This thread is pretty simple, the US has just invaded Iraq, tell me what you would of done differently than what we have done. PLEASE do not just say we should of not invaded, I know that is one option, but this thread is assuming we are already in Iraq...Come up with the best plan of ending the war and making it safe for Iraqis

3/26/2008 6:51:35 AM

Turn around, go home, and apologize for invading in the first place.

3/26/2008 6:57:07 AM

SO...you want to of started the war then just of given up

3/26/2008 6:58:43 AM

No, your question presumed that the foolish notion of starting the invasion had to be taken as given.
With that stipulation, I think the only sane choice would have been (not "would of been" btw) to quit asap.

3/26/2008 7:01:51 AM

I remember watching commentary on how to do it the right way before it started. Basically, even at that time it was known that there were many different groups with their own interests in mind. In particular, the neighboring countries were supposedly key. Afghanistan set a good president to be honest, we didn't even do most of the fighting there. That's what we should have done for Iraq, basically spent a large amount of time building a decent coalition to go in there. And this would have happened if left up to the generals, but the executive branch had their own time frame already built before any of it started. That's what killed us.

Oh yeah, and quadruple the number of troops and have the "reconstruction" office actually do something earlier than a month after we invaded.

Oh yeah, and don't disband the Iraq military. And you also might want to guard those munitions stores in the early days, you know, where mobs of people were walking away with rocket launchers and whatnot.


I guess what I'm trying to say is... do it competently?

3/26/2008 7:03:27 AM

I do think disbanding the Iraqi military and having jobless/broke people with weapons was a bad idea....I also feel that we didn't secure the borders with Iran and Syria fast enough to prevent weapons and terrorists in

3/26/2008 7:08:11 AM

TELL US MORE, YOUR PLANS SEEM SO PERFECT

3/26/2008 7:17:07 AM

Quote :

"you want to of started the war then just of given up"

this hurts my head to read.

3/26/2008 7:50:24 AM

Have?

3/26/2008 8:40:21 AM

Quote :

"I also feel that we didn't secure the borders with Iran and Syria fast enough to prevent weapons and terrorists in"

You'll have to agree that securing borders seems to be the bane of our existence. Si?

3/26/2008 8:44:45 AM

jocristian

Why does this hurt your head to read? I'm just stating my opinion and SkankinMonky why don't you come up with something useful to this thread...how about you state what you think you would of done to completed the war quicker..cause all I'm hearing is whining from your end

3/26/2008 8:46:05 AM

^n00b just got flamed for grammar and he doesn't even realize it

3/26/2008 8:48:43 AM

i think immediately leaving after landing and saying "oops, these troops took a wrong turn" would be a pretty quick way to end the war.

3/26/2008 8:49:58 AM

Whining? lol.

I'm grasping to fathom your poorly worded and barely english sentences. Are you sure you went to college? Oh, that's right, you were in sports so it didn't matter if you learned basic english or not.

I would not have started the war in Iraq so I wouldn't have had to plan anything. I know it's hard to fathom for you but just think about it, it may hurt, but try.

3/26/2008 9:10:13 AM

Quote :

"of"

3/26/2008 9:13:07 AM

History sure is a hard degree. Don't try to compare brain power with me You try getting two degrees in five years while playing a sport. By the way my degrees were in Business Management and Economics and I graduated with honors. My right hand is also in a cast so please excuse my grammatical errors.

3/26/2008 9:26:12 AM

Quote :

"My right hand is also in a cast so please excuse my grammatical errors."

Your hand being in a cast would explain spelling errors, your below average IQ would explain egregious grammatical errors.

3/26/2008 9:27:39 AM

You try getting two degrees in five years while playing a sport. By the way my degrees were in Business Management and Economics and I graduated with honors.

You still haven't bashed this part of my post, how about you give it a try?

3/26/2008 9:33:44 AM

Perfectly respectable majors if you actually did work and weren't able to breeze through due to your sports. And don't pretend it doesn't happen.

3/26/2008 9:41:47 AM

Talk to any of my teachers, I did not receive any special treatment. I earned all my grades. The only special treatment athletes get is in the PRT degree, which a majority of them are taking, PRT is Parks Rec and Tourism. Trust me I point that out to them all the time.

3/26/2008 9:58:16 AM

we shouldn't have went in to begin with...we had virtually the whole world's support for afghanistan, and blew it. but, based on the premise stated in the first post, it would seem logical to me that we let the military plan and run the damn thing. its been widely noted that for the first few years of the conflict, rummy and cheneybot dreamed up a false vision of how the war would unfold, even in the face of pretty much every important military mind saying it would be much, much, much more difficult than they claimed.

finally, after we were balls deep in a quagmire, they admitted they were wrong, rummy tucked tail and ran. They pretty much shifted operations planning to petraeus (a militar guy, go figure ). And the situation improved. it seems to me the admin has been, was, and is much too idealistic, and too slow to adapt in general.

point is, none of us know enough to say we should have done this or that, the admin included so they should have let the real experts handle it from the beginning.

3/26/2008 10:03:57 AM

Quote :

"SO...you want to of started the war then just of given up"

Haha - what an idiot

3/26/2008 10:07:37 AM

Haha Terpball is such a douchbag

3/26/2008 10:10:40 AM

Run sims in Risk.

3/26/2008 10:10:43 AM

message_topic.aspx?topic=520163

[Edited on March 26, 2008 at 10:15 AM. Reason : ]

3/26/2008 10:15:42 AM

They're no right way to eat a Reese's start an unnecessary war.

3/26/2008 10:17:57 AM

- Adopted the Powell doctrine regarding invasion and subsequent occupation instead of listening to Rumsfeld

- Franchised their national army instead of dismantling it and trying to rebuild from scratch (war criminals not withstanding -- you wouldn't get them all obviously, but you could prosecute the egregious offenders)

- Make local leaders/figureheads stakeholders in peace -- offer regions that kept the peace infrastructure buildout from oil revenues

- Remove all potential conflicts of interest, especially contracts for Haliburton



...this is all assuming the powers that be are not prolonging the chaos on purpose

3/26/2008 10:19:10 AM

3/26/2008 10:23:09 AM

^^ Yeah, it does seems like a lot of the things the administration ended up doing were primed for prolonging the conflict. That's not necessarily what happened but it allows for about two different explanations.

1. The administration wanted to prolong the conflict.

2. The administration is grossly incompetent.

Neither could be described as being anywhere near a good thing to have in the White House.

3/26/2008 10:26:40 AM

^^lol, hindsight!!? as I said before, pretty much every military mind saw the way the admin painted the conflict as grossly inaccurate beforehand, and they chose not to listen.

3/26/2008 10:31:18 AM

my point is, this whole thread is saying "in hindsight..."

we know a lot more now about the situation than we did 5 years ago

did anyone post all this stuff 5 years ago?

3/26/2008 10:32:53 AM

^x5 Agreed

- We needed a lot more troops at the get-go than we had, despite many recommendations to do so
- As for the Haliburton bit, it would have been nice, but there's really no other company large enough with enough resources to do some of the jobs their doing. But it would have been nice to not get ripped off by an American company during an American war.

[Edited on March 26, 2008 at 10:35 AM. Reason : ^]

3/26/2008 10:34:54 AM

Quote :

"did anyone post all this stuff 5 years ago? "

Yes, there were people posting this stuff 5 years ago

3/26/2008 10:37:13 AM

link?

3/26/2008 10:39:59 AM

You know damn well I can't link a thread from 5 years ago. As if it proves a point anyway... MANY people knew they were just making excuses to go into Iraq, and many people knew it would be a disaster.

3/26/2008 10:42:39 AM

I would have done the following in Iraq.

1. Build a barricade of about 150 Army and Marine combat brigades surrounding baghdad.

2. Set up refuge camps for short term relief and immigration to other countries.

3. Then using C-130 Cargo ships and other heavy bombers as cargo, I would drop leaflets saying that emmninent destruction of your city begins in 1 week, to leave with all the possessions you need and meet the US army at the checkpoints surrounding the city in order to escape. (this would remove weapons and other explosives in a thorough search of each individual)

4. I would continue to broadcast this message on every immaginable frequency for the remaining week.

5. At the end of week 1, I would then send in fast moving light infantry and continue to scan the city for 1 extra week to remove people from hospitals/schools and other innocents left behind. This would probably result in several hundred US casulaties.

6. At the end of week 2: bombardment on a large scale that results in little to no remaining structures in baghdad. (No nukes, conventional bombs)

7. After a potential week of bombardment I would send in heavy ground forces to clean up if there is any life left.

8. After sitting there 1 month I would then send in a massive cleanup crew consisting mainly of Iraqi citizens / US funds and supplies / UN help and any other allies that would assist in the rebuilding of baghdad

9. Set up new gov't modeled after the US gov't created in 1787

10. profit

3/26/2008 10:43:41 AM

Quote :

"MANY people knew they were just making excuses to go into Iraq, and many people knew it would be a disaster."

5 years ago the majority of people were for the war

hence my pictures about hindsight and monday morning quarterback

how many people is "MANY"? a lot less than the people who were for the war back in March of 2003

3/26/2008 10:44:16 AM

I know right, I mean, if the majority of people voted for the idiot making the decision, why desert him in a time of crisis?

3/26/2008 10:46:16 AM

Support of the war is not the same thing as support for the method employed in the war.

3/26/2008 10:47:06 AM

so you guys are acting like you knew the right plan all along? lol

3/26/2008 10:48:02 AM

yes. we are. but it's the pussy libs like yourselves that prevented it from happening

oh but we need 1 trillion rules of engagement.

i say if they aren't obeying the curfew: headshot

[Edited on March 26, 2008 at 10:50 AM. Reason : .]

3/26/2008 10:49:48 AM

I would say the military advisers and folks in the military who argued for large ground forces knew what they were talking about.

3/26/2008 10:50:13 AM

They're acting like the administration dropped hints that they knew this exact thing would happen and now we're criticizing their horrible, stupid actions.

3/26/2008 10:51:39 AM

I would also advise doing the following in Tehran:

1. Build a barricade of about 150 Army and Marine combat brigades surrounding baghdad.

2. Set up refuge camps for short term relief and immigration to other countries.

3. Then using C-130 Cargo ships and other heavy bombers as cargo, I would drop leaflets saying that emmninent destruction of your city begins in 1 week, to leave with all the possessions you need and meet the US army at the checkpoints surrounding the city in order to escape. (this would remove weapons and other explosives in a thorough search of each individual)

4. I would continue to broadcast this message on every immaginable frequency for the remaining week.

5. At the end of week 1, I would then send in fast moving light infantry and continue to scan the city for 1 extra week to remove people from hospitals/schools and other innocents left behind. This would probably result in several hundred US casulaties.

6. At the end of week 2: bombardment on a large scale that results in little to no remaining structures in baghdad. (No nukes, conventional bombs)

7. After a potential week of bombardment I would send in heavy ground forces to clean up if there is any life left.

8. After sitting there 1 month I would then send in a massive cleanup crew consisting mainly of Iraqi citizens / US funds and supplies / UN help and any other allies that would assist in the rebuilding of baghdad

9. Set up new gov't modeled after the US gov't created in 1787

10. profit (tehran woudl turn into a hub of technology in less than 20 years)

3/26/2008 10:52:11 AM

Quote :

"horrible, stupid actions."

4,000 US dead in Iraq AND Afganistan, vs. 40,000 US dead in Vietnam, vs. > 400,000 US dead in WW2.


what was 'horrible' about liberation of 2 countries at once controlled by terrorists? I still fail to see your viewpoints about this 'horrible' war Mister.

[Edited on March 26, 2008 at 10:55 AM. Reason : 4]

3/26/2008 10:54:09 AM

Quote :

"3. Then using C-130 Cargo ships and other heavy bombers as cargo, I would drop leaflets saying that emmninent destruction of your city begins in 1 week, to leave with all the possessions you need and meet the US army at the checkpoints surrounding the city in order to escape. (this would remove weapons and other explosives in a thorough search of each individual)"

we did drop leaflets. Your stream of consciousness war plan sucks.

3/26/2008 10:54:41 AM

Quote :

"so you guys are acting like you knew the right plan all along? lol"

nope, not at all. See my post:

Quote :

"point is, none of us know enough to say we should have done this or that, the admin included, so they should have let the real experts handle it from the beginning."

Quote :

"what was 'horrible' about liberation of 2 countries at once controlled by terrorists? I still fail to see your viewpoints about this 'horrible' war Mister."

you are terribly naive if you think liberation was the reason we went in...

[Edited on March 26, 2008 at 10:57 AM. Reason : .]

3/26/2008 10:55:43 AM

Quote :

"saying that emmninent destruction of your city begins in 1 week, to leave with all the possessions you need and meet the US army at the checkpoints surrounding the city in order to escape. (this would remove weapons and other explosives in a thorough search of each individual)""

holy fuck somebody can't read.

3/26/2008 10:55:45 AM

WW2?

you might as well bring the American Civil War into this

3/26/2008 10:56:13 AM

Quote :

"what was 'horrible' about liberation of 2 countries at once controlled by terrorists? "

You think IRAQ was controlled by terrorists??? If you're gonna put him on trial for what he did 20 years ago, gassing his own people, I think we're kinda late. Other than that, Suddam HATED terrorists, and Iraq was not being controlled by them.

3/26/2008 10:57:42 AM