Abizaid: Mideast wars may last 50 years

"Over time, we will have to shift the burden of the military fight from our ****** directly to regional ******, and we will have to play an indirect role, but we shouldn't assume for even a minute that in the next 25 to 50 years the American military might be able to come home, relax and take it easy, because the strategic situation in the region doesn't seem to show that as being possible," Abizaid said Wednesday at Carnegie Mellon University.

Premium Link Upgrade
 
California is burning and Georgia is out of water and it is being attributed to global climate change but people are predicting 50 years ahead.Even more ludicrous is the thread about mankind in 100,000 years.Optimism seems boundless.On this thread lets just say I take this to mean the mideast war will last forever or at least as long as the present world exists which reason says IMO can be measured in decades or less.
 
Well, Bush said we were in it for the long haul so I guess he was being literal by making that statement. What a fucking mess. Shame is, the dems can talk all they want about ending the war (and I am most certainly on favor of that), but how in the hell can we just bail out of there??? No one has presented a workable plan to do so that I am aware of.
 
Considering that region has been in conflict since over 5,000 years ago I somehow doubt that everything is all of a sudden going to get pleasant in 50.
 
Don't forget the estimated cost over the next 10 years will be $240 Billion a year. But of course the economy is in great shape despite the crashing and burning housing market, and construction folding up, and the devaluation of the dollar on the world stage. Nothing to worry about here. Richest 10% still got good tax breaks since the beginning of this fiasco.
 
That's not cynicism there is it AFA? It may be possible to effect a major change in 50 years or so, as I have always believed that the key to the problem is education, an educated population is far more difficult for a dictator to take control of than an uneducated and fanatically religious one. But of course the other problem is that, as has been said, these people have been fighting each other forever, so what do they do if they stop?
 
50 years is about the time when the Oil will be used up over there. So, yes, I agree with him.

The question is though will we be The United States of America in 50 years or The Peoples United Republic of America brought to you by WallMartistan
 
That's not cynicism there is it AFA? It may be possible to effect a major change in 50 years or so, as I have always believed that the key to the problem is education, an educated population is far more difficult for a dictator to take control of than an uneducated and fanatically religious one. But of course the other problem is that, as has been said, these people have been fighting each other forever, so what do they do if they stop?

That's true. My point is that this thing is scheduled to go on to 2017, and now adding 40 years to that is remarkable. Taxpayers and the average quality of life in the US will never be the same.

It's true that they administration B.S.'d themselves into how cheap and how fast and with how few lives lost this thing would take. A book I'm reading makes this abundantly clear that they wanted Iraq on line for oil at any cost, and were willing to dump cash into unregulated US businesses looking to maximize their profits at any cost. So not a lot got done at a very inflated price, in an area that needed far more restoration than anticipated.
 
If Bush Sr. would have gone to Baghdad, the war would be almost one-third
nearer the end. Smart guy that Bush Sr.

At least Sr had some gravitas and experience with world affairs and understood what the fall out from different actions would be, hence no deposing Saddam. As he knew that would make matters even worse which is how it turned out when Jr was foolish enough to meddle in Iraq.
 
It's been said that what makes a good used car salesman is what makes a president. Not the qualities of honesty, and integrity, those are part of the sales pitch.

I think they follow a strategic pattern on how to sell us on war. Always underestimate the cost and then slowly introduce the new data that it's going to cost more before actually making an official announcement.

I want to watch this when I get a chance.
Premium Link Upgrade
 
BTW, there was something of interest I saw on Frontline: Showdown With Iran
Premium Link Upgrade

It was abundantly clear that Iran purportedly such a threat to the US right now, had twice sent notice to Washington that they wanted to sign a peace treaty. The second time was immediately after 9/11 before Ahmadinejad came to power, but that wasn't enough for the administration who had been closely tying Iran to Iraq as part of their grand scheme to dominate the Middle East well before the current talk of the possiblity of going to war over their nuclear development.

Numerous writers have made the comparison of the administration's steps to vilify the Iranians as the same as those taken to vilify the Iraqi regime as a precursor to their invasion.
 
Already been going on more than 50 years?

George Sr., war criminal as bad as his ***.

No gratuitous naked chick this time, sorry.

:fight:

War is bad.
 
It really is an effort to reshape the Middle East and control the oil. The one film 2 posts above talks about the salesmanship of politicians to sell us on the idea, and while journalism is supposed to be independent, it is absolutely not. That's why on other subjects I've pointed out that while we think we are making intelligent choices as people, key points to the news are purposely withheld. The point was made that all UK newspapers questioned ill founded statements of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction while the US papers took the opportunity to sell papers based on patriotic headlines. That's fine, but the headlines were not true.

Now they're lining up Iraq as a threat, more Axis of Evil talk, as a war catch phrase that the Iraqi's were very offended by, especially after trying to sign a peace treaty with the US the day after 9/11.

My real annoyance is how they fund people like Noriega and Bin Laden when it serves their purpose and then want to take them out when they don't play ball anymore.

Bush creates a larger than life enemy by his administrations deeds and then wonders why people who fearlessly and strongly oppose him come to such power so quickly.
 
Last edited:
What irks me is just how short-sighted the vision of our "Leaders" is. Devoting all those lives and so much money to maintain a controlling presence in a region that contains only enough oil to keep us going for - at our current and projected consumption rates - a few more decades. Not only is it selfish like a toddler who hasn't learned better (they have what we want, so we will use simple brute ***** to take it; although imagine the self-righteous moral rhetoric if another country that was capable actually invaded us to take something on/under our soil), it's also delusional and boneheaded beyond belief. Instead of emptying our coffers for those last few drops, why not devote that money to the development of some truly alternative energies/fuels?? We would also be tackling the global warming issue head on, instead of continuing to suck up a resource that the burning/consumption of which is endangering the future of the place we live. I think Dick Cheney & Co. just get such a hard-on when they think of their garages filled with SUVs, and the mighty gas-powered and oil-lubed engines that they love to rev up on their way to the golf course, that they just refuse to consider that such a lifestyle might EVER have to come to an end. As it is, we are driving ourselves, literally and figuratively, right into a corner. Some of us want to put the brakes on and turn around, but those in power just want to hit the gas and see what happens. Reckless, shameless.
 
In addition to the very good "War Made Easy" and Frontline films that AFA already cited, here are a couple of other docs. about the clusterf**k in the Middle East that are worth checking out:

No End In Sight:

Premium Link Upgrade

and

Meeting Resistance:

Premium Link Upgrade
 
What irks me is just how short-sighted the vision of our "Leaders" is. Devoting all those lives and so much money to maintain a controlling presence in a region that contains only enough oil to keep us going for - at our current and projected consumption rates - a few more decades. Not only is it selfish like a toddler who hasn't learned better (they have what we want, so we will use simple brute ***** to take it; although imagine the self-righteous moral rhetoric if another country that was capable actually invaded us to take something on/under our soil), it's also delusional and boneheaded beyond belief. Instead of emptying our coffers for those last few drops, why not devote that money to the development of some truly alternative energies/fuels?? We would also be tackling the global warming issue head on, instead of continuing to suck up a resource that the burning/consumption of which is endangering the future of the place we live. I think Dick Cheney & Co. just get such a hard-on when they think of their garages filled with SUVs, and the mighty gas-powered and oil-lubed engines that they love to rev up on their way to the golf course, that they just refuse to consider that such a lifestyle might EVER have to come to an end. As it is, we are driving ourselves, literally and figuratively, right into a corner. Some of us want to put the brakes on and turn around, but those in power just want to hit the gas and see what happens. Reckless, shameless.


Really very good points. I'm glad you stated that so eloquently. Here's something else, I have to watch later;
Premium Link Upgrade

This has been a complaint about the US' narrow focus from before the 80's oil shortages, that the continuation of a country to depend on gas guzzling and polluting engines is absolutely foolish, and serves to benefit only those in the oil and automotive industries. There is no real investment in the future of alternative energy which is more the domain of college engineering studies. (GM's EV1, a fairly successful electric design, was eventually bought up and destroyed, Premium Link Upgrade ). Commercials flood TV and media to train people to want to buy that new car, SUV, truck with absolutely no regard to the overall picture. Look at the credit and housing markets in taters. Everyone needed a home as big as they could get that they couldn't afford because of adjustable teaser rates requiring only a payment of interest or even 50 year loans. Why wait to save up? Gotta have it now!

Sweden collects high gas taxes to invest in future alternative sources of power, while what the US culture does in every aspect, is greed and status based. I mean the tobacco industry still exists? Even the systematic destruction of wilderness areas to build tasteless shopping malls in the name of progress while tossing trash out of one's car window shows that same infantile view of teh importance of self and disregard for anyone or anything else.

Premium Link Upgrade
Premium Image Content
Upgrade to Premium to view all images in this thread
 
Last edited:
I do think we're in a bind with energy, esp. since the ideas of conservation and restraint are practically VERBOTEN, esp. among this administration. As for electricity, we can't just continue indefinitely w/ gas and coal-powered generation, and nuclear is a non-answer (the most dangerous and expensive method for boiling water to turn a turbine ever devised, not to mention the waste issues and terrorism risks). Solar and wind don't look very hopeful for replacing the dirty technologies, esp. as energy needs grow. Dams and hydropower create a whole slew of other problems, and we probably won't be able to get that many more megawatts than what we are getting now. We really need some new, fresh approaches. Perhaps the oceans?? I don't know.

As for cars, the problem with electric cars is the source of their electricity. More often than not, the electricity they are charged with is produced at a coal-fired power plant, so I think little is gained in that equation. But I think the hybrids are still a good step in the right direction, surely.

"Hijacking Catastrophe" is a very good film. I recommend it highly.
 
Watching it now, similiar theme to Why We Fight

Hijacking Catastrophe:
9/11, Fear & the Selling of American Empire (2004)


"Hijacking Catastrophe: 9/11, Fear & the Selling of American Empire examines how a radical fringe of the Republican Party used the trauma of the 9/11 ****** attacks to advance a pre-existing agenda to radically transform American foreign policy while rolling back civil liberties and social programs at home. The documentary places the Bush Administration's false justifications for war in Iraq within the larger context of a two-decade struggle by neoconservatives to dramatically increase military spending in the **** of the Cold War, and to expand American power globally by means of military *****."

Premium Link Upgrade
 
Back
Top