NationStates Jolt Archive

Well, subject says all. I've heard lots of people say "An american I know hates it" while others say "An american I know loves the war and bush too!"
Is there a general consensus or is it a split? Maybe like the last elections split?

Should America have never gone in, should they stay in, or should they get out?

When 5 american soldiers die daily, what is your guys' reactions?

Well, subject says all. I've heard lots of people say "An american I know hates it" while others say "An american I know loves the war and bush too!"
Is there a general consensus or is it a split? Maybe like the last elections split?

Should America have never gone in, should they stay in, or should they get out?

When 5 american soldiers die daily, what is your guys' reactions?

Polls would tell you that a bit over half of U.S. citizens are still for it.

5 soldiers a day do not die. Not even close. However, I personally divorce the policy from the micro-results, within reasonable limits. The policy was right, whether we lose 3 or 300 soldiers, and it'd be right even if we lost 300,000.. though in that case, it would've been a bad idea, right or wrong.

The Iraq war is split, some are for an some hate it. I think we must stay in and finish the job, but I don't like hearing about all the troops dying, but I don't want them to die in vain.

40% support
60% do not
as far as I know from yhe latest poll

40% support
60% do not
as far as I know from yhe latest poll

Maybe in a poll of France.

40% support
60% do not
as far as I know from yhe latest poll

Maybe in a poll of France.



No I think that was the U.S. yep the U.S.

I'm an American. I say NAY to Bush. But YAY for the war. Bush lied to us. He went to war on faulty accusations. Bad bad bad. Now, if he went to war JUST because Saddam was a menace to his people, I'd find that much more acceptable

40% support
60% do not
as far as I know from yhe latest poll

Maybe in a poll of France.



No I think that was the U.S. yep the U.S.

http://www.pollingreport.com/iraq.htm

Different polls different results.....both are still polls

Different polls different results.....both are still polls

Fine. Name one with different results. Specifically, one in which only 40% of people support the war, as you said earlier. The one I posted could be a few points high or low, but not 17..

Different polls different results.....both are still polls

Fine. Name one with different results. Specifically, one in which only 40% of people support the war, as you said earlier. The one I posted could be a few points high or low, but not 17..

I heard the results from a news station....all polls are biased based on where you poll and who you appeal to.....neither poll is scientific

> I got alot to say on this topic and I know Dfd would say this better then me...but when she sees this she'll post later...

I support the war. You said that 5 soldiers die daily. Well...just think how many Americans die in accidents daily from their own stupidity. Death happens...its war...so just accept it. I hate to say that about my bros...but I'd be there too if I it wasn't for something I don't want to talk about...

I sure as hell would've fought for my country. Hell...I don't want pricks to walk all over our nation and get the hell away with it. I don't think that this war is stupid or pointless. Its just that the news fudges up it and sugar coats it to make you think else wise. I think the news should just stay the hell away from the war and let our troops take care of this ASAP. I know ppl want to know how our soldiers are doin...but they should just shut the hell up with it for our own good...

I won't say whether I support Bush or not. He's our president...the least we could do is our national duty and just support him while he's in office. If we don't like him we don't have to vote for him again. I mean come on...what kind of nation are we when we talk crap about our own President...grow the hell up America. We voted for him...we deal with it...

And for the war and Bush's fault...Congress declares war not Bush. If you're going to hate Bush for the war then hate congress. More than one person decided to go to war...don't forget that. We can't put the blame of this war on one person...

> I got alot to say on this topic and I know Dfd would say this better then me...but when she sees this she'll post later...

I support the war. You said that 5 soldiers die daily. Well...just think how many Americans die in accidents daily from their own stupidity. Death happens...its war...so just accept it. I hate to say that about my bros...but I'd be there too if I it wasn't for something I don't want to talk about...

I sure as hell would've fought for my country. Hell...I don't want pricks to walk all over our nation and get the hell away with it. I don't think that this war is stupid or pointless. Its just that the news fudges up it and sugar coats it to make you think else wise. I think the news should just stay the hell away from the war and let our troops take care of this ASAP. I know ppl want to know how our soldiers are doin...but they should just shut the hell up with it for our own good...

I won't say whether I support Bush or not. He's our president...the least we could do is our national duty and just support him while he's in office. If we don't like him we don't have to vote for him again. I mean come on...what kind of nation are we when we talk crap about our own President...grow the hell up America. We voted for him...we deal with it...

And for the war and Bush's fault...Congress declares war not Bush. If you're going to hate Bush for the war then hate congress. More than one person decided to go to war...don't forget that. We can't put the blame of this war on one person...

We haven't lost nearly 5 soldiers a day. It's actually far less than one, if you discount suicides and non-combat accidents. However, the President can engage in war for 6 months without declaring it, so he does have definite powers over the situation and can be "blamed" by those that wish to do so.

> No....a president CANNOT engage in war up to 6 months. The war powrs act of 19whatever states that a president could send troops to anywhere he likes...but that isn't declaring war. Only congress could take us to war...

I didn't say we did lose that many soldiers...I just took the first number that was stated and used it as a reference. I know we don't lose that many...I just used it for trying to prove a point...

> No....a president CANNOT engage in war up to 6 months. The war powrs act of 19whatever states that a president could send troops to anywhere he likes...but that isn't declaring war. Only congress could take us to war...

I didn't say we did lose that many soldiers...I just took the first number that was stated and used it as a reference. I know we don't lose that many...I just used it for trying to prove a point...

The president cannot engage in war for up to 6 months. Rather, he can engage in "war" for up to 6 months. :wink: Looks the same, smells the same, tastes the same... but legally isn't war.

> True...but I go by the legal crap. Its got to be legally considered war to be war with me. I guess it would've helped if we cleared that up in the beginning... :lol:

i feel we should bomb the entire country into the middle ages and then take all the oil it has.

to hell with OPEC!

I'm Australian and we were one of the few countries that sent troops when the war first started. Despite of the war being hugely unpopular here, may I add, with the largest protests seen since Vietnam. I don't think John Howard is going to win the next election, allot (not all though) of people here are pretty pissed at his decision.

I think it's a total bloody mess that didn't need to happen. It's also a waste of perfectly fit young mens and womens lives.

As for overthrowing Saddam, the Bush adminstration just chucked that in to make it look good. The US supported Saddam for around a decade, especially in the late 70's and early 80's, when Saddam was doing his worse. Ever seen the footage of Rumsfeld (sp?) shaking Saddams hand back in 1982? Propably wouldn't have seen it in the US media, which I think is a shame.

History shows that dictators more often than not get overthrown from within, Romania, Chile and Argentina (sp?) are all examples of this. They didn't need any outside help, so going to war on this pretext is not justified. Anyway, if you look at US - dictatorship relations over the years you'll find they are for the most part pretty cosy. Pinochet ring any bells?

So, in closing, I'd like to say the war is a total waste of time and life that hasn't really helped anything, not to mention it was unjustified, illegal and went against world opinion. All it has done has increased access to oilfields for Haelburton (sp?), hatered in the Middle East towards the US and scepticism about US motives in the world.

i feel we should bomb the entire country into the middle ages and then take all the oil it has.

to hell with OPEC!

That's going to solve allot of problems, isn't it? Sure worked well in Vietnam.

i feel we should bomb the entire country into the middle ages and then take all the oil it has.

to hell with OPEC!

That's going to solve allot of problems, isn't it? Sure worked well in Vietnam.
Nam didnt have oil, so its a differant situation

i feel we should bomb the entire country into the middle ages and then take all the oil it has.

to hell with OPEC!

That's going to solve allot of problems, isn't it? Sure worked well in Vietnam.
Nam didnt have oil, so its a differant situation

But it did have allot of angry people shooting at you, and us may I add, like Iraq. Overwhelming firepower dosen't work. Different region and terrian, not a different situation.

I guess I am one of the everyone else group:

1. The war against Iraq is illegal.

2. The war against Iraq is immoral. Many people have died during this campaign of "Shock and Awe".

3. The US should have allowed the UN inspectors to complete their job.

4. The UN inspectors were NOT finding any banned WMD, save a few short range missles that slightly exceeded the allowance given them by the UN, AND they were being destroyed by the team.

5. Iraq posed no threat to the US security by either terrorism or WMD.

6. The US is using deadly nuclear weapons, including bullets that are bad for the Iraqis as well as the troops:

"When the uranium bullets, missiles, or bombs hit something or explode most of the radioactive uranium turns instantly to very, very small dust particles, too fine to even see. When US Troopers or Iraqis breathe even a tiny amount into their lungs, as little as One Gram, it is the same as getting an X-Ray every hour for the rest of their shortened life.

The uranium cannot be removed, there is no treatment, there is no cure. The uranium will long outlast the Veterans' and the Iraqis' bodies though; for, you see, it lasts virtually forever."

http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Mar04/Nichols0327.htm

7. The war in Iraq is creating MORE hatred towards the US by other Arab states, as well as the Iraqi people.

8. The US has alienated some of its' traditional allies.

i feel we should bomb the entire country into the middle ages and then take all the oil it has.

to hell with OPEC!

That's going to solve allot of problems, isn't it? Sure worked well in Vietnam.
Nam didnt have oil, so its a differant situation

But it did have allot of angry people shooting at you, and us may I add, like Iraq. Overwhelming firepower dosen't work. Different region and terrian, not a different situation.
Detrot, Memphis, and New Orleans has alot of angry people shooting at the "authority," so what exactally is your point?

I guess I am one of the everyone else group:

1. The war against Iraq is illegal.

2. The war against Iraq is immoral. Many people have died during this campaign of "Shock and Awe".

3. The US should have allowed the UN inspectors to complete their job.

4. The UN inspectors were NOT finding any banned WMD, save a few short range missles that slightly exceeded the allowance given them by the UN, AND they were being destroyed by the team.

5. Iraq posed no threat to the US security by either terrorism or WMD.

6. The US is using deadly nuclear weapons, including bullets that are bad for the Iraqis as well as the troops:

"When the uranium bullets, missiles, or bombs hit something or explode most of the radioactive uranium turns instantly to very, very small dust particles, too fine to even see. When US Troopers or Iraqis breathe even a tiny amount into their lungs, as little as One Gram, it is the same as getting an X-Ray every hour for the rest of their shortened life.

The uranium cannot be removed, there is no treatment, there is no cure. The uranium will long outlast the Veterans' and the Iraqis' bodies though; for, you see, it lasts virtually forever."

http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Mar04/Nichols0327.htm

7. The war in Iraq is creating MORE hatred towards the US by other Arab states, as well as the Iraqi people.

8. The US has alienated some of its' traditional allies.

Good post.

Agree with what you have said, but would add:

How has the US managed to waste 12 months from the fall of Saddam? The pics we were shown then were of jubilant Iraqis. Now, they all seemed to be violently opposed. Is/was there any "hearts and minds" campaign?

How does the closing of newspapers you do not like help to foster democracy?

Uniting the Sunnis and Shiites would have seemed impossible - now they appear as united in their opposition to the US. What has happened?

Please, some realistic proposals. None of the "they all hate freedom" cop-outs.

i feel we should bomb the entire country into the middle ages and then take all the oil it has.

to hell with OPEC!

That's going to solve allot of problems, isn't it? Sure worked well in Vietnam.
Nam didnt have oil, so its a differant situation

But it did have allot of angry people shooting at you, and us may I add, like Iraq. Overwhelming firepower dosen't work. Different region and terrian, not a different situation.
Detrot, Memphis, and New Orleans has alot of angry people shooting at the "authority," so what exactally is your point?

Really, do you have a grip on reality? There's a slight difference between crime and armed resistance to an occupational force.

i feel we should bomb the entire country into the middle ages and then take all the oil it has.

to hell with OPEC!

That's going to solve allot of problems, isn't it? Sure worked well in Vietnam.
Nam didnt have oil, so its a differant situation

But it did have allot of angry people shooting at you, and us may I add, like Iraq. Overwhelming firepower dosen't work. Different region and terrian, not a different situation.
Detrot, Memphis, and New Orleans has alot of angry people shooting at the "authority," so what exactally is your point?

Really, do you have a grip on reality? There's a slight difference between crime and armed resistance to an occupational force.

who determines that differance? the crypts, bloods, vicelords, and other gangs see themselves in the same posistion as the Iraqis that are fighting the US/UK troops.

i feel we should bomb the entire country into the middle ages and then take all the oil it has.

to hell with OPEC!

That's going to solve allot of problems, isn't it? Sure worked well in Vietnam.
Nam didnt have oil, so its a differant situation

But it did have allot of angry people shooting at you, and us may I add, like Iraq. Overwhelming firepower dosen't work. Different region and terrian, not a different situation.
Detrot, Memphis, and New Orleans has alot of angry people shooting at the "authority," so what exactally is your point?

Really, do you have a grip on reality? There's a slight difference between crime and armed resistance to an occupational force.

who determines that differance? the crypts, bloods, vicelords, and other gangs see themselves in the same posistion as the Iraqis that are fighting the US/UK troops.

What a lot of rot.

If these were Americans fighting invaders you would praise their courage.
What pretence to legitimate authority do the occupation forces have?

The US stated they were going in to find and destroy WMDs. Noe were found.

Then they wanted to overthrow Saddam. He is captured, his sons dead.

Then, they said they wanted to establish democracy. Shutting down opposition newspapers does not seemed to have helped.

i feel we should bomb the entire country into the middle ages and then take all the oil it has.

to hell with OPEC!

That's going to solve allot of problems, isn't it? Sure worked well in Vietnam.
Nam didnt have oil, so its a differant situation

But it did have allot of angry people shooting at you, and us may I add, like Iraq. Overwhelming firepower dosen't work. Different region and terrian, not a different situation.
Detrot, Memphis, and New Orleans has alot of angry people shooting at the "authority," so what exactally is your point?

Really, do you have a grip on reality? There's a slight difference between crime and armed resistance to an occupational force.

who determines that differance? the crypts, bloods, vicelords, and other gangs see themselves in the same posistion as the Iraqis that are fighting the US/UK troops.

Go and read some books or mabye watch a documentary or two before you starting commenting on current affairs. Maybe even look up some non - US media reports. I'm not even going to bother trying explain the difference.

I guess I am one of the everyone else group:

1. The war against Iraq is illegal.

2. The war against Iraq is immoral. Many people have died during this campaign of "Shock and Awe".

3. The US should have allowed the UN inspectors to complete their job.

4. The UN inspectors were NOT finding any banned WMD, save a few short range missles that slightly exceeded the allowance given them by the UN, AND they were being destroyed by the team.

5. Iraq posed no threat to the US security by either terrorism or WMD.

6. The US is using deadly nuclear weapons, including bullets that are bad for the Iraqis as well as the troops:

"When the uranium bullets, missiles, or bombs hit something or explode most of the radioactive uranium turns instantly to very, very small dust particles, too fine to even see. When US Troopers or Iraqis breathe even a tiny amount into their lungs, as little as One Gram, it is the same as getting an X-Ray every hour for the rest of their shortened life.

The uranium cannot be removed, there is no treatment, there is no cure. The uranium will long outlast the Veterans' and the Iraqis' bodies though; for, you see, it lasts virtually forever."

http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Mar04/Nichols0327.htm

7. The war in Iraq is creating MORE hatred towards the US by other Arab states, as well as the Iraqi people.

8. The US has alienated some of its' traditional allies.

Good post.

Agree with what you have said, but would add:

How has the US managed to waste 12 months from the fall of Saddam? The pics we were shown then were of jubilant Iraqis. Now, they all seemed to be violently opposed. Is/was there any "hearts and minds" campaign?

How does the closing of newspapers you do not like help to foster democracy?

Uniting the Sunnis and Shiites would have seemed impossible - now they appear as united in their opposition to the US. What has happened?

Please, some realistic proposals. None of the "they all hate freedom" cop-outs.
Well I guess the intelligence was wrong on more than WMD, namely whether the US would be perceived as "liberators". If the Shiites and Sunnis stay united, then this debacle will get much worse, in my humble opinion.

Yeah, closing down a tool of freedom (newspapers), was not such a good idea.

Another thing. When US soldiers go to Iraq, they are fighting for their leaders, but they hope to go home. The Iraqis are more than willing to die for their homeland, much like the suicide bombers in Palestine. That has to make it more difficult for US troops.

40% support
60% do not
as far as I know from yhe latest poll

Maybe in a poll of France.In France :
15% Support
85% do not

In the UK :
10% Support
90% do not

in Spain :
8% Support
92% do not

40% support
60% do not
as far as I know from yhe latest poll

Maybe in a poll of France.In France :
15% Support
85% do not

In the UK :
10% Support
90% do not

in Spain :
8% Support
92% do not
these stats do not matter, the US has 90% of the troops in Iraq.

What the world thinks doesn't matter, hey?

What the world thinks doesn't matter, hey?
fuck the world, the world isnt in Iraq, just mostly the US with some UK and other nation's help.

What the world thinks doesn't matter, hey?
f--- the world, the world isnt in Iraq, just mostly the US with some UK and other nation's help.

Maybe what the US is doing effects the world. Think about it

You just proved my point exactly.

A question, Yank, have you ever left the US? Even for a holiday?

More than 70 per cent of Canadians believe the U.S. military has become mired in a Vietnam-like situation in Iraq that will lead to increasing casualties, an Ipsos-Reid/CTV/Globe and Mail poll released yesterday indicates.

And 44 per cent of Canadians believe the United States knowingly used incorrect of fabricated intelligence to make the case for going to war.

“What we’re seeing goes beyond the issues to the credibility of the U.S. administration,” said John Wright, senior vice-president of Ipsos-Reid, who compiled the results.

Only one-third of Canadians polled believe that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction. And 70 per cent believe President George W. Bush should face impeachment if an investigation concludes he fabricated information to persuade Congress to approve military action.

these stats do not matter, the US has 90% of the troops in Iraq.Not counting iraqi troups, right?

> No....a president CANNOT engage in war up to 6 months. The war powrs act of 19whatever states that a president could send troops to anywhere he likes...but that isn't declaring war. Only congress could take us to war...

I didn't say we did lose that many soldiers...I just took the first number that was stated and used it as a reference. I know we don't lose that many...I just used it for trying to prove a point...

The president cannot engage in war for up to 6 months. Rather, he can engage in "war" for up to 6 months. :wink: Looks the same, smells the same, tastes the same... but legally isn't war.

Actually..according to the War Powers Act and the National Securty Act of 1947 (amended 1952)..the US Marine Corps is the only unit authorized to be put anywhere on the ground in combat operations for up to a period of 90 days without Congressional Approval/Declaration of War. Now that policy may have indeed been changed..it's been quite awhile since I had to actually look up a Marine Corps Order or a Bureau of Naval Regulations book

i just wanna know why america is so... evil? i always see angry americans on the tv hating everything, whats up with that?

i dont know 100% of the info for this iraq war, so my opinion would be invaslid, although i dont thinkj its that great. all i hope is that everyuthing turns out good for the iraqi people. And although mr bush may be an evil polititcian, he's probably a good bloke and everything, so judging him as a person isnt good since the ony thing u see of him on tv is his political side.

What the world thinks doesn't matter, hey?
f--- the world, the world isnt in Iraq, just mostly the US with some UK and other nation's help.

Unfortunately, my nation, Australia, is in there with you.

I just wish we weren't.

We were, quite simply, "conned".

We were told of the "imminent threat" of "weapons of mass destruction". They haven't been found, and now Powell is admitting that the "intelligence reports were wrong". In other words, they don't exist.

We were told that we would be ending a despotic and tyrannical regime. Well, that has happened, but could have happened 10 years earlier, under the senior Bush, after Kuwait. We were there then too.

We were told that "freedom" and "democracy" would be set up in Iraq. The war was declared as 'over" 12 months ago. Saddam is captured, his sons are dead, and what is happening? Occupation forces are closing down newspapers, and continually under attack.

We were told that there were links between terrorists and Iraq. More lies. The terrorists cause has been helped by the Iraq war in two major ways.
Firstly, it took the heat off Al Qaeda, allowing bin Laden (remember him - he's not in Iraq!) and others to flee into (probably) Pakistan. Secondly, it serves as a recruiting ground for more radicals.

And in response to our efforts, what do we get - an attitude of "f--- the world, the world isnt in Iraq, just mostly the US with some UK and other nation's help".

Nice one, yank.

Its bad enough to piss off the neutrals, now you're doing it to your friends.

i just wanna know why america is so... evil? i always see angry americans on the tv hating everything, whats up with that?


America evil?...little strong there don't you think?...I don't hate anybody..well..that's wrong too..I hate the cowards who used civilians and civilian airplanes to attack my nation..Al-Queda...if I could I would physically crush the life from Osama Bin Laden..I hate the extremist Islamic sect known as Wahabbism who have decided that either your an Muslim or your dead...I hate the Saudis for riding the fence on this matter, Wahabbism came from their country..the money that financed 9/11/01 came from Saudi..and I think my country does a disservice to it's citizens by kissing the Saudis ass because they control the gas spigots.

What the world thinks doesn't matter, hey?
f--- the world, the world isnt in Iraq, just mostly the US with some UK and other nation's help.

Unfortunately, my nation, Australia, is in there with you.

I just wish we weren't.

We were, quite simply, "conned".

We were told of the "imminent threat" of "weapons of mass destruction". They haven't been found, and now Powell is admitting that the "intelligence reports were wrong". In other words, they don't exist.

We were told that we would be ending a despotic and tyrannical regime. Well, that has happened, but could have happened 10 years earlier, under the senior Bush, after Kuwait. We were there then too.

We were told that "freedom" and "democracy" would be set up in Iraq. The war was declared as 'over" 12 months ago. Saddam is captured, his sons are dead, and what is happening? Occupation forces are closing down newspapers, and continually under attack.

We were told that there were links between terrorists and Iraq. More lies. The terrorists cause has been helped by the Iraq war in two major ways.
Firstly, it took the heat off Al Qaeda, allowing bin Laden (remember him - he's not in Iraq!) and others to flee into (probably) Pakistan. Secondly, it serves as a recruiting ground for more radicals.

And in response to our efforts, what do we get - an attitude of "f--- the world, the world isnt in Iraq, just mostly the US with some UK and other nation's help".

Nice one, yank.

Its bad enough to piss off the neutrals, now you're doing it to your friends.

Bloody right, mate.

I'm an Australian too, and Howard is turning this country into a lap dog for Bush. It's sickening.

You just proved my point exactly.

A question, Yank, have you ever left the US? Even for a holiday?
yes i have, and i couldn't wait to get back on that plane and go home.

If you dont like what the US is doing for the world, fuck you and the world.

We will be successful in Iraq, and sometime in the future Iraq will have a stable pro-West government.

As soon as Iran, Syria, and Saudi Arabia get all their insurgents out of there Iraq will be a very peaceful and prosperous place.

You just proved my point exactly.

A question, Yank, have you ever left the US? Even for a holiday?
yes i have, and i couldn't wait to get back on that plane and go home.

If you dont like what the US is doing for the world, f--- you and the world.

We will be successful in Iraq, and sometime in the future Iraq will have a stable pro-West government.

As soon as Iran, Syria, and Saudi Arabia get all their insurgents out of there Iraq will be a very peaceful and prosperous place.

Well where have you gone?

As for overthrowing Saddam, the Bush adminstration just chucked that in to make it look good. The US supported Saddam for around a decade, especially in the late 70's and early 80's, when Saddam was doing his worse. Ever seen the footage of Rumsfeld (sp?) shaking Saddams hand back in 1982? Propably wouldn't have seen it in the US media, which I think is a shame.

So, in closing, I'd like to say the war is a total waste of time and life that hasn't really helped anything, not to mention it was unjustified, illegal and went against world opinion. All it has done has increased access to oilfields for Haelburton (sp?), hatered in the Middle East towards the US and scepticism about US motives in the world.

Halliburton made 2-3 billion in non-bid contracts, thats quite a few jobs, w00t w00t, and according to republican economics, that means surely some nickels will trickle down to the poor... we actually did see the rumsfield pic, but i guess you wouldnt relize we probably saw it when it was first shot, either... 20 years ago. 20 years ago we were supporting iraq against the threat of the time, which was radical islam in the form of iran. People seem to forget millions died in that war, and Iran is still around to be a pain in the ass. Saddam was completely insane. I think we should impeach Bush, and send another 100,000 troops to the middle east.

"Over the last two weeks, Iraqi security forces have crumbled in some parts of the country. In recent days perhaps 20 percent to 25 percent of the Iraqi army, civil defense, police and other security forces have quit, changed sides, or otherwise failed to perform their duties, a senior Army officer said Saturday."

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/headline/world/2498834

Off to the beach, no doubt. Woo-hoo! :twisted:

You just proved my point exactly.

A question, Yank, have you ever left the US? Even for a holiday?
yes i have, and i couldn't wait to get back on that plane and go home.

If you dont like what the US is doing for the world, f--- you and the world.

We will be successful in Iraq, and sometime in the future Iraq will have a stable pro-West government.

As soon as Iran, Syria, and Saudi Arabia get all their insurgents out of there Iraq will be a very peaceful and prosperous place.

Well where have you gone?
Japan, Mexico, Canada, Costa Rica, France, UK, Spain, Italy (& the Vatican), and Germany. I haven't been to Australlia or NZ but I would like to go to see how I'd like it.

I wish we hadn't gone to war in Iraq it was wrong and it was a blatant attempt to get oil, it's been a year since the 'war was over', so why are people still dying, in falluga Americans are killing far more civillians that enermys, they are in a war zone and won't accept it's a war zone just a bit of unrest. The war was never over.

We where told that things wound be better for the Iraqies, it has not. Les have running water and electricicity now than before the war, less have food. Freedom and democracy have not happened the IGC is not elected and will not be for 4 years, it's decisians are evaluated by the US governer. very democratic. Meanwhile if you have a newspaper and print anything anti-american you get closed down, this is in USA held areas it's better in British held Iraq but thats still not good.

It was a con to get oil, and to draw attention away from the US's poor attempts to get Bin Larden (he's that bloke that you all thought was bad before Saddam rember.) You get told that he had links in iraq and you invade on false intel, and some hazy satalite pics. As well as a 45 minuate claim.

If Iraq had weapons of mass distruction they would have been found by now and everyone in the UK and about everywhere else except the USA and tony Blair know that their not their. Did you here what Blair said today in The Observer, about how he would not flinch from his moral duty in Iraq and his quest for freedom and democracy.

If these people where American and the USA had been unfairly invaded and take over you would be saying, 'well done guys heres a medel.'

On your hands you have another Veitnam, and a lot of troops losses, and all you seem to be able to say are, 'it's the liberals fault', 'they are evil people and why should they want to resist good old uncal Sam', 'f--- the world, the world isnt in Iraq, just mostly the US with some UK and other nation's help', other places do matter. Did you know that.

Thank god I'm not a iraqie.

[quote="Roy Del Fuego
We haven't lost nearly 5 soldiers a day. It's actually far less than one, if you discount suicides and non-combat accidents. However, the President can engage in war for 6 months without declaring it, so he does have definite powers over the situation and can be "blamed" by those that wish to do so.[/quote]

Just to clear up, on average 1 to 2 americans die every day directly due to the war in Iraq. And who knows how many Iraq fundamentalists, and worse, civilians? Bush doesn't keep count, because if he did, the world would be up in arms over the slaughter of these countless civilians.