Can anyone think of anything positive that the $300,000,000,000 Iraq War has done for America?

[Sheik Yerbouti]

Originally posted by: ahurtt

Originally posted by: Sheik Yerbouti

Originally posted by: ahurtt
It has definitely prevented us from not having high gas prices!
And while we can't really be certain, it may have prevented a lot of terrorist attacks on US soil that would have otherwise happened since 9/11.
Also, I feel much more comfortable now sleeping at night knowing that Iraq definitely did NOT have WMD's. I am so relieved.

My sarcasm meter's in the shop...

I'd let you borrow mine but the needle snapped off because it pegged so hard while I was writing my post.

Gracias. Mine seemed to kick in with this post.

 

[shadow9d9]

Originally posted by: Corbett

Originally posted by: shadow9d9

Originally posted by: Corbett
How about no terrorist attacks on US soil since 9/11 for starters? Better over there then over here.

THere were no terrorist attacks between 1993-2001 .. I guess Clinton did a great job too!

Are you freaking kidding me? Every hear of the USS Cole? Thats just for starters. If you want to bring Clinton into this, feel free, but his lack of doing anything about the Cole WILL be brought up.

On U.S. soil ... there have been plenty of terrorist attacks abroad since 9/11... Madrid, etc...

 

[dahunan]

Originally posted by: Corbett
If we take them out over there, we do not have to take them out over here.

DUMBEST ARGUMENT EVER

>>>19 hijackers is all it takes<<<<<

BET we made more than 19 new haters of america by killing 50,000 Iraqis??

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

Originally posted by: dahunan

Originally posted by: Corbett
If we take them out over there, we do not have to take them out over here.

DUMBEST ARGUMENT EVER

>>>19 hijackers is all it takes<<<<<

BET we made more than 19 new haters of america by killing 50,000 Iraqis??

You can triple that number of dead Iraqis, and that's being conservative. And yea, that is the most ignorant, naive argument for this war. "Fight 'em over there so we don't have to fight 'em over here"
Right, Iraq was planning a massive land and air assault on the US. Bringing all of their troops through Maine (but not in the winter, they read about Germany in Russia during WWII). Then they'll take Vermont, damn liberals won't put up a fight, then down through MA, then CT, and then it's Long Island baby....
Jesus, fight em over there, what crap...

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Sheik Yerbouti

Originally posted by: dahunan

Originally posted by: Corbett
If we take them out over there, we do not have to take them out over here.

DUMBEST ARGUMENT EVER

>>>19 hijackers is all it takes<<<<<

BET we made more than 19 new haters of america by killing 50,000 Iraqis??

You can triple that number of dead Iraqis, and that's being conservative. And yea, that is the most ignorant, naive argument for this war. "Fight 'em over there so we don't have to fight 'em over here"
Right, Iraq was planning a massive land and air assault on the US. Bringing all of their troops through Maine (but not in the winter, they read about Germany in Russia during WWII). Then they'll take Vermont, damn liberals won't put up a fight, then down through MA, then CT, and then it's Long Island baby....
Jesus, fight em over there, what crap...

Cut Corbett some slack, do you think it's easy for him to come up with valid examples?

 

[Firebot]

Originally posted by: Corbett

Originally posted by: Czar

Originally posted by: Corbett

Originally posted by: shadow9d9

Originally posted by: Corbett
How about no terrorist attacks on US soil since 9/11 for starters? Better over there then over here.

THere were no terrorist attacks between 1993-2001 .. I guess Clinton did a great job too!

Are you freaking kidding me? Every hear of the USS Cole? Thats just for starters. If you want to bring Clinton into this, feel free, but his lack of doing anything about the Cole WILL be brought up.

read what you wrote

Sorry. Should I have said, US property instead? SHEESH

Then you immediatly lose by going down that argument

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/09/12/syria.embassy/index.html

Not to mention that all attacks in Afghanistan and Iraq are also against US property.

Either you agree that there were no attacks under Clinton between 1993-2001 since the first WTC bombing and that Clinton's policy was equally as effective as Bush's policy on terror protecting US soil, or you agree that Bush's policy hasn't been protecting US property at all.

 

[SP33Demon]

WE ARE WINNING THE WOR ON TERROR, DUHH

 

[WhipperSnapper]

It's arguable that it helped lower the nation's unemployment rate by effectively removing a couple hundred thousand people from the labor force and putting them into the military.

Lessee...what else? Some members of our military have obtained combat and guerilla warfare experience, strenghtening the military for the future, at least in that respect.