Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 12/14/2003 1:09:34 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/14/2003 1:23:09 PM EDT by norman74]
It strikes me that the capture of "saddam" isn't really going to have any impact on the local insurgents in iraq. It would seem to me that while there may be (or have been) a small contingent that were saddam loyalists, the majority are likely simply muslims who don't like the infidel taking over their country.
So, do you think bagging "saddam" will change one thing about what's going on overe there? What do the so-called "insurgents" really want?
Link Posted: 12/14/2003 1:18:00 PM EDT
1. Removing all Westerners and all of western culture out of the middle east. 2. Set themselves up as the next dictator of Iraq.
Link Posted: 12/14/2003 1:21:33 PM EDT
They want power. They only model they have to reference for obtaining power is via terror, it has been that way for thousands of years, El Coward al Tikriti was just the latest in a long line of brutal leaders. If they can keep doing their hit and runs until we pull out of Iraq, then they will be able to claim they fought off the infidels when El Coward al Tikriti failed.
Link Posted: 12/14/2003 1:21:45 PM EDT
Originally Posted By ArmdLbrl: 1. Removing all Westerners and all of western culture out of the middle east. 2. Set themselves up as the next dictator of Iraq.
View Quote
Number 1 above was my first thought. How would you feel if Canada had invaded and driven Clinton out of the white house? How about six months later when they decree that you may keep one firearm per household? They want us out, and I don't see that I'd feel much differently if it were me.
Link Posted: 12/14/2003 1:35:23 PM EDT
21 virgins! Tj
Link Posted: 12/14/2003 1:56:07 PM EDT
I believe most of them simply want, what they consider to be a foreign invader out of their homeland. If a muslum country invaded the US, captured our president, then tried to convert us to their way of life, what would you want?
Link Posted: 12/14/2003 2:15:36 PM EDT
Considering many of the "insurgants" are turning out to be Syrian/Iranian/Palestinian... I think it'll take a while for things to calm down.
Link Posted: 12/14/2003 2:25:37 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/14/2003 2:27:39 PM EDT by bigsapper]
My take is that the "foreign" insurgents are going to melt back across the border. The writings on the wall for them and we'll probably get some good poop from SH that will at least allow us to make major confiscations of weapons and money. They'll certainly be less motivated. The Iraqi "dead-enders" will probably continue but I believe they'll be considerably less effective (see above). There may be new threats internally, wrt: control of power and/or paybacks coming to fruition. All IMHO.
Link Posted: 12/14/2003 2:42:10 PM EDT
Originally Posted By CITADELGRAD87:
Originally Posted By ArmdLbrl: 1. Removing all Westerners and all of western culture out of the middle east. 2. Set themselves up as the next dictator of Iraq.
View Quote
Number 1 above was my first thought. How would you feel if Canada had invaded and driven Clinton out of the white house? How about six months later when they decree that you may keep one firearm per household? They want us out, and I don't see that I'd feel much differently if it were me.
View Quote
If a Clinton like person got in office and then stopped elections, truly eliminated all Constitutional principles, started killing people left and right and did this for years I would welcome Canada invading and fight alongside them. Lets compare apples with apples.
Link Posted: 12/14/2003 3:58:06 PM EDT
Originally Posted By sherrick13:
Originally Posted By CITADELGRAD87:
Originally Posted By ArmdLbrl: 1. Removing all Westerners and all of western culture out of the middle east. 2. Set themselves up as the next dictator of Iraq.
View Quote
Number 1 above was my first thought. How would you feel if Canada had invaded and driven Clinton out of the white house? How about six months later when they decree that you may keep one firearm per household? They want us out, and I don't see that I'd feel much differently if it were me.
View Quote
If a Clinton like person got in office and then stopped elections, truly eliminated all Constitutional principles, started killing people left and right and did this for years I would welcome Canada invading and fight alongside them. Lets compare apples with apples.
View Quote
Kindly reread the part where I ask how you'd feel SIX MONTHS LATER, when they are still here. We are still there, telling honest Iraqui citizens thay may have only one weapon per household, setting curfews, selecting who may be in the higher echilons of government. Clinton is a known American who is unpopular with constitutionalists, among others. I never implied he was a moral or other equivalent of Hussein, in fact, his identity is irelevant. It's that part where the invading neighbor won't leave that is galling them, as was made clear in my first post.
Link Posted: 12/14/2003 4:41:36 PM EDT
Originally Posted By CITADELGRAD87:
Originally Posted By sherrick13:
Originally Posted By CITADELGRAD87:
Originally Posted By ArmdLbrl: 1. Removing all Westerners and all of western culture out of the middle east. 2. Set themselves up as the next dictator of Iraq.
View Quote
Number 1 above was my first thought. How would you feel if Canada had invaded and driven Clinton out of the white house? How about six months later when they decree that you may keep one firearm per household? They want us out, and I don't see that I'd feel much differently if it were me.
View Quote
If a Clinton like person got in office and then stopped elections, truly eliminated all Constitutional principles, started killing people left and right and did this for years I would welcome Canada invading and fight alongside them. Lets compare apples with apples.
View Quote
Kindly reread the part where I ask how you'd feel SIX MONTHS LATER, when they are still here. We are still there, telling honest Iraqui citizens thay may have only one weapon per household, setting curfews, selecting who may be in the higher echilons of government. Clinton is a known American who is unpopular with constitutionalists, among others. I never implied he was a moral or other equivalent of Hussein, in fact, his identity is irelevant. It's that part where the invading neighbor won't leave that is galling them, as was made clear in my first post.
View Quote
It doesn't really make good sense to invade a country & then leave before you've got a friendly gov't set up in place of the one you toppled. Capturing "saddam" was the first step towards that. I see it as a good thing in general. Unfortunately, I think that the insurgents will remain an excuse to keep our troops in Iraq even after we have established a puppet gov't.
Link Posted: 12/14/2003 5:05:20 PM EDT
Saddam's capture may have little direct effect on the insurgents fighting coalition forces. What the capture will have an effect on is the willingness of some portion of the Iraqi population to cooperate with coalition troops in putting down the insurgency and establishing an Iraqi government now that they know Saddam and his sons won't be back.
Top Top