Posted on 09/12/2007 8:21:36 PM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach
Remove Mookie on the way into Iran. Bomb them for weeks before going in. Not just a bit....have the munitions factories prepare to make smart bombs and iron bombs on a 24 hour schedule for the next several months. Fly everything that a bomb can be strapped to over that rats nest and crater it worse than the moon. Cities and all.
Is it time to quit playing games yet?
Heres what we should do.
We should withdraw from Iraq through Tehran. Heres how I think we should pull out of Iraq. Add one more front to the scenario below, which would be a classic amphibious beach landing from the south in Iran, and it becomes a strategic withdrawal from Iraq. And I think the guy who would pull it off is Duncan Hunter.
How to Stand Up to Iran
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1808220/posts?page=36#36
Posted by Kevmo to TomasUSMC
On News/Activism 03/28/2007 7:11:08 PM PDT · 36 of 36
Split Iraq up and get out
***The bold military move would be to mobilize FROM Iraq into Iran through Kurdistan and then sweep downward, meeting up with the forces that we pull FROM Afghanistan in a 2-pronged offensive. We would be destroying nuke facilities and building concrete fences along geo-political lines, separating warring tribes physically. At the end, we take our boys into Kurdistan, set up a couple of big military bases and stay awhile. We could invite the French, Swiss, Italians, Mozambiqans, Argentinians, Koreans, whoever is willing to be the police forces for the regions that we move through, and if the area gets too hot for these peacekeeper weenies we send in military units. Basically, it would be learning the lesson of Iraq and applying it.
15 rules for understanding the Middle East
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1774248/posts
Rule 8: Civil wars in the Arab world are rarely about ideas like liberalism vs. communism. They are about which tribe gets to rule. So, yes, Iraq is having a civil war as we once did. But there is no Abe Lincoln in this war. Its the South vs. the South.
Rule 10: Mideast civil wars end in one of three ways: a) like the U.S. civil war, with one side vanquishing the other; b) like the Cyprus civil war, with a hard partition and a wall dividing the parties; or c) like the Lebanon civil war, with a soft partition under an iron fist (Syria) that keeps everyone in line. Saddam used to be the iron fist in Iraq. Now it is us. If we dont want to play that role, Iraqs civil war will end with A or B.
Lets say my scenario above is what happens. Would that military mobilization qualify as a withdrawal from Iraq as well as Afghanistan? Then, when were all done and we set up bases in Kurdistan, it wouldnt really be Iraq, would it? It would be Kurdistan.
.
.
I have posted in the past that I think the key to the strategy in the middle east is to start with an independent Kurdistan. If we engaged Iran in such a manner we might earn back the support of these windvane politicians and wussie voters who dont mind seeing a quick & victorious fight but hate seeing endless police action battles that dont secure a country.
I thought it would be cool for us to set up security for the Kurds on their southern border with Iraq, rewarding them for their bravery in defying Saddam Hussein. We put in some military bases there for, say, 20 years as part of the occupation of Iraq in their transition to democracy. We guarantee the autonomy of Iraqi Kurdistan as long as they dont engage with Turkey. But that doesnt say anything about engaging with Iranian Kurdistan. Within those 20 years the Kurds could have a secure and independent nation with expanding borders into Iran. After we close down the US bases, Kurdistan is on her own. But at least Kurdistan would be an independent nation with about half its territory carved out of Persia. If Turkey doesnt relinquish her claim on Turkish Kurdistan after that, it isnt our problem, its 2 of our allies fighting each other, one for independence and the other for regional primacy. I support democratic independence over a bullying arrogant minority.
The kurds are the closest thing we have to friends in that area. They fought against Saddam (got nerve-gassed), theyre fighting against Iran, they squabble with our so-called ally Turkey (who didnt allow Americans to operate in the north of Iraq this time around).
Its time for them to have their own country. They deserve it. They carve Kurdistan out of northern Iraq, northern Iran, and try to achieve some kind of autonomy in eastern Turkey. If Turkey gets angry, we let them know that there are consequences to turning your back on your friend when they need you. If the Turks want trouble, they can invade the Iraqi or Persian state of Kurdistan and kill americans to make their point. It wouldnt be a wise move for them, theyd get their backsides handed to them and have eastern Turkey carved out of their country as a result.
If such an act of betrayal to an ally means they get a thorn in their side, I would be happy with it. Its time for people who call themselves our allies to put up or shut up. The Kurds have been putting up and deserve to be rewarded with an autonomous and sovereign Kurdistan, borne out of the blood of their own patriots.
Should Turkey decide to make trouble with their Kurdish population, we would stay out of it, other than to guarantee sovereignty in the formerly Iranian and Iraqi portions of Kurdistan. When one of our allies wants to fight another of our allies, its a messy situation. If Turkey goes into the war on Irans side then they aint really our allies and thats the end of that.
I agree that its hard on troops and their families. We won the war 4 years ago. This aftermath is the nation builders and peacekeeper weenies realizing that they need to understand things like the 15 rules for understanding the Middle East
This was the strategic error that GWB committed. It was another brilliant military campaign but the followup should have been 4X as big. All those countries that dont agree with sending troups to fight a war should have been willing to send in policemen and nurses to set up infrastructure and repair the country.
What do you think we should do with Iraq?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1752311/posts
Posted by Kevmo to Blue Scourge
On News/Activism 12/12/2006 9:17:33 AM PST · 23 of 105
My original contention was that we should have approached the reluctant allies like the French to send in Police forces for the occupation after battle, since they were so unwilling to engage in the fighting. It was easy to see that wed need as many folks in police and nurses uniforms as we would in US Army unitorms in order to establish a democracy in the middle east. But, since we didnt follow that line of approach, we now have a civil war on our hands. If we were to set our sights again on the police/nurse approach, we might still be able to pull this one off. I think we won the war in Iraq; we just havent won the peace.
I also think we should simply divide the country. The Kurds deserve their own country, theyve proven to be good allies. We could work with them to carve out a section of Iraq, set their sights on carving some territory out of Iran, and then when theyre done with that, we can help negotiate with our other allies, the Turks, to secure Kurdish autonomy in what presently eastern Turkey.
That leaves the Sunnis and Shiites to divide up whats left. We would occupy the areas between the two warring factions. Also, the UN/US should occupy the oil-producing regions and parcel out the revenue according to whatever plan they come up with. That gives all the sides something to argue about rather than shooting at us.
That leaves Damascus for round II. The whole deal could be circumvented by Syria if they simply allow real inspections of the WOMD sites. And when I say real, I mean real the inspectors would have a small armor division that they could call on whenever they get held up by some local yocal who didnt get this months bribe. Hussein was an idiot to dismantle all of his WOMDs and then not let the inspectors in. If he had done so, hed still be in power, pulling Bushs chain.
There are MANY Iranians who HATE their oppressors. Those are the people who can build a new Iran. You wanna kill them, too?
I understand your point, but there must be a better way than just bombing EVERYBODY. We need to get in there, support the opposition, and perform a little “surgery”.
Crank out the cruise missiles by the thousands and launch them from every platform possible. Screw the State Dept and the Disloyal opposition. They are poised to sell us out to the Mooselimbs and make nice with any other set of terrorists out there. The democraps mean this country harm and we better wake up and smell the coffee.
Defeatist Dems Won't Hear Of Victory In Iraq
IBD ^ | September 12, 2007 | Thomas Sowel
***********************************EXCERPTS******************************
The real problem is that many Democrats have bet the rent money on an American defeat in Iraq, and without that defeat they could find themselves in big trouble in the 2008 elections.
Deadlines for all who want to help in order to get out. Overwhelming firepower brought to bear is a good start. Surgical strikes if possible.
Powers to hold Iran nuclear talks
**********************************
Wednesday, 12 September 2007, 23:26 GMT 00:26 UK
The five permanent members of the UN Security Council, plus Germany, will meet in Washington on 21 September. Iran denies accusations it is seeking to develop nuclear weapons and has recently renewed co-operation with the UN's nuclear watchdog, the IAEA. But it refuses Western demands to end its programme of uranium enrichment. Speaking on Wednesday after a renewed call from the European Union for an end to enrichment, Tehran's chief nuclear negotiator said only "new initiatives" would lead to a diplomatic breakthrough. "We say that new possibilities should be explored... and we should not go back on the past," Ali Larijani said, referring to a previous temporary suspension of enrichment. The Security Council has already imposed two rounds of sanctions on Iran for failing to suspend uranium enrichment. 'No need' for bomb
In an interview with British television Iran's president, Mahmood Ahmadinejad, asked why Iran should stop an activity in which the United States and Britain were also engaged. He also reiterated that Iran had no desire to build a nuclear bomb, which he said would not be in its political interests. "The main problem is the enmity of America towards Iran. From the beginning we said that everything should be solved by the (International Atomic Energy) Agency. We do not need a bomb," he told Channel 4 News. 'Interference' Iran resumed co-operation with the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) in August after agreeing a plan to clear up unresolved issues relating to its past nuclear activities.
But, referring to the continued threat of sanctions, Iran's ambassador to the IAEA, Ali Ashgar Soltanieh, denounced continuing interference by the West. "Politically motivated interference will definitely jeopardise this new constructive trend," he said. "Therefore, we expect the international community to be aware of this fact that now Iran has done its part and now we expect the others want to show their political goodwill." UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon has also called for Iran to suspend its enrichment work, not simply co-operate with UN inspectors. And a number of Western diplomats have criticised the IAEA plan, accusing Iran of trying to delay the imposition of further UN sanctions while increasing its nuclear capabilities. Enriched uranium can be used for civilian nuclear power stations but can also provide fissile material for nuclear bombs. |
BBC Sucks
BBC Sucks
BBC Sucks
BBC Sucks
BBC Sucks
BBC Sucks
Enough talk concerning terrorist instigating (Russian backed) Iran as well as Syria — hit them both hard and very soon or we will be paying the highest price.
thanks Ernest!
Iranian Special-ops Unit Flees Iraq to Avoid Capture
The Examiner | September 12, 2007 | Rowan Scarborough
Posted on 09/12/2007 5:43:03 PM EDT by nuconvert
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1895492/posts
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.