Posts: 436771 Topics: 21978 LOGIN

Favourites

Most popular topics | World-issuesopen/close

Latest topics | World-issuesopen/close

 

Searchopen/close

Posts Topics

>> extended Search
 

  POST A NEW TOPIC REPLY  

Home >> World-issues >> The costs of the Iraq war

23.02.2008, 11:10 quote

Greystone
Greystone Joined: 28 Mar 2007 Posts: 444 Location: United Kingdom, England, London
View user's profile Visit poster's website

samenoname wrote:
Did anybody even notice whose tanks crossed the Kuweite border first?
That is right. Iraq invaded Kuwait in 1990 and would still be there had it not been for the efforts of America and its allies. Iraq was a danger to world peace and that was why most of the world came down hard on it.

Remeber also that back in 2003 there was massive world wide opinion in favour of removing Saddam and establishing democracy in Iraq. It was only later when things got tough that more and more people started saying the Iraq war was a mistake. But you need to see these things through and that is why we need to keep on in Iraq to the end to bring about a good conclusion, not bail out when the going gets tough.

 
Back to Top

23.02.2008, 11:20 quote

Anonymous

Yeah thats ok for you to say Greystone but when you have someone you love having to go away 6-7 times a year for a war that will take decades to win you might have a different view. Its not just people who lose their sons/daughters/partners out there it affects all of us that have someone we love out there.

 
Back to Top

23.02.2008, 13:07 quote

kayjaydub
kayjaydub Joined: 27 Sep 2007 Posts: 3 Location: United Kingdom, England, Wiltshire
View user's profile Visit poster's website

samenoname wrote:
Did anybody even notice whose tanks crossed the Kuweite border first?

It's not alright to treat your own citizens the way that iraq had but the moment you step over into your neighbors yard is the moment that people, or countries, in the world are going to notice you and do something about it.

I am not going into the USA and its own violations argument as this is another matter all together. Guantanamo Bay should be leveled if you ask me.


Yeah that would have been the Kuwaiti border guard in 1990 just before he got slotted by the Iraqi tank commander. His father was threatened in the early 60's with the same.

Or maybe ask the Saudi residents of Khafji about stepping over the border.

The 2003 invasion by the Coalition - points to be made either way to be honest I'll agree - if you look at International Law you can justify the act and you can condemn it to an equal degree - perhaps if the Coalition had gone in there and said 'we're just doing it for sh1ts and giggles' people might have been more comfortable with it.

For me - bottom line is Saddam was a bloody menace - I'm glad I was there in 90 and 91 to kick him out of Kuwait.

 
Back to Top

29.02.2008, 10:21 quote

Greystone
Greystone Joined: 28 Mar 2007 Posts: 444 Location: United Kingdom, England, London
View user's profile Visit poster's website

Nixy69 wrote:
Yeah thats ok for you to say Greystone but when you have someone you love having to go away 6-7 times a year for a war that will take decades to win you might have a different view.
Yes it is a shame that people have to leave their families during wartime but that is down to long tours of duty. Tours of duty could be shortened or people could be allowed to take their families with them to stay in fortified barracks near the front line so they be together. The rules need to be changed to keep families together.

 
Back to Top

29.02.2008, 19:41 quote

Cazzabee
Cazzabee Joined: 05 Jan 2006 Posts: 7246 Location: United Kingdom, Scotland, Fife
View user's profile Visit poster's website

Greystone wrote:
Nixy69 wrote:
Yeah thats ok for you to say Greystone but when you have someone you love having to go away 6-7 times a year for a war that will take decades to win you might have a different view.
Yes it is a shame that people have to leave their families during wartime but that is down to long tours of duty. Tours of duty could be shortened or people could be allowed to take their families with them to stay in fortified barracks near the front line so they be together. The rules need to be changed to keep families together.


Yeah im sure people would love to take their kids to a warzone where there is a possibility they could be killed..... Rolling Eyes Rolling Eyes Rolling Eyes Rolling Eyes Rolling Eyes

 
Back to Top

29.02.2008, 21:19 quote

Anonymous

My dad did it to us girls on occasion....I would never do it to my kids, ever. Not nice.

 
Back to Top

01.03.2008, 17:01 quote

kayjaydub
kayjaydub Joined: 27 Sep 2007 Posts: 3 Location: United Kingdom, England, Wiltshire
View user's profile Visit poster's website

Greystone wrote:
Nixy69 wrote:
Yeah thats ok for you to say Greystone but when you have someone you love having to go away 6-7 times a year for a war that will take decades to win you might have a different view.
Yes it is a shame that people have to leave their families during wartime but that is down to long tours of duty. Tours of duty could be shortened or people could be allowed to take their families with them to stay in fortified barracks near the front line so they be together. The rules need to be changed to keep families together.


Tours are about as short as they can be - RAF do 4 monthers generally and Army, Royal Marines and Royal Navy generally do 6 monthers. The training that is required to get a person on the ground on operations takes considerable time. For instance no soldier can deploy without having done as a minimum a 1 week operational orientation week. On top of that they are required to be in date and to have passed all of their annual individual training tests. Added to that is special-to-role training in the unit and then training with the other elements that you will be working with. All in all this can take up to 3-4 months to complete. So the shorter the tour the more often this training has to take place because units or individuals rotate in and out of Iraq/Afghanistan faster. This costs money and unless you want to pay more taxes to fund this or unless the Government allocate a higher percentage of taxes to the Armed Forces then it is difficult to achieve.

On to the bit about families going to 'secure bases' - have you any concept of what it is like to be out in an operational theatre like Iraq or Afghanistan - the answer quite clearly is no. I haven't been to Iraq since 1991 but I was in Afghanistan last year. Let's take Kabul which is considered 'cushy' - the air that you breathe is about 30% faeces - your nose becomes clogged frequently and when you blow it - your snot is brown. That is a starter for ten - incidences of communicable diseases are extremely high with the most common one being what we call D&V - shitting and vomiting to you and me and it is nothing like you'll have experienced. Once D&V hits a camp it can spread like wildfire - in Lashkar Gah we had something like 70 cases over a period of 2-3 days from a camp population of between 200 to 300 odd people. Ever had dysentery? I have and it laid me out for 3 days. So think about if your kids had it with medical support that can be described as 'austere'. Other domestic considerations - would you like your wife/child to sit on a chemical toilet or crap in a hole in the ground for 6 months or taking a shower once a week or so in some locations - that's if there isn't a problem with the water supply. Also where are the kids going to go to school? Oh and then there's the small matter of the enemy.

No base is entirely secure - the enemy in both Iraq and Afghanistan are equipped with rockets and mortars that can lob a shell/rocket into a base from anything out to as far as 5 - 7 miles away. Ever been under a mortar bombardment? I have and it is terrifying because you feel so helpless - there are enough grown men and women in the Armed Forces who are trained to cope with this who suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder - I'm pretty convinced a child is not going to find that much fun. You then have the threat of suicide bombs or other explosive devices - and they are real threats.

I'm now talking more about Afghanistan here as the majority of British Forces in Iraq are in one base now. Troops rotate between various isolated locations there - I won't go into how often that happens but the average guy in Afghanistan will be in one isolated location or another for about 75% of their tour. Many of these locations are attacked every day - while I was in Afghanistan last year (and I was there over winter when it is supposedly quiet - although in reality Helmand Province is never quiet - we had one day over the 6 month period while I was there where there was no enemy action - funnily enough that was Xmas Day) a figure of between 20 and 30 contacts with the enemy was not unusual. Many of these contacts last hours. To get into the place you generally fly in a helicopter which may be subjected to gunfire and surface to air missile attacks as well as possibly being mortared as it lands. Ever flown in a military helicopter that is flying to take evasive action at little over 50 feet above the ground and often less or a helicopter that descends from a fair height to land in a matter of seconds? Kids are pretty prone to motion sickness - want to subject them to that and give the crew more vomit to clean up in the helicopter? Also when you land you and another 30 or so people have to get on and off the thing in quick time (under a minute is the average) and often in the dark in clouds of stinging sand and dust thrown up by the rotor blades - are kids going to be able to do that?

If anyone wants an idea of how desperate it can be - they can either go onto youtube and have a look or maybe watch the Michael Caine film 'Zulu'. It is desperate stuff. So there is no possibility whatsoever of families going to these bases. They could in theory go to Camp Bastion which is a relatively 'secure' base but they would be living in austere conditions and they would not see their other half for up to 75% of the tour so it would be pretty pointless sending families out there.

I'll tell you for a fact - you are bloody grateful when you get out of places like these and you'll have survived thanks to a great deal of training and the fact that you have a weapon to defend yourself against the enemy with and that you are wearing body armour and helmet all of the time - ever worn it? In searing heat - it is knackering and bloody uncomfortable and you sweat buckets just sitting/standing around let alone walking/running/crawling. To get even a rough idea of how tiring this can be put a daysack with some weight on and wear a motorcycle helmet and crawl for 100 metres/yards (length of your average footy pitch) with your stomach touching the ground throughout. Again kids aren't physically robust enough to do that or shall we say - sorry kids no body armour - you may get tired and then wait for the inevitable press outcry when a child gets killed for not having it - it was bad enough when soldiers died because they didn't have it as at least one did in Iraq in 2003. At least we get paid to take those risks and accept them because it is our job - wives and kids are not and should not accept those risks.

A bit of a long way of saying no and no to the two suggestions.

 
Back to Top
  POST A NEW TOPIC REPLY  
 
Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum