| Topic: |
Politics > Politics-USA |
| User: |
"Komin" |
| Date: |
02 Feb 2005 09:58:53 AM |
| Object: |
will US military stay in Iraq for the next 50 years ? |
The US military ruled Germany for over 50 years ,
will the US military stay inside Iraq for the next 50 Years ?
.
|
|
| User: "George Harrison" |
|
| Title: Re: will US military stay in Iraq for the next 50 years ? |
02 Feb 2005 10:43:02 AM |
|
|
Komin wrote:
The US military ruled Germany for over 50 years ,
will the US military stay inside Iraq for the next 50 Years ?
So far, at $300 billion for a two year stay, why not?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Byker" |
|
| Title: Re: will US military stay in Iraq for the next 50 years ? |
02 Feb 2005 01:36:26 PM |
|
|
Komin wrote:
will the US military stay inside Iraq for the next 50 Years ?
Not if we pull out and turn it into radioactive glass...
.
|
|
|
| User: "Francis1234" |
|
| Title: Re: will US military stay in Iraq for the next 50 years ? |
02 Feb 2005 07:30:47 PM |
|
|
Before thaat happens it'll be Burn Washington Burn.
"Byker" <byker@do~rag.net> wrote in message
news:_Y9Md.7278$Ix.47@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
Komin wrote:
will the US military stay inside Iraq for the next 50 Years ?
Not if we pull out and turn it into radioactive glass...
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "rein" |
|
| Title: Re: will US military stay in Iraq for the next 50 years ? |
02 Feb 2005 03:04:22 PM |
|
|
We will stay until the oil runs out - And not one minute longer!
"Byker" <byker@do~rag.net> wrote in message
news:_Y9Md.7278$Ix.47@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
Komin wrote:
will the US military stay inside Iraq for the next 50 Years ?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Z" |
|
| Title: Re: will US military stay in Iraq for the next 50 years ? |
02 Feb 2005 06:58:58 PM |
|
|
The Presidents exit plan is & has been to stay until the Iraqi can be
trained protect themselves or the Iraqi government asks us to leave.
Is that too complicated to understand?
We did not steal the Kuwaiti naural resources, we could have. We liberated
them & the we left.
The same in Germany, Japan, France, Italy, China, & in Iraq soon..
Z
"rein" <rhermesh@shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:qfbMd.253030$8l.147374@pd7tw1no...
We will stay until the oil runs out - And not one minute longer!
"Byker" <byker@do~rag.net> wrote in message
news:_Y9Md.7278$Ix.47@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
Komin wrote:
will the US military stay inside Iraq for the next 50 Years ?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Francis1234" |
|
| Title: Re: will US military stay in Iraq for the next 50 years ? |
02 Feb 2005 07:32:53 PM |
|
|
That is what was said in Vietnam.
But the last person leaving Vietrnam was hanging on a rope ladder from a
helicopter.
"Z" <Z@freeDamn.net> wrote in message news:nMeMd.6162$s61.3972@fe07.lga...
The Presidents exit plan is & has been to stay until the Iraqi can be
trained protect themselves or the Iraqi government asks us to leave.
Is that too complicated to understand?
We did not steal the Kuwaiti naural resources, we could have. We
liberated
them & the we left.
The same in Germany, Japan, France, Italy, China, & in Iraq soon..
Z
"rein" <rhermesh@shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:qfbMd.253030$8l.147374@pd7tw1no...
We will stay until the oil runs out - And not one minute longer!
"Byker" <byker@do~rag.net> wrote in message
news:_Y9Md.7278$Ix.47@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
Komin wrote:
will the US military stay inside Iraq for the next 50 Years ?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "historymatters" |
|
| Title: Re: will US military stay in Iraq for the next 50 years ? |
02 Feb 2005 12:05:04 PM |
|
|
Komin wrote:
The US military ruled Germany for over 50 years ,
will the US military stay inside Iraq for the next 50 Years ?
Respectfully, I think you need to reexamine the accuracy of your
question. While there was an initial occupation of western Germany
divided into shared occupation zones following the surrender, by 1949
the cold war divided Germany into west and east. Konrad Adenauer, of
the Christian Democrats (CDU) became West Germany's first chancellor.
East Germany was led by Walter Ulbricht.
Before the Soviets through the East German government constructed the
Berlin Wall, Germans flooded over the border to escape into West
Germany. If you had asked any West German, at the time, whether they
appreciated the U.S. military presence in West Germany thoughout much
of the Cold War years the majority answer would have been, "you better
believe it."
In the later cold war years the answer you received was dependant on
what age group responded to the question. Younger people and students
often opposed U.S. presence. Older Germans supported it. Nevertheless,
the U.S. military presence in Germany has indeed lasted for more than
60 years, but neither West Germany nor the reunified Germany was
"ruled" by the U.S. military after 1950.
As for Iraq, I seriously doubt that we will continue to see a major
U.S. presence in Iraq for more than the current term of President Bush.
However, no one knows what the future U.S. involvement in Iraq will
entail. I certainly hope that it will not be more than 3 years, but
that's an educated guess.
John Teague
.
|
|
|
| User: "Daryl Hunt" |
|
| Title: Re: will US military stay in Iraq for the next 50 years ? |
02 Feb 2005 01:25:26 PM |
|
|
"historymatters" <historyisawesome@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1107367504.840850.112350@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
Komin wrote:
The US military ruled Germany for over 50 years ,
will the US military stay inside Iraq for the next 50 Years ?
Respectfully, I think you need to reexamine the accuracy of your
question. While there was an initial occupation of western Germany
divided into shared occupation zones following the surrender, by 1949
the cold war divided Germany into west and east. Konrad Adenauer, of
the Christian Democrats (CDU) became West Germany's first chancellor.
East Germany was led by Walter Ulbricht.
Before the Soviets through the East German government constructed the
Berlin Wall, Germans flooded over the border to escape into West
Germany. If you had asked any West German, at the time, whether they
appreciated the U.S. military presence in West Germany thoughout much
of the Cold War years the majority answer would have been, "you better
believe it."
In the later cold war years the answer you received was dependant on
what age group responded to the question. Younger people and students
often opposed U.S. presence. Older Germans supported it. Nevertheless,
the U.S. military presence in Germany has indeed lasted for more than
60 years, but neither West Germany nor the reunified Germany was
"ruled" by the U.S. military after 1950.
As for Iraq, I seriously doubt that we will continue to see a major
U.S. presence in Iraq for more than the current term of President Bush.
However, no one knows what the future U.S. involvement in Iraq will
entail. I certainly hope that it will not be more than 3 years, but
that's an educated guess.
John Teague
John, there was heavy inputs from the British and US up until about 1955
then it completely ceased due to any all fears of the Nazism being
resurrected. The only reason the US stayed while the others didn't was that
the US was the buffer against the Soviets expansionism. The West Germans
feared that more than anything else. Had that not been present, at about
1955, the US would have been asked to leave and would have done so.
.
|
|
|
| User: "historymatters" |
|
| Title: Re: will US military stay in Iraq for the next 50 years ? |
02 Feb 2005 08:40:27 PM |
|
|
Daryl Hunt wrote:
John, there was heavy inputs from the British and US up until about
1955
then it completely ceased due to any all fears of the Nazism being
resurrected. The only reason the US stayed while the others didn't
was that
the US was the buffer against the Soviets expansionism. The West
Germans
feared that more than anything else. Had that not been present, at
about
1955, the US would have been asked to leave and would have done so.
I don't disagree that, especially, the U.S. maintained a strong
political and military influence in West Germany. I was thinking
strictly in terms of the formation of the West German government.
I think it is important to note that Great Britain and, especially,
France simply did not have the economic resources to continue the
occupation, and concentrated thair efforts on reclaiming lost colonies,
leaving the primary defense of West Germany in the hands of the U.S.
I would go a step further by suggesting that had it not been for the
Soviet threat, the U.S. would have happily pulled the vast majority of
its troops out of the theatre and sent them home as they did at the end
of WWI.
John Teague
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "STOP_George" |
|
| Title: Re: will US military stay in Iraq for the next 50 years ? |
02 Feb 2005 12:50:57 PM |
|
|
I have found the first comment made by Exit Poll Coordinator, Mitofsky,
since the damning report by USCountVotes.org refuting his conclusions
that Kerry supporters were over-sampled in the 2004 exit poll. It's a
beauty!!!
update at:
<<<<Newsclip Autopsy>>>>
http://newsclipautopsy.blogspot.com/2005/01/truth-left-out-msm-fail-to-report.html
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "dapra" |
|
| Title: Re: will US military stay in Iraq for the next 50 years ? |
02 Feb 2005 02:57:33 PM |
|
|
historymatters wrote:
Komin wrote:
The US military ruled Germany for over 50 years ,
will the US military stay inside Iraq for the next 50 Years ?
Respectfully, I think you need to reexamine the accuracy of your
question. While there was an initial occupation of western Germany
divided into shared occupation zones following the surrender, by 1949
the cold war divided Germany into west and east. Konrad Adenauer, of
the Christian Democrats (CDU) became West Germany's first chancellor.
East Germany was led by Walter Ulbricht.
Before the Soviets through the East German government constructed the
Berlin Wall, Germans flooded over the border to escape into West
Germany. If you had asked any West German, at the time, whether they
appreciated the U.S. military presence in West Germany thoughout much
of the Cold War years the majority answer would have been, "you better
believe it."
In the later cold war years the answer you received was dependant on
what age group responded to the question. Younger people and students
often opposed U.S. presence. Older Germans supported it. Nevertheless,
the U.S. military presence in Germany has indeed lasted for more than
60 years, but neither West Germany nor the reunified Germany was
"ruled" by the U.S. military after 1950.
As for Iraq, I seriously doubt that we will continue to see a major
U.S. presence in Iraq for more than the current term of President Bush.
However, no one knows what the future U.S. involvement in Iraq will
entail. I certainly hope that it will not be more than 3 years, but
that's an educated guess.
I agree with your assessment of Germany. But Iraq is different.
They did not declare war on the US. They were no threat. The Cold War is
over. They had no one to fear, maybe except Israel.
Bush has different motives in Iraq than fighting 'communism' or the 'war
on terrorism'.
Short term goals;
1) Controlling of oil reserves of Iraq.
2) Establishing a neo liberal capitalist show state.
3) Take out an enemy of Israel.
Long term goals;
1) Take full control of the Gulf - the whole world economy.
2) Complete control of every corner of the World by the Corporate
Oligarchy. (Including the US, of course)
An important side benefit. Whether Bush is successful or not it will
keep the defense industry humming. Transferring taxpayers money to them.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: will US military stay in Iraq for the next 50 years ? |
02 Feb 2005 03:37:35 PM |
|
|
dapra wrote:
historymatters wrote:
Komin wrote:
The US military ruled Germany for over 50 years ,
will the US military stay inside Iraq for the next 50 Years ?
[snip]
Nevertheless,
the U.S. military presence in Germany has indeed lasted for more
than
60 years, but neither West Germany nor the reunified Germany was
"ruled" by the U.S. military after 1950.
As for Iraq, I seriously doubt that we will continue to see a major
U.S. presence in Iraq for more than the current term of President
Bush.
However, no one knows what the future U.S. involvement in Iraq will
entail. I certainly hope that it will not be more than 3 years, but
that's an educated guess.
I agree with your assessment of Germany. But Iraq is different.
They did not declare war on the US. They were no threat. The Cold War
is
over. They had no one to fear, maybe except Israel.
Bush has different motives in Iraq than fighting 'communism' or the
'war
on terrorism'.
Short term goals;
1) Controlling of oil reserves of Iraq.
Well, in the sense of having them in a western friendly nation.
2) Establishing a neo liberal capitalist show state.
I think you mighta meant a neo CONSERVATIVE show state. He
says it as being a locus of democracy, but the outcome is the same.
3) Take out an enemy of Israel.
Well, they were one of the lesser ones. But he does wish
to form a "second front" for those enemies in a political sense yes.
Long term goals;
1) Take full control of the Gulf - the whole world economy.
Again, make it western friendly, as oppose to say china
friendly.
2) Complete control of every corner of the World by the Corporate
Oligarchy. (Including the US, of course)
Oh, he inherited that one. Not that he minds of course.
An important side benefit. Whether Bush is successful or not it will
keep the defense industry humming. Transferring taxpayers money to
them.
Think what you wish, but the defense industry is having troubles
since so much of the military budget is going for non defense industry
related expenditures in Iraq. Legacy systems are doing okay,
especially
spare parts, but future systems are being chocked to death.
.
|
|
|
| User: "dapra" |
|
| Title: Re: will US military stay in Iraq for the next 50 years ? |
02 Feb 2005 04:23:38 PM |
|
|
wrote:
dapra wrote:
Bush has different motives in Iraq than fighting 'communism' or the
'war on terrorism'.
Short term goals;
1) Controlling of oil reserves of Iraq.
Well, in the sense of having them in a western friendly nation.
I'd say under US military control.
2) Establishing a neo liberal capitalist show state.
I think you mighta meant a neo CONSERVATIVE show state. He
says it as being a locus of democracy, but the outcome is the same.
The definitions are somewhat confusing. The neocons want a neo liberal
economy. No national borders, free flow of capital for the maximum
exploitation of the work force.
3) Take out an enemy of Israel.
Well, they were one of the lesser ones. But he does wish
to form a "second front" for those enemies in a political sense yes.
Long term goals;
1) Take full control of the Gulf - the whole world economy.
Again, make it western friendly, as oppose to say china
friendly.
And punish the friends if they step out of line.
2) Complete control of every corner of the World by the Corporate
Oligarchy. (Including the US, of course)
Oh, he inherited that one. Not that he minds of course.
Yeah, Clinton did a good job. But there are still renegade ones.
Venezuela, Cuba? China, Russia? What about the EU?
An important side benefit. Whether Bush is successful or not it will
keep the defense industry humming. Transferring taxpayers money to
them.
Think what you wish, but the defense industry is having troubles
since so much of the military budget is going for non defense industry
related expenditures in Iraq. Legacy systems are doing okay,
especially
spare parts, but future systems are being chocked to death.
I understand. Special forces, 'human intelligence' don't generate too
much money. But Star Wars is not dead.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: will US military stay in Iraq for the next 50 years ? |
03 Feb 2005 07:17:27 AM |
|
|
dapra wrote:
oconnell@slr.orl.lmco.com wrote:
dapra wrote:
Bush has different motives in Iraq than fighting 'communism' or the
'war on terrorism'.
Short term goals;
1) Controlling of oil reserves of Iraq.
Well, in the sense of having them in a western friendly nation.
I'd say under US military control.
Nah, hard to generate profits that way. The DoD draws off
too much of the profit. And it places congress in a position
to meddle. Bush/Cheney only have 4 more years and they want
access to those profits ALOT longer than that.
2) Establishing a neo liberal capitalist show state.
I think you mighta meant a neo CONSERVATIVE show state. He
says it as being a locus of democracy, but the outcome is the same.
The definitions are somewhat confusing. The neocons want a neo
liberal
economy. No national borders, free flow of capital for the maximum
exploitation of the work force.
But they want international borders, if you'll excuse the pun.
They want borders between those playing the game, and those not.
[snip]
Long term goals;
1) Take full control of the Gulf - the whole world economy.
Again, make it western friendly, as oppose to say china
friendly.
And punish the friends if they step out of line.
Actually, that is the one place they have planned the worst.
Bush/Cheney only have 4 more years. We'll probably be stuck
there at least that long. After they leave office, ain't no
one gonna go down that path again. Even if Iraq goes feudal
again, no one is going to go back. I like to joke that
the new ambassador to Iraq should ensure there's a good
helipad on top of the embassy. We may need it soon.
[snip]> >>An important side benefit. Whether Bush is successful or not
it will
keep the defense industry humming. Transferring taxpayers money to
them.
Think what you wish, but the defense industry is having troubles
since so much of the military budget is going for non defense
industry
related expenditures in Iraq. Legacy systems are doing okay,
especially
spare parts, but future systems are being chocked to death.
I understand. Special forces, 'human intelligence' don't generate too
much money. But Star Wars is not dead.
Almost nothing ever dies in DoD. But the funding level for
Star Wars is a mere shadow of its hay day. There are vastly larger
programs out there, and they are threatened by the current situation.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pencil-necked Demmie Freaks" |
|
| Title: Re: will US military stay in Iraq for the next 50 years ? |
03 Feb 2005 07:26:48 AM |
|
|
<oconnell@slr.orl.lmco.com> wrote in message
news:1107436647.595555.146670@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
dapra wrote:
oconnell@slr.orl.lmco.com wrote:
dapra wrote:
Bush has different motives in Iraq than fighting 'communism' or the
'war on terrorism'.
Short term goals;
1) Controlling of oil reserves of Iraq.
Well, in the sense of having them in a western friendly nation.
I'd say under US military control.
Nah, hard to generate profits that way. The DoD draws off
too much of the profit. And it places congress in a position
to meddle. Bush/Cheney only have 4 more years and they want
access to those profits ALOT longer than that.
Kind of like how Nancy Pelosi and the Democrat politicians want access to
the Social Security "contributions" (12% of people's paychecks) for ever and
ever, and begin howling like stuck pigs when proposals are made to allow
people to invest that money in their own future, rather than in the Tax N'
Spenders' future.
.
|
|
|
| User: "LawsonE" |
|
| Title: Re: will US military stay in Iraq for the next 50 years ? |
04 Feb 2005 12:12:49 AM |
|
|
"Pencil-necked Demmie Freaks" <LeftistLosers@Losers.net> wrote in message
news:sEpMd.7765$Ix.3810@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
<oconnell@slr.orl.lmco.com> wrote in message
news:1107436647.595555.146670@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
dapra wrote:
oconnell@slr.orl.lmco.com wrote:
dapra wrote:
Bush has different motives in Iraq than fighting 'communism' or the
'war on terrorism'.
Short term goals;
1) Controlling of oil reserves of Iraq.
Well, in the sense of having them in a western friendly nation.
I'd say under US military control.
Nah, hard to generate profits that way. The DoD draws off
too much of the profit. And it places congress in a position
to meddle. Bush/Cheney only have 4 more years and they want
access to those profits ALOT longer than that.
Kind of like how Nancy Pelosi and the Democrat politicians want access to
the Social Security "contributions" (12% of people's paychecks) for ever
and ever, and begin howling like stuck pigs when proposals are made to
allow people to invest that money in their own future, rather than in the
Tax N' Spenders' future.
Quick, which Party in the USA has been responsible for the most spending at
the Federal Level in the past 7 years?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
