How a Leader Responds to Americans Threatened

[Circe]

The US played no part in what happened in Germany after WWI. It was entirely the Europeans, who have always been worthless allies and brutal victors who put the squeeze on Germany and then lacked the courage to take action when Hitler rose to power.

Okay, good. SOMEBODY around here reads history!!

Caveat: the USA withdrew their loans to Germany because of the Crash of 1929 and the Great Depression -- we just didn't have the dollars -- and that did throw Germany into a serious depression, much worse than England or France. Did that support the rise of Hitler? Probably not really the point -- nationalism was the point -- but I guess it didn't help. But we were in the worse shape of all, so whatever. The rearming of the Rhineland (March 1936) was the moment of truth -- stop Hitler or not -- and that was Europe that let Hitler get away with that, but we would never have backed them if they had gone in with tanks.

Not that we should have, of course. Darn, can't these feckless Europeans do ANYthing on their own feet??

 

[pknopp]

That one is.

Never mind, get our people out, vite. Thousands of people mobbing a building -- nothing can stop that, not realistically. Nothing ever has.

Yeah, I know we could mow them down with machine guns, and history shows many examples of that (Champs de Mars, French Revolution; St. Petersburg Peasants March in 2005 Russia,, many other examples, such as the Boston Massacre). History also show that every single time, the government in place is then quickly overthrown.

So ---- bad move. Let's don't do that. I mean, I'd love it, but. Counterproductive.

Of course they can be stopped whether they are armed or not. If they are not armed, limited access to the building forces them to congregate in close quarters making the vulnerable to various non lethal remedies, and if they are armed, Apache gunships, fighter planes,etc. would quickly clear them out. Security at the embassy was lax because Iraqi special forces were supposed to be guarding the perimeter of the Green Zone, but they failed to act to stop the militia.

Iraq has no special forces. It's why we are still there. Iraq is not interested in fighting this war.

Your ignorance seems to be boundless. Iraq does have special forces and they were trained by the US. What "war" are you talking about?

It should be noted, that even though the U.S. trained them, we don't particularly trust them for our security or sometime in working in close proximity, as friends of mine who operated there have told me. This time my friends were right.

The Green Zone Iraqi special forces were guarding is not only the location of the US embassy but of all the foreign embassies and of the homes of major Iraqi political figures, so it was presumed reasonable the Iraqi special forces would maintain security, but they didn't even try to. Now US Marines will secure the perimeter of the Green Zone.

They never have. Why should it be expected now? We spent millions training them and arming them. They have never been interested.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Iraq has no special forces. It's why we are still there. Iraq is not interested in fighting this war.

Your ignorance seems to be boundless. Iraq does have special forces and they were trained by the US. What "war" are you talking about?

It should be noted, that even though the U.S. trained them, we don't particularly trust them for our security or sometime in working in close proximity, as friends of mine who operated there have told me. This time my friends were right.

We have killed their sons, daughters, wives and friends. Why would they be interested in protecting our interests?

Because I suspect we are mostly paying them, but you just can't get good help these days. Besides, dollars don't buy loyalty.

Yes they will take our money but they will not fight for us.

When did we last ask them to fight for us? Never?

 

[Circe]

Just what do you imagine US interests in Iraq to be?

We don't have interests in Iraq; we never did, after Kuwait was dealt with by George H.W. Bush pere.

And THAT is the problem. No interests, don't need the oil, get OUT.

 

[pknopp]

Your ignorance seems to be boundless. Iraq does have special forces and they were trained by the US. What "war" are you talking about?

It should be noted, that even though the U.S. trained them, we don't particularly trust them for our security or sometime in working in close proximity, as friends of mine who operated there have told me. This time my friends were right.

We have killed their sons, daughters, wives and friends. Why would they be interested in protecting our interests?

We also saved them from Saddam and from ISIS. Just what do you imagine US interests in Iraq to be?

We have been there 19 years and as of yet no one has been able to explain that. Can you?

In other words, you have no idea what these US interests are you keep referring to or what US war you are claiming the Iraqis don't want to fight.

No, I have no idea what our interests are there. Being there 19 years should we expect someone to explain that? We argued we needed to get rid of Saddam. That it would be in and out. How has that worked out?

 

[pknopp]

Your ignorance seems to be boundless. Iraq does have special forces and they were trained by the US. What "war" are you talking about?

It should be noted, that even though the U.S. trained them, we don't particularly trust them for our security or sometime in working in close proximity, as friends of mine who operated there have told me. This time my friends were right.

We have killed their sons, daughters, wives and friends. Why would they be interested in protecting our interests?

Because I suspect we are mostly paying them, but you just can't get good help these days. Besides, dollars don't buy loyalty.

Yes they will take our money but they will not fight for us.

When did we last ask them to fight for us? Never?

Then why are we still there?

 

[Circe]

Most people can't remember all that, but maybe they'll remember all the chants --- in parliament -- of Death To America! and all the nukes, and all the ballistic missiles wheeled along the streets. they continually say they want to kill me and mine, and I don't like that.Yeah, Iran needs a war. Solid glass instead of all that sand works for me.

Iran is happy with selling their oil to Russia and China. We aren't and it's none of our business.

What you said is not responsive to my point that Iran constantly threatens to nuke America.

Personally, I resent them wanting to kill me and mine.

 

[beautress]

Iraq has no special forces. It's why we are still there. Iraq is not interested in fighting this war.

Your ignorance seems to be boundless. Iraq does have special forces and they were trained by the US. What "war" are you talking about?

It should be noted, that even though the U.S. trained them, we don't particularly trust them for our security or sometime in working in close proximity, as friends of mine who operated there have told me. This time my friends were right.

We have killed their sons, daughters, wives and friends. Why would they be interested in protecting our interests?

We also saved them from Saddam and from ISIS. Just what do you imagine US interests in Iraq to be?

We have been there 19 years and as of yet no one has been able to explain that. Can you?

They are also not better off now than they were under Saddam.

We are better off not having a creep like Saddam hosting Osama bin Laden and other surreptitious haters of Israel and America.

 

[pknopp]

What you said is not responsive to my point that Iran constantly threatens to nuke America.

Personally, I resent that.

What do you expect them to do? We are constantly threatening them and it was the US that overturned their government.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Iraq has no special forces. It's why we are still there. Iraq is not interested in fighting this war.

Your ignorance seems to be boundless. Iraq does have special forces and they were trained by the US. What "war" are you talking about?

It should be noted, that even though the U.S. trained them, we don't particularly trust them for our security or sometime in working in close proximity, as friends of mine who operated there have told me. This time my friends were right.

We have killed their sons, daughters, wives and friends. Why would they be interested in protecting our interests?

We also saved them from Saddam and from ISIS. Just what do you imagine US interests in Iraq to be?

We have been there 19 years and as of yet no one has been able to explain that. Can you?

They are also not better off now than they were under Saddam.

Absolutely they are better off. Iraq is now a functioning democracy, the Kurds are no longer being gassed and killed or locked up in concentration camps as they were under Saddam and the Shi'ites are not being publicly executed for protesting government actions and Shi'ite villages are not having their water supply destroy. The Sunni were better off under Saddam but the rest of the country were not.

 

[Circe]

The Green Zone Iraqi special forces were guarding is not only the location of the US embassy but of all the foreign embassies and of the homes of major Iraqi political figures, so it was presumed reasonable the Iraqi special forces would maintain security, but they didn't even try to. Now US Marines will secure the perimeter of the Green Zone.

Very interesting. Trump ---------- get us OUT of there.

 

[pknopp]

Your ignorance seems to be boundless. Iraq does have special forces and they were trained by the US. What "war" are you talking about?

It should be noted, that even though the U.S. trained them, we don't particularly trust them for our security or sometime in working in close proximity, as friends of mine who operated there have told me. This time my friends were right.

We have killed their sons, daughters, wives and friends. Why would they be interested in protecting our interests?

We also saved them from Saddam and from ISIS. Just what do you imagine US interests in Iraq to be?

We have been there 19 years and as of yet no one has been able to explain that. Can you?

They are also not better off now than they were under Saddam.

We are better off not having a creep like Saddam hosting Osama bin Laden and other surreptitious haters of Israel and America.

And yet that never happened but you know that. Iraq was a secular nation. But you know that.

 

[pknopp]

Your ignorance seems to be boundless. Iraq does have special forces and they were trained by the US. What "war" are you talking about?

It should be noted, that even though the U.S. trained them, we don't particularly trust them for our security or sometime in working in close proximity, as friends of mine who operated there have told me. This time my friends were right.

We have killed their sons, daughters, wives and friends. Why would they be interested in protecting our interests?

We also saved them from Saddam and from ISIS. Just what do you imagine US interests in Iraq to be?

We have been there 19 years and as of yet no one has been able to explain that. Can you?

They are also not better off now than they were under Saddam.

Absolutely they are better off. Iraq is now a functioning democracy, the Kurds are no longer being gassed and killed or locked up in concentration camps as they were under Saddam and the Shi'ites are not being publicly executed for protesting government actions and Shi'ite villages are not having their water supply destroy. The Sunni were better off under Saddam but the rest of the country were not.

We have killed more Iraqi's than Saddam ever did. Iraq was a fairly modern country. Now it's third world. Saddam was bad. We have been no better.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Of course they can be stopped whether they are armed or not. If they are not armed, limited access to the building forces them to congregate in close quarters making the vulnerable to various non lethal remedies, and if they are armed, Apache gunships, fighter planes,etc. would quickly clear them out. Security at the embassy was lax because Iraqi special forces were supposed to be guarding the perimeter of the Green Zone, but they failed to act to stop the militia.

Iraq has no special forces. It's why we are still there. Iraq is not interested in fighting this war.

Your ignorance seems to be boundless. Iraq does have special forces and they were trained by the US. What "war" are you talking about?

It should be noted, that even though the U.S. trained them, we don't particularly trust them for our security or sometime in working in close proximity, as friends of mine who operated there have told me. This time my friends were right.

The Green Zone Iraqi special forces were guarding is not only the location of the US embassy but of all the foreign embassies and of the homes of major Iraqi political figures, so it was presumed reasonable the Iraqi special forces would maintain security, but they didn't even try to. Now US Marines will secure the perimeter of the Green Zone.

They never have. Why should it be expected now? We spent millions training them and arming them. They have never been interested.

They've never been interested in defending their own country? Nonsense. Until now, the Iraqi special forces did a good job maintaining securing at the Green Zone, but one of the officers said, that when the militia approached they did not have orders to stop them, so this was a political decision.

 

[pknopp]

Iraq has no special forces. It's why we are still there. Iraq is not interested in fighting this war.

Your ignorance seems to be boundless. Iraq does have special forces and they were trained by the US. What "war" are you talking about?

It should be noted, that even though the U.S. trained them, we don't particularly trust them for our security or sometime in working in close proximity, as friends of mine who operated there have told me. This time my friends were right.

The Green Zone Iraqi special forces were guarding is not only the location of the US embassy but of all the foreign embassies and of the homes of major Iraqi political figures, so it was presumed reasonable the Iraqi special forces would maintain security, but they didn't even try to. Now US Marines will secure the perimeter of the Green Zone.

They never have. Why should it be expected now? We spent millions training them and arming them. They have never been interested.

They've never been interested in defending their own country? Nonsense. Until now, the Iraqi special forces did a good job maintaining securing at the Green Zone, but one of the officers said, that when the militia approached they did not have orders to stop them, so this was a political decision.

So we allowed it to happen?

 

[White 6]

Of course they can be stopped whether they are armed or not. If they are not armed, limited access to the building forces them to congregate in close quarters making the vulnerable to various non lethal remedies, and if they are armed, Apache gunships, fighter planes,etc. would quickly clear them out. Security at the embassy was lax because Iraqi special forces were supposed to be guarding the perimeter of the Green Zone, but they failed to act to stop the militia.

Iraq has no special forces. It's why we are still there. Iraq is not interested in fighting this war.

Your ignorance seems to be boundless. Iraq does have special forces and they were trained by the US. What "war" are you talking about?

It should be noted, that even though the U.S. trained them, we don't particularly trust them for our security or sometime in working in close proximity, as friends of mine who operated there have told me. This time my friends were right.

We have killed their sons, daughters, wives and friends. Why would they be interested in protecting our interests?

We also saved them from Saddam and from ISIS. Just what do you imagine US interests in Iraq to be?

Saved them from Saddam and from ISIS? No. Flat, No. Iraq has been a middle east toilet for a long, long time. Saddam was a brutal dictator, no doubt. But most of the Iraqi people were better off before we blew the place to hell to get Saddam. In fact, the whole middle east was better before we went in there to get Saddam and he kept Iran at bay because they mutually hated each other. We kept him at bay mostly with a no-fly policy started by Geoge H.W. Bush and continued by Bill Clinton. Baby Bush, Darth Vader, Rummy and Bolton fucked up the entire middle east, especially Iraq.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Just what do you imagine US interests in Iraq to be?

We don't have interests in Iraq; we never did, after Kuwait was dealt with by George H.W. Bush pere.

And THAT is the problem. No interests, don't need the oil, get OUT.

Not quite. It's a small world today and what affects the ME affects our economy. While we are oil independent many of our trading partners are not. Moreover, there is a clear danger of a nuclear arms race in the ME and that could directly endanger us. Our interests are no longer narrow US interests but the interests of the whole world. The Europeans are useless and Russia under Putin is eager to fight above its weight and is behaving irresponsible, so if not for the US who is left to maintain some semblance of order in the world's hot spots? China? The UN. We would all like see our soldiers come home, but if they leave and it precipitates a nuclear arms race, what would they be coming home to?

 

[pknopp]

Just what do you imagine US interests in Iraq to be?

We don't have interests in Iraq; we never did, after Kuwait was dealt with by George H.W. Bush pere.

And THAT is the problem. No interests, don't need the oil, get OUT.

Not quite. It's a small world today and what affects the ME affects our economy. While we are oil independent many of our trading partners are not. Moreover, there is a clear danger of a nuclear arms race in the ME and that could directly endanger us. Our interests are no longer narrow US interests but the interests of the whole world. The Europeans are useless and Russia under Putin is eager to fight above its weight and is behaving irresponsible, so if not for the US who is left to maintain some semblance of order in the world's hot spots? China? The UN. We would all like see our soldiers come home, but if they leave and it precipitates a nuclear arms race, what would they be coming home to?

We aren't going to stop Iran from getting nukes. If needed China and Russia will supply them.

 

[toomuchtime_]

It should be noted, that even though the U.S. trained them, we don't particularly trust them for our security or sometime in working in close proximity, as friends of mine who operated there have told me. This time my friends were right.

We have killed their sons, daughters, wives and friends. Why would they be interested in protecting our interests?

We also saved them from Saddam and from ISIS. Just what do you imagine US interests in Iraq to be?

We have been there 19 years and as of yet no one has been able to explain that. Can you?

They are also not better off now than they were under Saddam.

Absolutely they are better off. Iraq is now a functioning democracy, the Kurds are no longer being gassed and killed or locked up in concentration camps as they were under Saddam and the Shi'ites are not being publicly executed for protesting government actions and Shi'ite villages are not having their water supply destroy. The Sunni were better off under Saddam but the rest of the country were not.

We have killed more Iraqi's than Saddam ever did. Iraq was a fairly modern country. Now it's third world. Saddam was bad. We have been no better.

If you were a Sunni, about 30% of the population, life was better under Saddam, but if you were in the the other 70% if Iraqis life was much worse. If not for Obama's premature withdrawal, there would have been no ISIS to contend with and Iraq would be in much better shape today than it is. With Saddam gone and with democratic institutions in place,there is hope for tomorrow, but if Saddam and his sons had remained in power there would be no hope for tomorrow.

 

[pknopp]

We have killed their sons, daughters, wives and friends. Why would they be interested in protecting our interests?

We also saved them from Saddam and from ISIS. Just what do you imagine US interests in Iraq to be?

We have been there 19 years and as of yet no one has been able to explain that. Can you?

They are also not better off now than they were under Saddam.

Absolutely they are better off. Iraq is now a functioning democracy, the Kurds are no longer being gassed and killed or locked up in concentration camps as they were under Saddam and the Shi'ites are not being publicly executed for protesting government actions and Shi'ite villages are not having their water supply destroy. The Sunni were better off under Saddam but the rest of the country were not.

We have killed more Iraqi's than Saddam ever did. Iraq was a fairly modern country. Now it's third world. Saddam was bad. We have been no better.

If you were a Sunni, about 30% of the population, life was better under Saddam, but if you were in the the other 70% if Iraqis life was much worse. If not for Obama's premature withdrawal, there would have been no ISIS to contend with and Iraq would be in much better shape today than it is. With Saddam gone and with democratic institutions in place,there is hope for tomorrow, but if Saddam and his sons had remained in power there would be no hope for tomorrow.

No it was not much worse. We had an agreement with Iraq that we would leave that was made by Bush. Obama honored that agreement. In the end your argument is that we can never leave. Leave then, leave two years later, leave whenever nothing changes.

We have to spend billions forever to protect an embassy? 19 years........when do you suppose we will see this hope?