Phillipine withdrawal

Regardless of how you feel about the conflict in Iraq, this is a very, very, very bad idea. I'll be rejoicing with everyone else if Angelo de la Cruz makes it home to his family, but this is a bad precedent for the Philippines to set.

-sm

Pulled out all 51 of their troops, eh?

The terrorists probably thought he was from some other country.

Capitulation never works. They'll just want more.

They were about to anyway, it was just l1 week or so early. Still a stupid move, they've just made life that bit more dangerous for everyone still there.

Say, at some point wasn't there a muslim influence in the Phillipines? Does a muslim minority still reside in that country? :confused:

Influence is one way of putting it. Active muslim extremist group with links to Al Queda, a history of kidnapping people and a constant thorn in the side of the government got decades is another.

There are actually multiple groups based in the South, Abu Syaf (sp?) is the best known for their kidnapping operations but are more common thugs and islamic extremeists. From memory there is another group, MMO I think who are better at the koran waving side of things. Both have been bitchslapped hard in the last couple of years by the army working with US specops.

What were they supposed to do? Stay and watch him die? Unlike America, which is sorrowfully resigned to see a civilian decapitated for fear that pulling out would appear 'weak', and not least as a result of a guilty conscience, and of course the issue of control, at least the Phillipine's are showing some support (loyalty?) for their countrymen. As a (small-ish) humanitarian unit, I understand that their retreat may send out a message that Iraq is unsafe for human aid contractors - but hang on a minute, it is unsafe! Along with the Spanish and Honduran contingent - and possibly soon the Bulgarians - they recognise the futility of attempting operation while insurgents are still trying to isolate the government and bloodshed is still rife. I do understand the danger of everyone abandoning ship, and that America may view it as yet again, Americans are the only ones spending and risking lives for redevelopment, but just remember who got us into this mess. I think GWB should be on the front line, fixing bandages and comforting sons and daughters who have lost their parents in yet another suicide bomb as a result of Western intervention.

Wolf wrote:

The terrorists probably thought he was from some other country.

Wolf what does this mean?

Catwoman, if Iraq is ever to achieve stability now, reconstruction work is utterly essential, probably the second priority behind security. What this does is validate their strategy and make the situation signifigantly more risky for all remaining nationals for countries who have troops in the country.

What's done is done now and the important thing is that somehow Iraq become a stable country, this has undermined that effort. In short, greatest good, greatest number.

Yes, I know I may be crying over spilt milk etc., but why expect other countries to remain in Iraq and effectively (and literally) 'clear up'? Clear up buildings, bodies and blood. If you were running a country that had absolutely no say in and therefore nothing to do with the war, would you be willing to put your people out there and risk death? Of course it is vital that reconstruction is completed. But you can understand the reason for withdrawal?

Well most countries that have token forces are there because they're blowing the US nad hoping for some favours in the future. The situation you're describing is exactly the same as the ones most major nations send peacekeeping forces into via the UN every year.

That's very true. But the US would be fucked if they didn't. At what point do they make a stand, and let the US know that next time they plunge headfirst into a full blown war, we won't be there to pick up the pieces.

But is that fair on the Iraqi people? I think most countries have taken a fairly good medium line, for example, agreeing to train Iraqi troops, but not in Iraq. Enough to let bush know that noone approves but still willing to help a lot of people in need.

The second factor is that *everyone* loses if Iraq becomes a failed state.

The Philipinos must be counting on Bush losing or they're assuming he needs them badly. They have a stake in Iraq but it's about being part of a coalition that'll help them fight the Moslem insurgencey at home. Bushes vindictive nature could cause him to pull back in the Philipines, but they are assuming something like a rational response rational in the sense that it fits the stated goals of the administration, not rational as in truly effective..

Jag wrote:

The second factor is that *everyone* loses if Iraq becomes a failed state.

Yes, I concede that the Iraqi people should come first here. It's just such a shame (excuse the euphemism) that so many people have to die to prevent so many people dying.

glatt wrote:

They have a stake in Iraq but it's about being part of a coalition that'll help them fight the Moslem insurgencey at home.

Do they really think the perceived 'coalition' will reciprocate?

Coalition won't, the US already is in a big way.

I think the Iraqi resistance will fail now, they've shot themselves in both feet with a 12gague by attacking Iraqi civvies and lost the mainstream support that had a legitimate resistance movement. Obviously there are different elements at work but without popular support they will wane and eventully die.

Catwoman wrote:

Do they really think the perceived 'coalition' will reciprocate?

We already are.

Must have more coffee

Griff wrote:

Must have more coffee

Did you know...


- If her husband doesn't give her coffee, a Saudi woman can divorce him
- The most readily identifiable smell is coffee. Peanut butter comes a close second
- A latte is literally called a 'wrong coffee' (Koffie verkeerd) in Holland
- Large doses of coffee can be lethal. 5-10g, or 100 cups over 4 hours can kill the average human.


Sorry, been sent more useless shit by another touting image library today.

Quote:Originally Posted by Wolf
The terrorists probably thought he was from some other country.

Wolf what does this mean?

That neither side really gives a damn if all 51 (or whatever) of the Phillipine troops are gone, and that the insurgents would really rather kidnap people from countries with larger numbers of troops.

If no one gives a damn why the hell have they been risking their lives??

I think 100 cups of water in 4 hours would come close to killing you.

Catwoman wrote:

Wolf what does this mean?

That was sarcasm. I meant "some country where people look vaguely Asian that had more the fifty-one soldiers."

You're a big fan of Neville Chamberlain, aren't you?

You're a big fan of Neville Chamberlain, aren't you?

Ouch.

jaguar wrote:

I think 100 cups of water in 4 hours would come close to killing you.

It does. Flushes the sodium and potassium out of your system and your heart stops.

(It's got a fancy name that I can never remember without google's help ... something polydipsia .. psychogenic polydipsia. No, that's just the desire to drink lots and lots of water. oooh ... google can be so unhelpful. It should know what the fuck I really want ... hyponatremia.) :)

Griff wrote:

The Philipinos must be counting on Bush losing or they're assuming he needs them badly. They have a stake in Iraq but it's about being part of a coalition that'll help them fight the Moslem insurgencey at home. Bushes vindictive nature could cause him to pull back in the Philipines, but they are assuming something like a rational response rational in the sense that it fits the stated goals of the administration, not rational as in truly effective..

catwoman wrote:

If no one gives a damn why the hell have they been risking their lives??

The US has so far lost 11 soldiers in the Philippines fighting Abu Sayyaf.

Wolf wrote:

You're a big fan of Neville Chamberlain, aren't you?

jag wrote:

Ouch.

I don't think wolf likes people who don't like guns.

UT- The very phrase 'capitulated to international terror' suggests weakness and surrender. What if they simply wanted to prevent more harm? Quite rational, really, as griff said.

[SIZE=1]damn double quotes[/SIZE]

I like many people who don't like guns.

Prevent more harm for whom?

If they find that kidnapping works to threaten governments, they will do it more often.

Good point.

Catwoman wrote:

What if they simply wanted to prevent more harm? Quite rational, really, as griff said.

Ah, the doormat defense. Works every time. No, it really does. When you have nothing left to give, they really do stop taking.

We probably shouldn't be there but, fact is, we are. And we aren't leaving until the job is finished regardless of how many heads they toss into the Tigris.

Not to hijack the thread, but I heard from a Marine in Iraq, that some of the Marines are spending their off duty time by going into Fallujah in their civies. :worried:

Why would they go there?

-sm

Sightseeing.

Right, R & R. Doesn't sound smart, to me. It didn't to the Marine that told me, either. :eek3:

xoxoxoBruce wrote:

Right, R & R. Doesn't sound smart, to me. It didn't to the Marine that told me, either. :eek3:

Are they going there to "take care of business" off the record? That's certainly what it sounds like to me, anyway. :rattat:

No Beestie, definitely not organized. Just guys on their off time looking for entertainment. :)

Although I know what this thread is about, for some reason I keep expecting there to be detailed instructions for some new, exotic sexual technique.

Well, it is about a good screwing. ;)

I just heard a Filipino-American commentator on Fox "fair and balanced" lashing out at the Philippines. She recommended sanctions including immigration quotas, even though she admitted that it would affect her own family.

I don't believe in appeasing terrorists. However, a country is responsible for it's citizens. The Phillipines made a decision that participation in Iraq was not worth it. They also made a decision that they were lied to about the reasons for the war, which is correct.

The US made a similar decision in Vietnam, which is why there are 58,000 names on a wall instead of 100,000.

The US-Phillipines relationship has always been complex. We are their savior and conqueror. We free them from the Japanese, but propped up brutal dictators. We have recently lost troops there fighting rebels/terrorsits.

Bottom line - They are a sovereign nation. Bush is not their president. They get to make their own choices and mistakes. God knows, we have made ours.

On a related note, in order to verify the number (I thought it was 56,000), I went to the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Fund web site.

Here are all of the men named Levy who died in Vietnam.

BRUCE LEVY PFC ARMY ELMHURST NY 4/11/1947 - 5/18/1968

GERALD LEVY SP5 ARMY MERIDEN CT 5/1/1945 - 1/2/1966

NORMAN STANLEY LEVY LCDR NAVY FOREST HILLS NY 4/21/1935 - 10/26/1966
WALTER NEVILLE LEVY 2LT MARINE CORPS NEW YORK NY 11/10/1938 - 9/18/1965
WILLIAM LEVY JR WILBURN SP5 ARMY MEMPHIS TN 5/9/1947 - 1/15/1969

Here are all of the men and women named Bush who died in Vietnam


CECIL FLOYD BUSH EM1 NAVY BOGALUSA LA 7/20/1933 - 2/27/1969

EDWARD L BUSH WO ARMY WICHITA KS 3/12/1943 - 3/20/1967

ELBERT WAYNE BUSH SSGT ARMY JACKSON MS 10/13/1946 - 1/8/1973

FRANK KENNETH BUSH LCPL MARINE CORPS YORK PA 1/12/1951 - 5/14/1970

GILBERT BYRON BUSH 2LT ARMY LARAMIE WY 1/17/1941 - 5/8/1966

JAMES BUSH SFC ARMY TALLADEGA AL 9/14/1941 - 5/1/1970

JAMES EDWARD BUSH SP4 ARMY LEBANON TN 6/20/1945 - 3/4/1966

JAMES HOWARD JR BUSH PFC MARINE CORPS GUYTON GA 9/14/1948 - 12/18/1967

JOHN ROBERT BUSH CAPT AIR FORCE FT WALTON BEACH FL 5/17/1943 - 7/24/1968

JOSEPH KERR JR BUSH CAPT ARMY TEMPLE TX 1/28/1944 - 2/10/1969

LEE RANDALL BUSH PFC ARMY LANSING MI 9/2/1947 - 6/6/1968

MARK JOEL BUSH SGT ARMY ANAHEIM CA 5/18/1950 - 6/22/1970

MILTON JACKSON BUSH SGT AIR FORCE BARNESVILLE GA 4/8/1947 - 5/18/1969

NATHANIEL BUSH PFC ARMY BALTIMORE MD 3/16/1947 - 10/2/1969

OTIS LEE BUSH PFC MARINE CORPS ORLANDO FL 9/18/1948 - 9/23/1967

PAUL WILLIAM BUSH 1LT MARINE CORPS GREENVILLE PA 7/8/1944 - 3/22/1968

PEARL BUSH SSGT ARMY LITTLE KY 12/30/1937 - 5/11/1968

ROBERT EDWARD BUSH LTC AIR FORCE HAMDEN CT 10/4/1928 - 3/24/1966

ROBERT IRA BUSH CAPT AIR FORCE RACINE WI 6/8/1938 - 6/9/1966

STEVEN CLARENCE BUSH CPL ARMY GRUBVILLE MO 7/13/1948 - 6/3/1968

THOMAS BURKE BUSH SP4 ARMY TULSA OK 1/10/1947 - 8/30/1968

THOMAS EDWARD BUSH PFC MARINE CORPS BILLERICA MA 8/10/1948 - 11/21/1968

Obviously, these men were no relation to "old yellow-belly" now residing in the White House. :mad2:

I saw a great cartoon which I couldn't track down on the net. Bush and Kerry are debating their war records on tv. Kerry:It's pacifists like me that fought that war! Bush:It's shirkers like me that supported the war at home! Two guys watching tv- Guy1: My head hurts. Guy2: I like them both!

Rich, my point is this. The Philippine decision should have nothing to do with their relationship to the US. It should have nothing to do with their motivations for entering the conflict, or their reservations about continuing.

The instant that someone captures one of you citizens and makes a demand, any acquiescence to that demands puts all of your citizens at risk. I agree that they have a responsibility to their own citizenry. The Philippines are home to a growing, and increasingly militant, Islamic community whose stated goal is to make the country an Islamic Theocracy. They have now effectively demonstrated that terror against their citizens is an effective method for altering their actions. That can’t be a good message to send back home.

And don’t believe for a moment that the “good graces” of Al Queda will follow them home. The Pan-Islamic movement doesn’t want friends and allies, they want a world empire.

-sm

I think the Philippine government has to walk a bit of a tight-rope, since they do have a significant Muslim minority among their own people. It is debatable whether pulling their 51 guys out of the Mid East was an appropriate response to terrorist tactics. However, I think its important to realize that these were Iraqui terrorists and not Philippino ones. The Philippines may be as disgusted by our actions in Iraq as the rest of our allies and siezed upon this incident as a pretext for withdrawing their men.

I might also add that it is only a vern small minority of Muslims who are bent on world domination. Its important to be aware of this and not tar every member of the Muslim faith with the same brush.

mari- I'm talking specifically about those muslims who ARE Pan-Islamists. There are a significant number of them living in the Phillipines. Some of them are millitant. And an even larger number are silently concurring, believing that it is a central tennet of the Muslim faith.

-sm

SM, from what I follow the hardline Islamic movementin the Phillipines is shrinking, not growing, they also have been under contastant military attack by the US and the phillipine army. Increasingly militant? They've been waging a sepratist war for decades, how much more militant can you get?

Just guessing, but the Filipino commentator that Rich is talking about is probably Michelle Malkin.. She frequently talks about tightening immigration standards and patrolling the borders.

Belmont Club points (via Malkin, coincidentally) to an article in the Philippines Daily Tribune which reports that the Philippines has paid an Iraqi terrorist gang US$6 million dollars for the release of hostage Angelo de la Cruz.

A ransom of $6 million was offered and paid out to the Iraqi rebels holding Filipino truck driver Angelo de la Cruz hostage, to ensure his release before President Arroyo's scheduled State of the Nation Address (Sona) on July 26, a high level Philippine intelligence officer told the Tribune yesterday. This offer was alleged to have been approved by the President herself, who then tapped Malaysian emissaries for the job, the intelligence officer, who asked for anonymity, said. Of the $6-million payoff, $5 million was shouldered by Malaysia and $1 million by the Landbank of the Philippines, the officer added.

Wretchard explains why that's BAD:

Operationally these ransom payments are actually cash infusions into terrorist coffers and the "matching funds" are probably a kind of disguised contribution by certain Malaysian and Libyan sympathizers to the cause. However that may be, the scale of the ransom reported by the Philippines Daily Tribune can be gauged by comparison to the World Trade Center attacks which cost Osama Bin Laden half a million dollars. The "ransom" paid by the Philippine Government is twelve times that amount and will kill dozens of Americans and Iraqis before it is expended. Six million dollars buys a lot of IEDs.

I'd be worried about the sieve like nature of the phillo intel services

Well, I suppose the Bush Administration is going to write the Phillipines up on the marker board as a member of the 'Axis of EEEEEvil' for giving the hostagetakers six million bux. :smack:

Six million bux sounds like a good idea...and there's some South Asians working in my office. Maybe I'll take someone hostage, barricade myself in my high walled (3 feet high that is) cubicle and threaten to staple ties and fingers and put tape in hair and smear whiteout on glasses until my demands are met: a FRESH box of Krispy Kreme donuts and $6 million! Bwahaha! :rar:

if you can hold off a swat team with a stapler I'll give you 6m.

Belmont Club tracks what happened to the now-confirmed ransom payment.

The two vital points confirmed by the AP report were that the Malaysians were involved and that a ransom was offered. That quarter of a million dollars, paid to the Khalid Ibn al-Walid brigade (who held the Filipino hostage) is coincidentally almost exactly the amount being offered by Zarqawi for the head of Iraqi Prime Minister Iyad Allawi. According to Reuters:

A group led by suspected al Qaeda ally Abu Musab al-Zarqawi offered a reward of $282,000 on Sunday for the killing of Iraqi Prime Minister Iyad Allawi, according to a statement posted on an Islamist Web site. "We in Khalid bin al-Walid Brigade announce to the Iraqi people a reward of 200,000 Jordanian dinars ($282,000) to whoever gets us Allawi's head," said a group statement posted on the site.

Is that an intentional coinsidence? I thought these brigades were well funded anyway. :confused: