Bush addresses the world- Pending War

[Coney]

Originally posted by Dúnedain
Actually, imo, if Saddam were dead I think these other people would try and run things, because they have been with him since the beginning of his reign. So they have just as much vested interest in things, so I wouldn't really put it past them to step-up and continue forward...

I think you're right......and I'm sure that Saddam would have made provisions for such a possibility.........after-all, he couldn't have had such a demonic hold on his country alone.

(In fact, I've often wondered if Saddam hasn't just been a figurehead of his govt. for the last decade-or-so).

[Coney]

Originally posted by Gwaimir Windgem
Yes, I was just wondering why everyone sticks a at the end of every line on this thread.

Oldest trick in the political debator's book.............avoid eye contact

[HOBBIT]

Well, the war has not been as painless as advertised. The president and media played it out to be a very fast war - lasting at most a couple days, that the Iraqi's would surrender almost immediately. I've lost count, but there have been about 5 helicopters down. And lots more casualties than expected. They are still meeting resistance...But you can't blame them for defending their home.

[Lief Erikson]

Originally posted by Coney
I think you're right......and I'm sure that Saddam would have made provisions for such a possibility.........after-all, he couldn't have had such a demonic hold on his country alone.

(In fact, I've often wondered if Saddam hasn't just been a figurehead of his govt. for the last decade-or-so).

Considering the ruthless hold he has always kept on everyone and everything in his country, it seems a bit unlikely. A bit out of character also for him to make such a slip.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Coney
I don't recall stating how anyone was fighting ...... the war is not won yet.

That was my point.........if Saddam is dead, there are still others who are willing to take his place as leader(s) of the Iraq' armed forces

I don't really understand why you would think the government WOULDN"T continue to fight. They've been trying to mobolise the citizenry and haven't managed to yet. They threatened that there would be 10's of thousands waiting to perform suicide attacks on US troops, they've said there were millions of civilians rising up and prepared to fight - yet so far nothing. The government of Iraq is in it's last breath and is just desperate trying to get the citizens to rise up.

I was talking about the military/government of Iraq escaping/surrendering.....not the civilians

In order for them to TRULY be patriotic - then the citizens would have to be rising up. The Republican Guard would fight because they're the most loyal - the rest of the militia seems to fight from fear of Hussein. The armed forces fighting has nothing to do with patriotism.

[Coney]

Originally posted by Lief Erikson
Considering the ruthless hold he has always kept on everyone and everything in his country, it seems a bit unlikely. A bit out of character also for him to make such a slip.

You don't think he had a whole network of people ranging from his family to militia?

And you think that he knew exactly what every part of his network were doing at all times??

I'm sure that he passed the buck of many of the responsibilitis of running Iraq to many of his 'trusted' people on various occasions.

One man cannot rule a country through terror.........

[Lief Erikson]

Originally posted by HOBBIT
Well, the war has not been as painless as advertised. The president and media played it out to be a very fast war - lasting at most a couple days, that the Iraqi's would surrender almost immediately. I've lost count, but there have been about 5 helicopters down. And lots more casualties than expected. They are still meeting resistance...But you can't blame them for defending their home.

From the beginning to the end, Pres. Bush has always said that the war could be long and probably won't be easy. Some officials did say that the war would be short, but they were never supported by the president or the Pentagon. This isn't the Taliban we're dealing with; this country is a lot larger and better equipped. The war with the Taliban wasn't over in two days, so it's insane for anyone to think that this war would be. The war has so far only been going on for a tiny amount of time in comparison with all wars but the war with Afghanistan, and the coalition has lost incredibly few people compared to previous wars. The primary casualties have all been on the Iraqi side- we've only lost about fifty people so far at most. I know that those losses are extremely sad for the families involved, and I daily pray for those families. But we have thousands and thousands of people out there fighting.

Also you might be interested in noticing that many of our casualties have been friendly fire or equipment failure.

It's really just crazy to think that this war is going at all badly for the coalition so far. If you want to be afraid of how this war is going, be afraid of the situation coming up in Baghdad. That's a situation worth being concerned about, but as yet the enemy resistance has been being crushed.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by HOBBIT
Well, the war has not been as painless as advertised. The president and media played it out to be a very fast war - lasting at most a couple days, that the Iraqi's would surrender almost immediately. I've lost count, but there have been about 5 helicopters down. And lots more casualties than expected. They are still meeting resistance...But you can't blame them for defending their home.

They NEVER said that. They said it would take weeks not months (no more than 6 months). It's been ONLY two weeks as of today. They didn't say there would be no casualties either.

[Coney]

Originally posted by jerseydevil
I don't really understand why you would think the government WOULDN"T continue to fight. They've been trying to mobolise the citizenry and haven't managed to yet. They threatened that there would be 10's of thousands waiting to perform suicide attacks on US troops, they've said there were millions of civilians rising up and prepared to fight - yet so far nothing. The government of Iraq is in it's last breath and is just desperate trying to get the citizens to rise up.

Simple, what have they got to gain if Saddam is dead? (the whole point of this part of the discussion surely?) Everything about Iraq is "Saddam is their glorious leader"......if the Coalition stopped the invasion tommorrow..........where would the Iraq' Govt be if they had to reveal that Saddam was dead?....surely they would cut their losses and run (as did the Nazi' officers post-WW2)

[Lief Erikson]

Originally posted by Coney
You don't think he had a whole network of people ranging from his family to militia?

And you think that he knew exactly what every part of his network were doing at all times??

I'm sure that he passed the buck of many of the responsibilitis of running Iraq to many of his 'trusted' people on various occasions.

One man cannot rule a country through terror.........

One man can do a heck of a lot with terror, particularly when he's ruling. He has secret police everywhere, and yes, people are afraid. Both inside his military outside. I'm not saying he's God in terms of being omniscient, but he doesn't have to be. His people have enough reason to be afraid that I strongly doubt they can effectively band together to blackmail him out of the country he rules.

The only reason he has remained ruler for as long as he has is because of this grip of terror he has upon the country. His officials would be taking a deadly risk in speaking to each other about revolt, considering Saddam's secret police. And considering what many of Saddam's people are like. He puts people in ranking positions who will do as he wants, and he can threaten or eliminate people who aren't trustworthy.

The primary way you could say that Saddam likely doesn't have complete control of his country is if you assume that there are powerful factions under him. Saddam never has and never would permit such factions; he has always consistently eliminated everyone who has been the slightest threat to his rulership.

I have to beg to differ with your final statement. One man can rule a country through terror.


However, the whole argument makes little differance one way or the other. We can't know whether Saddam's regime has been manipulating him or not, and it makes little differance either way.

[HOBBIT]

Originally posted by jerseydevil
They NEVER said that. They said it would take weeks not months (no more than 6 months). It's been ONLY two weeks as of today. They didn't say there would be no casualties either.

Yup they did. And I didn't say no casualities. It is true that already there have been more casualties than predicted - and more Iraqi resistance..

[Dúnedain]

Originally posted by jerseydevil
By the way Dúnedain, I love your flag sig.

Thank you thank you If you would like it as well, let me know and I will send you the code

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Coney
Simple, what have they got to gain if Saddam is dead? (the whole point of this part of the discussion surely?) Everything about Iraq is "Saddam is their glorious leader"......if the Coalition stopped the invasion tommorrow..........where would the Iraq' Govt be if they had to reveal that Saddam was dead?....surely they would cut their losses and run (as did the Nazi' officers post-WW2)

Because Iraq seems to think they can carry on and hang on long enough under the guise of Hussein being alive. If the US pulled out (which isn't going to happen, but they were hoping) - do you really think the government wouldn't just crack down on any uprisings and just have business as usual - even if they had to admit that Hussein was dead?

It's not about Hussein being alive in Iraq (at least as far as the government is concerned). In the long run it doesn't matter to them - just as long as they can use Hussein's image right now to keep the people from rising up. Right now hey can control the people and hope that through propaganda they may win.

[wahine]

*happy dance*

We took Baghdad airport, now we have a nice lil' thing to get supplies in! Yeehaw! *takes off pink leopard print cowboy hat and lasso's someone*

Sorry--

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by HOBBIT
Yup they did.

Nope - they didn't.

And I didn't say no casualities. It is true that already there have been more casualties than predicted

They actually never really predicted any casualities. As has been stated - most casualities have been caused by accidents.

- and more Iraqi resistance..

There was more Iraqi resistence in the south - less on the way to Baghdad. I think it has been balancing out. It was only the first weekend where their was huge resistence. Basra has been taking way longer than they thought - but overall - it hasn't been bad.

[Coney]

Originally posted by jerseydevil
It's not about Hussein being alive in Iraq (at least as far as the government is concerned). In the long run it doesn't matter to them - just as long as they can use Hussein's image right now to keep the people from rising up. Right now hey can control the people and hope that through propaganda they may win.

So why did you integrate the "is Saddam dead or alive" argument into this thread?

You really do amaze me sometimes JD......you start a discussion then contradict yourself by dismissing it

Oh well, it filled a couple of minutes in anyway...

[Lief Erikson]

Originally posted by Coney
Simple, what have they got to gain if Saddam is dead? (the whole point of this part of the discussion surely?) Everything about Iraq is "Saddam is their glorious leader"......if the Coalition stopped the invasion tommorrow..........where would the Iraq' Govt be if they had to reveal that Saddam was dead?....surely they would cut their losses and run (as did the Nazi' officers post-WW2)

They will be exposed as liars no matter what. They have stated publicly on television that the U.S. is not within a hundred miles of Baghdad, even though we're a couple hundred yards from it. They have lied and lied and lied; why should one more lie make any differance? Lies couldn't pull them out of power. If torture, ruthless brutality and all the other wicked atrocities Saddam's government has done weren't enough of a reason to get the people banding together against them, lies surely wouldn't be.

Saddam (If he's alive) or his government (If he isn't) have a hold of power right now, and they wouldn't give it up for anything. They also have nowhere to run, even if they did give up. They've committed horrible acts and have gotten every nation furious at them. It's not worth anyone's while to take them in; it would be dangerous for anyone who did.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by wahine
*happy dance*

We took Baghdad airport, now we have a nice lil' thing to get supplies in! Yeehaw! *takes off pink leopard print cowboy hat and lasso's someone*

Sorry--

Actually - we've had tons of their airports already - but this one is 10 minutes from downtown which is the best one. We can bring in tons of supplies and troops directly in and use it as a main base of operation.

[Dúnedain]

Originally posted by wahine
*happy dance*

We took Baghdad airport, now we have a nice lil' thing to get supplies in! Yeehaw! *takes off pink leopard print cowboy hat and lasso's someone*

Sorry--

*drools at the site of wahine*

Ummmm, I mean good news!

[wahine]

Thus, I brought out the PINK leopard print hat.