That means that for each uniformed member of the US military in the region, there was also a contract employee – a ratio of 1 to 1.
Now in Rear support areas (Ali A Sale'em Airbase, Camp Arifjan Kuwait, SPOD etc.) the ratio was MUCH Steeper.
I REALLY wish I could show a picture of the 228th Signal Company, 54th Signal Battalion.
We look like a bunch of Civies with a few guys in ACUs, Because, well, thats what we were.
Its more cost effective to Hire a guy to come in and run your servers, firewalls and networks than to train someone to Shoot, Fight, March, etc AND come in and run your servers, firewalls and networks.
Not to mention you then lose a "Soldier" for a Non-combat position.
Don't kid yourselves, War is now a Civilian and military Mission.
and Bullets don't discriminate.
I read this book "Wars, Guns, and Votes: Democracy in Dangerous Places", pretty good read and delved into a bunch of reasons shit will just fall apart when/if places like Iraq and Afghanistan are left back to their own devices.
StagLefty
08-20-2010, 07:13
shit will just fall apart when/if places like Iraq and Afghanistan are left back to their own devices.
I think this will happen no matter how long we stay and what we do-look at these countries history's. They will revert to their in house tribal wars as soon as we leave. JMHO
Byte Stryke
08-20-2010, 09:45
I believe they will return to their own devices because the liberal policies of this century have failed them.
How long did we occupy German after then end of WW1
not long enough... because we had to go right back for WW2
we learned from the first mistake, we stayed. Not a peep from them since.
Japan.. Stayed, Not a peep from them Since.
We booted the Russians from Afghanistan in the 80s and bailed immediately. We either forgot the lessons of the past or we just didn't care.. so we had to go back. Nature abhors a Vacuum and all of the shitheads were sucked into power.
Now I am not down with putting good men into harms way needlessly, which is exactly why I advocate we stay in Iraq and get this shit right the first time. Because more men will die the second time around. Shift the patrols to the Iraqis with US Support if needed, Air cover, Artillery, whatever. Hell I don't care if we convince them that the entire Iranian Horde is posed to come running down from the north to rape their sons.
We need to stay and lower our costs for "Next time".
Its cheaper to hold something than it is to retake it.
Those who forget History are doomed to repeat it.
Glad theyare coming home, But I only hope it isn't too soon.
Just sayin'
We booted the Russians from Afghanistan in the 80s and bailed immediately.
Say what? You mean the Stingers we sold the Mujahadeen, and the CIA/covert training we gave them? I really don't think the US can say it kicked the Russians out. If "Charlie Wilsons War" is accurate, most of the funding for that endeavor was Saudi.
Now I am not down with putting good men into harms way needlessly, which is exactly why I advocate we stay in Iraq and get this shit right the first time. Because more men will die the second time around. Shift the patrols to the Iraqis with US Support if needed, Air cover, Artillery, whatever.
This is the right sentiment, but it should have been applied in 2003 when we invaded. Nothing pisses me off more than the fact that we tried to wage a war "on the cheap." That we put in less than 1/3 of the force that was required. When they said the "War will pay for itself" we should have known it was lost before we put the first boots on the ground. You don't go to war trying to keep your budget in check. You go to war to win, you do it overwhelmingly. We should have had half a million men for that invasion, like we did for Kuwait. We should have had forces entering from every direction. When the looters roamed freely and total chaos in the streets, we didn't have the forces to control the situation, and that was the start of the ugly. If we'd be in control then, then maybe we could have been out in six months, like they promised.
Hell, we should have gone to Baghdad in 1991, and then we wouldn't have left US soldiers in Saudi Arabia.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w75ctsv2oPU
"The more you use, the less you loose" - Viscout Slim
If everyone likes to "follow the money," try following where the trillions spent on these wars went. Armor Holdings Group, KBR, etc. The billions "lost" in Iraq with zero accounting.
As for anyone who believes we went into Iraq to bring democracy to them, I say bullshit. If that was our policy, there are a lot of other countries we could have rolled over and had a better time of it. Burma would have been a nice place to vacation once it's all over; who the @#$% would want to go visit Iraq?
H.
by picking up and leaving we are complying with the demands of terrorists, all to forward a political agenda.
by picking up and leaving we are complying with the demands of terrorists, all to forward a political agenda.
By leaving Saudi Arabia in 2003 we were complying with the demands of terrorists. Sometimes you comply with their demands because it suits your agenda. To say, "Oh, it's what they want, so we'll continue to be contrary even if it's against our own bests interests just for the purpose of aggravating them" seems pretty retarded.
H.
This is the right sentiment, but it should have been applied in 2003 when we invaded.
H.
It was, but everyone cried when they (civilians, media, UN) were'nt told what was happening and couldn't tag along to get their story or watch it on the news. Everyone knows it, the US citizens screwed up that war by imposing US laws on warfare. If everyone would have just let us (USASOC) continue doing our jobs, things would be entirely different. Militants were TERRIFIED to even pick up a weapon within a few weeks of our presence there (pre-March 2003). Suddenly, you're not allowed to fight terrorism with terror and have to be nice and hand out food and water to people. I admit, there are alot of Iraqi people that I respect and admire some traits in them, but WE fed, trained, and supplied out enemy. What kind of BS is that? That is what happens when civilians (politicians and ordnary citizens, republicans and democrats alike) think they can run the military. Leave the warfare to the warriors and just say "thank you."
...rant over...
By leaving Saudi Arabia in 2003 we were complying with the demands of terrorists. Sometimes you comply with their demands because it suits your agenda. To say, "Oh, it's what they want, so we'll continue to be contrary even if it's against our own bests interests just for the purpose of aggravating them" seems pretty retarded.
H.
"against our own best interests" is a matter of widely varied opinion. I think it is a mistake to leave.
but even if time shows my opinion to be correct, it won't matter.
obama will get re-elected and on this date in 2015 he'll still be blaming bush.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.