Life During Wartime : We Need More Troops!

Political cartoon by Joshua Brown / Historians Against the War / The Rag Blog

Thanks to Dr. S.R. Keister /The Rag Blog

This entry was posted in Rag Bloggers and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

13 Responses to Life During Wartime : We Need More Troops!

  1. masterspork says:

    It worked in Iraq in going after the insurgents, why would it not work in Afghanistan. Afghanistan needed additional troops and resources there for a few years now, but Iraq was the more immediate concern until recently.

  2. Richard says:

    If it worked in Iraq, why didn’t win.

  3. masterspork says:

    We are winning there, that is why thing are much better compared to 5 years ago.

  4. Richard says:

    Eight years ago the Iraqis had water, electric, and health care.

  5. masterspork says:

    Eight years ago they where in fear of Saddam and not every group had all their needs met like the Kurds and Shiites. Also there was fear of attacks from Saddam too, why do you think the UN had a no-flyzone on the North and South of the country.

    Also as of June 2009, the population did have all those things. Heath care is still working with limited personal. Also the Surge was started in 2007 so one needs to look at that point on to see how it affected Iraq and why it can help Afghanistan.

  6. richard jehn says:

    MS, your facts are just wrong, but that’s no surprise given your political perspective. If you started reading real news instead of watching Fox, you might be a little better informed.

  7. masterspork says:

    Care to bring anything more then one liners, beacuase my statments hold to questioning. I just wonder why you have not posted anything to counter this.

  8. richard jehn says:

    We’ve posted numerous articles on this blog about the state of Iraqi society. You remarking that health care is working is ludicrous – ask an Iraqi the next time you are there is their health care system is on a par with what existed prior to 2003. There are numerous resources that document this fact, starting with the International Red Cross.

    Here is a relatively recent article that discusses the state of the “victory” in Iraq.

    Please be certain your facts are good before spouting here. What you do is grossly counterproductive. Big surprise from the reactionary right wing !!

  9. masterspork says:

    Re-read my post because I do not remember using ludicrous to describe it. They have access to heathcare despite the IEDs and bombings. As far as asking a Iraqi it is all about who was in favor with Saddam, if you where in favor life was good if not it was not. Also I on my tour I had yet to meet one person that was sad that he was gone. Do you have a link for the red cross?

    That post deserves a reply of it’s own when I have more time then I do now. But one thing I want to go after is that somehow things where stable(aka better off) with Saddam. But it has the feel of the collapses Yugoslavia after Tito’s death. A event that lead to bloodshed with out any help from us. I cannot imagine that Iraq would have avoid a fact if Saddam died a natural death.

    http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/51216/aleksa-djilas/tito-s-last-secret-how-did-he-keep-the-yugoslavs-together

    I am certain of my facts, also once again it is easy to say what is best when you do not have to deal with the problems the area faces. But then again there is the crowed that things that anything the military does is wrong no matter what.

  10. richard jehn says:

    Whenever one nation invades another, regardless of the rationale employed, it is wrong and prohibited under international law – that you will never circumvent, MS, although you have made it abundantly clear that you do not believe the US is obligated to obey its commitments to international law. It is not that the military is wrong in the sense of you and your peers having just followed orders; rather, the military is wrong insofar as you did not throw down your arms when asked to do something that was morally and legally unjustifiable. [FWIW, another ludicrous moment came when someone chose to call the agency of our imperial military the “Department of Defense.” This nation does not really “defend” anymore (if it ever did) it offends.]

    You are now rationalizing and defending something that always was indefensible. Why you would want to do so eludes me.

    And I will repeat what I said previously – for you to suggest that the health care system is working in Iraq today is ludicrous. There is inadequate funding, too few medical professionals, insufficient funding, and inferior facilities, all a consequence of the US invasion and pre-war economic embargo and nothing else. And health care in Iraq pre-2003 was NOT reserved for the elite and Saddam’s buddies. That is another myth, at which the reactionary right-wing, fear-mongering hordes are so adept.

    Own up to the fallacies of your position – the US should never have invaded (which will probably never be admitted), we owe billions in war reparations (which will probably never be paid), we diminished our world reputation permanently (which will also never be acknowledged), and (as an aside) the US is fundamentally bankrupt, largely as a consequence of Junior’s folly.

    Do me a favour and quit spouting your nonsense here.

  11. masterspork says:

    Except that the Gulf War ended in a 1991 was ended in a cease fire that Saddam did not honor the agreements according to the UN in 2002. The war was stopped on the assumption that these things would be honored, they were not so it is as the war never ended. It is also the reason that the Korean War is still considered ‘active’ even though there is no fighting because it too was haled by a cease fire that was never followed up by a peace treaty. That is why it was not seen illegal as far as international law goes.

    Also why would I throw down my arms or not deploy when being simply sent there is not a violation. It is how a person acts that determines if there was anything criminal done. Because that is still what is used to judge a person.

    I never said that the Iraqi healthcare did not have issues, but it is there. For what it has and lacks it makes due. But these are the problems that we are trying to help. I remember earlier this year where the Iranian pilgrims where attacked and I was helping with a medical ‘care package’ of supplies to be sent to the area. Seems that the Iraqi civilian hospital only requested supplies and not medical personal to help. It is not the issue of not having health care, but the cost. Something that the Iraqi people will have to face. Once again, how you lived all depended if you where on friendly terms with Saddam and his party. If that was the case that Saddam had universal health care for everyone, then why do you think that the country was so sharply divided on their opinion of him? Also as far as the embargo, I would like you to consider why they where put there in the first place and by who. It was the same group that wanted to put even more sanctions if we had not gone to war.

    In my opinion we should not have gone with Afghanistan going on, but despite the fact that I think that going there when we did was unwise, it was not illegal. We have been putting in billions in fixing, repairing and improving the conditions in Iraq. That is what my unit was sent there to do. Also for good or bad nothing is permanent as far as a nation’s reputation. It can also be argued that regardless of if we went to war that we would have taken the economic hit because of the loan practices. The fact that the depression hit the US in 1929 when we where not at war shows that we are just as open to economic problems as in wartime.

    Nope, can’t do that. But then again no one is forcing you to reply to me. Also I have to ask a personal question what was the reason that you left Canada for the US? No sarcasm, honest.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.