Poll: Who to invade next after Syria

[cpumaster]

We have invaded MExico so many times it is not even funny anymore...
You know what, I think we just found a future niche job for many Americans, invading other country...think about it, the only time (modern time, in the past 100 years) we have failed in the war is Vietnam and that's because of the defensive nature of the war, other than that when we are invading other country we always won, why not rent out this talent ot other country? Let's say Saudi Arabia want to expand their territory into Yamen, they can pay us to do that ,but of course we only do the invasion portion, we don't do policing job (simple, cuz we suck at it and it's not as profitable).... we could be like this cool mercenaries nation everybody scared of

 

[DT4K]

I don't think it's really that profitable.

It's cost us over 25 billion so far. And we'd need a little profit, so we would have had to charge at least 30 billion for Iraq. Assuming we can just leave after were done and dont have to police it. I wonder how many countries could afford to pay us 30 billion for an invasion. We could charge $1 for France. I'll chip in for that one.

 

[cmdavid]

haha.. france is winning...

 

[Rudee]

Originally posted by: glugglug
If the WMD were moved to Syria, we would no doubt have seen satellite photos of them being moved.

LOL. Hardly. WMD can be as little as a artillery shell, and can be easily moved in small trucks. Satellites are not going to track every vehicle in Iraq.

 

[DT4K]

Originally posted by: Rudee

Originally posted by: glugglug
If the WMD were moved to Syria, we would no doubt have seen satellite photos of them being moved.

LOL. Hardly. WMD can be as little as a artillery shell, and can be easily moved in small trucks. Satellites are not going to track every vehicle in Iraq.

Hell, it can be a couple of ziplocs full of anthrax spores. Or a car with a couple of canisters of Sarin in the trunk. Show me the satellite pictures of those.