Casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan

Military News and current conflicts. Middle East, Iraq, Afghanistan, etc.
lwd
Senior Member
Posts: 3810
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 2:15 am
Location: Southfield, USA

Re: Casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan

Postby lwd » Wed Dec 09, 2009 1:55 am

Just realized we have reversed the normal order of things. Normally it's a WWII or historical topic that gets off topic into modern matters now we're talking WWII in a topic on Iraq and Afghanistan .... :)

User avatar
Karl Heidenreich
Senior Member
Posts: 4808
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2006 3:19 pm
Location: San José, Costa Rica
Contact:

Re: Casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan

Postby Karl Heidenreich » Wed Dec 09, 2009 2:14 am

Because they didn't commit any. Got a hard question?


Wrong: according to the allied standards they commit war crimes.
An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.
Sir Winston Churchill

User avatar
Karl Heidenreich
Senior Member
Posts: 4808
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2006 3:19 pm
Location: San José, Costa Rica
Contact:

Re: Casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan

Postby Karl Heidenreich » Wed Dec 09, 2009 2:16 am

The process was hardly perfect on the other hand there were some very important and beneficial aspects of it. And yes it actually achieved a fairly reasonable level of justice.


Indeed. You seem to justify anything that suits you at the moment, which is what upsets me: things you even belief youself if you are half the inteligent guy I think you are. Let´s see: Doenitz punishment, for starters.
An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.
Sir Winston Churchill

User avatar
Karl Heidenreich
Senior Member
Posts: 4808
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2006 3:19 pm
Location: San José, Costa Rica
Contact:

Re: Casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan

Postby Karl Heidenreich » Wed Dec 09, 2009 2:18 am

What direct question? The fact that you want to focus on a very narrow set of data and make your call on that hardly obliges me to do the same.


You know very well what I´m refering to. Again: I question your positions but not your inteligence; be fair and accept it.
An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.
Sir Winston Churchill

User avatar
Karl Heidenreich
Senior Member
Posts: 4808
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2006 3:19 pm
Location: San José, Costa Rica
Contact:

Re: Casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan

Postby Karl Heidenreich » Wed Dec 09, 2009 2:20 am

Just realized we have reversed the normal order of things. Normally it's a WWII or historical topic that gets off topic into modern matters now we're talking WWII in a topic on Iraq and Afghanistan .... :)


Right! We got diverted ourselves. Bottom line: fighting the way the US is doing you are going to lose. And believe me: I don´t wanna you people to lose, it makes the world a more dangerous place and some idiots, like Hugo Chavez, can start thinking they have a chance of being Banana Republic Napoleons.
An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.
Sir Winston Churchill

User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7490
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: Casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan

Postby RF » Wed Dec 09, 2009 9:11 am

lwd wrote:
Geobbels was hardly a pinoeer in that field. Look for instance at some of the US newspapers in the 19th century. However the above defintion of spin is similar to the one I'm familiar with and your use of it doesn't seem to fit.


No, Geobbels was the true pioneer of political propaganda as a concerted Governmental campaign. Prior press campaigns couldn't hold a candle to the efforts of the totalitarian state.

Living in Britain and not the USA I would say spin is an exact description. Our beloved Labour Government does everything by spin, you couldn't get an honest word out of them. And the opposition Conservative Party and the Liberal Democrats are exactly the same, it is always the line to take, not what they really think. It is no doubt all part of the political correctness paradigm, just like ''climate change'' and the self glorification of the EU - which we Brits are all paying for (and yes, they don't tell us that either).
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.

lwd
Senior Member
Posts: 3810
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 2:15 am
Location: Southfield, USA

Re: Casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan

Postby lwd » Wed Dec 09, 2009 4:07 pm

Karl Heidenreich wrote:
Because they didn't commit any. Got a hard question?

Wrong: according to the allied standards they commit war crimes.

How so? Exactly what war crimes did they commit?

lwd
Senior Member
Posts: 3810
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 2:15 am
Location: Southfield, USA

Re: Casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan

Postby lwd » Wed Dec 09, 2009 4:14 pm

RF wrote:
lwd wrote:
Geobbels was hardly a pinoeer in that field. Look for instance at some of the US newspapers in the 19th century. However the above defintion of spin is similar to the one I'm familiar with and your use of it doesn't seem to fit.


No, Geobbels was the true pioneer of political propaganda as a concerted Governmental campaign. Prior press campaigns couldn't hold a candle to the efforts of the totalitarian state.

Not sure I agree with that. In any case the above hardly makes him a pioneer in the use of propaganda technicques. It might make him the pioneer as far as government applications of them but even then it's a pretty old field. Indeed rhetoric as practiced by the Romans was basically applied propaganda. Geobble just had modern technology to back him. Certainly he made "contributions" in the field but I'm not at all sure I'd consider him a pioneer expccept perhaps in the use of modern technology to the field. Even there he had some competition for example the Nazi's produced Triumph of the Will but the Soviets produced films like Alexander Nevski

User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7490
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: Casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan

Postby RF » Wed Dec 09, 2009 7:43 pm

lwd, I think we will have to agree to disagree. I write from a British (and English) perspective, where our political culture is different from that of the US.

Here the Third Reich is held as the paradigm of evil, the prototype totalitarian state, more so than the USSR, basically because it was on our European doorstep.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.

User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7490
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: Casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan

Postby RF » Wed Dec 30, 2009 10:38 am

lwd wrote:
RF wrote:The issue I have with Iraq and Afghanistan is over why Allied forces are still being involved there. WW2 and Vietnam were conflicts fought for a specific, defined purpose. These current conflicts are being conducted, but for what actual strategic purpose?

To leave behind a reasonably stable government unlikely to align with terrorist. I thought that was obvious.
[quote]

Last night I read a press report in the Wolverhampton Express and Star on local British soldiers serving in Helmand province. The report carries a detailed account of the military situation in the area, the main focus is on the heavily armed local tribes that inhabit the area and their main source of income - drugs.
The view of the soldiers is that these tribes want to get on with controlling their own areas, don't want foreign troops there and don't pose any threat to the UK or the USA. Nowhere in this report is Al Qaeda or terrorism mentioned.
Their view is that Afghanistan is now as stable as it ever can be, that there is no possibility of Afghanistan becoming a western democracy.

So we are back to the basic question - why are we there?

It certainly didn't stop some Nigerian fundamentalist from trying to blow up a plane in the US last week. Does it mean we now have to go into Nigeria to give them a stable government?

Are we fighting the right war?
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.

lwd
Senior Member
Posts: 3810
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 2:15 am
Location: Southfield, USA

Re: Casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan

Postby lwd » Wed Dec 30, 2009 3:42 pm

RF wrote: ...Last night I read a press report in the Wolverhampton Express and Star on local British soldiers serving in Helmand province. The report carries a detailed account of the military situation in the area, the main focus is on the heavily armed local tribes that inhabit the area and their main source of income - drugs.
The view of the soldiers is that these tribes want to get on with controlling their own areas, don't want foreign troops there and don't pose any threat to the UK or the USA. Nowhere in this report is Al Qaeda or terrorism mentioned.
Their view is that Afghanistan is now as stable as it ever can be, that there is no possibility of Afghanistan becoming a western democracy.

So we are back to the basic question - why are we there?

It certainly didn't stop some Nigerian fundamentalist from trying to blow up a plane in the US last week. Does it mean we now have to go into Nigeria to give them a stable government?

Are we fighting the right war?


At this point it's really two interconnected things. Drugs and Islamic fantatics. While Al Qaeda has been pushed well into the background the Taliban hasn't and drugs are both a source of income for them and a threat to much of the rest of the world. Now the drug problem could perhpas be handled in other ways but they don't seem to be politically acceptable right now so ....

User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7490
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: Casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan

Postby RF » Mon Jan 04, 2010 10:13 am

This is it. Are we fighting the right war?
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.

lwd
Senior Member
Posts: 3810
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 2:15 am
Location: Southfield, USA

Re: Casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan

Postby lwd » Mon Jan 04, 2010 5:23 pm

Afghanistan was clearly the right war when we went in. Not sure there's been an easy way out since then.

yellowtail3
Senior Member
Posts: 408
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2009 5:50 pm
Location: North Carolina, USA

Re: Casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan

Postby yellowtail3 » Mon Jan 04, 2010 5:28 pm

RF wrote:Here the Third Reich is held as the paradigm of evil, the prototype totalitarian state, more so than the USSR, basically because it was on our European doorstep.

A reasonable perspective, I'd say, given the evils perpetrated by the Nazis.
Shift Colors... underway.

User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7490
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: Casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan

Postby RF » Mon Jan 04, 2010 6:45 pm

lwd wrote:Afghanistan was clearly the right war when we went in. Not sure there's been an easy way out since then.


So was Iraq - at the time of Desert Storm.

The problem is, as the Chilcott enquiry currently undergoing in Britain is establishing, that there was no detailed planning into what to do immediately victory was achieved, to determine the exit strategy. That was the fault of both Presidents Bush - failure to properly finish the job, and indeed, to properly identify the purpose of the job let alone the how.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.


Return to “Military Conflicts Today”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest