Iraq Vote on Pullout Put on Back Burner - Polidicks

[QUOTE]BAGHDAD — Iraqi politicians say they have put aside for the time being any plans to push for a referendum on the U.S.-Iraqi security pact governing the American troop pullout here. The threat of a referendum had clouded U.S. withdrawal plans. If Iraqi voters were given a chance to vote on the deal some U.S. officials feared they would reject it, forcing an accelerated U.S. withdrawal. Military officials have said they will comply with any quicker withdrawal in the case of a "no" vote in a referendum. The flagging momentum for a referendum now, however, eases pressure on U.S. commanders. U.S. military spokesman Brig. Gen. Stephen Lanza said the referendum is an issue that is up to the Iraqis, and American troops are focused on continuing to comply with the security pact. The security pact calls for all American troops to be out of Iraq by the end of 2011. When the security treaty was approved, Sunni lawmakers insisted on a referendum as a condition of their support. Originally scheduled for last July, it was delayed. Many observers suspected it might never happen. But in August, Iraq's cabinet set a new date of Jan. 16, coinciding with nationwide parliamentary polls. A "no" vote on the deal would trigger a termination clause, speeding up a full American troop withdrawal by almost a year. Lawmakers said Sunday there weren't any moves afoot to push through legislation authorizing the referendum. That, they say, means it will either be delayed once again, or dropped altogether. [/QUOTE] Source: [url]http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,560100,00.html[/url]

Big suprise.

[QUOTE=peabrain101;17673751]Big suprise.[/QUOTE] You somewhat have to agree with their decision though

When you think about it, much like Afganistan, our military is the only thing holding their corrupt puppet government in place. They put on a show of trying to get rid of us for their constituencies, but IMO those in power don't want to lose that military strength.

[img]http://www.steamgames.com/tf2/pyro/images/pic_backburner.jpg[/img] Makes sense too, since everything comming near iraq gets fucked.

[QUOTE=Used Car Salesman;17675463]When you think about it, much like Afganistan, our military is the only thing holding their corrupt puppet government in place. They put on a show of trying to get rid of us for their constituencies, but IMO those in power don't want to lose that military strength.[/QUOTE] That's just the way politics work in general. You don't want to look like you're ass licking someone, but at the same time you can't lose out on the benefits of said ass licking.

[QUOTE=Used Car Salesman;17675463]When you think about it, much like Afganistan, our military is the only thing holding their corrupt puppet government in place. They put on a show of trying to get rid of us for their constituencies, but IMO those in power don't want to lose that military strength.[/QUOTE] Your statement reminds me of an Alternate History novel I read by Harry Turtledove called, "The Man With The Iron Heart". Its story was about a nazi insurgency in post-WWII Germany, right after the allied victory. The timeline diverges from reality when the SS decide to prepare a partisan war after the loss of Stalingrad. After killing more and more American, British, Soviet, and French occupation forces "after" the war was defeated, the people at home started rallies to bring our troops home. Eventually, the anti-occupation people manage to cut Truman's budget for keeping soldiers over there, so the US/British set up a psuedo-government and "hope" that it's strong enough to fight off the Nazis themeslves. Here's the last two paragraphs from the book. It gave me some shivers: [QUOTE] Rolf Halbritter coughed from the dust the retreating convoy kicked up. He shook his head in wonder not far from awe. The Amis were really and truly going - no, really and truly gone! Which meant...He had a badge pinned on the underside of his collar, where it didn't show. Now he could wear it openly again. It was round, with a red outer ring that caried a legend in bronze letters: NATIONALSOZIALISTISCHE DEUTSCHE ARBEITERPARTEI. The white inner circle held a black swastika. Every Party member had one just like it. Pretty soon, they'd all be showing it, too. [/QUOTE] Now, could you apply this to Iraq or Afghanistan?

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;17677224]Your statement reminds me of an Alternate History novel I read by Harry Turtledove called, "The Man With The Iron Heart". Its story was about a nazi insurgency in post-WWII Germany, right after the allied victory. The timeline diverges from reality when the SS decide to prepare a partisan war after the loss of Stalingrad. After killing more and more American, British, Soviet, and French occupation forces "after" the war was defeated, the people at home started rallies to bring our troops home. Eventually, the anti-occupation people manage to cut Truman's budget for keeping soldiers over there, so the US/British set up a psuedo-government and "hope" that it's strong enough to fight off the Nazis themeslves. Here's the last two paragraphs from the book. It gave me some shivers: Now, could you apply this to Iraq or Afghanistan?[/QUOTE] It's up to the people to choose their government. If they truly want the old way of life then they should be free to have it.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;17677332]It's up to the people to choose their government. If they truly want the old way of life then they should be free to have it.[/QUOTE] So, if the Nazis rose to power again after World War II, you would have absolutely no problem with that?

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;17677387]So, if the Nazis rose to power again after World War II, you would have absolutely no problem with that?[/QUOTE] The people have the freedom to choose their own government, whether I agree with it or not.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;17677224]Here's the last two paragraphs from the book. It gave me some shivers: [/QUOTE] Thanks for the spoilers.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;17677457]They people have the freedom to choose their own government, whether I agree with it or not.[/QUOTE] Even if these people swear that they will come after you, and have a clear record to prove that they mean to do what they say?

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;17677511]Even if these people swear that they will come after you, and have a clear record to prove that they mean to do what they say?[/QUOTE] You kill someone only in self defense. Pre-emptive strikes are just as bad as what you are trying to strike against.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;17677606]You kill someone only in self defense. Pre-emptive strikes are just as bad as what you are trying to strike against.[/QUOTE] Even if they show clear signs of military build up along your border?

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;17677660]Even if they show clear signs of military build up along your border?[/QUOTE] Then you build up your military along their border.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;17677692]Then you build up your military along their border.[/QUOTE] You would rather have the possibility of your nation over run, your citizens enslaved, yourself possibly killed instead of pre-emptively attacking them to prevent that? I cite Israel on the Six-Day War. That's how a pre-emptive strike can be used as self defense.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;17677920]You would rather have the possibility of your nation over run, your citizens enslaved, yourself possibly killed instead of pre-emptively attacking them to prevent that? I cite Israel on the Six-Day War. That's how a pre-emptive strike can be used as self defense.[/QUOTE] I never said leave yourself vulnerable, just don't attack unless attacked first.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;17677956]I never said leave yourself vulnerable, just don't attack unless attacked first.[/QUOTE] But this has a greater probability of losing, since you will most likely be fighting in your own territory, which harms your industry, population and moral.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;17678093]But this has a greater probability of losing, since you will most likely be fighting in your own territory, which harms your industry, population and moral.[/QUOTE] Actually fighting on your own territory increases moral in most populations. It can harm industry, but not if you have an actual gameplan for the defense of your country, and war harms your population regardless.

Pulling out isn't really reliable at such times - they should have started using more protection and security as soon as possible :quagmire:

[QUOTE=yawmwen;17680524]Actually fighting on your own territory increases moral in most populations. It can harm industry, but not if you have an actual gameplan for the defense of your country, and war harms your population regardless.[/QUOTE] Like France and Germany in World War II? The French amounted up troops along their border, and got ready for a clash. Even after war was declared, they didn't invade at all during the "Phony War". What happened to them? They got smashed to the ground.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;17680689]Like France and Germany in World War II? The French amounted up troops along their border, and got ready for a clash. Even after war was declared, they didn't invade at all during the "Phony War". What happened to them? They got smashed to the ground.[/QUOTE] Don't use the French as an example. They were trying to fight as if it were WW1 again. They weren't prepared for the new style of war that the Germans brought forward. The USSR is a slightly better example. The fact that Germany took a bunch of land so quickly only strengthened the Soviet Resolve.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;17680772]Don't use the French as an example. They were trying to fight as if it were WW1 again. They weren't prepared for the new style of war that the Germans brought forward. The USSR is a slightly better example. The fact that Germany took a bunch of land so quickly only strengthened the Soviet Resolve.[/QUOTE] The Soviet Union did not make significant gains in land until the Allied invasion of Normandy, acting as a release valve of German troops against the USSR.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;17680959]The Soviet Union did not make significant gains in land until the Allied invasion of Normandy, acting as a release valve of German troops against the USSR.[/QUOTE] No, the tide of the war began to change towards the end of 1942. Well before the allies landed in Europe.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;17681058]No, the tide of the war began to change towards the end of 1942. Well before the allies landed in Europe.[/QUOTE] Yes, it did begin to change, but the USSR did not make [i]significant[/i] gains until after the Normandy invasion.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;17681113]Yes, it did begin to change, but the USSR did not make [i]significant[/i] gains until after the Normandy invasion.[/QUOTE] Not really. [img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/96/Eastern_Front_1943-08_to_1944-12.png[/img] By April in 1943 the Soviets had taken back most of the Ukraine and were actually taking a bit of Poland, they had huge success taking back their bit of Baltic area. It's true they began really hitting hard with an offensive into Poland and Germany in the summer, but they were already making a lot of big strides and that offensive probably would have had similar success regardless of the allied invasion. In 1943 it was apparent that it was only a matter of time before the USSR overran Germany.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;17681383]Not really. By April in 1943 the Soviets had taken back most of the Ukraine and were actually taking a bit of Poland, they had huge success taking back their bit of Baltic area. It's true they began really hitting hard with an offensive into Poland and Germany in the summer, but they were already making a lot of big strides and that offensive probably would have had similar success regardless of the allied invasion. In 1943 it was apparent that it was only a matter of time before the USSR overran Germany.[/QUOTE] The North African and Italian fronts helped relieve troops from the Eastern Front as well.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;17681454]The North African and Italian fronts helped relieve troops from the Eastern Front as well.[/QUOTE] Africa didn't all that much. Italy did help a bit though, I'll give you that.

Obama will be my most favorite president ever if he ends this war. I don't even give a shit about anything else, just get Iraq over with.

[QUOTE=POLOPOZOZO;17682670]Obama will be my most favorite president ever if he ends this war. I don't even give a shit about anything else, just get Iraq over with.[/QUOTE] Even if he does, my favorite will always be TR. Besides, Obama still has to wrestle with health care, Afghanistan and the recession.