Trumping himself: Has the Donald gone too far in calling Iraq war ‘a big fat mistake’? (how to stymie Donald Trump)

[sneakypete]

But it worked in Germany after World War II, right?
How could it not work in Iraq?

Germany was a western civilized nation prior to the fascist shithead Nazi's taking over. By the end of WW-2 the Germans has suffered enough they were ready to welcome civilization back with open arms.

Feudal Japan would probably be a closer match because of the strictly structured culture that was entirely different from western cultures,but even they welcomed western ideas into their new government.

What the Germans and the Japanese both had were societies where hard work and education were valued,and nations where the people were united under a national identity.

With the Muslims you have countries where most of the people are completely ignorant of life outside of Islam,and even the ones that are educated and aware of other cultures are terrified to speak up because they are all brutal police states that don't mind murdering their own systems.

Then add the centuries long tribal wars,and the only way to civilize Islamic states is to nuke em until they glow,and then shoot them in the dark.

[MACVSOG68]

The G.W. Bush Iraq war was a didactic experience for both America and The West.

Going into it, from a relatively conservative viewpoint, it seemed like "the right thing to do".

That is, go in, defeat an enemy Army, remove the dictator that controlled the army, restore order, attempt to set up the framework for free elections and a psuedo-democratic government.

Looked good enough, but...
... the lesson to be learned was that this cannot work in islamic nations and with islamic peoples.

But it worked in Germany after World War II, right?
How could it not work in Iraq?

Well, what did we actually DO in Germany after WWII?
At the core, we "de-Nazified" the country -- literally purged it of the political (and almost religious) zeitgeist, to the point of putting its leaders on trial for "crimes against humanity".

What kind of analogy could be drawn, comparing that to what needs to be done with islam and the countries under its thrall?

Bush might answer that Germany, Japan and Italy were basically dictatorships and that democracy came to them after the war.  All three countries have had a history of dictatorship far longer than they have had a democracy.  He might also say that we tried to fashion Iraq into a democracy because it existed in Turkey.  Long before that however he made several mistakes in prosecuting the war and the post-war period.  He failed to recognize the depth of hatred between the ethnic groups especially the Shia.  He failed to secure the weapons caches along with releasing so much of the Iraqi army, as well as creating the vacuum in the government.  Starting over with both was far worse than a slow transition.  Additionally he failed to secure the borders allowing back and forth movement of internal civil war combatants and supplies.

Could it have worked?  I think it possible with adequate troops to handle the borders and the insurrectionists and with help from a defeated army, much of which was willing to cooperate with the US.  Good idea; bad execution.  Over time and with the surge, it could have made it, but the incoming administration had decided to give notice of our departure, and did so. 

Comparing the Nazi Party to Islam isn't particularly helpful in dealing with Islam.  At the height of power there were around 8 million Nazis who were part of a short-term purely political movement.  There are around a billion and a half Muslims whose movement is a religion with political aspects and different sects going back 1400 years. 

[Fishrrman]

MAC wrote above:
"Comparing the Nazi Party to Islam isn't particularly helpful in dealing with Islam.  At the height of power there were around 8 million Nazis who were part of a short-term purely political movement.  There are around a billion and a half Muslims whose movement is a religion with political aspects and different sects going back 1400 years."

So, it's a matter of numbers? Only 8 million, vis-a-vis more than a billion?

The fundamental task-at-hand remains the same.

The only long-term solution to deal with the muslim nations of the world is to "de-islamicize" them, just as we purged Nazism in Germany and in a similar vein, shintoism in Japan.

So long as 1.4 billion people remain entrapped within islam's evil spell, the world is in danger, freedom is in danger.

You can call islam a religion, you can call it a political movement, you can call it an all-encompassing system of totalitarian control, you can call it mass mental illness. It doesn't matter.

Sooner or later, we'll have to deal with it as we did with the Nazis and Japanese beforehand.

If the world wishes to go on, the world will have to cleanse itself of islam.

Or it will be they who cleanse the world.... of us.

[Meshuge Mikey]

islam is a scourge •

[truth_seeker]

The G.W. Bush Iraq war was a didactic experience for both America and The West.

Going into it, from a relatively conservative viewpoint, it seemed like "the right thing to do".

That is, go in, defeat an enemy Army, remove the dictator that controlled the army, restore order, attempt to set up the framework for free elections and a psuedo-democratic government.

Looked good enough, but...
... the lesson to be learned was that this cannot work in islamic nations and with islamic peoples.

But it worked in Germany after World War II, right?
How could it not work in Iraq?

Well, what did we actually DO in Germany after WWII?
At the core, we "de-Nazified" the country -- literally purged it of the political (and almost religious) zeitgeist, to the point of putting its leaders on trial for "crimes against humanity".

What kind of analogy could be drawn, comparing that to what needs to be done with islam and the countries under its thrall?

I said the same thing over 10 years ago, re. "de-nazification" of Germany (and much the same for Italy and Japan, too).

A significant and major difference: In WWII we were willing to do whatever it took for a lasting win. About ten percent of the then 160 million US population served in uniform, many as draftees, and most served willingly with honor.

Today we dare not ramp up the military headcount, first because many will resist a draft.  Crybabies and bleep.

So we did Iraq on the cheap in manpower terms. After the initial invasion, the locals receded into the landscape, to wait us out. Then the locals surged, and we were in trouble.

Not to overlook the fact we had left Afghanistan half finished, in order to divert to Iraq. Our troops have been worn down far too much, deployed to often, with insufficient rest between deployments.

We do not have the political will or necessary manpower to fight and win such a conflict. Because Bush was CinC, it was his fault.

[MACVSOG68]

MAC wrote above:
"Comparing the Nazi Party to Islam isn't particularly helpful in dealing with Islam.  At the height of power there were around 8 million Nazis who were part of a short-term purely political movement.  There are around a billion and a half Muslims whose movement is a religion with political aspects and different sects going back 1400 years."

So, it's a matter of numbers? Only 8 million, vis-a-vis more than a billion?

The fundamental task-at-hand remains the same.

The only long-term solution to deal with the muslim nations of the world is to "de-islamicize" them, just as we purged Nazism in Germany and in a similar vein, shintoism in Japan.

So long as 1.4 billion people remain entrapped within islam's evil spell, the world is in danger, freedom is in danger.

You can call islam a religion, you can call it a political movement, you can call it an all-encompassing system of totalitarian control, you can call it mass mental illness. It doesn't matter.

Sooner or later, we'll have to deal with it as we did with the Nazis and Japanese beforehand.

If the world wishes to go on, the world will have to cleanse itself of islam.

Or it will be they who cleanse the world.... of us.

We only prosecuted a relative handful of the Party.  Most of the Nazis went right on working; some lost jobs and paid fines.  But that was it.

We did order that state Shintoism be abolished.  But it was the military leaders we prosecuted, not the religious ones, and not even the emperor.  Shintoism is alive and well today.  We continued the occupation for many years with Okinawa being a prime example.  Japan willingly moved to a democracy, something everyone here says can't happen in the ME.  Germany willingly moved to a democracy.  How did we fare in Iraq and Afghanistan on that democracy thingy?

If anyone thinks we can cleanse the world of Islam, I'm listening.  America is already war weary and we can't even seem to defeat ISIS.  The Taliban are ready to take back Afghanistan in spite of the longest war we have ever fought.   

[sneakypete]

If anyone thinks we can cleanse the world of Islam, I'm listening.  America is already war weary and we can't even seem to defeat ISIS.  The Taliban are ready to take back Afghanistan in spite of the longest war we have ever fought.

I think we can if we WANT to,but other than the guys doing the fighting,nobody seems interested in winning. They seem to be more interested in keeping the war going to keep the unemployment levels down. The economy seems to have been going in the tank for a long time now,and was is,always has been,and always will be good for the economy. It gives jobs to the unemployed that are wiling to wear uniforms,it keeps highly paid  union jobs in the defense industries from disappearing,and it keeps the politicians in districts with defense industries happy and in office from the pork they bring in.

Plus war gives the professional political class a call for the voters to rally around. After all,who doesn't want to support our troops (and their leaders) during time of war?

I think an awful lot of people would be surprised if they ever started to look around to see just how intertwined all this really is.

I have said it before and chances are I will be saying it with my last breath,"There is no excuse for the way insurgent wars like the one against Islam and Islam against the west are being ran. You do NOT win wars by killing privates,and you most especially will NOT win any war by killing ignorant religious drones that think getting killed while fighting against their religious enemy is their guarantee of the "good life with all the sex they want with women too inexperienced with sex to realize how incompetent they are."

If you want to win insurgency wars in the 21st Century you MUST take out the leadership and the financiers that provide the money to keep the raghead troops fed,watered,clothed,armed,and with a little money to send home for their families. Dry up the money and the Jihadists and the Jihad disappear.

 If you want to dry up the money forever,you do so by tracking down and killing the individuals that are behind it,and then seize ALL their money from their bank accounts and from any other source of income they have. Yes,this means leaving their families in poverty. So what? Maybe their families NEED to be worrying about being forced to live a life of poverty in order to slap any future Jihadists into line and prevent them from getting involved? This is war,not badminton.  The leaders of the Jihad are NOT rational people. They are still living in medieval times.and we need to get medieval with their asses.

If we don't,they will win. Period. They breed like rats and care nothing about their children's futures. They will win simply by outnumbering us and bankrupting us unless we are willing  to drop our 20th century philosophy of  "fighting them to a draw and making them quit",and go back to the medieval warfare mode of fighting them to destroy them as a people and a culture.  If we are not willing to do that,we MUST seal off their borders and stop all goods going into or out of those countries,and this includes refugees. Doing this will eventually cause civil wars within their own countries,and their own people will kill all the leadership classes we don't have the stones to kill.

I have no idea what sort of culture would replace Islam in those areas,but I am fairly confident it would be a hungry one in desperate need of food and medical care. THOSE people we can deal with in a humane manner because they will understand it was Islam and themselves that were the root of their problem.

[HAPPY2BME]

The G.W. Bush Iraq war was a didactic experience for both America and The West.

=================================

Former Military Chief: Iraq War Was A 'Failure' That Helped Create ISIS

Retired Lt. General Michael Flynn, the former head of the Defense Intelligence Agency who came up through intelligence positions in Iraq and Afghanistan, says that the George W. Bush administration's Iraq war was a tremendous blunder that helped to create the self-proclaimed Islamic State, or ISIS.
..

[MACVSOG68]

Sneakypete wrote:

I have no idea what sort of culture would replace Islam in those areas,but I am fairly confident it would be a hungry one in desperate need of food and medical care. THOSE people we can deal with in a humane manner because they will understand it was Islam and themselves that were the root of their problem.

Sneaky, earlier you said we should go after the money that funds these terrorists.  I agree.  Are you suggesting in some way that we replace Islam in these countries?  If so, how?  I'm not sure if you're referring to the destruction of ISIS or some larger set of goals.

[sneakypete]

Sneakypete wrote:

  Are you suggesting in some way that we replace Islam in these countries?

Nope.I try to never suggest the impossible. What we have to do is destroy the ability of Islam to govern,make and enforce Sharia laws,and conduct military campaigns by destroying the leadership/infustructure,and funding.

It is impossible to destroy an idea. What you CAN do though is to prove it to be false and incompetent,and responsible for the misery of the people it governed,and thereby have the MUSLIMS destroy Islam by no longer fearing or obeying it. Anything short of that is a compete and total waste of time and money,just like the dumbass approach we are using now that only makes martyrs and heroes out of the scumbuckets that are pushing it.

We can kill Muslims by the hundreds of thousands without much effort if we want to,but what WE can never so is destroy Islam. The people in Islamic nations have to decide to do that for themselves. There are many,many ways we can help them come to that conclusion.

We need to start fighting smart,not hard. We need to start turning our geeks loose on them,and NO,I will NOT publish any details on what I mean by that on this or any other public board.

[flowers]

Nope.I try to never suggest the impossible. What we have to do is destroy the ability of Islam to govern,make and enforce Sharia laws,and conduct military campaigns by destroying the leadership/infustructure,and funding.

It is impossible to destroy an idea. What you CAN do though is to prove it to be false and incompetent,and responsible for the misery of the people it governed,and thereby have the MUSLIMS destroy Islam by no longer fearing or obeying it. Anything short of that is a compete and total waste of time and money,just like the dumbass approach we are using now that only makes martyrs and heroes out of the scumbuckets that are pushing it.

We can kill Muslims by the hundreds of thousands without much effort if we want to,but what WE can never so is destroy Islam. The people in Islamic nations have to decide to do that for themselves. There are many,many ways we can help them come to that conclusion.

We need to start fighting smart,not hard. We need to start turning our geeks loose on them,and NO,I will NOT publish any details on what I mean by that on this or any other public board.

 

[Sanguine]

We need to start fighting smart,not hard. We need to start turning our geeks loose on them,and NO,I will NOT publish any details on what I mean by that on this or any other public board.

I can agree with that.

[MACVSOG68]

Nope.I try to never suggest the impossible. What we have to do is destroy the ability of Islam to govern,make and enforce Sharia laws,and conduct military campaigns by destroying the leadership/infustructure,and funding.

It is impossible to destroy an idea. What you CAN do though is to prove it to be false and incompetent,and responsible for the misery of the people it governed,and thereby have the MUSLIMS destroy Islam by no longer fearing or obeying it. Anything short of that is a compete and total waste of time and money,just like the dumbass approach we are using now that only makes martyrs and heroes out of the scumbuckets that are pushing it.

We can kill Muslims by the hundreds of thousands without much effort if we want to,but what WE can never so is destroy Islam. The people in Islamic nations have to decide to do that for themselves. There are many,many ways we can help them come to that conclusion.

We need to start fighting smart,not hard. We need to start turning our geeks loose on them,and NO,I will NOT publish any details on what I mean by that on this or any other public board.

Appreciate the comments.  No matter what, war is war.  The Cold War was war.  It will be difficult to convince Americans that any kind of war is worthwhile for a long time.  People here on this board are convinced we have made many mistakes in trying to change cultures in these countries and nation-build.  More than anything they criticize our efforts at democratization.  So convincing these nations will take a hell of an effort.  But it's not all hopeless.  Even though Islamic, Turkey is a democracy.  For how long?  If that fails, there's no hope for any other nation with a majority of Muslims.

[ABX]

[musiclady]

That is PERFECT AbaraXas!

Trump has a way of removing values from his supporters and replacing them with his lack thereof.

This is but one example, but a glaring one.

[DCPatriot]

That is PERFECT AbaraXas!

Trump has a way of removing values from his supporters and replacing them with his lack thereof.

This is but one example, but a glaring one.

....not if you're attempting to attract disenchanted Democrats and Independents, it isn't.

[musiclady]

....not if you're attempting to attract disenchanted Democrats and Independents, it isn't.

There are other ways besides lying and blaming GWB for 9/11.  Reagan attracted Democrats and Independents without being unethical.

There is NO excuse for Trump's lies.

[Bigun]

There is NO excuse for Trump's lies.

NONE!!!

[sneakypete]

Appreciate the comments.  No matter what, war is war.  The Cold War was war.  It will be difficult to convince Americans that any kind of war is worthwhile for a long time.  People here on this board are convinced we have made many mistakes in trying to change cultures in these countries and nation-build.  More than anything they criticize our efforts at democratization.  So convincing these nations will take a hell of an effort.  But it's not all hopeless.  Even though Islamic, Turkey is a democracy.  For how long?  If that fails, there's no hope for any other nation with a majority of Muslims.

<P>

No one forced Turkey to become a Democracy but the people of Turkey. It's not something you can create from the outside and force on a people. THEY have to decide to either do that,or continue killing and being killed by their neighbors.

[sneakypete]

That is PERFECT AbaraXas!

Trump has a way of removing values from his supporters and replacing them with his lack thereof.

This is but one example, but a glaring one.

He is a salesman. That is all he has ever been. He tells people what he thinks they need to hear to make the sale. Right now he is trying to sell "Trump" to disillusioned Republicans,so he is busy telling them things they either already believe or want to believe.

That's what salesmen do.

[Bigun]

After His Cruz LIE Was Exposed, Debunked, And Condemned By Coburn, Trump REPEATED It On Stage

http://www.redstate.com/absentee/2016/02/16/lie-exposed-debunked-condemned-tom-coburn-trump-repeated-stage-fact/

[sneakypete]

....not if you're attempting to attract disenchanted Democrats and Independents, it isn't.

A serious question. Do you really think he's trying to do that?

The reason I ask is it seems blindingly obvious to me his complete focus at this point is being Number 1 in the Primary play list.  I still think he is going to drop out late in the primary for cash and future considerations,so he has no concern at all about pulling in voters in a general election.

Trump never finishes anything. He dips his beak in the blood,takes what he can get,and then runs away to let others try to clean up the mess after being paid to go away.  What makes you so sure he is serious about running in the general election?

[MACVSOG68]

<P>

No one forced Turkey to become a Democracy but the people of Turkey. It's not something you can create from the outside and force on a people. THEY have to decide to either do that,or continue killing and being killed by their neighbors.

I agree completely with that.  Overall I was responding to your suggestion that there were ways we could influence transformation to democratic governments.  And an earlier poster suggested that somehow we could eliminate Islam through force.  And most here and on other conservative forums have stated most emphatically that we cannot significantly influence democratization of those nations as we did with Japan and Germany.

No doubt we made major mistakes trying to democratize and rebuild both Afghanistan and Iraq.  Political influence isn't going to do the job.  Money might help but is likely a short term fix.  So long as Islam rules those nations, nothing short of war, cold or hot, open or secret, is going to change that.  A dictator with control of the military can dominate huge areas of population.  Civil wars can have measured successes, but rarely short of outside help--IOW war. 

The Ottoman Empire actually began a form of democracy before its demise.  After its fall, none survived the experiment except Turkey.  Since that time, Islam has taken over all those countries except of course Israel.  The Arab Spring brought a lot more chaos than it did democracy.  The West is certainly in part  to blame for the growth of Islam after the Ottoman Empire dissolved.  We tried to define borders, prop up tyrants, and prosecute wars.

There are no good guys in the history of the region, but right now it's pretty clear who the truly bad guys are.  The question is how to turn it back around, especially without creating more of the same messes we've been involved in for many years there.

[sneakypete]

 The question is how to turn it back around, especially without creating more of the same messes we've been involved in for many years there.

That's a really good question,but I sure ain't smart enough to have a simple answer.

As for killing all the Muslims goes,I have no idea how you would go about doing that since there are billions of them all over the world,even if you put aside the moral questions. You can kill people,but you cannot kill ideas. Leave just one man and one woman alive,and in a couple of hundred years the problem will pop up again.

BTW,killing all the Muslims wouldn't be genocide since they are not all of one races,so what would the proper term be?

Would "Halocaust" fit.or would Jewish heads explode at that term being used for Muslims? There has to be a word for the destruction of a religion,but for the life of me I can't remember ever hearing it.

[MACVSOG68]

That's a really good question,but I sure ain't smart enough to have a simple answer.

As for killing all the Muslims goes,I have no idea how you would go about doing that since there are billions of them all over the world,even if you put aside the moral questions. You can kill people,but you cannot kill ideas. Leave just one man and one woman alive,and in a couple of hundred years the problem will pop up again.

BTW,killing all the Muslims wouldn't wouldn't be genocide since they are not all of one races,so what would the proper term be?

Would "Halocaust" fit.or would Jewish heads explode at that term being used for Muslims? There has to be a word for the destruction of a religion,but for the life of me I can't remember ever hearing it.

Actually genocide fits.  Any group whether ethnic, racial, religious or members of a state when selected for elimination fits that term.  Anyway, I'm not sure of the answer other than stopping the militants will involve war in one way or another...though Rand Paul didn't think so.  As you and I both know, the best military plans in the world work very well...until the first step across the line of departure.