What is the likely outcome of Gulf 2?

schwarzchildradius

Weapons of mass destruction - the mobil labs shown to the UN by Powell has been found. However, there is no evidence that they produced or were intended to produce anthrax.
VX and other chemical agents were reportedly found in the waters of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers, no doubt dumped by guilty Baath party aparatchiks.
Sold as a solution to a direct threat to the US, yet NOW US soldiers are dying there daily. Well, so what people die in war... yet the war is "over" according to the top brass.
Apparently completely ignorant stories from museum curator of Iraqi museum that treasures were looted -- yet said treasures turn up in a vault? The curator had no idea where the treasures were?!
What the hell is happening in Iraq? What will happen there in the next 12 months?

russ_watters

I voted for the second one but it may take more than a year (I'm not sure how long Japan took, but I know it was surprisingly fast). Five years ought to cover it.

Btw, your objections to the war itself are not relevant to the question posed. I must point out though the museum thing - we already established that the curator was misquoted/misunderstood in his initial interview.

Ivan Seeking

We will continue to rule Iraq with guns until we finally pull out because of political pressure at home and abroad. This will leave a power vacuum and it will cause an Iraqi civil war. This will act to further destabalize the Middle East. Just a guess. [;)]

russ_watters

Any guess on timeframe?

I do see that as a real possibility, but Bush wouldn't pull out while he's in office (that way he can't be blamed). In 5.5 years when Bush leaves office, if its still a quagmire, his successor will probably just pull chocks and take off.

Ivan Seeking

Excuse me while I shove this pencil into my head. [g)]

Ivan Seeking

3.5 or 5.51 years.

schwarzchildradius

Let me know then, which was it: misquote, or misunderstanding (i.e. mistranslation of Iraqi to english) because they are different. Could it be that the curator had his own museum looted, expecting the Americans to try to take to loot, but finding that a relatively stable American empire would secure him?
I heard a new term today - "tax-cut empire," on "washington week," on PBS. That's a great term for it - an empire running on the cheap, the old fashioned way, like in the day of Alexander the Great. They didn't worry about "social programs" like schools and roads; taxes were to finance conquest, expand the empire. But the big difference between Alexander and George -- the former could distinguish fantasy from reality.

Zero

Iraq will be forgotten as soon as Bush finds a new oil field to conquer. The best part of economic imperialism is that you don't need as many troops, if you control the money and food.

Ivan Seeking

I have grave doubts about this.

Chemicalsuperfreak

American soldiers will continue to die every day. The rate will probably increase as iraqis grow accustomed to US tactics. American people begin to believe that the iraqi people don't want us there as evidenced by crowds of iraqi civilians cheering US deaths. Millions protest US occupation in Iraq and abroad. US war crimes in iraq increase. As evidenced by the recent taking of iraqi hostages by US forces. Promises of troops coming home are broken as powers that be realize US forces are undermanned. Talk of draft ensues.

At home support for Bush* and war plummet. Protests increase as well as jitteryness among republican hold outs. Bush and other hawks continue to lie as for reasons for war and fail to admit mistakes. Because the whole point of the war wasn't about the security of the United States, but about a reelection campaign. So no matter how many iraqis we kill, we still lose the war. Just like Vietnam. You'd think people would have learned by now.

russ_watters

Uh huh...

Chemicalsuperfreak

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp...2003Jul27.html

Believing that we're the good guys doesn't make it true.

schwarzchildradius

I don't know, guys, it looks pretty grim. Arent you tired of hearing about all the bloodshed every day? I hope that this is truly a naiive, heroic act, saving those people from Saddam's iron fist. But the alternative seems to be more plausible - that it's just a demonstration of power for self-glorification (not even to divide the spoils among the victorious, let alone to "democratize" anything). It's abuse of the military, and definitely a cold commoditization of the soldiers' class.
I support the military - I don't want them killed to glorify some Texan.

schwarzchildradius

Found this little web-site:
Military Families Speak Out dot ORG
should be applicable to the discussion somehow?

Chemicalsuperfreak

Who would that be? G. Dubya's from Connecticut. That's the only thing the Dixie Chicks got wrong.

russ_watters

Could you be more specific? I see several Iraqi war crimes in there including threatening to kill people's families if they don't fight and using human shields. I don't see anything about American war crimes.

Chemicalsuperfreak

Read a little more carefully. Those ain't iraqis.

snip
"_Col. David Hogg, commander of the 2nd Brigade of the 4th Infantry Division, said tougher methods are being used to gather the intelligence. On Wednesday night, he said, his troops picked up the wife and daughter of an Iraqi lieutenant general. They left a note: "If you want your family released, turn yourself in." Such tactics are justified, he said, because, "It's an intelligence operation with detainees, and these people have info." They would have been released in due course, he added later. "