Japan will not Send Troops to Iraq due to increasing Violence

[tnitsuj]

from the BBC

 

[Fencer128]

Japan postpones Iraq deployment

Japan has said it will postpone sending troops to join the US-led coalition in Iraq until next year because of the worsening security situation.

I guess they will send troops - but not until either the security situation has improved or it looks like the administration can set a realistic and firm date for a government handover.

Cheers,

Andy

 

[chazzheatherly]

Back in 1941, they were gonna take over the world. In 2003,
they can't even take over a street corner -
Gutless, useless, worthless - almost as bad as the French.
At least Tojo does not smell!

 

[kage69]

"Back in 1941, they were gonna take over the world. In 2003,
they can't even take over a street corner -
Gutless, useless, worthless - almost as bad as the French.
At least Tojo does not smell! "



And here I thought Pers was the bigoted @sshole du jour. I stand corrected.

 

[DivideBYZero]

Originally posted by: chazzheatherly
Back in 1941, they were gonna take over the world. In 2003,
they can't even take over a street corner -
Gutless, useless, worthless - almost as bad as the French.
At least Tojo does not smell!

You made the bed, now lie in it. Why should they come in when Iraq is almost as dangerous now as during War.

New battles in Tikrit, Air strikes restarted, etc. Is THAT a place where safety can be provided for the rebuilding of the country? Where law and order duties can be passed to other nations?

I don't blame ANY country for not sending troops right now, not until the current security issues are at least on the mend.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero

Originally posted by: chazzheatherly
Back in 1941, they were gonna take over the world. In 2003,
they can't even take over a street corner -
Gutless, useless, worthless - almost as bad as the French.
At least Tojo does not smell!

You made the bed, now lie in it. Why should they come in when Iraq is almost as dangerous now as during War.

New battles in Tikrit, Air strikes restarted, etc. Is THAT a place where safety can be provided for the rebuilding of the country? Where law and order duties can be passed to other nations?

I don't blame ANY country for not sending troops right now, not until the current security issues are at least on the mend.

Sorry that is gutless. You think the U.S. and it's soldiers should be the only ones to rid the world of ruthless Dictators? Where in the Constitution does it say we are the Worlds Cop?

Every country that believes in Democracy should be helping out otherwise they are just the wusses that they were and always will be.

The Security Issues is everyone's business not just the U.S. Our Men and Women will get the job done though without your help obviously.

 

[XZeroII]

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero

Originally posted by: chazzheatherly
Back in 1941, they were gonna take over the world. In 2003,
they can't even take over a street corner -
Gutless, useless, worthless - almost as bad as the French.
At least Tojo does not smell!

You made the bed, now lie in it. Why should they come in when Iraq is almost as dangerous now as during War.

New battles in Tikrit, Air strikes restarted, etc. Is THAT a place where safety can be provided for the rebuilding of the country? Where law and order duties can be passed to other nations?

I don't blame ANY country for not sending troops right now, not until the current security issues are at least on the mend.

There are cities in the US that are more dangerous the Iraq is right now.

 

[Fencer128]

There are cities in the US that are more dangerous the Iraq is right now.

How many people die each day on the road? Does that make being a soldier in Iraq safer than them being at home driving to work?

Cheers,

Andy

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: XZeroII

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero

Originally posted by: chazzheatherly
Back in 1941, they were gonna take over the world. In 2003,
they can't even take over a street corner -
Gutless, useless, worthless - almost as bad as the French.
At least Tojo does not smell!

You made the bed, now lie in it. Why should they come in when Iraq is almost as dangerous now as during War.

New battles in Tikrit, Air strikes restarted, etc. Is THAT a place where safety can be provided for the rebuilding of the country? Where law and order duties can be passed to other nations?

I don't blame ANY country for not sending troops right now, not until the current security issues are at least on the mend.

There are cities in the US that are more dangerous the Iraq is right now.

Someone posted recently the casualties in the Washington D.C. area due to crime.
Sounds like we need the National Guard on the streets there.
No I'm not supporting a Nanny State but we don't have a Government if we allow Drugs, Lawlessness and killings take over and run rampant.

 

[Gaard]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero

Originally posted by: chazzheatherly
Back in 1941, they were gonna take over the world. In 2003,
they can't even take over a street corner -
Gutless, useless, worthless - almost as bad as the French.
At least Tojo does not smell!

You made the bed, now lie in it. Why should they come in when Iraq is almost as dangerous now as during War.

New battles in Tikrit, Air strikes restarted, etc. Is THAT a place where safety can be provided for the rebuilding of the country? Where law and order duties can be passed to other nations?

I don't blame ANY country for not sending troops right now, not until the current security issues are at least on the mend.

Sorry that is gutless. You think the U.S. and it's soldiers should be the only ones to rid the world of ruthless Dictators? Where in the Constitution does it say we are the Worlds Cop?

Every country that believes in Democracy should be helping out otherwise they are just the wusses that they were and always will be.

The Security Issues is everyone's business not just the U.S. Our Men and Women will get the job done though without your help obviously.

How do you figure this?

 

[bigdog1218]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero

Originally posted by: chazzheatherly
Back in 1941, they were gonna take over the world. In 2003,
they can't even take over a street corner -
Gutless, useless, worthless - almost as bad as the French.
At least Tojo does not smell!

You made the bed, now lie in it. Why should they come in when Iraq is almost as dangerous now as during War.

New battles in Tikrit, Air strikes restarted, etc. Is THAT a place where safety can be provided for the rebuilding of the country? Where law and order duties can be passed to other nations?

I don't blame ANY country for not sending troops right now, not until the current security issues are at least on the mend.

Sorry that is gutless. You think the U.S. and it's soldiers should be the only ones to rid the world of ruthless Dictators? Where in the Constitution does it say we are the Worlds Cop?

Every country that believes in Democracy should be helping out otherwise they are just the wusses that they were and always will be.

The Security Issues is everyone's business not just the U.S. Our Men and Women will get the job done though without your help obviously.

American troops are only there because taking control of Iraq benifits America, it has nothing to do with making the world a better place. If we were all about Democracy why don't we start with Cuba? Or how about some other dictators like in North Korea?

 

[HeroOfPellinor]

Originally posted by: bigdog1218

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero

Originally posted by: chazzheatherly
Back in 1941, they were gonna take over the world. In 2003,
they can't even take over a street corner -
Gutless, useless, worthless - almost as bad as the French.
At least Tojo does not smell!

You made the bed, now lie in it. Why should they come in when Iraq is almost as dangerous now as during War.

New battles in Tikrit, Air strikes restarted, etc. Is THAT a place where safety can be provided for the rebuilding of the country? Where law and order duties can be passed to other nations?

I don't blame ANY country for not sending troops right now, not until the current security issues are at least on the mend.

Sorry that is gutless. You think the U.S. and it's soldiers should be the only ones to rid the world of ruthless Dictators? Where in the Constitution does it say we are the Worlds Cop?

Every country that believes in Democracy should be helping out otherwise they are just the wusses that they were and always will be.

The Security Issues is everyone's business not just the U.S. Our Men and Women will get the job done though without your help obviously.

American troops are only there because taking control of Iraq benifits America, it has nothing to do with making the world a better place. If we were all about Democracy why don't we start with Cuba? Or how about some other dictators like in North Korea?

They aren't supporting terrorists and don't have unaccounted-for materials for the manufacturing of WMD, genius.

 

[HeroOfPellinor]

What's the point of being in the coalition if you're not going to lend any assistance?

 

[DivideBYZero]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero

Originally posted by: chazzheatherly
Back in 1941, they were gonna take over the world. In 2003,
they can't even take over a street corner -
Gutless, useless, worthless - almost as bad as the French.
At least Tojo does not smell!

You made the bed, now lie in it. Why should they come in when Iraq is almost as dangerous now as during War.

New battles in Tikrit, Air strikes restarted, etc. Is THAT a place where safety can be provided for the rebuilding of the country? Where law and order duties can be passed to other nations?

I don't blame ANY country for not sending troops right now, not until the current security issues are at least on the mend.

Sorry that is gutless. You think the U.S. and it's soldiers should be the only ones to rid the world of ruthless Dictators? Where in the Constitution does it say we are the Worlds Cop?

Every country that believes in Democracy should be helping out otherwise they are just the wusses that they were and always will be.

The Security Issues is everyone's business not just the U.S. Our Men and Women will get the job done though without your help obviously.

If you're so tough why can't you finish what you started?

 

[Gaard]

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: bigdog1218

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero

Originally posted by: chazzheatherly
Back in 1941, they were gonna take over the world. In 2003,
they can't even take over a street corner -
Gutless, useless, worthless - almost as bad as the French.
At least Tojo does not smell!

You made the bed, now lie in it. Why should they come in when Iraq is almost as dangerous now as during War.

New battles in Tikrit, Air strikes restarted, etc. Is THAT a place where safety can be provided for the rebuilding of the country? Where law and order duties can be passed to other nations?

I don't blame ANY country for not sending troops right now, not until the current security issues are at least on the mend.

Sorry that is gutless. You think the U.S. and it's soldiers should be the only ones to rid the world of ruthless Dictators? Where in the Constitution does it say we are the Worlds Cop?

Every country that believes in Democracy should be helping out otherwise they are just the wusses that they were and always will be.

The Security Issues is everyone's business not just the U.S. Our Men and Women will get the job done though without your help obviously.

American troops are only there because taking control of Iraq benifits America, it has nothing to do with making the world a better place. If we were all about Democracy why don't we start with Cuba? Or how about some other dictators like in North Korea?

They aren't supporting terrorists and don't have unaccounted-for materials for the manufacturing of WMD, genius.

So unless the dictator supports terrorists or has unaccounted-for-WMD-materials, we don't give two hoots for the citizens. I see. It's really not about democracy.

 

[DivideBYZero]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero

Originally posted by: chazzheatherly
Back in 1941, they were gonna take over the world. In 2003,
they can't even take over a street corner -
Gutless, useless, worthless - almost as bad as the French.
At least Tojo does not smell!

You made the bed, now lie in it. Why should they come in when Iraq is almost as dangerous now as during War.

New battles in Tikrit, Air strikes restarted, etc. Is THAT a place where safety can be provided for the rebuilding of the country? Where law and order duties can be passed to other nations?

I don't blame ANY country for not sending troops right now, not until the current security issues are at least on the mend.

Sorry that is gutless. You think the U.S. and it's soldiers should be the only ones to rid the world of ruthless Dictators? Where in the Constitution does it say we are the Worlds Cop?

Every country that believes in Democracy should be helping out otherwise they are just the wusses that they were and always will be.

The Security Issues is everyone's business not just the U.S. Our Men and Women will get the job done though without your help obviously.

See bold:

It doesn't and if it did, it would still mean sh1t -all. So why oh why, when the UN DID NOT AGREE TO THE WAR, you went alone anyway, didn't find any evidence of WMD or Terrorsist activity and have left the country in a more destabilised state than it was with a despotic and ruthless dictator. Sounds like Vigilantly behavior, in liu of World cop status.

Nice job.

And is it any wonder foreign invaders are attacked? I sure as hell would attack any unwanted presence in my country. You see, the war 'may' have been a good thing if only to depose Saddam. However, the issues that have been created since, such as choas regarding law and order, infrastructure issues and lack of a rebuild strategy may not.

All the time they are being RULED by a foreign power there will be resistance. They needed saving from a Despot. They do not need to be ruled by another country, no matter what the intentions.

Heal the wound you helped to create, then get out and leave the people alone to their own future wealth and prosperity.

 

[Gaard]

<<
KEEP MILLENNIUM BANNED FOR GOOD THIS TIME!!>>

Banned again?

 

[DivideBYZero]

Originally posted by: Gaard
<<
KEEP MILLENNIUM BANNED FOR GOOD THIS TIME!!>>

Banned again?

He was. Is he back? Ahh, I'll leave it anyways. I like it now.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: bigdog1218

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero

Originally posted by: chazzheatherly
Back in 1941, they were gonna take over the world. In 2003,
they can't even take over a street corner -
Gutless, useless, worthless - almost as bad as the French.
At least Tojo does not smell!

You made the bed, now lie in it. Why should they come in when Iraq is almost as dangerous now as during War.

New battles in Tikrit, Air strikes restarted, etc. Is THAT a place where safety can be provided for the rebuilding of the country? Where law and order duties can be passed to other nations?

I don't blame ANY country for not sending troops right now, not until the current security issues are at least on the mend.

Sorry that is gutless. You think the U.S. and it's soldiers should be the only ones to rid the world of ruthless Dictators? Where in the Constitution does it say we are the Worlds Cop?

Every country that believes in Democracy should be helping out otherwise they are just the wusses that they were and always will be.

The Security Issues is everyone's business not just the U.S. Our Men and Women will get the job done though without your help obviously.

American troops are only there because taking control of Iraq benifits America, it has nothing to do with making the world a better place. If we were all about Democracy why don't we start with Cuba? Or how about some other dictators like in North Korea?

They aren't supporting terrorists and don't have unaccounted-for materials for the manufacturing of WMD, genius.

6 months into this conflict and the Materials are still unaccounted for and the theory that Iraq had ties with Al Qaeda has been debunked (well ties before the war) So I guess that we go to war with ruthless Dictators based on Faulty Intel.

Actually the Neo Cons have always had Iraq in their sights and the events on 9/11 only helped them achieve their objective by using Americas shock and bitterness over the Terrorists attacks to support an Invasion and Occupation of Iraq.

 

[dpm]

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: bigdog1218 If we were all about Democracy why don't we start with Cuba? Or how about some other dictators like in North Korea?

They aren't supporting terrorists and don't have unaccounted-for materials for the manufacturing of WMD, genius.

Cuba I'll grant you, but North Korea?

 

[Mardeth]

Originally posted by: chazzheatherly
Back in 1941, they were gonna take over the world. In 2003,
they can't even take over a street corner -
Gutless, useless, worthless - almost as bad as the French.
At least Tojo does not smell!

Just because they will postpone cleaning your mess? Phew...

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
What's the point of being in the coalition if you're not going to lend any assistance?

Exactly, wusses.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Gaard

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: bigdog1218

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero

Originally posted by: chazzheatherly
Back in 1941, they were gonna take over the world. In 2003,
they can't even take over a street corner -
Gutless, useless, worthless - almost as bad as the French.
At least Tojo does not smell!

You made the bed, now lie in it. Why should they come in when Iraq is almost as dangerous now as during War.

New battles in Tikrit, Air strikes restarted, etc. Is THAT a place where safety can be provided for the rebuilding of the country? Where law and order duties can be passed to other nations?

I don't blame ANY country for not sending troops right now, not until the current security issues are at least on the mend.

Sorry that is gutless. You think the U.S. and it's soldiers should be the only ones to rid the world of ruthless Dictators? Where in the Constitution does it say we are the Worlds Cop?

Every country that believes in Democracy should be helping out otherwise they are just the wusses that they were and always will be.

The Security Issues is everyone's business not just the U.S. Our Men and Women will get the job done though without your help obviously.

American troops are only there because taking control of Iraq benifits America, it has nothing to do with making the world a better place. If we were all about Democracy why don't we start with Cuba? Or how about some other dictators like in North Korea?

They aren't supporting terrorists and don't have unaccounted-for materials for the manufacturing of WMD, genius.

So unless the dictator supports terrorists or has unaccounted-for-WMD-materials, we don't give two hoots for the citizens. I see. It's really not about democracy.

This has always been my question if you look at my posts looong before this whoe Iraq mess.

It has always seemed to me that we let and keep Dictators in power. There is some truth to the "We have to pick our Battles" kind of thing like someone mentioned above Countries harboring Terrorists, making WMD etc.

But why did we leave Castro in power, he pointed WMD right in our face from 90 miles out and yet he is still there...

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674




But why did we leave Castro in power, he pointed WMD right in our face from 90 miles out and yet he is still there...

Easy, to have removed him by force might have resulted in a Nuclear conflict between us and the Soviets. At the very least it would have provoked them into invading West Berlin.

 

[HeroOfPellinor]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Gaard

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: bigdog1218

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero

Originally posted by: chazzheatherly
Back in 1941, they were gonna take over the world. In 2003,
they can't even take over a street corner -
Gutless, useless, worthless - almost as bad as the French.
At least Tojo does not smell!

You made the bed, now lie in it. Why should they come in when Iraq is almost as dangerous now as during War.

New battles in Tikrit, Air strikes restarted, etc. Is THAT a place where safety can be provided for the rebuilding of the country? Where law and order duties can be passed to other nations?

I don't blame ANY country for not sending troops right now, not until the current security issues are at least on the mend.

Sorry that is gutless. You think the U.S. and it's soldiers should be the only ones to rid the world of ruthless Dictators? Where in the Constitution does it say we are the Worlds Cop?

Every country that believes in Democracy should be helping out otherwise they are just the wusses that they were and always will be.

The Security Issues is everyone's business not just the U.S. Our Men and Women will get the job done though without your help obviously.

American troops are only there because taking control of Iraq benifits America, it has nothing to do with making the world a better place. If we were all about Democracy why don't we start with Cuba? Or how about some other dictators like in North Korea?

They aren't supporting terrorists and don't have unaccounted-for materials for the manufacturing of WMD, genius.

So unless the dictator supports terrorists or has unaccounted-for-WMD-materials, we don't give two hoots for the citizens. I see. It's really not about democracy.

This has always been my question if you look at my posts looong before this whoe Iraq mess.

It has always seemed to me that we let and keep Dictators in power. There is some truth to the "We have to pick our Battles" kind of thing like someone mentioned above Countries harboring Terrorists, making WMD etc.

But why did we leave Castro in power, he pointed WMD right in our face from 90 miles out and yet he is still there...

OMG! You're so close to understanding this I could jump for joy!

If you wait until they're pointing WMD at you, it's too late. You finally get it? Please say yes.

Also, Castro didn't have a history of repeatedly using WMD and supporting terrorist (you liberal drones seem to forget that there are other terrorist groups besides Al Qaeda) and also hadn't tried taking over Haiti which is why we weren't justified in a forceful removal of Castro from power.

You're so close to getting this. Think outside the hive! Take the blue pill...no...wait...the red one, Neo!