nevada
Senior Member
well said. I agree completely, and have said the same many times over the years.
we need to mind our own business. we cant even get our own shit straight, we have no business meddling in other countries affairs.
ISIS in Iraq.....
- Thread starter Ol'Blue
- Start date
well said. I agree completely, and have said the same many times over the years.
we need to mind our own business. we cant even get our own shit straight, we have no business meddling in other countries affairs.
BlackWorksInc
New member
I don't agree with why we were in the Middle East in the first place and honestly I lay much of that blame on Bush and his friends of the previous administration, they're the ones who sent them in based upon some what shakey evidence (at best) and were in charge of the insertion, tactics, and most of the operations for the majority of the time our soldiers were on the ground. The current administration has its own issues, of which I am not happy with either, so don't jump on me for supporting one set of twats vs. the other; I personally believe the entire US Political system can be boiled down to two bickering children that get nothing done and cause drama for everyone. We'd be better off to kick every politician out of office and start the American Political system from the ground up with fresh faces and ideas.
That being said, we did our military and its members a disservice of the greatest kind.
-We sent them in with no substantial exit plan
-No well planned tactical plans besides rushing to Baghdad to get a photo-op (a few friends in various branches told me of how they left bombs, armaments, ammunition, ect on the side of the road in a rush to get to Baghdad instead of clearing it as they should have based upon orders given.)
-The administration ignored 20 years of post-Cold War data that showed combat was going to become urbanized and more based in guerrilla combat and would require corrective tactics, armour, weapons, ect. (to give credit to Bush, he DID push to get those technology packages for our troops; it was Congress that decided "we'll do anything to stop the terrorists" did not include the funds to properly equip our troops for the reality of modern warfare that was foreseen during the Vietnam era)
-We created a mess in the Middle East during the Cold War and now we are taking our lashings for decisions that were both not ideal, but necessary (i.e. most of the weapons used in the Middle East can be traced back to our involvement during the Cold War in some fashion) Not to mention some animosity is tee result of things like the CIA & US Military trying to install puppet governments, back various players (Osama Bin Laden and Saddam being popular examples), manipulate various players in the Middle East, ect during much of the Cold War.
-Not to mention the surge in needed recruits due to incompetent upper management which resulted in the unnecessary deaths of soldiers also greatly lowered the standards of recruitment. This in turn resulted in a higher rate of sexual assaults, gang related issues, ect. (again, this is based on data and personal accounts from friends who went overseas in different branches.) many of which were either outright ignored, blamed the victim, tied up the legal process in red tape, ect. to keep more boots on the ground.
-We've relocated the US Coast Guard in some cases to Iraq for various purposes (a branch of the military specifically made to protect the US Territories Coastlines while our Navy is away and we send them also overseas? Way to leave our ass hanging out...)
-Poor control/management of PMCs utilized in the conflict, which only ended up causing us more problems. Because the US's "Don't Ask Don't Tell" policy doesn't just apply to homosexuals and results in far more problems with this country due to ignorance and procrastination.
There are many additional reasons why the "Iraq War" was and still is a black stain on not only this country but the US Military's Honour, Credibility, and public image. Many of these issues have allowed out military to become infected with individuals who aren't there to serve their country or protect the American Dream, but rather paid thugs and scum. They've done a disservice to the REAL soldiers of the US Military; the ones who are honourable, the ones who do uphold the American Dream, the ones who uphold a level of professionalism and dignity that represents the best of our Country when their boots march overseas. These men and women, the real soldiers who I salute for their service to this country, have had their reputation stained by this war and the overwhelming amount of bureaucratic idiocy that has blemished a once great military I was proud to call my own.
Post Note-
I unfortunately was never able to provide my services to the USMC (I lived by Camp Pendleton for 7+ years and knew many a great Marine) based upon my then age and recently a sudden tightening of recruitment standards (apparently insane people are no longer welcome in the USMC? I thought that was a bare minimum to become a Marine!
) I had intended to be an EoD as it best fit my skillset, talents, and abilities. My Father was ex-Romanian Military and so for me it felt right to pay those learned skills to the country that granted my family and I citizenship and welcomed us into its arms.
That being said, we did our military and its members a disservice of the greatest kind.
-We sent them in with no substantial exit plan
-No well planned tactical plans besides rushing to Baghdad to get a photo-op (a few friends in various branches told me of how they left bombs, armaments, ammunition, ect on the side of the road in a rush to get to Baghdad instead of clearing it as they should have based upon orders given.)
-The administration ignored 20 years of post-Cold War data that showed combat was going to become urbanized and more based in guerrilla combat and would require corrective tactics, armour, weapons, ect. (to give credit to Bush, he DID push to get those technology packages for our troops; it was Congress that decided "we'll do anything to stop the terrorists" did not include the funds to properly equip our troops for the reality of modern warfare that was foreseen during the Vietnam era)
-We created a mess in the Middle East during the Cold War and now we are taking our lashings for decisions that were both not ideal, but necessary (i.e. most of the weapons used in the Middle East can be traced back to our involvement during the Cold War in some fashion) Not to mention some animosity is tee result of things like the CIA & US Military trying to install puppet governments, back various players (Osama Bin Laden and Saddam being popular examples), manipulate various players in the Middle East, ect during much of the Cold War.
-Not to mention the surge in needed recruits due to incompetent upper management which resulted in the unnecessary deaths of soldiers also greatly lowered the standards of recruitment. This in turn resulted in a higher rate of sexual assaults, gang related issues, ect. (again, this is based on data and personal accounts from friends who went overseas in different branches.) many of which were either outright ignored, blamed the victim, tied up the legal process in red tape, ect. to keep more boots on the ground.
-We've relocated the US Coast Guard in some cases to Iraq for various purposes (a branch of the military specifically made to protect the US Territories Coastlines while our Navy is away and we send them also overseas? Way to leave our ass hanging out...)
-Poor control/management of PMCs utilized in the conflict, which only ended up causing us more problems. Because the US's "Don't Ask Don't Tell" policy doesn't just apply to homosexuals and results in far more problems with this country due to ignorance and procrastination.
There are many additional reasons why the "Iraq War" was and still is a black stain on not only this country but the US Military's Honour, Credibility, and public image. Many of these issues have allowed out military to become infected with individuals who aren't there to serve their country or protect the American Dream, but rather paid thugs and scum. They've done a disservice to the REAL soldiers of the US Military; the ones who are honourable, the ones who do uphold the American Dream, the ones who uphold a level of professionalism and dignity that represents the best of our Country when their boots march overseas. These men and women, the real soldiers who I salute for their service to this country, have had their reputation stained by this war and the overwhelming amount of bureaucratic idiocy that has blemished a once great military I was proud to call my own.
Post Note-
I unfortunately was never able to provide my services to the USMC (I lived by Camp Pendleton for 7+ years and knew many a great Marine) based upon my then age and recently a sudden tightening of recruitment standards (apparently insane people are no longer welcome in the USMC? I thought that was a bare minimum to become a Marine!
) I had intended to be an EoD as it best fit my skillset, talents, and abilities. My Father was ex-Romanian Military and so for me it felt right to pay those learned skills to the country that granted my family and I citizenship and welcomed us into its arms.
Last edited:
hikenbike
New member
Ol'Blue
New member
Well after reading all the other posts I can see where most people stand on this. I my self do not agree with everything above. In the end it dose not matter why I was in Iraq, I was there. My job was not to make policy. Did parts of it piss me off to no end, of course it did. At the end of the day I took an oath to protect this nation and follow the orders of the officers above me and that is what I did with honor.
We can all either agree or disagree about the why and how we got there. At the end of the day we are committed to Iraq and to make damn sure it dose not fail, period. I have lost to many friends to make sure the people of Iraq and Afghanistan have a little bite of freedom that we take for granted everyday. At this point it more than just pains me to see this stuff still happening. I say this because I operated on the ground for a long time. The men fighting almost always had one hand tied behind there back. If ground troops were able to do there jobs and could go back to help once again it would have to be to finish it. I'm sure I do not have to explain how that is done. As I have said before this nation building crap is for the birds. If we are going to help them this time all it should be is for movement to contact and kill and clear missions against hard targets. After that is done we are done and go home, period.
I know this is not a popular take on this but the only way to stop this is to end there life's. I can assure you that both of the wars can be ended in a few months but the United States and the world do not have the stomach for that type of war fare anymore.
Ugh, I really didn't want to rant like this but at what point are we going to grab our balls and win and quit fing around.
Blue
slapdappy
Banned
I have not served in the armed forces.
Nations used to go to war for 2 reasons, either someone else wanted what you had or you wanted what someone else had. Ultimately it was about asserting dominance or being dominated.
"To the victor go the spoils."
Wars are resource intensive. Waging a war is the quickest way to consume capital for non productive purposes.
In economics there is a basic theory of "guns or butter". Capital can be used to produce goods which themselves can be used in the production of goods and provide a return on that expenditure, or it can be used to produce goods which are consumed. Factories are productive, tractors are productive, guns and tanks are not. Guns do not assist in the growth, harvesting, or distribution of crops. Tractors do. Guns cannot. Butter can be used in the production of bread and other foods. The mere fact that a good has a use does not make it a productive good. Using capital for production provides a return on that investment. Using capital for consumption does not.
You can save your money and invest it, say open a bakery and start producing bread and selling it for a profit or you can spend it for short term consumption, eat at fancy restaurants, buy a new speedboat, and take a fancy cruise.
The return on capital from war used to be all of the stuff the other guys had. You consumed $100,000,000 worth of your capital to wage the war but you got an entire country's worth of stuff if you prevailed, and you weakened them such that they were no longer a threat. You subjugated them, took their stuff, and they would now abide by your laws and expectations.
Now we engage in various strategic wars which consume enormous amounts of capital yet produce no positive return. Having conquered Iraq we should have declared it a territory of the USA, assumed ownership of its resources, and assumed responsibility for imposing a rational legal and bureaucratic structure.
We did not do that. Of course, once we pull out things will go back to the way they have been. All of our efforts and sacrifices will amount to nothing beside empty coffers we have no realistic way to replenish.
We should go back to the proven model of warfare in which "to the victor goes the spoils." If someone will not leave you be, you ultimately run roughshod over them.
The matter of brutal internal violence such as that in Darfur does merit the active attention and involvement of the free world, as it were. There are instances when it is immoral and unethical to allow certain behaviors to go unanswered. One cannot allow a father to molest his daughter, one must intervene though there is no profit in it. This is why the United Nations was formed as an overarching monitor and enforcer of civilized behavior on a national and global scale. It does have armed forces at its disposal. It is empowered to use armed force. Yes, I know it abdicates this responsibility as matter of course.
I do not advocate warfare solely for our economic preservation or enhancement, but I do believe this should be the primary rationale for such engagement and risk. I do not think any lasting good comes from simple intervention and withdrawal. It manifests no change. I think if it merits our armed involvement we should follow through and take responsibility on all levels for the running of that country. If they cannot figure out a way to not rape and mutilate each other, especially children, we should step in and assert out authority.
The motivation for war in this case is different but the resolution is the same, i.e. taking ownership. To take ownership does not mean grab the loot and run, it means establish authority, restructure, administer, and enforce.
How any democratic country can claim any moral high ground while allowing North Korea to exist is beyond me.
I believe this is the most basic issue we need to address as a nation, thus my longer than most post.
Nations used to go to war for 2 reasons, either someone else wanted what you had or you wanted what someone else had. Ultimately it was about asserting dominance or being dominated.
"To the victor go the spoils."
Wars are resource intensive. Waging a war is the quickest way to consume capital for non productive purposes.
In economics there is a basic theory of "guns or butter". Capital can be used to produce goods which themselves can be used in the production of goods and provide a return on that expenditure, or it can be used to produce goods which are consumed. Factories are productive, tractors are productive, guns and tanks are not. Guns do not assist in the growth, harvesting, or distribution of crops. Tractors do. Guns cannot. Butter can be used in the production of bread and other foods. The mere fact that a good has a use does not make it a productive good. Using capital for production provides a return on that investment. Using capital for consumption does not.
You can save your money and invest it, say open a bakery and start producing bread and selling it for a profit or you can spend it for short term consumption, eat at fancy restaurants, buy a new speedboat, and take a fancy cruise.
The return on capital from war used to be all of the stuff the other guys had. You consumed $100,000,000 worth of your capital to wage the war but you got an entire country's worth of stuff if you prevailed, and you weakened them such that they were no longer a threat. You subjugated them, took their stuff, and they would now abide by your laws and expectations.
Now we engage in various strategic wars which consume enormous amounts of capital yet produce no positive return. Having conquered Iraq we should have declared it a territory of the USA, assumed ownership of its resources, and assumed responsibility for imposing a rational legal and bureaucratic structure.
We did not do that. Of course, once we pull out things will go back to the way they have been. All of our efforts and sacrifices will amount to nothing beside empty coffers we have no realistic way to replenish.
We should go back to the proven model of warfare in which "to the victor goes the spoils." If someone will not leave you be, you ultimately run roughshod over them.
The matter of brutal internal violence such as that in Darfur does merit the active attention and involvement of the free world, as it were. There are instances when it is immoral and unethical to allow certain behaviors to go unanswered. One cannot allow a father to molest his daughter, one must intervene though there is no profit in it. This is why the United Nations was formed as an overarching monitor and enforcer of civilized behavior on a national and global scale. It does have armed forces at its disposal. It is empowered to use armed force. Yes, I know it abdicates this responsibility as matter of course.
I do not advocate warfare solely for our economic preservation or enhancement, but I do believe this should be the primary rationale for such engagement and risk. I do not think any lasting good comes from simple intervention and withdrawal. It manifests no change. I think if it merits our armed involvement we should follow through and take responsibility on all levels for the running of that country. If they cannot figure out a way to not rape and mutilate each other, especially children, we should step in and assert out authority.
The motivation for war in this case is different but the resolution is the same, i.e. taking ownership. To take ownership does not mean grab the loot and run, it means establish authority, restructure, administer, and enforce.
How any democratic country can claim any moral high ground while allowing North Korea to exist is beyond me.
I believe this is the most basic issue we need to address as a nation, thus my longer than most post.
Last edited:
Quatre Coureur
New member
Simple intervention and withdrawal. Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan. We go in, pull out. Go in, pull out. Go in, pull out. Somebody's getting fu€ked.
hikenbike
New member
Thank you for your service and I'm truly sorry you lost friends. I'm fairly certain you don't support sending more soldiers there and putting them in harms way simply to honor those who were there and perhaps died or were injured before them, right? You'd probably think we'd need a plan for success before doing so. I think it's been proven by now that there actually is no possible plan for success there that anyone or any administration can put any strategy to or timeframe on. Respect the enemy and manage their whereabouts daily and weekly etc forever and ever. They'll always be there, they hate us with a hate we'll never comprehend, and they are patient. I say we pay very close attention, kill'em when we can, and don't let them get any foothold in our homeland. That is where our energies should be focused.
Ol'Blue
New member
I truly understand what you getting at and I do agree with you in parts. I'm going to say this because I have walked down some really dark roads in the same areas that are now being lost to organizations that have one goal, and that is to kill people that do not follow there line or way of thinking. When you have established governments turning tale and running for the hills, it is logical to think that anyone other than ground troops are going to get them out other that dropping 2k pound bombs on everything they hide in.
In the end there is no easy way to do this and I understand that. You asked if I would support more troops on the ground. I would only under one circumstance, If the rules of engagement were gone just like in 2003 in the city of Al-Nasseria. After we are done with clearing a city out then we simply go home. That is it. We use units like SF, Ranger, Force Recon Etc Etc as the hammer. I'm telling you, watching units like this work will break the drive of any foe.
There have been some really good points made and I do agree with some of them. At this point the people of Iraq and the leaders that are in place are not ready or I'll say it capable of running Iraq. So we either make an agreement that if bad people want to do harm we will fix that problem or we just take it over and as one said use all the resources as ours.
Blue
ndcent
New member
This is a scary sentiment when you realize they have the same mentality.
It's like that old saying goes... All is fair in love and war.
MtnT4R
New member
100% this. We possess the most badass assault forces on the planet, backed up by overwhelming firepower and logistical support. You cannot use a purpose built tool like that for nation building and police action and expect any other result than what we have now, and its heartbreaking to see. Regardless of our differing opinions about why we went there and for what reasons, the fact remains that the best and bravest of us spent a decade fighting and working for a cause that MATTERS. And they did it despite being saddled with bullshit politically motivated ROEs that look great on paper but in reality end up putting our soldiers in unnecessary danger.
These insurgents we fought are seriously evil people. They go out of their way to torture, maim and kill innocent civillians and prisoners of war to solidify their hold on power. These scumbags only recognize the power of the gun and ruthless violence. They need to be dealt with as such. Just about everyone is opposed to American forces on the ground in Iraq anymore but I think we could all support bombing absolute crap out of ISIS with our standoff weapons.
BlackWorksInc
New member
Unfortunately I do not believe there is a "right way" when it comes to the Middle East. We're talking about a territory that has been in constant war for the last few millennia. Mainly because its so varied in its religious beliefs. Now I'm not saying religion is inherently evil or corrupt; that can be saved for another discussion. But based simply on the history of the area, the large majority of conflicts in the Middle East are due to religious reasons of some fashion.
There will never be peace in the Middle East unless religion is removed from the equation (which would mean abolishing all religions in the world), religious equality is met (again another unlikely possibility), the entire territory and its people are glassed and the zone is made too toxic to live (in which case the strife only moves to other territories), and/or the fundamental underpinnings of human nature are changed (this is even more unlikely than the above statements.)
Basically, the Middle East is a constant on our planet... it will always be at war, it will always be unstable, and it will always be difficult to control/manage. We should simply treat the entire area as a hostile combat zone and try to keep civilian causalities and damage as low as possible. Its a bit drastic, but the Middle East as an entire territory is a few thousand year old warzone that hasn't stopped fighting once in its history.
There will never be peace in the Middle East unless religion is removed from the equation (which would mean abolishing all religions in the world), religious equality is met (again another unlikely possibility), the entire territory and its people are glassed and the zone is made too toxic to live (in which case the strife only moves to other territories), and/or the fundamental underpinnings of human nature are changed (this is even more unlikely than the above statements.)
Basically, the Middle East is a constant on our planet... it will always be at war, it will always be unstable, and it will always be difficult to control/manage. We should simply treat the entire area as a hostile combat zone and try to keep civilian causalities and damage as low as possible. Its a bit drastic, but the Middle East as an entire territory is a few thousand year old warzone that hasn't stopped fighting once in its history.
ndcent
New member
THE IRAQ MESS: PLACE BLAME WHERE IT IS DESERVED
This comment nails it...
For the simple-minded mantra reciting crew absorb these facts.
We INVADED Iraq. They hate us.They did not ask us there. We created 2 million refugees in the middle east. We killed their sons and fathers. Infrastructure was destroyed. There was NO plan for disarming the Republican guard. There was NO plan for a civil society. There were NO WMD (Sorry that's a fact) There was no understanding of the intense rivalry between the Shia and Sunnis. There was absolutely NO Alqaeda presence in IRAQ during Saddam's time. Iraq was secular (If you don't know what secular means you have NO business typing on the internet about anything related to the middle east) Iraq is now, due to the Republican right, completely and totally in Iran's camp. (Please look at a map and duuh see what country borders Iraq totally on it's eastern border) The Sunni's ONLY embraced the BS "SURGE" because they were paid. YES fact...Sunni Sheikh's accepted mercenary $ to do so.(If you don't know what a Sunni sheikh is please no longer comment) Maliki is a hateful Shia and Obama was stuck with him. This is a no win situation. Our soldiers wasted their lives and limbs for absolutely NOTHING. It is MORONIC to say"Well they ( Iraq) have the choice to make it democracy" and if their desire isn't stronger than ours then it won't work" YES duuuuh...because WE invaded them. We decided to end their government. We imposed OUR system on them. The lap dogs in the government of Iraq were selected approved and financed by USA. It is a puppet government (One which hates us and put up with us until they no longer had to) This radicalized murderous extremist ISIS is the natural outcome of the chaos we created. No military presence by us after the carnage we initiated could EVER fix it. The world has changed - asymmetric warfare is the rule now
Thank you neo-cons you have set the middle east aflame. And you blame the fireman when he can't restore the burned building you incinerated.
This comment nails it...
For the simple-minded mantra reciting crew absorb these facts.
We INVADED Iraq. They hate us.They did not ask us there. We created 2 million refugees in the middle east. We killed their sons and fathers. Infrastructure was destroyed. There was NO plan for disarming the Republican guard. There was NO plan for a civil society. There were NO WMD (Sorry that's a fact) There was no understanding of the intense rivalry between the Shia and Sunnis. There was absolutely NO Alqaeda presence in IRAQ during Saddam's time. Iraq was secular (If you don't know what secular means you have NO business typing on the internet about anything related to the middle east) Iraq is now, due to the Republican right, completely and totally in Iran's camp. (Please look at a map and duuh see what country borders Iraq totally on it's eastern border) The Sunni's ONLY embraced the BS "SURGE" because they were paid. YES fact...Sunni Sheikh's accepted mercenary $ to do so.(If you don't know what a Sunni sheikh is please no longer comment) Maliki is a hateful Shia and Obama was stuck with him. This is a no win situation. Our soldiers wasted their lives and limbs for absolutely NOTHING. It is MORONIC to say"Well they ( Iraq) have the choice to make it democracy" and if their desire isn't stronger than ours then it won't work" YES duuuuh...because WE invaded them. We decided to end their government. We imposed OUR system on them. The lap dogs in the government of Iraq were selected approved and financed by USA. It is a puppet government (One which hates us and put up with us until they no longer had to) This radicalized murderous extremist ISIS is the natural outcome of the chaos we created. No military presence by us after the carnage we initiated could EVER fix it. The world has changed - asymmetric warfare is the rule now
Thank you neo-cons you have set the middle east aflame. And you blame the fireman when he can't restore the burned building you incinerated.
Some people realize it, but clearly not enough do.
Besides.. we can just print a couple Trillion, to cover the costs. Who cares about the National Debt, or the value of the Dollar anyway...
MtnT4R
New member
Sorry ndecent, but that comment doesn't nail it, and here's why:
"The partitioning of the Ottoman Empire (30 October 1918 – 1 November 1922) was a political event that occurred after World War I. The huge conglomeration of territories and peoples that formerly comprised the Ottoman Empire was divided into several new states.[1] The partitioning brought the creation of the modern Arab world and the Republic of Turkey. The League of Nations granted France mandates over Syria and Lebanon and granted the United Kingdom mandates over Mesopotamia (later Iraq,) and Palestine, (later divided into Palestine and Transjordan). The Ottoman Empire's possessions on the Arabian Peninsula became the Kingdom of Hejaz and the Sultanate of Nejd (today Saudi Arabia), the Mutawakkilite Kingdom of Yemen, and the Arab States of the Persian Gulf."
~Partitioning of the Ottoman Empire - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
When Britain and France partitioned the Ottoman Empire at the conclusion of WWI, they did so with very little regard to the complex cultural and religious boundaries existing in the region. While the American led coalition to remove Saddam Hussein has been the latest firestorm in the Middle East, the sectarian warfare we see now has roots pointing directly to the breakup of the Ottoman Empire. Some factions hate us, some like us, most just want our weapons. Contrary to your quote above, there was hardly any stability before we intervened in Operation Iraqi Freedom, or even Desert Storm. Saddam gassed the Kurds, warred with Iran, invaded Saudi Arabia, the list goes on. We may not have fixed much, but its hardly worse than at any other point since the end of WWI.
Believe it or not, large portions of the population in the Middle East look at America and WANT what we have. Western lifestyle fascinates them and they are envious of the freedoms we enjoy. They don't want to be dominated by hardcore Sharia law any more than Europe wants a return to serfdom in the Middle Ages.
I think there is some hope. Look at the Kurds. They are one of the beacons of stability in the region and they are moving to secure as much territory around them as possible. And the fact that Iran is sending troops to shore up Baghdad does show promise of improving at least some relations.
MtnT4R
New member
I'm going to have to disagree with you and say IT IS NOW MUCH WORSE than at any time since WWI.ainkiller:
You bring up some great points, and I don't necessarily disagree with anything you said except for the above. Granted, this is a Wikipedia list, but the following is an interesting timeline of the Middle East following WWI:
1917 - Lord Balfour, Foreign Minister of Great Britain, in letter to Lord Rothschild, gives British government approval to Zionist's goal of building a "national home" in Palestine
1918 - Britain and France occupy former Ottoman Empire lands
1919–21 - Franco-Syrian War
1919–23 - Asia Minor Catastophe, a widescale conflict reshapes Anatolia as continuous fighting incorporates the newly founded Republic of Turkey, Armenia, France, Greece and numerous revolts
1922 - Egypt is granted nominal independence from the United Kingdom.
1922–23 - French Mandate of Syria and Lebanon and British Mandate for Palestine come into power, Emirate of Transjordan is an autonomous region under the Mandate for Palestine
1925 - Sheikh Said rebellion of Kurds against Turkey
1927–30 Ararat rebellion of Kurds, as Republic of Ararat is declared, but dissolved upon defeat
1932 - Kingdom of Saudi Arabia declared in unification of Najd and Hejaz
1933–36 Tribal revolts in Iraq of Assyrians in Simele, Shia in the south and Kurds in the north
1934 - Saudi-Yemeni War
1935 - Persia becomes Iran
1937 - Dersim rebellion, is the largest uprising of the Kurds against Turkey, massive casualties
1939–1945 - Mediterranean and Middle East Theatre
1946 - Emirate of Transjordan becomes Kingdom of Jordan (named Transjordan until 1948)
1946 - Kurdish Republic of Mahabad declared along with Azerbaijan People's Government, but defeated by Iranian military forces and dissolved
1947 - UN General Assembly proposes to divide Palestine into an Arab and Jewish state
1948 - Israel declares independence and Arab-Israeli war erupts
petroleum becomes important political factor
1952 - After a revolution in Egypt the monarchy is overthrown
1953 - The coup d'état in Iran
1954 - Gamal Abdel Nasser becomes president of Egypt
1954 - Central Treaty Organization
1956 - Suez Crisis
1961 - First Kurdish-Iraqi War erupts in north Iraq.
1963 - Ba'th Party comes to power in Iraq under the leadership of General Ahmad Hasan al-Bakr and Colonel Abdul Salam Arif
1964 - Abdul Rahman Arif stages military coup in Iraq against the Ba'th Party and brings his brother, Abdul Salam Arif, to power
1967 - Six-Day War, Israel occupies the Sinai Peninsula, Golan Heights, West Bank and Gaza Strip
1967 - Kurds revolt in Western Iran, the revolt is crushed
1968 - Ba'athists stage second military coup under General Ahmed Hassan al-Bakr, Saddam Hussein is made vice president of Iraq
1970 - Gamal Abdel Nasser dies, Anwar Sadat becomes president of Egypt
1971 - The Aswan High Dam is completed with Soviet help in finance and construction; independence of Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain and the UAE
1973 - Yom Kippur War
1974 - The PLO is allowed to represent the people of Palestine in the UN
1974–1975 - Second Kurdish-Iraqi War
1975–90 - Lebanese Civil War
1976 - Syria invades Lebanon
1978 - Camp David Accords
1979 - Saddam Hussein becomes president of Iraq; Iranian Revolution; Israel-Egypt Peace Treaty
1980–1989 - Iran–Iraq War results in 1–1.25 million casualties, Iraq uses chemical weapons against Iran and rebel Kurds; large scale economical devastation and surge in oil prices affect the global world economy
1981 - Murder of Anwar Sadat
1982 - Israel invades Lebanon
1987–1990 - First Intifada
1991 - The Gulf War
1993 - Oslo Accords
1994 - 1994 civil war in Yemen
2000 - Israeli troops leave Lebanon
2003 - The 2003 Iraq War
2004–present - Shia insurgency in Yemen
2005 - Syrian troops leave Lebanon as a result of the Cedar Revolution
2006 - The 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict; Saddam Hussein executed for "crimes against humanity"
This is arguably a direct result of short sighted decisions made by victorious nations dividing the spoils of war. There have been one hell of a lot of vicious conflicts for a relatively small region within the last 100 years. I wasn't expecting a list quite that long when I started looking it up.
The list of countries recently adopting extreme Sharia law is interesting. I'm under no illusion that we can just invite Muslims into our super malls and fast food restaurants, give em an iPhone and everything will be peachy. These people are raised in a value system that is just very different than ours. That being said, Muslim countries operate under a bewildering array of interpretations of Sharia law, and though most forms have very little in common with a free democratic form of government, some populations have quite a few more 'freedoms' than their neighbors next door. That fact alone means that their systems are always evolving- just like ours is- and I don't think we would be overly optimistic in hoping that one day we might see a hybrid form of Sharia law that would be more open to free enterprise comparable to what we see in China. The economic zones that have allowed areas like Dubai to thrive have already been a proven success, and things are changing all the time. I don't know, just my ramblings.
Jumpkix
New member
First off, THANK YOU to all who have served our country. The rest of us owe you a debt that we cannot repay.
I think we all agree that we want the good people living in the middle east to know peace and freedom, and the many other blessings we take for granted here in the US.
At the same time, there will never be harmony back there, no matter what we do. Don't get me wrong, I'd love to hang the rules of engagement and put some .556 in each of those terrorist's skull. But American media would quickly betray our own, and I realize sadly how the uninformed public opinion greatly inhibits our military forces from doing their jobs and staying safe. But even if we decided to erase the middle east entirely, it wouldn't be long before someone else came along and started the process over again.
There's a couple things I think people need to understand:
-There are evil people in this world that will never accept peace
-War is an ugly and awful thing. Sometimes the wrong people die, but that's part of the game.
-Sometimes our society cries out at injustice, yet will not accept the price to fix that injustice.
-99% of us civilians (including me) are misinformed, stupid, and really have no understanding of foreign policy, the middle east, or the protocol of the US military and their functions.
-Before making assumptions about Iraq, go find a veteran who lost a body part or a friend, look them in the eyes and tell them your thoughts. I guarantee you will be enlightened about the true nature of the war.
Thank you again to all who have sacrificed. It's why we still live in the greatest country on earth.
I think we all agree that we want the good people living in the middle east to know peace and freedom, and the many other blessings we take for granted here in the US.
At the same time, there will never be harmony back there, no matter what we do. Don't get me wrong, I'd love to hang the rules of engagement and put some .556 in each of those terrorist's skull. But American media would quickly betray our own, and I realize sadly how the uninformed public opinion greatly inhibits our military forces from doing their jobs and staying safe. But even if we decided to erase the middle east entirely, it wouldn't be long before someone else came along and started the process over again.
There's a couple things I think people need to understand:
-There are evil people in this world that will never accept peace
-War is an ugly and awful thing. Sometimes the wrong people die, but that's part of the game.
-Sometimes our society cries out at injustice, yet will not accept the price to fix that injustice.
-99% of us civilians (including me) are misinformed, stupid, and really have no understanding of foreign policy, the middle east, or the protocol of the US military and their functions.
-Before making assumptions about Iraq, go find a veteran who lost a body part or a friend, look them in the eyes and tell them your thoughts. I guarantee you will be enlightened about the true nature of the war.
Thank you again to all who have sacrificed. It's why we still live in the greatest country on earth.
Quatre Coureur
New member
After an extensive visit from Hitler, Persia changed its name to Iran, which translates as 'Aryan'. Not related, but interesting nonetheless.
Similar threads
