Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

And so ends the Iraq war... Officially, at least.

  • 19-08-2010 03:17AM
    #1
    Manic Moran
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 16,884 Mod ✭✭✭✭


    Without much fanfare ahead of time, a Stryker battalion hopped into their trucks last night and drove down the road into Kuwait, and the Kuwaitis shut the gate behind them. Thus officially ended Operation Iraqi Freedom.

    Of course, there are still some 50,000 US troops remaining in the country under Operation New Dawn. I'm sure a lot of them will still be out and about in company of Iraqis as further advisors and trainers, and I don't think anyone is under any misconceptions that the struggle for a properly functioning country is in any way over.

    But, it is now officially (it has been in practise for some time) Iraq's show, with Iraqis responsible for how the country progresses.

    I wish them, and particularly those I broke bread with, luck.

    NTM


«134

Comments

  • #2
    demonspawn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,460 ✭✭✭demonspawn


    Manic Moran wrote: »
    Without much fanfare ahead of time, a Stryker battalion hopped into their trucks last night and drove down the road into Kuwait, and the Kuwaitis shut the gate behind them. Thus officially ended Operation Iraqi Freedom.

    Of course, there are still some 50,000 US troops remaining in the country under Operation New Dawn. I'm sure a lot of them will still be out and about in company of Iraqis as further advisors and trainers, and I don't think anyone is under any misconceptions that the struggle for a properly functioning country is in any way over.

    But, it is now officially (it has been in practise for some time) Iraq's show, with Iraqis responsible for how the country progresses.

    I wish them, and particularly those I broke bread with, luck.

    NTM

    What they don't tell you is there are still thousands of private military personnel in Iraq. The U.S. doesn't need a regular army anymore when they can just hire professional soldiers from private firms like Blackwater.


  • #3
    ynotdu
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,817 ✭✭✭ynotdu


    demonspawn wrote: »
    What they don't tell you is there are still thousands of private military personnel in Iraq. The U.S. doesn't need a regular army anymore when they can just hire professional soldiers from private firms like Blackwater.

    Hi demonspawn. i don't blame You at all for feeling so cynical,it is though at least a start to an end of a shameful episode in America's history.IMO.Iraq's top General wanted combat troops to remain until 2020.
    Wars always so much more easy to start than to finish.
    This was an unesscery war to topple a man who America backed in the Iran-Iraq war because he was seen as the lesser of two evils.

    The popular belief that its main driving force in Bush's mind was an alledged plot by Saddam to have his Father assasinated,i don't believe for a minute.In fact i think it was more to do with Rumsfeld,Cheyney,Rice and many sinister forces/organisations at work at the time.

    It does at least show that the normal balance and checks between the secrety of Defense and the Secrety of State are returning to normal.
    Colin Powell[proably the finest mind in the first term of Bush Jnr] was well and truely hung out to dry,sidelined/ and fed false imformation about WMD's,which he then in good fate presented as evidence to the World to Justify it all.You will never hear him say that though as unlike others when he takes oaths he is not spouting Platitudes like most of Bush's Administration did.The fact that he respectfully declined a second term speaks volumes,IMO

    Who knows what an affect a 9/11 would have on ANY Nations psyche though?
    I have suspicions that Bush was played like a puppet too,but too soon after the event to know if Bush was really as stupid as perceived.

    Saddam was an evil [EMAIL="B@stard"]B@stard[/EMAIL] but Nations are normally best left to there own devices and with a few rare exceptions it takes a civil war to bring stability,It was never America's war to fight.
    I have got to say as someone who admires a lot of What Tony Blair done in his first term that it is a real pity that even now he wont come out and say, "I was just plain wrong".there goes his place in history!

    Irelands hands are not clean either,We let Shannon be used as a stopping point because with plenty of justification We were scared Sh*tless that it would cost us billions of $$$$$$$$$!

    BTW Manic,any idea why the pull-out came early? i am guessing the element of surprise?


  • #4
    Zambia
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,333 ✭✭✭Zambia


    # Maj. General Stanislaw Sosabowski: Doesn't matter what it was. When one man says to another, "I know what let's do today, let's play the war game."... everybody dies. »

    Glad you and your guys wont see that place again Manic.


  • #5
    animalhuger
    Closed Accounts Posts: 29 ✭animalhuger


    Hmmm 50,000 troops left there and our whole army is less than 5000 lmao

    Training my arss!


  • #6
    MysticalRain
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,428 ✭✭✭MysticalRain


    I can't wait for Gulf War III to start.


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    karma_
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,798 ✭✭✭karma_


    demonspawn wrote: »
    What they don't tell you is there are still thousands of private military personnel in Iraq. The U.S. doesn't need a regular army anymore when they can just hire professional soldiers from private firms like Blackwater.

    Call them what they are, mercenaries.


  • #8
    Highly Salami
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 216 ✭✭Highly Salami


    MysticalRain wrote: »
    I can't wait for Gulf War III to start.

    You won't have long to wait, another 6-12 months imho.


  • #9
    BlaasForRafa
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,020 ✭✭✭BlaasForRafa


    ynotdu wrote: »
    Irelands hands are not clean either,We let Shannon be used as a stopping point because with plenty of justification We were scared Sh*tless that it would cost us billions of $$$$$$$$$!

    I always thought that fuss over the shannon stopover was over the top tbh. So what if some planes stopped here and refueled etc?, some people made it into a big deal when it just wasn't.


  • #10
    karma_
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,798 ✭✭✭karma_


    BlaasForRafa wrote: »
    I always thought that fuss over the shannon stopover was over the top tbh. So what if some planes stopped here and refueled etc?, some people made it into a big deal when it just wasn't.

    Its because Ireland is Neutral, and breached the neutrality rules:

    Belligerent armies' men and material may not be transported across neutral territory.


  • #11
    ynotdu
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,817 ✭✭✭ynotdu


    karma_ wrote: »
    Its because Ireland is Neutral, and breached the neutrality rules:

    Ireland is Neutral on the side that suits it:D
    Complex why Dev remained Neutral on the side of the Allies in WW2,unforgivable that he signed a book of condolance for Hitler and No matter the reasons,something i feel ashamed about.

    You have to know who Your friends are, and by God America has been a real friend to Ireland.!

    Afghanistan is a totally diffrient case than Iraq and IMO We should have NO hesitation in supporting efforts there.

    Iraq was avoidable,Afghanistan was not.
    Neutrality can be used as an excuse for Cowardice sometimes IMO.


  • Advertisement
  • #12
    karma_
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,798 ✭✭✭karma_


    ynotdu wrote: »
    Ireland is Neutral on the side that suits it:D
    Complex why Dev remained Neutral on the side of the Allies in WW2,unforgivable that he signed a book of condolance for Hitler and No matter the reasons,something i feel ashamed about.

    You have to know who Your friends are, and by God America has been a real friend to Ireland.!

    Afghanistan is a totally diffrient case than Iraq and IMO We should have NO hesitation in supporting efforts there.

    Iraq was avoidable,Afghanistan was not.
    Neutrality can be used as an excuse for Cowardice sometimes IMO.

    You can't just be neutral when it suits, you either are or aren't. Cowardice has nothing to do with it, a man can be a coward a country can't.


  • #13
    Nijmegen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,086 ✭✭✭Nijmegen


    The war is over for the west, mostly. But I daresay for the Iraqi's it will be a different story.


  • #14
    ynotdu
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,817 ✭✭✭ynotdu


    karma_ wrote: »
    You can't just be neutral when it suits, you either are or aren't. Cowardice has nothing to do with it, a man can be a coward a country can't.

    If You read up on Irish history You will find that sadly We did cherry-pick our neutrality,
    If it was put to a referendum i would bet any money We would keep our weird version of Neutrality,on the basis of "i really hope those crazy Nations don't gain control over the World,but i don't want My Son/Daughter to be drafted or be killed to protect our way of life"[ which is a very human response by parents]


  • #15
    Fratton Fred
    Closed Accounts Posts: 26,567 ✭✭✭✭Fratton Fred


    karma_ wrote: »
    Its because Ireland is Neutral, and breached the neutrality rules:

    Belligerent armies' men and material may not be transported across neutral territory.

    Except Ireland isn't neutral, it is non aligned. there is a subtle, if significant difference.


  • #16
    WakeUp
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,823 ✭✭✭WakeUp


    Manic Moran wrote: »
    Of course, there are still some 50,000 US troops remaining in the country under Operation New Dawn. I'm sure a lot of them will still be out and about in company of Iraqis as further advisors and trainers, and I don't think anyone is under any misconceptions that the struggle for a properly functioning country is in any way over.

    It was a properly functioning country before you're lot and the British illegally invaded and occupied the place, bombed the place back to the stoneage destroying civillian infrastructure and causing massive civillian loss of life.

    Not to mention the hundreds of thousands of children and civillians who sufffered and persihed as a result of 10 years of sanctions pre-invasion initiated by the Clinton administration. You have sowed the seeds of a civil war which will be resulting in the deaths of many innocent people for many years to come.

    So before you all start patting yourselves on the back for a job "well done" I'd just like to point a few truths.

    a) The war, occupation and invasion where illegal based on lies, greed and a lust for blood, operation new dawn, Iraqi freedom, gimme a break more like operation illegal occupation by greedy bas@ards, imo.

    b) The US & British have the blood of thousands & thousands of innocent people on their hands, that doesn’t wash easily and never will make sure you remember that and remember it well.

    c) George Bush and Tony Blair are war criminals who should be sent on trial for their crimes against humanity and given a custodial prison sentence for the rest of their lives.

    d) History will judge the above as the truth no matter what you say or how you try to dress it up.

    Shame on the governments of the US & Britain.


  • #17
    Nijmegen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,086 ✭✭✭Nijmegen


    WakeUp wrote: »
    It was a properly functioning country before you're lot and the British illegally invaded and occupied the place, bombed the place back to the stoneage destroying civillian infrastructure and causing massive civillian loss of life.

    Umm. Much as one might agree to suspect motives and all that, Iraq was neither a functioning country nor one you would want to live in in general before the invasion.

    Remember any of the mass graves they started digging up shortly afterwards, filled with political opponents, people the local policeman had a problem with, whomever and for whatever?


  • #18
    nacho libre
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,604 ✭✭✭✭nacho libre


    karma_ wrote: »
    You can't just be neutral when it suits, you either are or aren't. Cowardice has nothing to do with it, a man can be a coward a country can't.

    I disagree.
    i think a man and a country can be both guilty of cowardice by giving into peer pressure.
    lets say you have a solider that refuses to serve in Iraq as a matter of conscience, who comes from a family and a place that is deeply steeped in the military, that takes guts in my view. in the same way a country that refuses to renege on its neutrality in the face of international pressure is not being a coward.


  • #19
    ynotdu
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,817 ✭✭✭ynotdu


    WakeUp wrote: »
    It was a properly functioning country
    No dispute with Your post except above,How can ANY Country be called "Properly functionig" If its leader is a dictator. a bully, an oppressor and a Murderer?
    but as i said in an earlier post that should have been for the Iraqi People to change.


  • #20
    SeanW
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,329 ✭✭✭SeanW


    Its because Ireland is Neutral, and breached the neutrality rules:

    Belligerent armies' men and material may not be transported across neutral territory.

    Our "neutrality" is a sham and most people know it.

    To really be neutral we would have to have a credible standing army, air corps, navy and so on. Swiss style. Which is why, for example, Nazi Germany decided not to invade Switzerland, because they knew they would sustain heavy losses with every able bodied man there hiding behind a rock with a rifle.

    We on the other hand have no military worth talking about, but hey, the RAF is right next door. Not that there's anything wrong with that per se, it's just not neutrality.

    BTW: I'm not sure if there's anything against Neutral countries selling goods and services to belligerants.

    https://u24.gov.ua/
    Join NAFO today:

    Help us in helping Ukraine.



  • #21
    nacho libre
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,604 ✭✭✭✭nacho libre


    ynotdu wrote: »
    No dispute with Your post except above,How can ANY Country be called "Properly functionig" If its leader is a dictator. a bully, an oppressor and a Murderer?
    but as i said in an earlier post that should have been for the Iraqi People to change.

    well i didn't hear the above criticism levelled at countries who were run by dictators supported by the west. these country were said to be properly functioning because they had the right economic model.


  • Advertisement
  • #22
    OhNoYouDidn't
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,934 ✭✭✭OhNoYouDidn't


    BlaasForRafa wrote: »
    I always thought that fuss over the shannon stopover was over the top tbh. So what if some planes stopped here and refueled etc?, some people made it into a big deal when it just wasn't.

    Beacause it was illegal and initially kept a secret.


  • #23
    Fratton Fred
    Closed Accounts Posts: 26,567 ✭✭✭✭Fratton Fred


    WakeUp wrote: »
    It was a properly functioning country before you're lot and the British illegally invaded and occupied the place,

    no it wasn't it was a very non functioning place run by a dictator and his blood thirsty family.

    The invasion was wrong, we all know that now, but don't fall into the trap of thinking everything in Irq was rosey before hand. This is the regime that openly gassed large parts of it's population, the biggest being the 5000 Kurds killed in Halabja.
    WakeUp wrote: »
    Shame on the governments of the US & Britain.

    And Poland, Australia and Spain. But hey, we like those countries so we won't mention them.


  • #24
    ynotdu
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,817 ✭✭✭ynotdu


    nacho libre wrote: »
    in the same way a country that refuses to renege on its neutrality in the face of international pressure is not being a coward.

    See thats the Strange part,It's trying to have it both ways.
    A Country is entitled to stay neutral,but should expect to be allowed to sink if it comes under threat.
    Why should any other Army risk it's troops lives to defend a Country that will not risk its own troops?


  • #25
    karma_
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,798 ✭✭✭karma_


    Fratton Fred wrote: »
    no it wasn't it was a very non functioning place run by a dictator and his blood thirsty family.

    The invasion was wrong, we all know that now, but don't fall into the trap of thinking everything in Irq was rosey before hand. This is the regime that openly gassed large parts of it's population, the biggest being the 5000 Kurds killed in Halabja.



    And Poland, Australia and Spain. But hey, we like those countries so we won't mention them.

    Invaded by a country that once dropped 2 nukes on 2 civilian cities.


  • #26
    karma_
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,798 ✭✭✭karma_


    ynotdu wrote: »
    See thats the Strange part,It's trying to have it both ways.
    A Country is entitled to stay neutral,but should expect to be allowed to sink if it comes under threat.
    Why should any other Army risk it's troops lives to defend a Country that will not risk its own troops?

    Who is Ireland under threat from?


  • #27
    ynotdu
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,817 ✭✭✭ynotdu


    nacho libre wrote: »
    well i didn't hear the above criticism levelled at countries who were run by dictators supported by the west. these country were said to be properly functioning because they had the right economic model.

    No but supporting Dictators has come right back and bit the west right on the Ass


  • #28
    ynotdu
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,817 ✭✭✭ynotdu


    karma_ wrote: »
    Who is Ireland under threat from?

    I don't know,I have not got a chrystal ball.


  • #29
    OhNoYouDidn't
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,934 ✭✭✭OhNoYouDidn't


    ynotdu wrote: »
    I don't know,I have not got a chrystal ball.

    The point he was making is we have not asked anyone to come to our aid and EU aside, were never part of any arrangement requesting same.

    So, yes, you are right.


  • #30
    Fratton Fred
    Closed Accounts Posts: 26,567 ✭✭✭✭Fratton Fred


    karma_ wrote: »
    Invaded by a country that once dropped 2 nukes on 2 civilian cities.

    what's your point? I said we now know the invasion was wrong.

    I supported it at the time, but I'll admit, i was sold on the whole making the place better spin, which it obviously didn't.

    If you going to criticise though, I think a special mention needs to be made of those people killed the largest amount of people, those people who think bombing a market place makes the world a better pklace to live in. I mean, what is that supposed to be other than pure sectarian cold blooded murder.


  • Advertisement
  • #31
    BluePlanet
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,444 ✭✭✭BluePlanet


    Oh yeah, you see it was all worth it because of "Halabja", which of course, took place in 1988, just a few years prior to the glorious US troops invaded, and while Uncle Sam was busy supporting Saddam.

    Gotta love the rationalisations of American apologists.
    Let's see:

    Halabja (est 5000 dead) = Genocide

    Hirohshima (est 90,000–166,000 dead) = "saving lives"
    Nagasaki (est 60,000–80,000 dead) = "saving more lives"

    :rolleyes:


Advertisement