Not that the sunnis don’t matter, this event today doesn’t matter–it’s to be expected in a region dominated by those that supported the guy we just removed via a war.

concerning thos eother democracies….if a countries title, contains a description of the TYPE of government it is SUPPOSED to be, it isn’t. “people’s republic of China” not really the model of a republic, and I’d be curious if it’s really for “the people.”
“democratic Republic of_____” Haiti, congo,etc. Neither Democratic, nor Republics.

jokes aside, many democracies are corrupt. However, the potential to convert from an opressive dictatorship to a GOOD, FUNCTIONING, democratic republic is there. That potential was NOT there before.

when I speak of Democracies, I do not refer to true democracies. That is as stable as a True communits eutopia. People get swayed this way and that, then bad decisions are made, then -bang-they elect a dictator that promises to “solve” their problems(Hitler, Mussolini, Aristede,etc.)
It’s tough, but it can be done. At least now, there IS a chance for a better life for the Iraqis–especially if we can all “make nice” with each other, and do the rest together, and let time tell who was right, and who was wrong, and for WHAT reasons.

Originally posted by aCiDHg
wow… 400 kms range was it…. wonder how big them radars r gonna be when/if they field this thing….
besides f22 is a pure a AA fighter rightnow, tho possible wild weasel mission capabilities later i supx. & didn’t they already have f117 & b2 able to perform strike mission on iraqi sams?

anyways my point remains that current gen american forces can still kick every1 elses’ behinds with or without f22 even in 10-15 yrs. to say w/ f22 they can win war against major power with “low” casulties is far from the truth.

that kind of stuff cannot be predicted. The F-22 is not to make sure we have low casualties. It is so that we’re flying the best aircraft possible, in the best force possible. Any less than the best possible, and casualties will increase.
The F-22 can carry air to ground weapons. Right now, it can carry 2 1,000lb JDAMs, plus 2 Amraams in the main bay, plus the 2 sidewinders. Not much, really, but enough to get it in range of any SAM to take it out.

The latest US weapon, entering production soon if not now, is the SDB. The small diameter bomb is a pencil shaped 250-300 pound bomb with better GPS guidance than present JDAMS, and a gliding wing. It’s designed to fit in the weapons bay of F-22’s and 35’s, as well as any other aircraft. The F-22 will be able to carry 8 of them, plus Air to air weapons.

I think they are looking into a wild weasel version of the F-35, as it holds more promise in that area. The B-2 and F-117 do strike Sam sites, but they are slow.

Speed and stealth compliment each other. A stealthy aircraft basically reduces the range at which enemy radar can detect it. By moving faster, the window which the aircraft is vulnerable to a given SAM is reduced. combine the small window afforded by a fast aircraft, with the smaller detecteble range of a stealth aircraft, and you’re able to strike areas that would be dangerous to either fast conventional aircraft, or slow stealthy ones.

Originally posted by aCiDHg

tis utter lunacy to turn iraq in2 a western democracy rightnow as fanaticle elements would most probably gain power. (read 2day’s cnn/bbc for iraqis mutilating & hanging foreigners’ bodies on the bridge.)
& pluto were u watchin tv before iraq & aghanistan? inbedded reporters, demonizing documentarys based on reports by iraqi exiles, alleged wmd efforts, former cia cheifs goin on national tv & talkinsaddam, al queda alliance, afghans thiefs who get their hand amputed, alleged raping of girls by taliban, suppresion of woman, great oppinion pieces on masood, etcetc… seem great pr work 2 me. things r diff & evolved but same old propaganda efforts.

So it’s lunacy to try to democratize Iraq? The CHANCE for freedom is better than what they had. As for today’s events, big deal, it’s in the Sunni area. They were treated well by Saddam, so what WOULD you expect.

All that stuff you call propaganda… We call it news, information, knowledge. Nobody was lead to HATE afghanistan, or Iraq. Those shows point out the Evils of Saddam, the Evils of the Taliban, and Al-queda–not the people of the country. We have access to this stuff, it’s not like it’s fed to us by the government, and we do what they say. You never saw martches of American against Afghanistan, or IRaq.

In fact, the only people that DID march FOR the war did so in SUPPORT for the Iraqi people, and the Afghan people–no hate, just the desire to free them of opression.

People all over the world were nervous after 9-11. Many muslim groups tried to get Images of the trade center going down removed from the air, for fear that it would cause widespread hatred against muslims. Instead, hundreds of thousands of Americans, ignorant of Islam, took up classes, read books, and watched documentaries, so they could better understand the religion, and the people. Very VERY few people displayed haterd towards muslims–and anybody with a turbin.

It’s just not the way we work. watching documentaries on Saddam’s torture methods, or Taliban executions, or Afghan customs, does nothing to instill hated against a people-NOTHING.

Originally posted by aCiDHg
haha didn’t this used 2 be a raptor thread??
& mythical russian sams w/ 200 mile ranges eh???
& “everyone” else flying beasts that could shot dwn anything in the american arsenal?? reminds of that clint eastwood movie firefox… wait maybe we should do a remake w/ chinese characteristics!! now that’ll be real good for propaganda purposes!! wait i got dibbs on that idea!! now if only i could land richard gere as the lead!!!

mythical?

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/russia/s-400.htm

sorry, 400km range, close enough… Factor in Russian overstatement, and it’s still pretty damn long ranged.

A 400km range SAM lessens the effectiveness of AWACS aircraft, putting more of the burden on the actual combat aircraft. The low observable nature of the F-22 will reduce this 400km range
significantly, allowing it access where current aircraft will at high risk.

You dismiss this as propaganda. Funny. One of the main reasons for the F-22 is the advantage it has over other aircraft against missle threats. The US has not faced any “new” russian missles since Vietnam, where they had a 2% or less effectivness against conventional aircraft.

current model russian SAM’s are somewhat near as effective as US missles(patriot pac-3), which, unfourtunatly to the TWO coalition aircraft they were fired at, had 100% hit rates. If I recall correctly, an F-16 was targeted, but hit the radar with a harm before the Pac-3 could fire first.

The last thing the US wants is to go against NEW russian “double digit” SAMs without an aircraft designed to evade them.

Originally posted by GoldenDragon
No the problem is that many Americans just hate another nation for no reason other than needing a new enemy.

Whether it is Air Force Secretary James Roche singling out China as a threat, as a reason for the Raptor or Bush attempting to link Iraq with Al Qaida, it is an attempt to incite hate and to prepare the American public for conflict by demonizing another country.

Surely that does exist, as there are idiots in every country–and the US has a lot of people. I’m sure you can find people that think Saddam is the guy with the beard that lives in a cave in Afghanistan that is also the dictator of Iraq, and actually flew one of the planes into the world trade center!

I disagree that this is universal among all americans, or even most of us. Surely the governmnet is not trying to demonize China. Quite the opposite, actually.

From what is said about China, especially from seinior officials, you’d wonder why they would even consider them a threat.
China is our best friend when it comes down to dollars and cents.

I never got the impression China was being demonized by the government.

From human rights groups, yes, china is made out to be the 8th circle of hell, but most people don’t HATE the Chinese, it’s just not the way people think anymore. There’s so may races here in the US, it’s not really possible to be so globally ethnocentric anymore.

I definatly disagree that it is an attempt to incite hate, let alone to prepare for a conflict.

Such things have NEVER BEEN DONE in recent times. Never was any attempt made to incite hate towards Iraq, North Korea, Afghanistan, Serbia, etc. Never. Just the opposite, actually. People became facinated with the Afghan culture, to gain an understanding of the people. Same for Iraq.

Don’t kow much about Vietnam or Korea in the past, but in WWII, that was really common. the propoganda was very intensive, and effective. Some people were so driven to hate the enemy, they fought BECAUSE OF the hate for the enemy, carrying that hate well past the war.

Not the case now.

I do see where your concern lies, as it could SEEM that way, but nobody’s trying to incite hate–we don’t work that way.

Originally posted by Vympel
I couldn’t stand the litany of propaganda any longer:

Which were leftovers from the 1980s. Did you even bother to read the UNMOVIC reports in this regard?

Do you actually KNOW what David Kay said, or did you watch the news, and learned from what they wanted you to hear.

Here’s part of one of is statements:
David Kay:

“We have discovered dozens of WMD-related program activities and significant amounts of equipment that Iraq concealed from the United Nations during the inspections that began in late 2002. The discovery of these deliberate concealment efforts have come about both through the admissions of Iraqi scientists and officials concerning information they deliberately withheld and through physical evidence of equipment and activities that ISG has discovered that should have been declared to the UN. Let me just give you a few examples of these concealment efforts, some of which I will elaborate on later:

· A clandestine network of laboratories and safehouses within the Iraqi Intelligence Service that contained equipment subject to UN monitoring and suitable for continuing CBW research.

· A prison laboratory complex, possibly used in human testing of BW agents, that Iraqi officials working to prepare for UN inspections were explicitly ordered not to declare to the UN.

· Reference strains of biological organisms concealed in a scientist’s home, one of which can be used to produce biological weapons.

· New research on BW-applicable agents, Brucella and Congo Crimean Hemorrhagic Fever (CCHF), and continuing work on ricin and aflatoxin were not declared to the UN.

· Documents and equipment, hidden in scientists’ homes, that would have been useful in resuming uranium enrichment by centrifuge and electromagnetic isotope separation (EMIS).

· A line of UAVs not fully declared at an undeclared production facility and an admission that they had tested one of their declared UAVs out to a range of 500 km, 350 km beyond the permissible limit.

· Continuing covert capability to manufacture fuel propellant useful only for prohibited SCUD variant missiles, a capability that was maintained at least until the end of 2001 and that cooperating Iraqi scientists have said they were told to conceal from the UN.

· Plans and advanced design work for new long-range missiles with ranges up to at least 1000 km — well beyond the 150 km range limit imposed by the UN. Missiles of a 1000 km range would have allowed Iraq to threaten targets through out the Middle East, including Ankara, Cairo, and Abu Dhabi.

· Clandestine attempts between late-1999 and 2002 to obtain from North Korea technology related to 1,300 km range ballistic missiles –probably the No Dong — 300 km range anti-ship cruise missiles, and other prohibited military equipment.

In addition to the discovery of extensive concealment efforts, we have been faced with a systematic sanitization of documentary and computer evidence in a wide range of offices, laboratories, and companies suspected of WMD work. The pattern of these efforts to erase evidence — hard drives destroyed, specific files burned, equipment cleaned of all traces of use — are ones of deliberate, rather than random, acts. “

What was PROVED was not that “there were/were NOT WMDs”, but that Saddam continued to defy the UN, and kept his programs either hidden or in limbo, so that he could continue if he so wished.

The fact is that Saddam was in material breach, and was “supposed’ to face severe consequences.

The UN’s idea of severe consequences, after 12 years of defiance, and chances, was, simply, to give him more chances!

Bush was not going to allow this to carry on any longer, made his case, the UN chose inaction, and the rest is history. Lots of Europe was ****ed, sure, but only history will tell who was right.

Just as some americans can be hard headed, and think they’re always right(sterotype of us…understandable, but not always true), Europeans can act the same way.

It realy comes down to this: Was Bush Correct in taking action against Saddam? Was the UN correct in NOT taking action?

Personally, I feel the UN is near-useless, because it fears taking action that might result in war. It seems the UN is unaware that there are things far worse than war.

Maybe some of you wanted to see Saddam go, but just “not like this.”

Maybe some of you just hate America, and want it to fail–hey, there ARE people like that.

Maybe some of you simply have more faith in the UN than they do in their own country. While I despise the size of the US government, I trust it FAR FAR more than I do the beurocratic, spineless mess that is the UN.

In time, Iraq will settle down, in whatever path it chooses. We’ll see what happens, though. If it turns into West Iran, that’ll suck. If it becomes a strong free nation, that’ll be great (I’ve always wanted to see the cradle of civilization!).

Regardless, Iraq was going nowhere under Saddam, now they have their future in their OWN hands. Personally, I see this as a good thing, and a big improvement over Saddam, or his kids.

Originally posted by m.ileduets
It’s hard to believe that people still believe in this offensive domino theory Bush tries to pursue in Iraq.

Ask your soldiers how they are being treated down there. They can’t even patrol on foot or go out anymore. This is worse than it used to be in Vietnam. There the GIs could at least enjoy nightlife occasionally.:D
It seems much more likely that things go the other way around and that the Iraqi Shiites will follow Iran and turn it into a Islamic theocracy.
How convenient (but wrong) to always link Saddam with international terrorism. Did the intervention stop it? No- on the contrary: Al Quaeda didn’t have access to Iraq as long as Saddam was in power, since he didn’t tolerate any power beside himself. Now in liberated Iraq they find an ideal breeding ground.

Well, a friend of mine has jsut returned, and was in the 82nd airborne. While the guy doen’t care about the reasons fo r going to war, and thinks it was a personal vendetta agaisnt Saddam, he is very sure it was a good thing. His descriptions of how the people acted surprised me. They were incredibly grateful that Saddam was gone, and were sick of the UN sanctions, which hurt only them.
He was free to walk the streets, converse with people, etc.

contrary to what you seem to “know” the iraqi people DO NOT WANT an islamic state, they want a secular state, not a theocracy. This is th erecurrent result of public opinion polls thoughout Iraq. They look around and see that a theocracy leads them down the same path as a dictatorship. Certainly, you look at demonstrations of Shiite’, protesting, and you think they represent the majority view. When in fact, they are just the vocal minority, out shouting the silent majority.

International terrorism was ONE of many thing Saddam was doing. He financed palestinian terrorists, hindering the “peace” “process” over there.

Yes, the intervention did what it was supposed to do. It stopped Saddam from defying the UN, removed th ethreat he posed to the region, and stopped him from any dealings he might have had with terrorists.

The terrorists are all in Iraq now, you say? And that’s a BAD THING? Tell me, would rather have terrorists in your cities, planning to attack civilians, or in the desert, with US and British troops? I think the terrorists stand a much better chance of being kiled/wiped out when facing US troops.

the terrorists MUST cause Iraq to fail, at all costs. They have outlined it themselves, that Iraq’s sucess asa democratic nation, would prove to muslims that the future doe not lie in radical, 4th centuray, theocratic dictatorships, but in democracy.

They wil try at all costs to stop the US from succeding. They can’t beat US troops, so now, they’re attacking Iraqi police, and civilians. This, was supposed to cause Iraqis to reject the US, as they “brought this to them”, but it is backfiring, and the terrorists are finding it near impossible to recruit new members.

Do you people really think that the “uncertainty’ faced by the Iraqis now is WORSE than what they had under Saddam?

Originally posted by google
Ah, so now the tune is being changed from WMD to terrorists? Besides Saddam’s giving money to the families of palestinian suicide bombers, which has nothing to do with Al-Qaeda, there has never been any evidence of Al-Qaeda terrorists working with Saddam. Powell admitted as much this year, but now that there is a power vacuum in the region, of course there are a gazillion crazy AQ wackos all waiting to blow up the US.

On January 8, 2004, Powell conceded that despite his assertions to the United Nations last year, he had no “smoking gun” proof of a link between the government of Iraqi President Saddam Hussein and terrorists of Al Qaeda. “I have not seen smoking-gun, concrete evidence about the connection,” Mr. Powell said, in response to a question at a news conference.

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/special/iraq/2344058

The removal of Saddam from Iraq was a stabilizing factor int he region

Would you care to explain how this is so? Now all the ethnic groups in Iraq are at each other’s throats, and the situation is far less controlled than in the Saddam-era. In fact, without a strong Iraq, a resilient and rising Iran will be forthcoming.

I don’t see what was said that “changed the tune.”
It seems that you weren’t following the events from the start, since this war was not about “WMD” or “Al-Queada”, or “human rights issues” alone.

Saddam was in material breach of UN resolutions for weapons systems that he was not “supposed” to develop, use of these weapons, and affiliations with TERRORISIM. He financed terrorists, this is a known fact. Terrorists trained in Iraq(under his control or not), this is a fact.
The UN voted UNANIMOUSLY that if he did not: a. give inspectors “unfettered” access to EVERYWHERE. b. document ALL his weapons programs to the UN. He would face “SERIOUS CONSEQUENCES.”

Saddam CONTINUED to mislead inspectors. Saddam did NOT document ALL of his weapons programs, not even considering the “supposed” WMD’s.

Bush went to the UN to get them to ENFORCE THEIR OWN RESOLUTION. But they didn’t, they wanted to give him more time, just a few more months. More time while the Iraqi people suffered under UN resolutions.

When we talk terrorists, why assume Al-queda alone, they’re all terrorists, and they all have a common goal. Saddam funded terrorists.

Saddam may or may not have had stockpiles of WMD’s, but he definatly maintained the abilitryt to make and use them. Nobody mentions the LIVE culture of botulinin found, able to be used to , well, MAKE BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS, or Botox. The fact that it was found in a weapons scientist’s hpome, kinda rules out cosmetic applications. Longer than allowed range missles were found, and FIRED at US troops. Hollow warhead missle and rockets were found–able to be quickly filled with any biotoxin/chemical weapon needed. Plans for nuclear programs were found. Long range(Isreal) missle programs were under way. Chemical plants of dubious nature were found, including those mobile labs.

All in all, Saddam could have rebuilt his stockpiles of chemical/biological weapons in less than a year, with his current programs restarted, once the inspectors left.

There’s no change in tune, Saddam’s Iraq was in breach of UN resolutions, and the UN didn’t want to do anything(like in Rwanda, somalia, etc.)and AGAIN, becaus of UN inaction, millions of Iraqis were to suffer. The US followed through, the people of Iraq have a future, and Saddam will meet justice.

As far as Iraq being a stabilizing factor.

Iraq has a brighter future than ANY mideast country. There is still fighting, especially in the Sunni regions(like the killings today), but the PEOPLE are better off. As of now, they’re still rebuilding, recovering, and haven’t even had ELECTIONS yet!

Give them time! Remember, they’ve just been through a 40 year dictatorship, ethnic/relighious persectuion at the hands of said dictator, an 8 year war with Iran, more oppression/murder/tyranny, another War, this time with severe bombings, 12 years of UN sanctions(where European High-ups skimmed the top off the oil for food program, along with , again, the dictator), small bombings/attacks by coalition aircraft during the 12 year peiod, small uprisings here and there, followed by gassings(dictator, again), and to top it all off–another WAR! This time, an invasion, by the same people that bombed the crap out of them just over a decade ago.
The fact that Iraq is wher eit is, only a YEAR after the start of the war, is amazing.
You DO NOT see the whole picture on whatever news your’re watching. US troops have been very well recieved considering they’re an occuping force. the IRaqi people WANT them to leve, probably almost as much as the troops want to go home! But they DO NOT want them to go UNTIL Iraq is able to stand on its own.

Iraq was a powder keg in the region, a large, powerful nation, ruled by an evil, all-powerful dictator, with questionable mental stability. The region was uneasy becasue of Saddam, and his tendancy to INVADE OTHER COUNRIES, and GAS HIS OWN PEOPLE.

Saddam is gone, the Mideast is more stable because of it. Now, palistinian terrorist aren’t getting paid off to kill innocents, NOw, they have to recruit 15 year old kids with social anxiety disorder, and convince them that “the 70 virgins will accept them, once they blow themselves up.”

When Iraq has elections, and an eleted government is established, and the Iraqi police and Army are large enough, and stong enough to keep the peace, Iraq will be the richest nation in the Mideast, next to Saudi Arabia. With a democraticlly elected government, the policies will favor the population rather than the house of Saud, and, eventually, Iraq will be the center of the Mideast. iraq’s rise from the dictatorial hellhole it was under Saddam, to the economic powerhouse it will be, will greatly influence the future of the Mideast. Other muslims, seeing how a democratic system has transformed Iraq, will follow through.

Iran’s youth is educated, and knows the future lies on a different path than the Mullahs/ With influence of a strong, friendly, stable, non-dictatorial Iraq, Iran will undergo a (hopefully peaceful) revolution, hopefully followed by Syria and Saudi Arabia.

It’ll probably take decades, but with Iraq as a starter, it’s at least on the timetable.