Iraqi insurgents offer to halt attacks.

[Darthphere]

Sorry if this has been posted.

HERE!


What do you guys think?

 

[StorminNorman]

I am normally a very strong advocate about not pulling out until the mission is gone, but I think this is a chance we should take.

It would, however, be stupid not to leave a good amount of troops in Kuwait ready to go if the terrorists make any move to topple the government.

 

[lazur]

Who are the insurgents again? Oh yeah, NOT part of the Iraqi military or government organizations. Therefore, no deal.

 

[Darthphere]

Who are the insurgents again? Oh yeah, NOT part of the Iraqi military or government organizations. Therefore, no deal.

Doesnt surprise me.

 

[Darthphere]

I think some of their demands will never be met though so, it seems all in vain.

 

[blind_fury]

I thought we didn't negotiate with terrorists. lol!

 

[Darthphere]

I thought we didn't negotiate with terrorists. lol!

So far we dont, they made the offer.

 

[Fred_Fury]

**** no

 

[Darth Elektra]

Intresting, I may take the offer if I was Bush.

Ofcourse Bush would never though.

 

[Motown Marvel]

sounds reasonable to me. i mean, lets face it: we've been there for 3 years, we've been training iraqi police and military and helping them set up a government. this deal gives us 2 more years to continue that work. now, people say that if we set a timetable, the insurgents will just wait us out. well, isnt that what we're training iraqi police/military/government to deal with once we're gone? this gives us 2 MORE years, with LESS 'violent interruptions' from insurgents, to continue training them. and honestly, if within this 5 year time span, if iraqi police/military/government cant get their s#!t together and isnt good enough to deal with their own crap...then im sorry, we did all we could and lost many lives of our own doing it for them...they need to f**king deal with it.

 

[War Lord]

The insurgents might only be offering a truce in order to gather their forces because they're spent.

I'd prefer to beat them once and for all.

 

[Motown Marvel]

The insurgents might only be offering a truce in order to gather their forces because they're spent.

I'd prefer to beat them once and for all.

thats defenitely possible, and im sure thats how bush will spin it. but heres an offer at potential peace. i say we take it. spend the next 2 more peaceful years there training iraqis and helping them rebuild. and if it turns out the insugents were lying....then the iraqis are trained, the government is set up....its their turn for them to deal with it now. its their country. we're getting closer to 3,000 US soldiers who died for iraq....its time iraq starts being responsible. and if they want their country to be free bad enough, then they'll fight for it. they should have plenty of enough troops trained and good to go in this whole 5 year span.

 

[War Lord]

thats defenitely possible, and im sure thats how bush will spin it. but heres an offer at potential peace. i say we take it. spend the next 2 more peaceful years there training iraqis and helping them rebuild. and if it turns out the insugents were lying....then the iraqis are trained, the government is set up....its their turn for them to deal with it now. its their country. we're getting closer to 3,000 US soldiers who died for iraq....its time iraq starts being responsible. and if they want their country to be free bad enough, then they'll fight for it. they should have plenty of enough troops trained and good to go in this whole 5 year span.

If there was a serious offer of peace, than it should be looked at. However, history will tell you that it's more likely a way for them to gather their forces and plan a renewal to overthrow the the Iraqi government so the insurgents can then impose their will upon the Iraqi people.

3,000 people over three years is hardly worth worrying about. During WWI and WWII, the big battles cost 30,000 lives or even 300,000 lives within weeks.

 

[Corinthian™]

If there was a serious offer of peace, than it should be looked at. However, history will tell you that it's more likely a way for them to gather their forces and plan a renewal to overthrow the the Iraqi government so the insurgents can then impose their will upon the Iraqi people.

3,000 people over three years is hardly worth worrying about. During WWI and WWII, the big battles cost 30,000 lives or even 300,000 lives within weeks.

just like america did?

overthrowing their goverment to impose their will upon Iraqui people


and wait..... isn't that what the history have thought us?

Didn't the french overthrew their imperialistic goverment to impose their will upon france?

and didn't the Americans overthrew the Britanic rule over the colonies in America to impose their will?


and didn't....


so on and so forth



It's called revolution

 

[Motown Marvel]

If there was a serious offer of peace, than it should be looked at. However, history will tell you that it's more likely a way for them to gather their forces and plan a renewal to overthrow the the Iraqi government so the insurgents can then impose their will upon the Iraqi people.

listen, i know beore we even get into this we're not gonna agree, and honestly, im not in the mood to really get into it. but you got your opinion, and thats cool. and im sure thats how bush is gonna deal with it. and i got my opinion of how i think it should be handled. so yeah, we both laid it out...i dont feel like debating right now.

3,000 people over three years is hardly worth worrying about. During WWI and WWII, the big battles cost 30,000 lives or even 300,000 lives within weeks.

hardly worth worrying about? thats an incredibly cold hearted thing to say. 3000 human lives....gone. i dont care about comparisons to other wars. this is 3000 human beings who no longer exist. who do not get to go home to their families. who do not get to experience a full life. 3000 lives who no longer get to laugh at jokes, be entertained by a movie, make love to their signifigant other, or all together experience the joys of a decent life. going into the military, they knew it was possible they'd not come home, but they decided to stand up for their country regardless. they decided they're willing to make that sacrafice for the citizens of the united states, yourself included. and when even ONE of those soldiers die, well excuse me, but its f**king something to worry about.

 

[War Lord]

hardly worth worrying about? thats an incredibly cold hearted thing to say. 3000 human lives....gone. i dont care about comparisons to other wars. this is 3000 human beings who no longer exist. who do not get to go home to their families. who do not get to experience a full life. 3000 lives who no longer get to laugh at jokes, be entertained by a movie, make love to their signifigant other, or all together experience the joys of a decent life. going into the military, they knew it was possible they'd not come home, but they decided to stand up for their country regardless. they decided they're willing to make that sacrafice for the citizens of the united states, yourself included. and when even ONE of those soldiers die, well excuse me, but its f**king something to worry about.

They died in a war zone, so it's kind of expected. Better for them to die over their battling the terrorists and insurgents than on our soil battling the terrorists and insurgents.

 

[Motown Marvel]

They died in a war zone, so it's kind of expected. Better for them to die over their battling the terrorists and insurgents than on our soil battling the terrorists and insurgents.

expected or not, when 3000 people are f**king dead, you do not sit back and say "well, thats hardly worth worrying about.", especially when you're in a position that could result in either a potential peace or at least a situation where you can allow the iraqi's to start taking care of their own s#!t, like they should be doing in 2 years time, so we're not looking at loosing another 3,000 troops!

regardless, within 2 years time, theres no reason why the iraqi's shouldnt be controlling the country, insurgents or no insurgets. so, we can either spend those 2 years helping them while dealing with insurgent attacks everyday, which result in more military losses...OR, we can help them with signifigantly less insurgent attacks to worry about.

 

[deemar325]

I say f**k that! This relates to me more than most and even though it would mean more of my fellows troops have to stay in that hell hole of a land, it ludachris to even think of making a deal with these scumbags.


You can trust them, their demands clearly states their motives, they want to stop the ban on former Bathiest from participating in the new government and allow former military leaders from Saddam's regime the chance to participate in the new military structure.


What the F**K! does that sound like to all of you 'simps' who think we should take the deal?

It's these scumbags' way of gaining power after we leave and starting the whole cycle over again. Anyone who thinks we should even consider it is a moron.

 

[War Lord]

expected or not, when 3000 people are f**king dead, you do not sit back and say "well, thats hardly worth worrying about.", especially when you're in a position that could result in either a potential peace or at least a situation where you can allow the iraqi's to start taking care of their own s#!t, like they should be doing in 2 years time, so we're not looking at loosing another 3,000 troops!

regardless, within 2 years time, theres no reason why the iraqi's shouldnt be controlling the country, insurgents or no insurgets. so, we can either spend those 2 years helping them while dealing with insurgent attacks everyday, which result in more military losses...OR, we can help them with signifigantly less insurgent attacks to worry about.

For us to walk away when 3,000 soldiers have died, when Iraq is not yet secure, is to really waste their sacrifice as well as wasted the last 3 years because that would only result in Iraq falling into the Islamists hands.

The fact that they are offering a truce, means that they are losing and are now willing to beg for mercy. If they were winning, they wouldn't be offering a truce, they'd be continuing to do as they have been doing.

The best thing we can do is to push forward and get them to admit defeat, because that is the only way to win.

 

[deemar325]

Damn I agree with War Lord? I need to rethink this.

 

[deemar325]

For us to walk away when 3,000 soldiers have died, when Iraq is not yet secure, is to really waste their sacrifice as well as wasted the last 3 years because that would only result in Iraq falling into the Islamists hands.

The fact that they are offering a truce, means that they are losing and are now willing to beg for mercy.

The best thing we can do is to push forward and get them to admit defeat, because that is the only way to win.

That is exactly whats happening, it a sign of weakness on their part to even offer a deal albeit one with sinister motives. I've dealt with these f**ks before and you can't trust them, you can barely trust the so-called friendlies.

 

[War Lord]

Damn I agree with War Lord? I need to rethink this.

Even two atoms bouncing about in a world sized container, have to meet each other eventually.

 

[deemar325]

Even two atoms bouncing about in a world sized container, have to meet each other eventually.

You may speak the truth, but usually I hate your guts. Except on this issue.

 

[War Lord]

You may speak the truth, but usually I hate your guts. Except on this issue.

Truth = War Lord.
War Lord = Truth.

I don't expect to be loved.

 

[deemar325]

Love is not the answer.


Why do people think that it is?