Iraqi Resolve

[implodinggoat]

Yesterday the British were conducting a training mission involving paratroopers along the Irag/Kuwait border. When an Iraqi regiment saw this they assumed that the war had started and immediatley took the oppurtunity to throw down their guns, march across the border and surrender to the British.

Prior to this I felt that the Iraqi military might actually be willing to die for the benefit of their most glorius leader but now I am convinced that there is little threat of a war with Iraq turning into another Vietnam.

What do you think? Is this a good indication of the resolve and commitment of the average Iraqi soldier or am I jumping to conclusions?

[mysecondstar]

i absolutely agree. aside from the republican guard, i believe that the rest of the iraqi army will be a push-over. i believe if there is to be much fighting anywhere, it will be street-fighting in Baghdad. and even then it shouldn't be so bad.

[mysecondstar]

mind you i still am not for war, and i would love it if everyone in iraq will just throw down their weapons. that would be ideal, but you should always expect the worst.

[mysecondstar]

At 3/12/03 09:22 PM, JudgeMeHarshX wrote: I felt bad for finding this story funny, but can you see it? We should just light firecrackers and so flybys with jets until the armies have all just thrown their weapons down and ran to the caves.

it is disturbingly amusing. what an ideal scenario for war, don't you think?

[Commander-K25]

At 3/12/03 09:11 PM, implodinggoat wrote: Yesterday the British were conducting a training mission involving paratroopers along the Irag/Kuwait border. When an Iraqi regiment saw this they assumed that the war had started and immediatley took the oppurtunity to throw down their guns, march across the border and surrender to the British.

Prior to this I felt that the Iraqi military might actually be willing to die for the benefit of their most glorius leader but now I am convinced that there is little threat of a war with Iraq turning into another Vietnam.

What do you think? Is this a good indication of the resolve and commitment of the average Iraqi soldier or am I jumping to conclusions?

In the first Gulf War the Iraqis were surrendering to reporters and camera crews just so they could GET OUT OF THERE!

Remember that the average Iraqi soldier does not wan to be there. He is a conscript, drafted into the army. Only the "elite" Republican Guard are true professionals.

[karasz]

It is funny... dont feel bad for laughing at it... although I still dont understand why the Brits sent the Iraqi troops back... i think that is odd... (and i swear to god if i hear one person say its so there can be more bloodshed i think ill find them and shed some blood...)

i still think that Saddam will use some chem weapons on some of the invading armies... and despite popular opinion Bush uses a nuke and destroys Baghdad... and about 25 years from now when the country starts being rebuilt, armageddon begins... somewhere in the book of revelations it says when Babylon is rebuilt the end times are begun... (i know most people are anti-bible and such but hey, we be screwed...)

babylon=baghdad
baghdad=nuked=eventually rebuilt=we are so fucked...

[Jlop985]

If you are a supposed Christian, then at least clean up your language. Also, since we cannot stop the events of the last days from occurring, then we must look at the world as it were never to happen. Expect the apocalypse, but don't let it change your views on world events.

[karasz]

At 3/12/03 11:30 PM, Jlop985 wrote: If you are a supposed Christian, then at least clean up your language.

im not a christian, doesnt mean i cant read the bible though...

Also, since we cannot stop the events of the last days from occurring, then we must look at the world as it were never to happen. Expect the apocalypse, but don't let it change your views on world events.

actually the whole reason the book of revelations,if im not mistaken, is to help people know how not to let it happen... i know that is the rationale behind Nostradamus' book of prohpecies, only problem is noone can decipher the prophecy until after the fact...

i like living... so armageddon affects me, and i dislike having to fight the final battle... but hey thats me...

[tomthinks]

That doesn't make sense.

If you say that not letting the events in Revealation occur is the way to avoid end times.... then you are suggesting that the book of Revealation is a source of truth (since if you let those events happen, the world would end). BUT, that's a fallacy, because the book of Revealation suggests those events will happen.

I'm finding this incredibly hard to explain.

[karasz]

well then i suppose im wrong... oh well, not the first time...

[Slizor]

I doubt this will involve much ground-fighting actually. The US will just drop bombs on civilians and shoot surrendering soldiers, like in the last Gulf War. I would expect it to be something like that, with few US casualties.

[NEMESiSZ]

Dead enemy soldiers aren't a liability, living ones are.

[implodinggoat]

At 3/12/03 11:25 PM, karasz wrote: It is funny... dont feel bad for laughing at it... although I still dont understand why the Brits sent the Iraqi troops back... i think that is odd... (and i swear to god if i hear one person say its so there can be more bloodshed i think ill find them and shed some blood...)

They sent them back because without a formal decleration of war they cannot hold them as prisoners of war. I sort of pity them because god knows what Saddam has done to them. Undoubtedly he has tortured and executed a good number of them, poor bastards.

[implodinggoat]

At 3/12/03 11:30 PM, Jlop985 wrote:

actually the whole reason the book of revelations,if im not mistaken, is to help people know how not to let it happen.

The book of revelations is bullshit that the Catholic Church added to the Bible in the middle ages to scare people into following the church, kind of makes you wonder how much the Catholic church edited the bible over the years.

[implodinggoat]

At 3/13/03 08:51 AM, Slizor wrote: I doubt this will involve much ground-fighting actually. The US will just drop bombs on civilians and shoot surrendering soldiers, like in the last Gulf War. I would expect it to be something like that, with few US casualties.

Shit happens in war Slizor. Compared to most of the world the United States practices in war are quite humane. We spend ass loads of money on smart bombs wih the express purpose of reducing civilian casulties.

However you do have a valid point in that dropping bombs alone isn't a proper method of warfare. That is what we did under the Clinton Administration in Kosovo so that we could minimize our cassulties and thus provide the Clinton administration with a PR victory. The U.S. had 0 cassulties to enemy fire but we also inflicted 8000 civilian casulties out of about 20,000 people who died, a sickeningly high percentage.

The proper approach is to use air superiority to disable the enemy infrastructure and then go in full force with an overwhelming ground force, thus increasing American casulties but drastically decreasing over all casulties.

[karasz]

At 3/14/03 12:22 AM, implodinggoat wrote:

At 3/12/03 11:30 PM, Jlop985 wrote:

actually the whole reason the book of revelations,if im not mistaken, is to help people know how not to let it happen.

The book of revelations is bullshit that the Catholic Church added to the Bible in the middle ages to scare people into following the church, kind of makes you wonder how much the Catholic church edited the bible over the years.

what you mean like how at one point Jesus goes from 12 to 30 in the new testament...

do u have any proof to ur statement about the middle agesand the book of revelations...

although i wonder if someone were to take Nostradamus' book of prophecies and the book of revelations and see if they are anyhow linked in prohecies...

[implodinggoat]

At 3/14/03 01:08 AM, karasz wrote:
do u have any proof to ur statement about the middle agesand the book of revelations...

Yeah I saw a History Channel special on it once. I forgot the name of the guy who wrote it but it was added around 1400.

The writing was heavily influenced by Dante's Divine Comedy which was written in 1340 A.D.

[SickJester13]

i believe that iraqs army is a push over and wont be another vetienam, cause they got funded by a whole other government iraq doesnt, 2 only like 80 guys died 3 sadam stays in power for political reason im not sure of the reasons. 4 im always up for a fight when You HAVE to but i feel being motivated by oil and money is far from having too. 5 what bush wanting to go war for those reasons aint right at all,6 but when the UN always uses our army to solve things in the world its no wonder why we are hated and i think the UN hased used the US armed forces so much cause other countries may not have as big of armies i think they forget who the army actually is under the command of i dont believe in war being political war is sicker when u have a bunch of rich assholes making desicions about wheater we should or should not kill people.

[Zapman]

I think that the iraqi army is defently a push over, but if the army is pulled into the cities and buildings, we are recreating the crisis in Somalia. Urban warfare is dangerous. It doesn't matter if you have the strongest army. It is dangerous because a gun can poke out of any window or around any corner. Also the civilians will attack us. Just watch Black Hawk Down. My resolve for Iraq is if they do pull into the cities, instead of chasing them, we should just blocade the city. Allow only innocent civilians to leave.