Poles in Iraq. What's the point?

I was told it was because they had weapons of mass destruction that were deployable within 45 minutes.
So why are the troops there ?

I'm not a General, so anything I say doesn't mean a hill of beans in the scheme of things anyway, but if you want my opinion, here goes.

The reasons for staying there have little to do with the reasons for going. They are unrelated IMHO in the same way one can be arrested for drinking in a motor vehicle after being originally stopped for a missing tail light. Never mind the lack of a bottle in the vehicle will seldom be a good defense in court. Troops aren't weapons inspectors, or at least most of them aren't. The small teams originally in Iraq if you recall, were being forbidden from searching certain areas, and others they could only search if they gave considerable advance notice. Of COURSE they hadn't found anything prior to the war beginning.

Whether you believe Saddam had WMDs and you believe them to have been hidden or transferred to entities unknown, or perhaps believe them to have been a complete bluff on Saddam's part and never to have existed....that is only a fraction of the matter now. Honestly, I've seen things that make me believe Saddam had them, but I think the reasons for still being there have more to do with not leaving until the new government is on its feet enough that when everyone leaves,and trying to ensure Iraq will not become a "theocratic" vassal of the Ayatollah and Mullahs in Iran.

Such a mistep would give Tehran control of enough of the world's fuel to become its most powerful since the days of the Persian Empire. Consider Iran's recent alliances with Moscow. With a controlling share in the world's fuel supply, (I read somewhere that Iran/Iraq combined would be the world's 2nd largest producer of oil, and that's WITHOUT the alliance with Russia) they could have a strangle hold on all of Europe, and indirectly, the World. Such an alliance could control Europe or bring it to its economic knees (theoretically anyway) without rolling a single tank The U.S. would also suffer, although not as soon as Europe(Iraq provides no oil to the U.S.) . The Soviet Union, with a Persian twist....is hiding behind the next curtain to the left....

Next,
I think we are kidding ourselves if we believe for one minute that, even were every WMD Iraq ever had discovered, you or anyone else would ever hear about it in the media. The losses from giving away methods and locations, etc. inevitably derivable by anyone with previous knowledge of the WMD's location far outweigh the gains from announcing success to the world, even if it would save a little of our embattled President's popularity.

Think of this. Saddam's own scientists told him he had a program, but I am skeptical that even if they were still in the country (of Iraq), we would find them all. Nuclear weapons are small. Even in the 60's the actual warheads were not particularly large, and the Soviets even fielded "suitcase" nukes for a time. Chem and Bio weapons are even smaller. A liter of either is bad news for quite a few people. In the meantime, if we are so good at finding such weapons after they've been deliberately hidden or passed off to entities unknown, why can't we even protect ourselves from IED's, which are sometimes much larger physically than many WMD's?

The reality of things, I think, would frighten most people, people who vote...so most government officials prefer to distract the public by mocking the current administrations inability to find WMD's, while quietly offering no plan of their own to find them, either...

I feel that somewhere along the line, a decision was made, to accept ridicule rather than admit if any of these things are found (also the only explanation I can think of that cameras weren't in some of the places I've seen). Much better admitting political defeat and accepting global mockery than to proclaim "We found it!" and have the weapon(s) we didn't discover used, to horrible effect (and not necessarily within Iraq) or at the very least, lose the intelligence to be gained by not admitting we already have them.

Not having "WMD's FOUND!" proclaimed all over the news might be an embarassment to the administration, but that pales in comparison to having the headlines read "Hundreds of Thousands Dead, U.S. proclaims Success Too Early"

I'm rambling a bit but I think you see where I'm going with this.
Anyway I'm just a rescue swimmer and sometime gunner, not a general, so what do I know.

John - Thanks for the reply. I respect the fact that you have given a reasoned response rather than the all too familiar gung ho.

I think the WMD was a red herring and a poor excuse but it fitted the bill at the time.
I agree with you regarding control of the global oil markets and see this as the real threat from Russia ( I have posted here on the Gazprom situation in Eu before )

To save a long and rambling post, I believe the US policy towards the Middle East is all wrong and heavy handed, I would have preferred the route of financial investment and diplomacy rather than the use of force, which is counterproductive when misappropriated.

I have not been to Iraq myself but have close people who have been there a couple of times ( doing a similair job to yourself ) which has shaped my opinion on why the troops shouldn't have been there in the first place and should get out as soon as they can.

Polish soldiers in Poland are badly paid, but if they go to IRAQ they end up doing quite well for themselves. Most Polish troops are more pragmatic and worldly than the average Yank infantryman so yes most of them ae there for the money, some are there for bragging rights but I doubt many of them have delusions about liberating Iraqis or spreading democracy

I still don't understand how Warsaw is defended in Iraq .

Honestly this makes me nervous, as an American, also. Our media, of course, is oblivious. They vary between being the propaganda arm of a few hollywood elites (IMHO) who at the moment favor the Democratic party at all costs, to barely above the local gossip, prattling on and on about who is supposedly sleeping with who or wore what dress at a party in Hollywood... honestly to get the real news one has to see what they AREN'T saying, these days...


This is unfortunately the case with all wars, I think. War seldom happens until the diplomats have failed to do their job. Personally, I think Saddam was unprepared for this administration in the U.S. since the one previous to it seldom did anything more than a token air strike here or there unless there was a scandal involved or a media victory to be won. As for getting out of there, I'm all for it. I just feel there needs to be stability before we leave. I think things could be even more successful however there are agents provacateurs and rabble rousers trying to keep the instability-saying things as outrageous even as "Americans will eat your children and ban Islam" to get people to fight us. Even when I was there in 2003 (at the beginning) Iranian infiltrators were stirring things up in Fallujah, etc. (I have some cool "Islamic bank of Iran" souvenir money now, with Ayatollah Khomeini's picture on it) now, that the fighting has died down long enough for people there to see what Americans are REALLY about, Fallujah is one of the better places in Iraq. Go figure. War is only partly about violence, I think. Break the enemy down, then, if you plan to have him as a friend later, build him back up. It took 10 years of fighting and hunting people down, and many more died than in this war, but Germany has turned out for the most part OK (although, personally I don't think we should have agreed to let the Russians have any of it...that's just me though.)


I don't know. Pay was not discussed, the guys we were working with were from something called GROM. Even our SEALs gave them their just respects, which, at least up until that point, I'd not seen happen so much for some other more well known SpecOp outfits we'd worked with. And no, I am not a member of any of these units. Now that GROM isn't working with us, there are various Iraqi outfits we work with, which is heartening. We don't want to be Iraq's de facto army. She needs her own.


That is ultimately Warsaw's decision to make. As an American (albeit of Polish heritage) I will say it earned some respect for Poland. Poland was who stood up. Wars are remembered differently after the fact than when they are happening, and this is not something forgotten.

I am rambling yet again, but neither Russia nor Germany has stood by Poland in recent history other than to use her as a doormat while marching back and forth. America lately has suffered due to some weak minded politicians who did not care who our friends are, but in the larger scheme of things, Warsaw is hopefully looking out for Poland's best interests. Ideally I would like that to be a U.S. friendly position, but ultimately, I think it does come down to the behind the scenes oil/power grab between the Iranians and Russia. If Russia can no longer militarily control Europe (although there's new movement that she's trying-Bears are back on patrol) then she will put a snare around Europe's neck, by controlling the fuel supply.

A question: if you knew that if a certain candidate you like in the next elections is not favored by Russia, would you care? Now, that same question, but you know if your candidate wins, the heating oil will be stopped, and your grandmother will freeze to death in her home this winter...would you still vote the same?

That is exactly the kind of power Russia is trying for if Iran can keep Iraq unstable long enough for it to become Iran's puppet (after all, isn't the Ayatollah somewhere up there, like perhaps the Pope in Catholicism?) It isn't that far of a stretch. So it is IMHO in Poland (and everyone besides Russia Iran and maybe China)'s best interest to see the U.S. and ultimately, Iraq, succeed. Regardless of if you ever see a single announcement about found WMD's, or a single Al Qaeda attack on Polish soil, whether you agree with the alleged reasons for the war or not-it HAS to succeed. It isn't so much about Iraq IMHO now as it is about Iran and Russia. A loss in Iraq means Russia and Iran control Europe's fuel supply. I would say that DEFINITELY affects Warsaw. And Krakow. And Plock. And Wroclaw...

Just my opinion, anyway.

Interesting thoughts of Andrew Olmsted -"Shafting the Poles" (look up google) - I guess Poles like to be shafted.......

the soldiers shuold get out, just in case we have these bombs exploding in our towns,, we've had enough thnask to the germans and russkiis we dont need the arabs doing it.. overall we have a decent relationship with the islamic world as mr lech has initiated this, business is increasing and so is migration, we need to get our troops out and spend our money on developing our nation...

We don't need to protect American interests in Iraq. Let the americans and the jews take care of their own problems. This all sounds so idiotic. As if the arabs and terrorists are invading Poland and we need to go down there and get involved in someone else's mess.

The war in Iraq is not in Poland's national interest and may well constitute a threat to Poland's national security in the future.

According to latest news, one Polish soldier from 3rd Mehanized Brigade in Lublin lost his life after IED attack in Iraq, last night. Another one lost his hand... Two others were wounded.

R.I.P.

No Polish mother should have to wear a black veil for her lost son in this illegal unjust war serving American - Israeli interests. :(

R.I.P.

Instead of Michal, Jan, Stevan, let Mike, John and Steve place their heads in the bags every time they step outside their base in Baghdad.

It's a shame you would say that about anyone's son, whether it's Americans with Polish names (like myself) or people actually from Poland.

You also have no idea, apparently, what is happening in Iraq. I routinely went outside base when I was in Baghdad, and truth be told, it is not the majority of people who rush up to you ready to put bags over your head. Most seemed happy to sell me things, but that's about it. Treat people with respect, and even in war, they will often treat you the same.

freewebs.com/a1mak/soul/

for people who say you shold support there millitery what support mass genoside becuse the u.s. and its couterparts make it sound lawfull instead of awfull

haw many inocent people have bee killed and mamed in this war it was about wepons of massdestruction where are they where she super gun that the u.s.a had so much intelligence on where are the missleadig spy plane and satalite shots that we was shown saying saddam has nukler reactors and missils any one read the articale about a u.s commander that swears saddam and his family was shipped out of iraq in the dead of night by the u.s air force or the articale about the states testing new wepons that nobody has seen the likes of till now nukler powerd microwave artillery that frys whatever its aimed at first it was afganistan becuse they did not and would not let the pipe lines run up along the country then iraq soon iran and syria who next seeing the only two superpawers are going to be the u.s.a and the E.U as for the united nations its just a body it holds no power whatsoever

*Hosea 13:16 -"They will fall by the sword; their little ones will be dashed to the ground, their pregnant women ripped open."

This is just another christian crusade in the guise of so called terrorism the war in the former youkoslavia was a war of mass genocide,rape,slughter inocent muslim children where cut up and trwn on trains to starving people you never heard a peep out the u.s. or any other country for that matter what about pinoshey and his likes

what did bush and blair say, That they are doing the lords work.

*Jeremiah 48:10 -"Cursed be he who does the Lords work carelessly, he who holds back his sword from blood."

indeed acording to the bible they are what are they going to do when its all over some day wash there hads and say it wasant me?

*

Most of them were killed by your camel brothers.

a1makji please check your sources...
the microwave gun you refer to is actually an effort at avoiding unnecessary casualties. It is not lethal, nor does it permanently injure. It causes its targets to sense pain and leave the area, whereas often in the past the same person might have to be shot dead, much more permanent...

Also you are mistaken about no one noticing the slaughter in the former Yugoslavia. That happened in a pre ious administration for us Americans, and Americans(and others) are still there...

Incidentally, verses like those are easily found and pointed at as supporting a given group or course of action. Similar verses, whether Biblical or from the Koran, can be used the same by the opposing side.

and who pushed for those sanctions? who chased the weapons inspectors out before they had a chance to tell the world Saddam had no WMD capabilities?

do you realize that US has been killing Iraqis at a faster rate then Saddam ever did?

helping? freedom? hmmm


are you kidding?


why? they joined and now are killing people for any good reason. i am supposed to support torture and murder?

Wow, are you serious? what's next, Americans are forcing under privileged Polish children to work in secret salt mines?
No doubt Bush and Cheney fly in during the dark of night, and drink their blood, too!
Ridiculous the horrid things people will believe because they want to. Hate Americans? post a picture of some guards, who have since been tried and convicted, embarassing prisoners and call it torture (as opposed, I guess to sawing off someone's head, which, apparently is nowhere near as bad) then watch the supposed "victims" of "secret" camps come out of the woodwork. Then watch simple minded people believe every word. If Americans are really doing all these terrible things as a policy, I sure missed it in MY training. I also wonder why the networks parade these poeple around but nobody seems to have asked why, if such horrid and illegal things were being done to them, why did their captors not simply kill them? Just be glad no one is judging Poland based on some web photos of someone doing something stupid and illegal. Imagine some sickos video themselves raping someone, so then all the world screams Polish people are horrible! they are rapists and murderers! This is essentially what you are saying about Americans, and it is apparent you are either trolling or honestly are more like most Americans than you realize, in that about many topics, if the TV says it, it must be so...

nope.. since the war is ILLEGAL any and all actions in iraq by americans, canadians, poles, brits and aussies and whomever may be part of this coalition, are ILLEGAL.

why did you join? was it to go to Iraq and spread freedom?

Illegal why? you are not backing up your statement here, only repeating a slogan based on unsubstantiated accusations levelled by people you don't know, who either seek importance or are enemies of others, who you also don't know. I am only asking that you step back for a second, and think of the claims you are making, which while popular with some, paint with a very wide, one-sided brush.

As for my own reasons for joining (other than the opportunity to torture innocents and murder children, of course! not sure how I got tricked into all this search and rescue stuff... ) they are irrelevant, and happened a long time ago.

Didn't get the second UN resolution. USA say they didn't need it - Kofi Anan et al disagree.


The USA have admitted that they use torture ( rendition flights etc ) although they are now questioning whether it has any real benefits.

iraq was never a threat to the US and that little UN thing szkot mentioned. how shifty have reasons for war been thus far? i am thinking if this war was legal and just there would only be one reason and everybody would be supporting the effort. as it is, no one is really supporting the war besides a few governments.. not the people.. in all the countries involved the populace isn't all for it.. not even in the US anymore.. everyone is figuring out that they got snowballed.


they are revelant. you i think you said you served there etc.. that makes it relevant, to me at least it is. did you join just to go there? economic reasons? 9-11? not trying to pick on you here.. just trying to figure your angle on things.

btw. i agree with you that we shan't leave until we "fix" the mess we've made. i think gen. patreus is finally making some progress. it only took 5 years. was this the plan?

washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/31/AR2007103103095_pf.html

what are your feelings on the afghani conflict? poles are there too.

PLK I thought you were smarter then that, Obviously your tinfoil hat needs a repolish. Im sure your Fellow Poles over there would be so proud of you looking down at them like that.

I wouldn't blame the troops. They just do what the politicians ask of them. The politicians are supposed to represent the majority. The problem with Iraq is that this didn't happen.

The services are only responsible for how they conduct themselves in doing their job.

Good point,AvJoeUK! I don't get the point of poles in Iraq. Just because they are supporting them, doesn't mean it is a big deal! So they are supporting troops! Lots of people are dying form the war in Iraq! Maybe the poles are just trying to help those people! Wouldn't you guys help them? The poles aren't suppose to be the ones who are fighting against them! Why do you think they have the army and navy? Some poles go there to visit friends! Whats the big deal about visiting friends? Huh?!

Hi again.


Kofi Anan is just like all the other politicians. He and his son were apparently making money from Saddam the whole time, which is why there was no motivation to act from him. Previous administrations were content to let Saddam and his implied WMD threat slide. Times change. There were 16 resolutions routinely broken, perhaps more. Not just two. There are multiple UN resolutions, each "reaffirming" that Iraq needs to offer unfettered access to their WMD and other facilities. Each of which Saddam or Uday or (fill in the Ba'ath party official of your choice) disregarded. Saddam had his neighbors convinced...as well as intelligence agencies all over the world. If anything, the war is one of the few things I do agree with Bush about.

As for the admission of "torture" the only credible articles I have seen were quoting vague unnamed officials supposedly at the U.N. ,admitting the incidents at Abu Ghraib, (embarrasing photos, bad music, etc) for which said people have been tried as the criminals they are. While hugely embarrasing to the U.S. this is not IMHO the same thing as admitting such is used as policy.

I've also heard accusations made by people who are making a lot of money and or fame for themselves, but again I have to wonder why if these things were being done by U.S. intelligence agencies, why weren't these people killed. Sounds far fetched to me, that we would genuinely torture someone picked up off the street somewhere, then set him free to go in front of every camera he can find. I guess anything's possible however.

PLK, if you hate Americans, you will find plenty of articles to support just about anything you want to say about us. Fact is we are just regular people too, not the bogey-men that you seem to see us all as. Your article however, was confusing. Rumsfeld's sticky notes as reported by a paper (coincidentally) slighted by him reads strangely as a smear...remember, in the U.S. news reporting is a for-profit arrangement, and whatever spectacular thing sells the most papers is what is reported, not necessarily the truth, the whole-truth, and nothing-but-the truth...supposedly that only happens in closed courtrooms, and I suspect, not always even then.

It is also, still irrelevant why I joined, as I said, that was a long time (almost 14 years) ago and had nothing to do with the present conflicts.

Afghanistan? it is for the most part I gather, a success. There is still massive military deployment there, and fighting is still happening, sporadically, but the media vultures are less interested and simply don't report on it, as there is simply more money to be made sensationalizing Iraq than reporting success . There is an old media saying here, "If it Bleeds, it LEADS"-there's simply far more money to be made elsewhere. Incidentally...6603 Americans alone were lost at D-Day-one DAY. Almost twice what has been lost by the entire coalition in this entire WAR. Yet somehow this one is being reported as if it were the most horrific war in history, or that it is somehow "unwinnable". What have people become, that nothing is worth fighting for anymore?

Just because someone dies in Iraq...doesn't mean he was killed by an American soldier. We are not setting the IEDs, we are not sawing off people's heads or shooting them execution style nor are we indiscriminately killing people.

We are: building schools, training police and firefighters, building hospitals...power and water facilities, rebuilding roads....some of these many times because certain groups seeking to keep Iraq destabilized keep blowing them up.

Seen any of THAT in your stories lately?

Anyway cheers folks, having stirred the pot I will return later to read your thoughts again.

Neocon smears, as far as I am aware no evidence of this has been provided. The only link was the Oil for Food programme.


Different resolutions for different things. The ones I wrote about were the ones required which would have provided a "mandate" for the war that the USA didn't have, as such, the war is "illegal".


I am sure many have been, a lot more will come out of Gitmo I'm sure.

I saw a report about construction of a bridge in Baghdad. An Iraqi engineer estimates that for repairs the necessary amount is 200,000 $ (two hundred thousand dollars) and that for the use of machinery because the workforce and materials are cheap. The job was received by an intermediary firm owned by Dick Cheney for the price of 54,000,000 $ (fifty four million dollars). That's how Bush is sucking money of the American taxpayers and filling the pockets of himself and his friends. He is a far greater swindler then Kofi Anan.

Govna su uvijek govna, samo neka smrde manje ili više.

A "mandate" from the UN has never to my knowledge been required to go to war. To have the UN's help or to declare a particular action a UN action, a UN mandate is required. The UN has never had sovereignty over any nation; it simply exists to make it easier to allow member nations to speak as one and enforce the will of the many if need be. So again, what exactly constitutes an "illegal" war? and further, you also said that any acts done by members of various countries military (perhaps you mean me) were therefore also "illegal". Guess we'll start tearing down those bridges and hospitals we built, then... Actually I feel there are wars, and then there are acts that take place during wars that are illegal esp. if done by nations who signed on to the Geneva conventions or the international laws of war-both of which are self-regulated. Neither of the above define what constitutes justification for GOING to war, only what constitutes legal methods of carrying one out.

As for your assumptions about what is obviously happening at Gitmo, I think you will be sadly disappointed. Even the news cameras don't go there anymore, as the only people being abused are the guards as everyone is so afraid of offending any of the inmates that they are actually getting fat, due to being fed and pampered heavily. You misread my previous post. I find it hard to believe that people would be put through such obviously illegal things as they are claiming, and live to tell about it. It is much easier to kill than to torture. Unless, you redefine the word torture, to include playing bad music, or keeping the lights on all night...(believe it or not those are some of the things currently being called torture-I don't know. I personally am used to the medieval definition of torture, not the modern one where even playing music a prisoner does not like is called torture). Think about it. These people are claiming they were tortured, in prisons that "don't exist" taken there on secret flights, which only THEY know the purpose for, by people who "don't exist" but are readily identifiable somehow to the supposed victims as "U.S. CIA"...so if they were REALLY in these places unbeknownsts to anyone, I think the BS is getting deep when they claim they simply got out to freely tell their tale. If such secret places really exist and unsavory people in the employ of the U.S. government (or ANY government for that matter) are doing horrible things to people...well, one does not do horrible things to people in hidden locations that "nobody knows about" then let them go, to say what they wish in front of television cameras. It simply slips beyond the realm of believability.

Interesting that you say all these things about Kofi Anan are "neocon smears" yet readily believe Americans you have never met are readily doing the most awful things imaginable (then concede that, well just the ONE thing was true...). They are reported on the same television set. You readily believe something about some unsubstantiatable story about a bridge in Baghdad you've never seen, but then disbelieve things supporting the opposing side? Why believe one if you do not believe the other? The oil for food scandal is not enough? How many women does one need to rape to be called a rapist, how many illegal deals behind the back of an organization one supposedly chairs, before one is considered crooked? How many times does one have to steal, before he is considered a thief? At least America's dirty laundry gets aired, and people imprisoned when they err.

By the by, ALL of the resolutions were supposedly backed by a promise of force. A UN "mandate" is IMHO a fictitious item that does not exist in the real sense of the word. If a member wants a resolution saying "go to war" that is all a mandate is, however such a thing assumes any of the given members of the UN consider themselves and their sovereignty subject to it.

None do.

More, it is like a club, in the old sense of the word. People discuss, and sometimes they let in new members, sometimes not. If something seems advantageous to all, all work as one. Ideally. It is not some sort of global super-government, at least, not yet. It was created to keep an open channel between governments on the verge of annihilating each other some decades ago.

Do I have any delusions about Iraq always being a wonderful place? no, I do not. I would, however, like to have at least ONE friendly nation in the area, considering the economy of the entire planet revolves around oil, and while the U.S. doesn't use Iraqi oil, I sure don't want Putin and Ahmadinejad controlling it.

I also have not heard the above allegations of Iraqi oil being sold or given to Exxon and Mobil etc. from any reputable sources. I could just pass it off as another "smear" but mostly, I know it isn't coming HERE. So who is getting it?Regardless, none of this has anything to do with Poland's participation in the war. I can't comment on regular Polish army as I've not seen them, but the troops we worked with were absolute professionals, if a bit more ruthless than some of our own. Our troops are greatly restricted in how we can carry out fighting, something other countries including Poland, apparently realize is silly. Our troops are not allowed, for instance, to fire on someone, unless we think we see a weapon, we think the person with the weapon is a direct threat to us (e.g. preparing to FIRE the weapon at us) then whoever is in charge of us AGREES that the person is a threat and then authorizes us to open fire... Unless of course the individual(s) are actually firing at us, which is different entirely.

So...I KNOW all the stories about genocides and massacres etc etc being the rule...are a load of CR@P.

I would give the Persians, not one but 30 nuclear bombs, just for the sake of restoring some balance in this World.


And we saw the fruits of this USA mission in the former Yugoslavia, where the US, through NATO, attacked a sovereign state that threatened neither the United States nor its own neighbors. In Yugoslavia, USA abandoned the claim it once had to the moral high ground. The result of the illegal and immoral USA intervention in the Balkans speaks for itself: US troops will occupy the Balkans for the foreseeable future. No peace has been attained, merely the cessation of hostilities and a permanent dependency on US foreign aid.

The further expansion of NATO is in reality a cover for increased US interventionism in Europe and beyond. It will be a conduit for more unconstitutional US foreign aid and US interference in the internal politics of member nations, especially the new members from the former East.