When will the idiocy over Iraq end?

[BaliBabyDoc]

Bush, I know we are going to win.
That's just delusional . . . he "believes" we are going to win and he "wants" us to win. But anything resembling "victory" in Iraq will require a lot of things to come to together that aren't even in the ballpark of reality at this point in time.

Esse Quam Videri - to be rather than to seem
It's my state's motto but there's a 'hood version too . . . keeping it real. George Bush is the archetype for Dave Chappelle's "When Keeping It Real Goes Wrong." Unfortunately, he's not the only one that must deal with the consequences.
Check out President Black Bush and Keeping It Real

But this guy is a tool as well.

Dean, the Democratic National Chairman, on Monday told a San Antonio, Texas, radio station that the United States appears to be making the same mistakes it made during the Vietnam War, and the idea that the war in Iraq can be won is "just plain wrong."

I may be misstating his argument, but I believe Dean is fundamentally wrong in saying the war cannot be won. I think he's right to say we aren't going to win (at least not in the next decade or so) with our current execution. But the notion that it's impossible to successful in Iraq is probably not right. Obviously, we have more options for failure but that doesn't mean failure is a foregone conclusion. Then again, Bush is President.

 

[morrisbj]

OMFG, there are people around other than me that know about PNAC? Maybe the world isn't going to end after all!!

 

[CoolTech]

how can you win against an enemy that is not some unified entity, its not like we can go bomb the headquarters of al-qaeda. This is an organization that works in cells and without borders. It can run as a headless operation. This will not stop in the near term until the U.S. comes clean about its skeletons and makes amends. Even then, it probably won't. These young impressionable so-called "insurgents" will not put their weapons down and say, ok, U.S. you have won the war, now lets build a unified IRaq/Middle East. Lol. That's like saying Israel and Palestine will get along. How can the president not see this? How is this sending the "wrong message" to the troops. Its called the truth! I mean IMHO this is worse than Vietnam, I mean at least you knew you what country your were fighting against then.

 

[Engineer]

Originally posted by: morrisbj
OMFG, there are people around other than me that know about PNAC? Maybe the world isn't going to end after all!!

More than you think. There are many here that also live by it's doctrin, or so they act.

 

[arsbanned]

Remember, the U.S. isn't polarized. Bush is a uniter. Right, Bush fans? :disgust:
Given the poisonous political climate in this country, it won't be long before Iraq will become irrelevant. We'll be worried about our own civil war.

 

[Genx87]

You have two extremes who are trying to make their case. The truth obviously lands right in the middle.

However i think Dean comments were over the top and useless. The only mistake we can make that will parellel Vietnam is withdrawing early without a stable capable Iraqi govt.

Then it will end just like Vietnam did with our opposition toppling the govt and end with a lot more dead than we have now.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: arsbanned
Remember, the U.S. isn't polarized. Bush is a uniter. Right, Bush fans? :disgust:
Given the poisonous political climate in this country, it won't be long before Iraq will become irrelevant. We'll be worried about our own civil war.

You know maybe you and your party can take the high road and try to be uniters?
I know being a democrat now means to whine, cry, have a defeatist attitude. But take the moral high ground you so love and do the right thing.

 

[NJDevil]

Originally posted by: Genx87
You have two extremes who are trying to make their case. The truth obviously lands right in the middle.

However i think Dean comments were over the top and useless. The only mistake we can make that will parellel Vietnam is withdrawing early without a stable capable Iraqi govt.

Then it will end just like Vietnam did with our opposition toppling the govt and end with a lot more dead than we have now.

How long are you willing to stay in Iraq to see this stable government? Who knows if one will ever form?

Are you willing to keep over 100k american troops, spending over 100 billion a year for the next five years?

 

[CaptnKirk]

Dean on this reminds me of the kid way out in left field in Little League Baseball.
Didn't pay attention to what the coach told him, al the parents are in the stands, &
he's tossing his glove up in the air and kicking the dandylions into fluff in the wind.

Then the ball gets hit towards him - he doesn't know what to do, so he just makes it up -
throws a random toss to anyone who he sees in front of him when he does get the ball.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: NJDevil

Originally posted by: Genx87
You have two extremes who are trying to make their case. The truth obviously lands right in the middle.

However i think Dean comments were over the top and useless. The only mistake we can make that will parellel Vietnam is withdrawing early without a stable capable Iraqi govt.

Then it will end just like Vietnam did with our opposition toppling the govt and end with a lot more dead than we have now.

How long are you willing to stay in Iraq to see this stable government? Who knows if one will ever form?

Are you willing to keep over 100k american troops, spending over 100 billion a year for the next five years?

before the invasion the administration gave a timetable of between 3-5 years for an occupation. If by the end of the 4th year we dont start seeing some improvements then it is time to worry. If by the end of the 5th the administration hasnt got a clue then we should revisit this subject.

Who knew if the Germans or Japanese would ever come back, but we spent billions in each country and havent left in 60 years.

 

[Blackjack2000]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Who knew if the Germans or Japanese would ever come back, but we spent billions in each country and havent left in 60 years.

Are you really comparing the situation in Iraq to the situation in Germany and Japan at the end of WWII?

 

[piasabird]

I dont see the US as a Victor in this. It is the People of Iraq, that I would like to see win. It is their country. If they want to make democracy work then they have to step up to the plate. We can only help them.

 

[DragonMasterAlex]

Personally, I say that if we can't win, we should just white-phosphorous bomb the ENTIRE middle east. Frankly, I'm sick of these goddamn savages. Even when we *weren't* heavily involved and invested of troops, equipment, etc. in the middle east these barbarians were strapping bombs to themselves and walking into cafes and boarding busses.

Face it: They're a culture of THUGS, and the only way to deal with someone who refuses to deal in any terms but violence is with LETHAL violence. Maybe when they come home from their terrorist training camps and find their wives and children in a smoking ruin with their charred flesh hanging from their bones they'll get the fvcking point.

Jason

 

[DragonMasterAlex]

Originally posted by: NJDevil

Originally posted by: Genx87
You have two extremes who are trying to make their case. The truth obviously lands right in the middle.

However i think Dean comments were over the top and useless. The only mistake we can make that will parellel Vietnam is withdrawing early without a stable capable Iraqi govt.

Then it will end just like Vietnam did with our opposition toppling the govt and end with a lot more dead than we have now.

How long are you willing to stay in Iraq to see this stable government? Who knows if one will ever form?

Are you willing to keep over 100k american troops, spending over 100 billion a year for the next five years?

Why not? We spend more than that on worthless welfare scum. If we can make Iraq a successful nation with a Capitalist economy, and seed a change in their culture to where the Kurds/Sunnis/Shiites can learn to respect each others' rights to disagree without bombing each other to smithereens, then we'll have accomplished something *very* worthwhile that COULD stand to influence surrounding nations.

One can't underestimate the importance of the funamental right to *disagree* without fear of being bombed by your neighbor.

Jason

 

[BBond]

Originally posted by: DragonMasterAlex
Personally, I say that if we can't win, we should just white-phosphorous bomb the ENTIRE middle east. Frankly, I'm sick of these goddamn savages. Even when we *weren't* heavily involved and invested of troops, equipment, etc. in the middle east these barbarians were strapping bombs to themselves and walking into cafes and boarding busses.

Face it: They're a culture of THUGS, and the only way to deal with someone who refuses to deal in any terms but violence is with LETHAL violence. Maybe when they come home from their terrorist training camps and find their wives and children in a smoking ruin with their charred flesh hanging from their bones they'll get the fvcking point.

Jason

Spoken like a true terrorist.

I'd also like to point out that, as a supporter of an administration that perpetrated this unprovoked attack against Iraq -- which has resulted SO FAR in the deaths of between 27,000 to over 100,000 innocent civilians -- I find your charcterization of an entire culture, based on the actions of a few of it's members completely hypocritical and totally abhorrent seeing as how the good old USA, led by the liars in the Bush administration, refused "to deal in any terms but violence" even when there were UN inspectors on the ground in Iraq with unlimited access finding NOTHING in the way of the WMD the U.S. used as an excuse to cause all of this carnage.

Currently, under George W. Bush and his band of neocon madmen headed by Dick Cheney, if you are capable of honestly comparing our culture with theirs, you'll be forced to come to the conclusion that there is little difference. Their murderering fanatics strap on suicide vests or bury IEDs along highways. Ours use the highest tech military on Earth. The results are the same.

I fully supported destroying the Taliban and al Qaeda along with any other terrorist organization that threatened peace but by going into Iraq and causing the destruction and death that we've caused and continue to cause over the past nearly two years and nine months we are no better than them. There was no reason to attack Iraq and there is no reason to continue this carnage other than to join the ranks of the terrorists that the Bush administration let off the hook by going off on this fool's errand. A fool's errand that people like you, who admit getting some sort of sick satisfaction from finding someone's innocent "wives and children in a smoking ruin with their charred flesh hanging from their bones" which we are indeed finding in cities like Fallujah at our own hand, continue to support although it is abundantly clear that the entire fiasco was based on nothing but pack of lies by people who are one in the same with those they use as an excuse for their own brand of terrorism.

 

[DragonMasterAlex]

Originally posted by: BBond

Originally posted by: DragonMasterAlex
Personally, I say that if we can't win, we should just white-phosphorous bomb the ENTIRE middle east. Frankly, I'm sick of these goddamn savages. Even when we *weren't* heavily involved and invested of troops, equipment, etc. in the middle east these barbarians were strapping bombs to themselves and walking into cafes and boarding busses.

Face it: They're a culture of THUGS, and the only way to deal with someone who refuses to deal in any terms but violence is with LETHAL violence. Maybe when they come home from their terrorist training camps and find their wives and children in a smoking ruin with their charred flesh hanging from their bones they'll get the fvcking point.

Jason

Spoken like a true terrorist.

I'd also like to point out that, as a supporter of an administration that perpetrated this unprovoked attack against Iraq -- which has resulted SO FAR in the deaths of between 27,000 to over 100,000 innocent civilians -- I find your charcterization of an entire culture, based on the actions of a few of it's members completely hypocritical and totally abhorrent seeing as how the good old USA, led by the liars in the Bush administration, refused "to deal in any terms but violence" even when there were UN inspectors on the ground in Iraq with unlimited access finding NOTHING in the way of the WMD the U.S. used as an excuse to cause all of this carnage.

Currently, under George W. Bush and his band of neocon madmen headed by Dick Cheney, if you are capable of honestly comparing our culture with theirs, you'll be forced to come to the conclusion that there is little difference. Their murderering fanatics strap on suicide vests or bury IEDs along highways. Ours use the highest tech military on Earth. The results are the same.

I fully supported destroying the Taliban and al Qaeda along with any other terrorist organization that threatened peace but by going into Iraq and causing the destruction and death that we've caused and continue to cause over the past nearly two years and nine months we are no better than them. There was no reason to attack Iraq and there is no reason to continue this carnage other than to join the ranks of the terrorists that the Bush administration let off the hook by going off on this fool's errand. A fool's errand that people like you, who admit getting some sort of sick satisfaction from finding someone's innocent "wives and children in a smoking ruin with their charred flesh hanging from their bones" which we are indeed finding in cities like Fallujah at our own hand, continue to support although it is abundantly clear that the entire fiasco was based on nothing but pack of lies by people who are one in the same with those they use as an excuse for their own brand of terrorism.

Oh fvck off you worthless boob. You have yet to contribute anything INTELLIGENT to this forum in all the years I've seen you here. The bottom line is this: The middle-eastern Muslim culture is AMOCK with the idea that physical shows of FORCE are what matters. It's THEIR mentality, THEIR choice. They do it to each other whether the US is present or not, and they have for centuries.

And as I've told your sorry ass repeatedly, I am not now nor have I EVER been a supporter of Bush in ANY endeavor except the war on terror, which, like it or not, IS a war that must be fought. It's not pretty, there WILL BE civilian deaths, and that's just life. If you want to blame someone for civilian deaths, blame the Muslim THUGS who are such great COWARDS that they dress as civilians and run into crowds in order to ensure that as much collatoral damage as possible is caused by the legitimate forces persuing them, whether those forces are US or Iraqi.

You, BBond, are little more than an APOLOGIST for SAVAGES. I wouldn't be surprised to find you cozied up having dinner with the likes of bin Laden, nor would I be surprised if you were one of those pathetic retards on TV crying out that "all we need to do is find the terrorists and tell them we understand and we don't want to hurt them!"

George W. Bush has, at best, a tenuous grasp on reality. Your grasp is just a little bit LESS than his. Sad and pathetic.

Jason

-----------------------------------------
Personal attacks are forbidden.

This is your only warning before you will help shovel the manure with me.

 

[BBond]

Originally posted by: DragonMasterAlex

Originally posted by: BBond

Originally posted by: DragonMasterAlex
Personally, I say that if we can't win, we should just white-phosphorous bomb the ENTIRE middle east. Frankly, I'm sick of these goddamn savages. Even when we *weren't* heavily involved and invested of troops, equipment, etc. in the middle east these barbarians were strapping bombs to themselves and walking into cafes and boarding busses.

Face it: They're a culture of THUGS, and the only way to deal with someone who refuses to deal in any terms but violence is with LETHAL violence. Maybe when they come home from their terrorist training camps and find their wives and children in a smoking ruin with their charred flesh hanging from their bones they'll get the fvcking point.

Jason

Spoken like a true terrorist.

I'd also like to point out that, as a supporter of an administration that perpetrated this unprovoked attack against Iraq -- which has resulted SO FAR in the deaths of between 27,000 to over 100,000 innocent civilians -- I find your charcterization of an entire culture, based on the actions of a few of it's members completely hypocritical and totally abhorrent seeing as how the good old USA, led by the liars in the Bush administration, refused "to deal in any terms but violence" even when there were UN inspectors on the ground in Iraq with unlimited access finding NOTHING in the way of the WMD the U.S. used as an excuse to cause all of this carnage.

Currently, under George W. Bush and his band of neocon madmen headed by Dick Cheney, if you are capable of honestly comparing our culture with theirs, you'll be forced to come to the conclusion that there is little difference. Their murderering fanatics strap on suicide vests or bury IEDs along highways. Ours use the highest tech military on Earth. The results are the same.

I fully supported destroying the Taliban and al Qaeda along with any other terrorist organization that threatened peace but by going into Iraq and causing the destruction and death that we've caused and continue to cause over the past nearly two years and nine months we are no better than them. There was no reason to attack Iraq and there is no reason to continue this carnage other than to join the ranks of the terrorists that the Bush administration let off the hook by going off on this fool's errand. A fool's errand that people like you, who admit getting some sort of sick satisfaction from finding someone's innocent "wives and children in a smoking ruin with their charred flesh hanging from their bones" which we are indeed finding in cities like Fallujah at our own hand, continue to support although it is abundantly clear that the entire fiasco was based on nothing but pack of lies by people who are one in the same with those they use as an excuse for their own brand of terrorism.

Oh fvck off you worthless boob. You have yet to contribute anything INTELLIGENT to this forum in all the years I've seen you here. The bottom line is this: The middle-eastern Muslim culture is AMOCK with the idea that physical shows of FORCE are what matters. It's THEIR mentality, THEIR choice. They do it to each other whether the US is present or not, and they have for centuries.

And as I've told your sorry ass repeatedly, I am not now nor have I EVER been a supporter of Bush in ANY endeavor except the war on terror, which, like it or not, IS a war that must be fought. It's not pretty, there WILL BE civilian deaths, and that's just life. If you want to blame someone for civilian deaths, blame the Muslim THUGS who are such great COWARDS that they dress as civilians and run into crowds in order to ensure that as much collatoral damage as possible is caused by the legitimate forces persuing them, whether those forces are US or Iraqi.

You, BBond, are little more than an APOLOGIST for SAVAGES. I wouldn't be surprised to find you cozied up having dinner with the likes of bin Laden, nor would I be surprised if you were one of those pathetic retards on TV crying out that "all we need to do is find the terrorists and tell them we understand and we don't want to hurt them!"

George W. Bush has, at best, a tenuous grasp on reality. Your grasp is just a little bit LESS than his. Sad and pathetic.

Jason

And precisely what did bin Laden have to do with Bush's unprovoked invasion of Iraq??? You sound like Cheney. Still trying to make that connection. When called on it will you deny the attempt as well?

PS I don't dine with terrorists or supporters of terror. That would leave bin Laden and certain members of this forum who call for the incineration of millions of innocent women and children out.

 

[ToXiCRaGE]

Too many people from here to quote so I rather to it in point form:

1. You can't conquer Iraq fully until you conquer the hearts of the Iraqi people. I know this sound corny but it is true. Becasue of their religion and upbringing, they have different outlooks on life and that is okay in itself. Iraq was under dictatorship for many years so people need to adjust to democracy (aka what do do with your 'freedom'). You can't just beat the crap out of their army and think that you have done your job, you have to lead them by the hand on the path to demorcaty. And that is where the problem lies: US does not want to do it because the process it to lenghty and costs too much money (they also don't care about that since they already have access to oil) and the Iraqi people do not want to have anything to do with US (although they 'may' want democracy).

2. Let's not BS ourselves here, the war in Iraq was a war for oil (petrol). US is so thirsty for petrol that it will stike down anybody in its way (as seen here). Any economy is literally driven by petrol (sorry to dissapoint any of you that thought only about your car tanks). From sea transporters to city buses, "goods" need to be moved to make economy function.

Vietnam was about "stoping communism from spready" (or to make it even simpler, it was about having a bigger sand box then your pal) but most importantly it was about strategic military positions for easy strike against USSR and for another dumping market for US based product (aka "economic expansion"). Saying that both wars were about the people is like saying McDonalds is healty.

3. If the Iraqi people were so unhappy with the Saddam regime they would have had abolished it themselves without anybodys help. If you push people hard enough to the point of no return you will feel the burn. That is how the Communist Easters Block fell. People were at a point of no return and fought back; we are not talking here about some BS Saddam regime, we are talking here about going against the USSR (or to put it into a better perspective, the White House and Pentagon with unlimited resources to crush the uprising).

4. To all those of you who call the Middle Easteners "barbarians" I say you should get some brains before you open your mouth. Do I like those people, not really but not all of them are bad. Not only you have to understand "them" but also you have to understand why they do it, why they fight for what they believe (the whole "killing infidels to have a place in heaven" is just the tip of the iceberg).

I agree that some cells and networks from the Middle East should be napalmed without any remorse because some people are just trouble makers (regardless of race), however those cells and networs are so complexly intertwined with legit organizations that by healing the disease, you most likely would kill the patient.


I don't want this topic to turn into a "flame fest" just wanted to shed some different light on this subject.

To answer the original Topic question - ...never.

 

[DragonMasterAlex]

Originally posted by: BBond

Originally posted by: DragonMasterAlex

Originally posted by: BBond

Originally posted by: DragonMasterAlex
Personally, I say that if we can't win, we should just white-phosphorous bomb the ENTIRE middle east. Frankly, I'm sick of these goddamn savages. Even when we *weren't* heavily involved and invested of troops, equipment, etc. in the middle east these barbarians were strapping bombs to themselves and walking into cafes and boarding busses.

Face it: They're a culture of THUGS, and the only way to deal with someone who refuses to deal in any terms but violence is with LETHAL violence. Maybe when they come home from their terrorist training camps and find their wives and children in a smoking ruin with their charred flesh hanging from their bones they'll get the fvcking point.

Jason

Spoken like a true terrorist.

I'd also like to point out that, as a supporter of an administration that perpetrated this unprovoked attack against Iraq -- which has resulted SO FAR in the deaths of between 27,000 to over 100,000 innocent civilians -- I find your charcterization of an entire culture, based on the actions of a few of it's members completely hypocritical and totally abhorrent seeing as how the good old USA, led by the liars in the Bush administration, refused "to deal in any terms but violence" even when there were UN inspectors on the ground in Iraq with unlimited access finding NOTHING in the way of the WMD the U.S. used as an excuse to cause all of this carnage.

Currently, under George W. Bush and his band of neocon madmen headed by Dick Cheney, if you are capable of honestly comparing our culture with theirs, you'll be forced to come to the conclusion that there is little difference. Their murderering fanatics strap on suicide vests or bury IEDs along highways. Ours use the highest tech military on Earth. The results are the same.

I fully supported destroying the Taliban and al Qaeda along with any other terrorist organization that threatened peace but by going into Iraq and causing the destruction and death that we've caused and continue to cause over the past nearly two years and nine months we are no better than them. There was no reason to attack Iraq and there is no reason to continue this carnage other than to join the ranks of the terrorists that the Bush administration let off the hook by going off on this fool's errand. A fool's errand that people like you, who admit getting some sort of sick satisfaction from finding someone's innocent "wives and children in a smoking ruin with their charred flesh hanging from their bones" which we are indeed finding in cities like Fallujah at our own hand, continue to support although it is abundantly clear that the entire fiasco was based on nothing but pack of lies by people who are one in the same with those they use as an excuse for their own brand of terrorism.

Oh fvck off you worthless boob. You have yet to contribute anything INTELLIGENT to this forum in all the years I've seen you here. The bottom line is this: The middle-eastern Muslim culture is AMOCK with the idea that physical shows of FORCE are what matters. It's THEIR mentality, THEIR choice. They do it to each other whether the US is present or not, and they have for centuries.

And as I've told your sorry ass repeatedly, I am not now nor have I EVER been a supporter of Bush in ANY endeavor except the war on terror, which, like it or not, IS a war that must be fought. It's not pretty, there WILL BE civilian deaths, and that's just life. If you want to blame someone for civilian deaths, blame the Muslim THUGS who are such great COWARDS that they dress as civilians and run into crowds in order to ensure that as much collatoral damage as possible is caused by the legitimate forces persuing them, whether those forces are US or Iraqi.

You, BBond, are little more than an APOLOGIST for SAVAGES. I wouldn't be surprised to find you cozied up having dinner with the likes of bin Laden, nor would I be surprised if you were one of those pathetic retards on TV crying out that "all we need to do is find the terrorists and tell them we understand and we don't want to hurt them!"

George W. Bush has, at best, a tenuous grasp on reality. Your grasp is just a little bit LESS than his. Sad and pathetic.

Jason

And precisely what did bin Laden have to do with Bush's unprovoked invasion of Iraq??? You sound like Cheney. Still trying to make that connection. When called on it will you deny the attempt as well?

PS I don't dine with terrorists or supporters of terror. That would leave bin Laden and certain members of this forum who call for the incineration of millions of innocent women and children out.

You've been beating on the same BS drum for 3 years now, give it a goddamn rest. Did Bush try to equate OSB with Iraq? Yes, through implication and carefully chosen words. Is that legit? Not directly, no, though we DO know that there were Al Quaeda training camps in Iraq (you'll conveniently have forgotten, of course, but we found those a couple of YEARS ago now) and that Al Quaeda has, right now, a presence in Iraq.

Bottom line it for you: War sucks, we ALL get it, and people die when it happens. That's just the way it is.

There are FAR more significant concerns about Bush's failure as a president, including his REFUSAL to secure our borders, his CONTINUED push for Amnesty (though he doesn't want to admit that it's amnesty, of course), his continued outrageous spending, the fact that he increased subsidies for farmers, etc. The list goes on, and goes largely ignored because fools who fixate on Iraq completely miss all the other garbage the bastard is doing.

Jason

 

[BBond]

Originally posted by: DragonMasterAlex

You've been beating on the same BS drum for 3 years now, give it a goddamn rest. Did Bush try to equate OSB with Iraq? Yes, through implication and carefully chosen words. Is that legit? Not directly, no, though we DO know that there were Al Quaeda training camps in Iraq (you'll conveniently have forgotten, of course, but we found those a couple of YEARS ago now) and that Al Quaeda has, right now, a presence in Iraq.

Bottom line it for you: War sucks, we ALL get it, and people die when it happens. That's just the way it is.

There are FAR more significant concerns about Bush's failure as a president, including his REFUSAL to secure our borders, his CONTINUED push for Amnesty (though he doesn't want to admit that it's amnesty, of course), his continued outrageous spending, the fact that he increased subsidies for farmers, etc. The list goes on, and goes largely ignored because fools who fixate on Iraq completely miss all the other garbage the bastard is doing.

Jason

Bush has been killing innocent Iraqis for three years now -- and all for a lie. How does one get away with such a crime against humanity and why on Earth isn't the entire nation beating that drum?

War sucks, unnecessary war that results in the deaths and maiming of hundreds of thousands of innocent civilains sucks far more, especially when its done by an American president for a lie. Or for oil. Or for world domination. Or for profit. Or for whatever reason Bush's pals at PNAC had up their sleeve.

PS There has been no link proven between Saddam and al Qaeda. Bush brought al Qaeda to Iraq instead of annihilating them in Afghanistan. The only training camp that has been proven to be in activity in Iraq prior to Bush's unprovoked terrorist attack against Iraq was in the Kurdish controlled north near the Iranian border.

 

[Meuge]

Wars have been fought for profit of the few since the beginning of time... so have wars for nationalism. It saddens me that the people who are fighting this one for profit, have no nationalism in their hearts... at least not those of them who're making the decisions.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: BBond

Originally posted by: DragonMasterAlex

You've been beating on the same BS drum for 3 years now, give it a goddamn rest. Did Bush try to equate OSB with Iraq? Yes, through implication and carefully chosen words. Is that legit? Not directly, no, though we DO know that there were Al Quaeda training camps in Iraq (you'll conveniently have forgotten, of course, but we found those a couple of YEARS ago now) and that Al Quaeda has, right now, a presence in Iraq.

Bottom line it for you: War sucks, we ALL get it, and people die when it happens. That's just the way it is.

There are FAR more significant concerns about Bush's failure as a president, including his REFUSAL to secure our borders, his CONTINUED push for Amnesty (though he doesn't want to admit that it's amnesty, of course), his continued outrageous spending, the fact that he increased subsidies for farmers, etc. The list goes on, and goes largely ignored because fools who fixate on Iraq completely miss all the other garbage the bastard is doing.

Jason

Bush has been killing innocent Iraqis for three years now -- and all for a lie. How does one get away with such a crime against humanity and why on Earth isn't the entire nation beating that drum?

War sucks, unnecessary war that results in the deaths and maiming of hundreds of thousands of innocent civilains sucks far more, especially when its done by an American president for a lie. Or for oil. Or for world domination. Or for profit. Or for whatever reason Bush's pals at PNAC had up their sleeve.

PS There has been no link proven between Saddam and al Qaeda. Bush brought al Qaeda to Iraq instead of annihilating them in Afghanistan. The only training camp that has been proven to be in activity in Iraq prior to Bush's unprovoked terrorist attack against Iraq was in the Kurdish controlled north near the Iranian border.

Well there were Al Qaeda Camps in Iraq..in Northern Iraq that was under the control of the Kurds, not Hussein.

 

[Future Shock]

Originally posted by: DragonMasterAlex
Personally, I say that if we can't win, we should just white-phosphorous bomb the ENTIRE middle east. Frankly, I'm sick of these goddamn savages. Even when we *weren't* heavily involved and invested of troops, equipment, etc. in the middle east these barbarians were strapping bombs to themselves and walking into cafes and boarding busses.

Face it: They're a culture of THUGS, and the only way to deal with someone who refuses to deal in any terms but violence is with LETHAL violence. Maybe when they come home from their terrorist training camps and find their wives and children in a smoking ruin with their charred flesh hanging from their bones they'll get the fvcking point.

Jason

And wtf do you intend to do about Pakistan, eh big boy? You know, a country that has a majority of conservative Mulsims, who have many operational nuclear weapons? Do you REALLY think that a lapdog General can keep the entire population in line after we wipe out their religious bretheren, and the remaining mullahs are screaming for a fiery death to the USA?

You wipe out the Muslims in the ME, and a Pakistani (or "lost" Pakistani) nuke gets LA and/or NYC in the next 1-3 years. It's very, very predictable...

Muslim-controlled nukes ARE already a reality, so it's time to stop thinking this is a video game, and remember there are people involved here - with long memories, and long vengances, even across generations...

Future Shock

 

[ToXiCRaGE]

I don't like to judge people's IQ level based on their answers (not enough coffee in your system lowers IQ as well, right? ), however, some of you may want to consider twice talking about something that you have no clue about (so go back to watching re-runs of Friends). C'mon, safe yourself the embarresment.

Going forward, someone mentioned Pakistan and nukes. What about North Korea and nukes, what about China and nukes? Hell, why doesn't the US enter the North Korean borders and try to set the Koreans straight ...and while they are at it, bitch-slap China? **and since you are bitch-slaping China, free Tibet from oppression like good ol' Captain America as well*** North Korean people are oppressed and live under a dictator, why not liberate them and spread the seeds of democracy there? China, despite the super fast growing economy, is super poor! Why not liberate them? I guess you can't rob a poor person, can you so don't give me (or worse yet, believe) in the bull that US went to Iraq to liberate its people!


And for those of you who argue that the attacks on 9/11 were performed by Afgani, Iraqi or whoever you think did it, here is some food for thought. Most of the hijackers were Saudi, hell good ol' Bin Laden is Saudi (not Iraqi)... but I guess you don't want to upset your good and rich Saudi friends who have the bling and oil, now would you?! Terrorist attacks are a horrible thing and should be crushed, however, it seems like if they are done by your rich "friends", you can close one eye and blame it on the next guy. What does that say? It says you are a greedy bastard and are getting paid to keep your mouth shut.

Anyhow, I don't want to overcomplicate things for some of you here so I will end with this:

Go on Google and type in "failure" in the search bar... then open the first link. That says it all about this issue and its outcome.

Cheers!

 

[Moonbeam]

Dean should not have said we can't win because there is a one in a million chance that he is wrong. A comet, for example, might hit Iraq or, under new leadership, if it hit Washington DC.