NationStates Jolt Archive

It truly saddens me that I have to post this, but I believe that I do. I was watching NBC with Brian Williams when he reported that the insurgents have been able to buy uniforms and pose as Iraqi "national guard" soldiers right under our noses. We were doomed from the beginning. We just couldn't accept that. It is truly pathetic that such heinously stupid group of people have gottan together and have been running the most powerfull nation on Earth for the past five years. I pray that our remaining soldiers will be able to return home without the loss of too much life. I am currently writing a letter to Rumsfeld himself, telling him what a lousy job he is doing. I think you all should do the same.
Buck Fush.

Hell yeah, the iperailistic bushites are doomed. The democratic party is absolved of all this too, becuasse they opposed it. God dam Bushies ruined AMericas.

The poster above me (Antre_Travarious) is either a troll or an idiot. I'm not bothering to quote him.

It truly saddens me that I have to post this, but I believe that I do. I was watching NBC with Brian Williams when he reported that the insurgents have been able to buy uniforms and pose as Iraqi "national guard" soldiers right under our noses. We were doomed from the beginning. We just couldn't accept that. It is truly pathetic that such heinously stupid group of people have gottan together and have been running the most powerfull nation on Earth for the past five years. I pray that our remaining soldiers will be able to return home without the loss of too much life. I am currently writing a letter to Rumsfeld himself, telling him what a lousy job he is doing. I think you all should do the same.
Buck Fush.

The poster here is slightly more rational, but he got his report from NBC. I do respect his concern for our troops, but I'd like to see him do a better job as president. Also, I'd want to see us pull all troops out of Iraq and have it descend into a hellhole, just so you fools see what'd happen if we weren't there.

No. We won the war. We defeated our enemy. One could assert that we are operating a failing occupation, but the war is over.

No you fool we have not won the war, and we never will. Without the aid of other, stronger allies, it is impossible for us to fight such an insurgency. Our idiot administration never had a plan to begin with. Saddam never posed a threat. Never (mis)underestimate the predictability of stupidity.

No you fool we have not won the war, and we never will. Without the aid of other, stronger allies, it is impossible for us to fight such an insurgency. Our idiot administration never had a plan to begin with. Saddam never posed a threat. Never (mis)underestimate the predictability of stupidity.
I don’t know what your definition of war is, but mine is a conflict between two or more sovereign nations.
In this particular war, one nation didn’t technically exist for over a year. That one lost, the other one won.

. Never (mis)underestimate the predictability of stupidity.
Thank you for warning us about the content of your posts.

No you fool we have not won the war, and we never will. Without the aid of other, stronger allies, it is impossible for us to fight such an insurgency. Our idiot administration never had a plan to begin with. Saddam never posed a threat. Never (mis)underestimate the predictability of stupidity.

Even if Saddam didn't have missles aiming at Israel, or Iran, or whatever, why don't you spend a day in Saddam's torture chambers? That'd be fun. Or have half your family disappear for no reason? Oh, that's alright, at least we aren't getting liberated. That'd suck. I hope the only people who can do something never do, and just sit on their hands while we die.

I'm all for invading Iran. And North Korea at that.

The poster here is slightly more rational, but he got his report from NBC. I do respect his concern for our troops, but I'd like to see him do a better job as president. Also, I'd want to see us pull all troops out of Iraq and have it descend into a hellhole, just so you fools see what'd happen if we weren't there.
his what for our troops? his concern for our what? he denies them medical care, cuts their pay, and sends them to an illogical and never-ending war. but i'm glad to hear he supports our troops.

you know what, Bush saying "I support our troops" doesn't mean fuck when he treats them as he does. if you believe him, you're falling into a PR trap.

No. We won the war. We defeated our enemy. One could assert that we are operating a failing occupation, but the war is over.

Which war?
If you are talking about the war against Saddam's regime, then yes, the war is over. Saddam is long gone.
If you are talking about the War on Terror: Shock and Awe Style!, then I'd say we lost the war as soon as we decided to bring it to a country that was not previously engulfed by terrorism. Remember Fallujah? half of these so-called terrorists are resisting what they see as a hostile occupation. it doesn't matter to them whether we had good intentions; we created a cause for would-be peaceful citizens to rally behind as terrorists.

Even if Saddam didn't have missles aiming at Israel, or Iran, or whatever, why don't you spend a day in Saddam's torture chambers? That'd be fun. Or have half your family disappear for no reason? Oh, that's alright, at least we aren't getting liberated. That'd suck. I hope the only people who can do something never do, and just sit on their hands while we die.

I'm all for invading Iran. And North Korea at that.
Liberate=killing over 100,000 people?

Well you haven't lost the war, because you're still occupying the country. You've just done a shit job of it.

We didn't win the war, where are the WMDs? Where is Osama?

Even if Saddam didn't have missles aiming at Israel, or Iran, or whatever, why don't you spend a day in Saddam's torture chambers? That'd be fun. Or have half your family disappear for no reason? Oh, that's alright, at least we aren't getting liberated. That'd suck. I hope the only people who can do something never do, and just sit on their hands while we die.

I'm all for invading Iran. And North Korea at that.

if we wanted to liberate Iraq, we should have said so. Because the war was entered on false pretenses, it cannot achieve its goal.

Invade North Korea if you want nukes thrown at us.

As for Iran... why now? they are not a threat. and what would we be liberating them from? it just doesnt make sense.

Liberate=killing over 100,000 people?

Yes, that could be done to liberate. To sacrifice enough lives to reach a more satisfying goal.

Liberate=killing over 100,000 people?
I assume you're talking about the NK situation here? if so revise that to the essentially non-avoidable at this point of between 500,000 - 2,000,000 SK civvie deaths.

Which war?
If you are talking about the war against Saddam's regime, then yes, the war is over. Saddam is long gone.
If you are talking about the War on Terror: Shock and Awe Style!, then I'd say we lost the war as soon as we decided to bring it to a country that was not previously engulfed by terrorism. Remember Fallujah? half of these so-called terrorists are resisting what they see as a hostile occupation. it doesn't matter to them whether we had good intentions; we created a cause for would-be peaceful citizens to rally behind as terrorists.
As I said, a war is between two or more sovereign nations, thus, the War on Terror isn’t a real war. There is nothing to win and much to lose.

Yes, that could be done to liberate. To sacrifice enough lives to reach a more satisfying goal.

say that in 20 years, when Iraq's democracy falls apart and theres a dictator. much more satisfying.

if we wanted to liberate Iraq, we should have said so. Because the war was entered on false pretenses, it cannot achieve its goal.

Invade North Korea if you want nukes thrown at us.

As for Iran... why now? they are not a threat. and what would we be liberating them from? it just doesnt make sense.

1. We did. But it wasn't the only reason stated


2. Nukes aren't the problem, it's all the fucking arty they've got pointed at Seoul.

3. So in 7 years when they become a nuclear threat can I force you to deal with them personally?

As I said, a war is between two or more sovereign nations, thus, the War on Terror isn’t a real war. There is nothing to win and much to lose.

then we are in agreement on this. the war is over, and we won of course. but thats nothing to brag about. if we "won" the "war" on "terror," that would be something to brag about.

We didn't win the war, where are the WMDs? Where is Osama?
WMD's were found in Iraq in the form of VX traces in artillery shells. Stop watching CNN, they downplay that stuff. As for Osama, I haven't a clue where he is either. We haven't had a tape for him in a while, only from that fat bastard Zirquawi, or whatever his name is. I'd think that either Pakistan is harboring Osama, or he's dead.

. Never (mis)underestimate the predictability of stupidity.Thank you for warning us about the content of your posts.
ROFL.

I assume you're talking about the NK situation here? if so revise that to the essentially non-avoidable at this point of between 500,000 - 2,000,000 SK civvie deaths.
I was speaking of Iraq.
say that in 20 years, when Iraq's democracy falls apart and theres a dictator. much more satisfying
Iraq’s “democracy” will never exist, at least not one even remotely embraces civil rights, and if a democracy doesn’t do that, what’s the point?

1. We did. But it wasn't the only reason stated


2. Nukes aren't the problem, it's all the fucking arty they've got pointed at Seoul.

3. So in 7 years when they become a nuclear threat can I force you to deal with them personally?

1. we did not. find any newspaper article FROM THE PRE-WAR PERIOD that tells you it was about anything besides WMD's.

2. that too, but that only stabilizes my point about NK.

3. we dont have a right to say who cant have nukes if we have 2600.

The poster above me (Antre_Travarious) is either a troll or an idiot. I'm not bothering to quote him.



The poster here is slightly more rational, but he got his report from NBC. I do respect his concern for our troops, but I'd like to see him do a better job as president. Also, I'd want to see us pull all troops out of Iraq and have it descend into a hellhole, just so you fools see what'd happen if we weren't there.
Same thing that's ahppening right now, the difference is US lives wouldn't be lost...

We didn't win the war, where are the WMDs? Where is Osama?
If you're talking about the war in Iraq, which I assume you are by the reference to WMDs, then Osama was never a goal.

3. we dont have a right to say who cant have nukes if we have 2600.

Fine. Lemme give these ICBM's to Mr. Enraged Despot here. Have fun getting your house vaporized. The United States will never, ever use nuclear weapons until we invade France.

Same thing that's ahppening right now, the difference is US lives wouldn't be lost...

So we're worth more than the Arabs?

say that in 20 years, when Iraq's democracy falls apart and theres a dictator. much more satisfying.
You are right, it will be very sastifying to say that when Iraq is destabalized and the republicans are in jail where they belong.

I was speaking of Iraq.

Y'know, I would think you at least would shy away from using that statistic. Quoting from the Lancet study is a very very Bad Idea unless you include the entire statistic.

100,000 (95% CI 8,000 - 198,000)

This means that they are 95% certain that the number of civilians killed in the Iraq conflict lies between 8,000-198,000 deaths. Because 100,000 lies almost dead center between between the extremes that is what they published when any reliable statistician can tell you it's essentially bullshit.

Yes we did liberate lots of people getting killed by a stupid dictator, but it would indeed make more sense to declare war on North Korea or Iran.

say that in 20 years, when Iraq's democracy falls apart and theres a dictator. much more satisfying.

I will, and I'll rub those pop tarts in your face.

1. we did not. find any newspaper article FROM THE PRE-WAR PERIOD that tells you it was about anything besides WMD's.

Do you think I was referencing what the ratings-hungry media was picking up on? No. Look at the actual transcripts of Bush's speeches. He lists all of the reasons for going to war. He concentrates on WMD because that is what will most catch people attention. Also, the end of the Volcker report only stated that there were currently no stockpiles of WMD hidden in Iraq that they could find. However if you look in the notes in the report some interesting information appears. The sat imagery in the months leading up to the war showed a bunch of heavy truck traffic, much more than normal, crossing to and fro across the Syrian border. The report says there were other leads pointing to the Syrians perhaps gained control of WMD's but that because of the political situation(we didn't exactly want to start another war while we were dealing with Iraq) they couldn't follow up on the leads.

Fine. Lemme give these ICBM's to Mr. Enraged Despot here. Have fun getting your house vaporized. The United States will never, ever use nuclear weapons until we invade France.

You don't know that the U.S. won't use them any better than you know Iran will. We very well might use them against someone we PERCEIVE as a threat just as Iran very well might attack someone once they got them that they perceived as a threat (the U.S.). If I were in charge of another country, I would want to have a stash of nukes if all of these other countries have them for protection. Think of it as your precious gun laws. Why do the criminals get to have them and not you? No one ever sees themselves as the criminal. Or at least rarely.

You don't know that the U.S. won't use them any better than you know Iran will. We very well might use them against someone we PERCEIVE as a threat just as Iran very well might attack someone once they got them that they perceived as a threat (the U.S.). If I were in charge of another country, I would want to have a stash of nukes if all of these other countries have them for protection. Think of it as your precious gun laws. Why do the criminals get to have them and not you? No one ever sees themselves as the criminal. Or at least rarely.

We won't use nuclear arms because we actually have to care about international and public opinion. Let's say I just nuked Canada. Britain will say 'OMG WTF WERE YOU THINKING?' and France, along with Germany, would respond with a hearty 'SEE U.S. IS WARMONGERS COWBOY DIPLOMACY'. That wouldn't be good, since every nation in the world hates us to begin with. To wrap it up, the liberals would scream bloody murder and have riots in the capital.

We won't use nuclear arms because we actually have to care about international and public opinion. Let's say I just nuked Canada. Britain will say 'OMG WTF WERE YOU THINKING?' and France, along with Germany, would respond with a hearty 'SEE U.S. IS WARMONGERS COWBOY DIPLOMACY'. That wouldn't be good, since every nation in the world hates us to begin with. To wrap it up, the liberals would scream bloody murder and have riots in the capital.

We care about public and international opinion? Really? Why, then I guess we did get the U.N. approval after all!

We won't use nuclear arms because we actually have to care about international and public opinion..

*collapses writhing with laughter*

We care about public and international opinion? Really? Why, then I guess we did get the U.N. approval after all!

The U.N. failed years ago.

No you fool we have not won the war, and we never will. Without the aid of other, stronger allies, it is impossible for us to fight such an insurgency. Our idiot administration never had a plan to begin with. Saddam never posed a threat. Never (mis)underestimate the predictability of stupidity.


yes youre a perfect example of it, 4-5 car bombs a day against civilan targests and convoys does very little to the US military. You seem to ignore the fact that hundreds tend to die in this car bomb attacks are people usually LINEING UP TO WORK FOR THE NEW IRAQ....

the people are being killed by the hundreds and yet they still line up to work for the new iraq, because they have the courage to face those kinds of people, face it you were anti iraq to begin with so dont even try to act like you were anything else before this story. just because your buried in daily negativity doesnt mean thats the way the war is actually being fought...viet nam is a perfect example of that, north vietnam stated in the late 90;s that the USA had indeed soundly defeated them in every battle, but they knew if they just kept things up long enough the american public would rebel..which is exactly what happened, and exactly what they are trying in iraq...

and YOURE stupidty and sheepness is what is driving it home even more...US soldiers are dying because of you and a your projection of negativity.

I really enjoy the posts of the "deep thinkers" who support the war. We haven't finished with Afganistan, and it is having real problems because we pulled out to much to soon. A "humanitartian war" could have been fought in a few other places first and saved tens of thousands of lives, prevented mass torture and mutilation, name it. There a quite a few WORSE places than Iraq was (and they were horrible). Just dont fool yourself into thinking our leadership has much to do with humanitarian.

Take as an example that Democracy and Regime Change were the real reasons for a war in Iraq instead of our ruling party just being plain wrong again(wmd, terrorists, etc.). Ok, that changes being wrong, wrong, wrong, to lie, lie, lie... but anyway... Taking the presumtion, we could have spent months giving Haliburton and others billions to stock pile desalination plants and oil refinery parts in Kuwait. Police and military schools could also have been established in neighboring countries. If we had taken these sorts of preperations along with buying body and humvee armor, we could have entered the post war phase with much better results. We know that there was no urgency in the invasion. With the kinds of preperations mentioned, world wide support may have come flooding in, Sadaam may have fled, peacefull transition may have been possible.

It is truly difficult to point out one thing that W and friends have done right other than going into Afganistan quickly after 9/11. After that...

One thing that is definately better with this war is that Americans seem to truly support the soldiers (except for maybe the White House as mentioned in posts by others).

:headbang:

*collapses writhing with laughter*

if you dont have anything to say then stop cluttering up threads bitch.

I really enjoy the posts of the "deep thinkers" who support the war. We haven't finished with Afganistan, and it is having real problems because we pulled out to much to soon. A "humanitartian war" could have been fought in a few other places first and saved tens of thousands of lives, prevented mass torture and mutilation, name it. There a quite a few WORSE places than Iraq was (and they were horrible). Just dont fool yourself into thinking our leadership has much to do with humanitarian.

Take as an example that Democracy and Regime Change were the real reasons for a war in Iraq instead of our ruling party just being plain wrong again(wmd, terrorists, etc.). Ok, that changes being wrong, wrong, wrong, to lie, lie, lie... but anyway... Taking the presumtion, we could have spent months giving Haliburton and others billions to stock pile desalination plants and oil refinery parts in Kuwait. Police and military schools could also have been established in neighboring countries. If we had taken these sorts of preperations along with buying body and humvee armor, we could have entered the post war phase with much better results. We know that there was no urgency in the invasion. With the kinds of preperations mentioned, world wide support may have come flooding in, Sadaam may have fled, peacefull transition may have been possible.

It is truly difficult to point out one thing that W and friends have done right other than going into Afganistan quickly after 9/11. After that...

One thing that is definately better with this war is that Americans seem to truly support the soldiers (except for maybe the White House as mentioned in posts by others).

:headbang:

if you could say one thing without stinking of radical left wing bullshit code words like Haliburton and Kuwait was the evil one, you might have one cent of creditiblity..

PS dont post in an iraq thread if you can fucking spell Saddam.

The U.N. failed years ago.

The U.N. isn't successful and I don't pretend to think otherwise. However, many of our allies did not support the war. The anti-american sentiment sky-rocketed when we ignored them. How does that show we care about international opnion? Bush couldn't care less about diplomacy.

if you dont have anything to say then stop cluttering up threads bitch.

I made a perfectly accurate statement there. I just decided to emote a little. And given your penchant for pissy behaviour I think this is a case of the pot calling the kettle black.

However, many of our allies did not support the war.
Yeah so? Our "ally" France voted en block with China to avoid calling what is going on in Sudan a genocide so as to protect their oil contracts. Ergo, they are responsible along with China for about 400,00 or so deaths by now. Yet no one seems to have called them on it. Odd that.

(Why am I replying...only adding fuel to the fire...aw fuck it)

The argument that the U.S. hit Iraq to topple Saddam is way off.
For one: yes, it really was all about the WMDs (I am getting so fucking sick of that acronym) and not a horrible dictator who did horrible things (no need to flog a dead horse by naming said horrible things). Therefore, the whole pretense of going to war with Iraq was wrong.
However, Saddam was an evil bastard, right? Right. Him being gone is a good thing, right? Right. So the war is justifiable, right? Sorry, not this time. There was one very simple way to get rid of Saddam, his body doubles, his subourdinates, and anyone else the U.S. didn't approve with who could grab some power after Saddam was gone:
:sniper:
That's right, assasinations. Lots of them. Still ruthless, and supportive of an abhorent trade, but would have saved many Iraqi AND American lives. It would also have saved the U.S. a good chunk of change as well. A war bill of nearly a trillion dollars (or has it gone past that mark by this point?) could have been swapped with a bill of - at most - about a billion dollars paid to the best hitmen the world has to offer.
And there's plenty to choose from too! Japan has a good reputation for capable killers, as does Switzerland (best mercs in the world, the Swiss are), and hell, there's probably a good number of homegrown American sharpshooters that could have fit the part as well (although an American getting caught in the act would probably be more of an international shit-storm compared to the others).
Yes it would violate international law, but so what? The American government already proved they were willing to do that by going to war without the U.N's approval (poor U.N, they're like that big quiet kid who cries at lunch hour on the bleachers; looks imposing and tough, but all he can do is whine, complain, and try to stop other kids from fighting).

Anyway, don't listen to me, I'm just applying my two cents. And if you DO listen to me, and agree with what I'm saying; stop right now, I'm brainwashing you unintentionally.

Wow, the Gulf Republics stated that our guys are dying because of our negativity. IF BUSH HADN'T FIRED THE GENERAL THAT SAID WE WOULD NEED MORE TROOPS FOR AN OCCUPATION THAN FOR THE WAR we would be doing much better. But hey, that was a bad bad bad negative thought. We need goo goo happy thoughts. HAPPY THOUGHTS STOP BULLETS. The insurgancy will fail if we think positive. Stupid Rumsfeld saying that insurgancies go on for years and years. Bad negative thought. He should think happy happy thoughts like W. They will throw flowers at us and Democracy will flow through the land.

Ever since Clinton got NAFTA signed when the Republicans couldn't, they have had their undies all bunched up. Three Republican administrations of fewer jobs created than either Clinton or Carter. The only three administrations since WWII to increase the national debt to the gross domestic product. The ACTUAL taxes paid as a percentage of income by the top 1 percent is now lower than what is paid by those making 50 to 100k a year. I mean really. Forget negativity. Get some critical thinking. You automitons in the Republican party can party on, but the Conservatives out there can help change things. Liberal California voted in Arnold because he seemed a better choice than another vote for the establishment, so it aint the Liberals who are stuck in the pile of stinking dogma, they ARE still thinking. (not that Arnold has worked out all that well, but who knew an actor in California would come out against unions ;) )

if you could say one thing without stinking of radical left wing bullshit code words like Haliburton and Kuwait was the evil one, you might have one cent of creditiblity..

PS dont post in an iraq thread if you can fucking spell Saddam.

You're a riot. With a potty mouth like that, you take issue with my spelling in a fast post? Like I said, u guys r real deep thinkers :)

It truly saddens me that I have to post this, but I believe that I do. I was watching NBC with Brian Williams when he reported that the insurgents have been able to buy uniforms and pose as Iraqi "national guard" soldiers right under our noses. We were doomed from the beginning. We just couldn't accept that. It is truly pathetic that such heinously stupid group of people have gottan together and have been running the most powerfull nation on Earth for the past five years. I pray that our remaining soldiers will be able to return home without the loss of too much life. I am currently writing a letter to Rumsfeld himself, telling him what a lousy job he is doing. I think you all should do the same.
Buck Fush.


LOL .

cuts their pay

If you are refering to Bush, the military actually had a PAY RAISE! How do I know this? My father is in the military.

I was speaking of Iraq.

Try knocking down your numbers by 75%!

Iraq’s “democracy” will never exist, at least not one even remotely embraces civil rights, and if a democracy doesn’t do that, what’s the point?

Read the Iraqi Constitution.

1. we did not. find any newspaper article FROM THE PRE-WAR PERIOD that tells you it was about anything besides WMD's.

There's your problem. Read the war resolution. There is a hell of alot more to it than WMD.

*11,000 post and I had to waste it with idiots*

Read the Iraqi Constitution.

We did. It enshrines Sharia as the supreme law of the land. Now aren't we saying Iran are bad for having Sharia Law?

If you are refering to Bush, the military actually had a PAY RAISE! How do I know this? My father is in the military.


Congrats on 11k posts. To bad you had to waste it on these morons.

There's your problem. Read the war resolution. There is a hell of alot more to it than WMD.


But that little catch phrase is so easy to remember.

We did. It enshrines Sharia as the supreme law of the land. Now aren't we saying Iran are bad for having Sharia Law?

Apparently, you didn't read all of it. It is a rather long document. Twenty-Eight pages if you want to print it out. I've read half of it and it seems to me that they are favoring democracy more than you think they are.

We did. It enshrines Sharia as the supreme law of the land. Now aren't we saying Iran are bad for having Sharia Law?

My understanding was it only refered to Islamic law as one of many sources of law, rather than enshrining Sharia as the supreme law of the land.

I could be wrong though, becuase I haven't been paying much attention.

We didn't win the war, where are the WMDs? Where is Osama?

Osama's in Iraq? Dadgum good thing we're already there, takes care of the alqaeda connection and getting bin laden.

My understanding was it only refered to Islamic law as one of many sources of law, rather than enshrining Sharia as the supreme law of the land.

I could be wrong though, becuase I haven't been paying much attention.

It isn't the supreme law of the land! You are right Lacadaemon it is one of many sources of law.

Apparently, you didn't read all of it. It is a rather long document. Twenty-Eight pages if you want to print it out. I've read half of it and it seems to me that they are favoring democracy more than you think they are.
First of all, if a constitution can’t fit on a poster, it’s too long.

Second, do you actually believe that Iraqis, who have no precedent for democracy and almost no respect for civil rights as a people, can maintain a democracy? The only Mid-Eastern nation besides Israel to have a lasting “democracy” is Turkey, and that is only through the very un-democratic oppression of Islamic parties and an extremely pro-West military.

Were can I read the Iraq Constitution?

First of all, if a constitution can’t fit on a poster, it’s too long.

Second, do you actually believe that Iraqis, who have no precedent for democracy and almost no respect for civil rights as a people, can maintain a democracy? The only Mid-Eastern nation besides Israel to have a lasting “democracy” is Turkey, and that is only through the very un-democratic oppression of Islamic parties and an extremely pro-West military.

So you are saying that arabs are incapable of running a democracy?

It truly saddens me that I have to post this, but I believe that I do. I was watching NBC with Brian Williams when he reported that the insurgents have been able to buy uniforms and pose as Iraqi "national guard" soldiers right under our noses. We were doomed from the beginning. We just couldn't accept that. It is truly pathetic that such heinously stupid group of people have gottan together and have been running the most powerfull nation on Earth for the past five years. I pray that our remaining soldiers will be able to return home without the loss of too much life. I am currently writing a letter to Rumsfeld himself, telling him what a lousy job he is doing. I think you all should do the same.
Buck Fush.
Yes fuck Bush but...the war isn't lost.

Geez. World War Two doesn't ring any bells?

Did the Soviets lose at Stalingrad after losing countless men?

The Idiocy that abounds on this forum and this country astounds me. Everybody wants to make our soldiers out to be victims that are just sitting around waiting to be blown up.

We kill 50 or more terrorists for every one soldier they kill. The only thing America is losing is a Media war that is perpetrated by a bunch of crybabies that Hate Bush, America and everything West of the Palestinians. The only time America ever lost a war is due to the fact that the public pacifists weren’t killed for their treason, people need to shut the hell up and let our soldiers do their job. Yeah Iraq is just like Vietnam, our soldiers are doing the hard work, kicking ass and winning a war that everybody else says they’re losing.

“This is a re-creation of the media's role in the Vietnam war, where American victories on the battlefield were turned into defeat on the home front by the filtering and spin of the media. Even the current Communist rulers of Vietnam have admitted that they lost militarily in Vietnam but hung on because they expected to win politically in the United States -- as they did, with the help of the Jane Fondas, the Walter Cronkhites and a cast of thousands in the streets and on campuses across the country. The very people who have been anti-military for years, who filter out American heroes in battle, are now proclaiming that they are ‘honoring’ our troops by publicizing every death by name, day in and day out.”

We need quit publishing pictures of our dead and star publishing the stories of heroism exemplified by our soldiers’ day in and day out.

We need quit declaring defeat before the fat lady blows. The only reason extremist Muslims blown themselves up is because they’re terrible shots and couldn’t shoot a fish in bucket. Our military is best of the best, but if people want them to die in vain and continue to proclaim to the wolrd that our soldiers are just bunch of pansy victims that cant defend themselves then it makes it hard for to them to win or even want to win.

No. We won the war. We defeated our enemy. One could assert that we are operating a failing occupation, but the war is over.

laughs extremely hard

So you are saying that arabs are incapable of running a democracy?
I’m saying their civilization in its current state is incapable. I have no problem with Arabs. A white society in its shoes would be exactly the same (think Middle Ages.) Also, Turkey is home to Turks.

Were can I read the Iraq Constitution?

Iraqi Constition (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,113576,00.html)

Yes its Fox News but you can find it on CNN, MSNBC, and other various news websites.

AHH!!! Here's the full version I believe

New Iraq Constition (http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2005-08-24-iraqi-constitution-draft_x.htm)

Winning a war is not only winning an armed hostility between two or more countries; it is achieving one's political objectives. I am not certain what the 'political' objectives of the Bush régime were since they seem to have changed so many times. But if one of them happened to be 'ending terrorism' - then I would have to agree with the professionals in the Pentagon and disagree with Bush. In fact, terrorism is alive and well and terrorists are multiplying as a direct result of a badly botched occupation.

And why should terrorism not thrive when 'the liberators' encarcerate people indiscriminately, mistreat those in their custody (Abu Ghraib, etc.), and insult the land they occupy, its people, and the things they hold sacred.

I am afraid that the west will see much, much more terrorism from those who feel they have nothing to lose. I would only hope that western governments do not use the threat as an excuse to abolish freedoms at home and to wage more war abroad.

I’m saying their civilization in its current state is incapable. I have no problem with Arabs. A white society in its shoes would be exactly the same (think Middle Ages.) Also, Turkey is home to Turks.

Well then, they have to start some time. You could very well have made the same argument about the Japanese at the end of WWII.

I don’t know what your definition of war is, but mine is a conflict between two or more sovereign nations.
In this particular war, one nation didn’t technically exist for over a year. That one lost, the other one won.

funny, because the USA (in general) can not claim State or Nation status.

we have no common culture and our sovereignty is false

Well then, they have to start some time. You could very well have made the same argument about the Japanese at the end of WWII.
The only honorable thing to do would be to help the Japanese, and it took over ten years to really accomplish the goal. Iraq has been a waist of resources and was something we were not obligated to do. Plus, our occupation losses were not nearly as high in Japan, and it helps that we were able to completely discredit the basis of their religion (that the Emperies was God on Earth.) Also another big difference, the Japanese respected Macarthur, and he was as loved there as much as he was here. The Iraqis hate us.
funny, because the USA (in general) can not claim State or Nation status.

we have no common culture and our sovereignty is false
I have no idea what that is supposed to mean. We are a heterogeneous society so we aren’t a country?

Iraq is not a war and never was a war. It is/was a miltary operation code named Operation Iraqi Freedom. I agree with it but who gives a shit if you do or don't? Fact is that arguing about what got us there is pointless because we must remain at this point. If we pull out now Iraq will crumble and we'll be weakened. We cannot allow this to happen. So agree or not with why we're there, we must all come together that we must finish the job.

Terrorism and liberals :mp5:

We won't use nuclear arms because we actually have to care about international and public opinion. Let's say I just nuked Canada. Britain will say 'OMG WTF WERE YOU THINKING?' and France, along with Germany, would respond with a hearty 'SEE U.S. IS WARMONGERS COWBOY DIPLOMACY'. That wouldn't be good, since every nation in the world hates us to begin with. To wrap it up, the liberals would scream bloody murder and have riots in the capital.

No you don't. The US doesn't use nuclear weapons now because if they did, everybody with one would say "Wheee! The US did it! Party on dudes! Lets bring all our nuclear weapons out! If they can use it, so can we!" and start chucking theirs everytime they had a problem their military couldn't face

And besides, they wouldn't like the economic and political repurcussions either. The US as a government doesn't really care about how well they get along with other people, only how much money they can make off the other nations.

It is amazing how the human mind works. I have read the posts on this thread and I am apalled at the lack of memory that is exhibited here. It seems that most every person that cries the loudest about the war in Iraq, Osama Bin Laden, the perceived wrong being perpetrated upon Islam and so forth. In addition, it is amazing how Pres. Bush, Rumsfeld and others are painted as the great satanic beings. I wonder if any of you remember September 11, 2001 and events that occured in New York City? Do any of you recall what happened in Spain? Oh and most recently what occured in London?
If you have any questions about what is occuring in Iraq I suggest you go to: http://www.ogrish.com/archives.html and take a look at the sections under terrorism and beheadings and get a fresh look at what the price of life is in Iraq. Let me say up front...I AM NOT AGAINST ISLAM...I am against Islamic Fascism that seeks to perpetrate it's beliefs, political ideology, social structure and education upon any person, country or entity. Fascism is conservativism gone rampant just as communism is liberalism gone rampant. Neither system has any good in them. Multitudes could be written about the occurances in Sub Saharan Africa by the multitude of despots that rule there.
It is very frustrating to hear and read things that are written by people in support for criminals such Bin Laden and Zarqawi, particularly when the people are promoting the down fall of people and countries who are trying bring a little bit of life and freedom to the countries that men like Bin Laden have trampled under their feet. Let me finish with this; the Taliban and Bin Laden were in the process of returning Ahfganastan to it's Islamic roots correct? Do any of you recall what women were subjected to at the hands of Bin Laden's and the Taliban's people? Need an answer? Then go here:
http://www.ogrish.com/archives/2005/january/ogrish-dot-com-about_to_be_stoned.jpg
I am pretty sure that we would all like to have our mothers, sisters, daughters, nieces, girlfriends and wives being looked after by Bin Laden and those like him.

The only honorable thing to do would be to help the Japanese, and it took over ten years to really accomplish the goal. Iraq has been a waist of resources and was something we were not obligated to do. Plus, our occupation losses were not nearly as high in Japan, and it helps that we were able to completely discredit the basis of their religion (that the Emperies was God on Earth.) Also another big difference, the Japanese respected Macarthur, and he was as loved there as much as he was here. The Iraqis hate us.


Uh-huh. I appreciate the difference, but surely you admit that the problem of democracy in Iraq is not intractable - just it can't be solved overnight.

In any case, as we invaded the place, we can hardly abandon it now. Whatever people want. That would be wrong.

We lost the war in Iraq? No we didn't, and no fool can tell us that we have. We will win this war and we have been winning it. We grabbed the enemy by the head and we kicked him in the ass, we will continue kicking the hell out of him.

I'm just using a lot of logic that General Patton would of used. There is no way we are going to lose this war. We are going to kill those losers where ever they are. They are nothing more then terrorists, and we will not allow them to win. Only the cowards can do that.

Even if Saddam didn't have missles aiming at Israel, or Iran, or whatever, why don't you spend a day in Saddam's torture chambers? That'd be fun. Or have half your family disappear for no reason? Oh, that's alright, at least we aren't getting liberated. That'd suck. I hope the only people who can do something never do, and just sit on their hands while we die.

I'm all for invading Iran. And North Korea at that.

Though it would mean more lives of our soldiers, I agree. Iran and North Korea pose serious threats to the world.

America, in my opinion, has steadily declined morally for the past half-century. I seriously believe that we have done a disgrace to our Nation's reputation. The filth on TV, in magazines, and on the Web is, sadly, a terrible contribution of morally and ethically challenged persons. The lack of these two qualities in American Business is also readily visible.

Our nation has become complacent, and even after the terrible attacks on the Twin Towers, Synagogues, Madrid, London, Egypt, etc, we do not take risks.

Hitler could have been defeated very early on, had America intervened earlier. I do not criticize FDR, for he was a magnificent leader. I only state facts.

We must not allow North Korea or Iran, or any other lawless nation, to progress to a like-level as Nazi Germany did before we decide to take action.

America has come a long way technologically and developmentally since WWII, however, if we do not address our borders, Americanization of Immigrants, National Identity, and producing a majority of our needs, rather than outsourcing, etc., I fear America may quickly fall behind.

These next decades shall decide the supremacy of the nations. Shall China pull ahead? Will America continue in its failing education systems? Its blind eye toward the murders of hundreds of thousands of human beings per year (abortion)? Will the people remain divided by percieved differences, by ignorance?

I truly fear for my country, and pray to God that I can change it in my life time.

WMD's were found in Iraq .....
4 more years...I want 4 more years!!!

Originally Posted by Mind Sickness
A war bill of nearly a trillion dollars

OH come on, a trillion dollars? Do you realize how much money that is? Hell, the annual US budget is just over 2 trillion.
The iraq war to date has cost about 190 billion dollars.

OH come on, a trillion dollars? Do you realize how much money that is? Hell, the annual US budget is just over 2 trillion.
The iraq war to date has cost about 190 billion dollars.

Eh don't worry.. his name goes well with him. Mind sickness... a lack of logic, a lack of will.. a tendency of overblowing the facts.. the war in Yugoslavia from what I heard was like $90 billion. And we didn't even take over. We just did some strikes.

After reading the full length of that constitution. I would say that it seems to me that the United States and its allies are winning.

After talking with alot of military buds that have served there it seems the United States and its allies are winning.

After seeing Sadam in jail. His sons shot to pieces it seems the United States and its allies are winning.

After apparent democratic movements in other Arabic countries its seems the United States and its allies are winning.

After thousands of terrorists killed in action its seems the United States and its allies are winning.

After reading leftist spin in some of our nations newspapers. Hmmm it seems the United States is losing.... Whom to believe?

Whom to believe?

Depends on which war you meant.

The war against the nation of Afghanistan? Done, although it seems like the job wasn't done to last.

The war against the sovereign nation of Iraq? Done. Currently in occupation phase.

The war against an abstract noun? Maybe when they make it illegal to be in the dictionary or something, but that's not a certainty.

I don’t know what your definition of war is, but mine is...well...If my soldiers keep being shot in the faces..I am still at war...

Iraqi villagers kill 5 insurgents
By Middle East correspondent Mark Willacy

The residents of a small Iraqi village have killed five insurgents who had attacked them for voting in last weekend's national elections.

Several other insurgents were also wounded.

The insurgents raided the village of al-Mudhiryah south of Baghdad after warning its inhabitants not to vote in the election.

The villagers fought back, killing five of the insurgents and wounding eight others.

The insurgents' cars were then set alight.

Al-Mudhiryah's tribal sheikh says his people are sick of being threatened by Islamic extremists.


Gee, sure are losing.. :rolleyes:

Terrorism and liberals :mp5:

Love how you lumped the two together. Liberal is just another word for terrorist after all. :rolleyes:

I don't know it any of you have noticed, but this thread degenerated into a 'Cowboys vs Bleeding Hearts' conversation about four pages back, not including some very informative posts (thanks Wir Kommen Zuruck, Undelia and Dun Glenn). Calling each other morons, gun-nuts, and commies isn't going to get anyone anywhere and is truely deplorable behaviour.

OH come on, a trillion dollars? Do you realize how much money that is? Hell, the annual US budget is just over 2 trillion.
The iraq war to date has cost about 190 billion dollars.

And when I said a trillion dollars, I MEANT a trillion dollars. That is the figure I read in the paper nearly a year ago, and it could only have gone up from there.

EDIT: Besides, the point wan't the amount of money spent, but what could have been done with it.

Mind sickness... a lack of logic, a lack of will.. a tendency of overblowing the facts..

Thanks Mesatecala, for using my mental health problems as a platform to insult me just because you don't agree with me. Good job, man. Fucking prick.

Clinton lied too.

and YOURE stupidty and sheepness is what is driving it home even more...US soldiers are dying because of you and a your projection of negativity.
You have completely missed the point? US troops are dying because they were sent to fight a war that should never have been fought. US troops will continue to die in Iraq until the US realizes that Iraq is a lost cause, and since you support the US staying the course, lets blame future US troop deaths on you and the Bush administration.

BTW, and perhaps you might have overlooked this fact but innocent Iraqis are dying too, or don't they count?

You have completely missed the point? US troops are dying because they were sent to fight a war that should never have been fought. US troops will continue to die in Iraq until the US realizes that Iraq is a lost cause, and since you support the US staying the course, lets blame future US troop deaths on you and the Bush administration.

BTW, and perhaps you might have overlooked this fact but innocent Iraqis are dying too, or don't they count?

Yes, but whether or not the original invasion was justified, the US cannot now just up and out of Iraq. Having invaded the place, it is obliged to stay there until it is sorted - however long that takes - unless some other group or groups is willing to take its place.

...US soldiers are dying because of you and a your projection of negativity.

Wow. I didn't know you could do that. *projects negativity*

*some US soldier in Iraq dies*

Cooool. *Projects major negativity*

Next day

CNN: In other news today, President George W Bush has just released a statement that the complete destruction of all US personel in Iraq will not deter him from his course of actions.

Negativity, more deadly than WMDs.

You have completely missed the point? US troops are dying because they were sent to fight a war that should never have been fought. US troops will continue to die in Iraq until the US realizes that Iraq is a lost cause, and since you support the US staying the course, lets blame future US troop deaths on you and the Bush administration.

BTW, and perhaps you might have overlooked this fact but innocent Iraqis are dying too, or don't they count?

How about this.

If I die in Iraq you blame me because I chose to enlist into the United States Army, nobody but myself is responsible for my actions and nobody but myself can be blamed for my death. Every single man and woman who wears the uniform chose to join. After having talked to men and women who have served in the military and seeing first hand the horror that was Saddam's Regime all have said they would go volunteer for another tour of duty in Iraq. See the media has a theory about what they report, if it bleeds it leads. How many times do you see stories on CNN of US Soldiers helping to rebuild damaged schools? How many times do you see images of US Soldiers helping the injured after a suicide attack? How many times do you see the positives, which far outweigh the negatives, in the news? Very rarely. All the major news broadcasters (including FOX) have been exagerrating the level of Violence in Iraq. I have seen letters written by soldiers in Iraq that have told of them coming under attack while on patrol, only a few shots fired no casualties, and then getting back to base, turning on the TV and finding out that 2 soldiers in their unit were supposedly killed and 7 more wounded.

So once again, to try and drive my point home. If I die in Iraq nobody is to be blamed but myself because America's military is made up completely of volunteers.

http://www.markfiore.com/animation/victory.html

From other point of view, the project for an Iraqi Constitution got delayed yesterday for fourth time. The first time was delayed for a week; the second, for three days; the third, for just a day; this one, wihout date.

And more; adding to the terrorism and the inter-ethnical and inter-religious violence; yesterday were showed on TV images of shii factions killing each other.

I fear if we're watching the Civil War at the present. :(

i haven't used these forums for very long but as my time here has progressed i have noticed that probably 40-50% of threads are either criticising Bush, the war in Iraq, or Christian beliefs.
in my opinion this quite frankly sucks - why can't people keep their opinions to themselves instead of wasting valuable internet space discussing and re-dicussing the same issues :headbang:

Fin

From other point of view, the project for an Iraqi Constitution got delayed yesterday for fourth time. The first time was delayed for a week; the second, for three days; the third, for just a day; this one, wihout date.

Actually, the draft has been submitted. I have provided a link to the document.

Iraq Constitution (http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2005-08-24-iraqi-constitution-draft_x.htm)

It is just the vote that has been delayed and they don't think it'll be delayed again. We shall see though. Its quite an interesting document to read too.

And more; adding to the terrorism and the inter-ethnical and inter-religious violence; yesterday were showed on TV images of shii factions killing each other.

And now Al Sadr is calling that off!

Al-Sadr: End Shiite-on-Shiite violence (http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/08/25/shiite.violence/index.html)

I fear if we're watching the Civil War at the present. :(

I don't think so!

i haven't used these forums for very long but as my time here has progressed i have noticed that probably 40-50% of threads are either criticising Bush, the war in Iraq, or Christian beliefs.
in my opinion this quite frankly sucks - why can't people keep their opinions to themselves instead of wasting valuable internet space discussing and re-dicussing the same issues :headbang:

Fin

Well the reason we don't keep opinions to ourselves is because this is how we expand our ideas. Remember the dialectics? Bush the war and christianity (probably due to ID controversy) are all prominent issues. We aren't argueing to say "your an asshole I am right" but to gather facts and opinions and challenge ourselves. (at least I hope that's right.)


Anyway this whole Iraq situation is misrepresented to begin with. If bush wanted to go in he should have just said that Saddam gassed as many kurds as he did and torture and blah blah, but those were second to WMD's. At least that is the impression I got. And people are on here promoting invading NK and Iran...Do they know how spread out we are? How poorly the modern world looks on imperialism? How close we are to starting the draft??

WMD's were found in Iraq in the form of VX traces in artillery shells.
You didn't hear then, the announcement later the same week that the initial tests in the field had given a false positive, and laboratory examination had found them to be clean? :rolleyes:

Wow. I didn't know you could do that. *projects negativity*

*some US soldier in Iraq dies*LOL

No you fool we have not won the war, and we never will. Without the aid of other, stronger allies, it is impossible for us to fight such an insurgency. Our idiot administration never had a plan to begin with. Saddam never posed a threat. Never (mis)underestimate the predictability of stupidity.

well it's good to know you're behind the US.

in other news, you are wrong. we're killing insurgents every day, the iraqis are moving forward (though the damn Sunnis are being picky, but they'll get on board sooner or later), and Saddam is gone.

We took down Saddam (let that sink in).

The Iraqi people now have the opportunity at freedom/choosing their rulers instead of being stuck under Saddam.

We are doing a mostly-good deed, and our troops need all the support they can get to get the job done. There's no way we can leave until the Iraqis can govern/protect themselves. To do so would be like mowing half the lawn and then walking off the job.

What is it with some people, they think everything's going to be easy, and the second there's adversity, they want to quit? WE CAN'T QUIT. If we back down to the insurgency, radical islam everywhere will be emboldened. We must stand up to them, even if nobody else (spain, tsk tsk) will.

It would be a disaster if this turns into another Vietnam, with hippies messing everythign up, shitting on the flag, ruining our armed services' chances to finish the job. I hope the troops know that a lot of us are in their corner and want them to do well and finish the job.

Actually, the draft has been submitted. I have provided a link to the document.

Iraq Constitution (http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2005-08-24-iraqi-constitution-draft_x.htm)

It is just the vote that has been delayed and they don't think it'll be delayed again. We shall see though. Its quite an interesting document to read too.



And now Al Sadr is calling that off!

Al-Sadr: End Shiite-on-Shiite violence (http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/08/25/shiite.violence/index.html)



I don't think so!

Corneliu, we are watching the Civil War... we have democrats sabotaging the United States' efforts. Back then they (well, most of them) didn't care whether the South seceeded or not.... today they don't give a crap about the fate of a country we've spent years trying to help to rebuild after taking down their ruthless dictator. This can still be a good country (Iraq)... but there's no way it will be anytime soon if we leave. If we leave there'll be nothing to stop the terrorists/insurgents.

Corneliu, we are watching the Civil War... we have democrats sabotaging the United States' efforts. Back then they (well, most of them) didn't care whether the South seceeded or not.... today they don't give a crap about the fate of a country we've spent years trying to help to rebuild after taking down their ruthless dictator. This can still be a good country (Iraq)... but there's no way it will be anytime soon if we leave. If we leave there'll be nothing to stop the terrorists/insurgents.

A yes, the bloodless Civil War in the US is currently going on and the Democrats are losing that one too! :D

Wow, this is TOTALLY the first time I'm hearing about this. :rolleyes:

Anyhoo, wars these days no longer have winners and losers, just a lot of paperwork and rebuilding.

We lost the war in Iraq? No we didn't, and no fool can tell us that we have. We will win this war and we have been winning it. We grabbed the enemy by the head and we kicked him in the ass, we will continue kicking the hell out of him.

I'm just using a lot of logic that General Patton would of used. There is no way we are going to lose this war. We are going to kill those losers where ever they are. They are nothing more then terrorists, and we will not allow them to win. Only the cowards can do that.

Who is the enemy????

Who is the enemy????

The enemy is those that do not want to see a free Iraq.

It truly saddens me that I have to post this, but I believe that I do. I was watching NBC with Brian Williams when he reported that the insurgents have been able to buy uniforms and pose as Iraqi "national guard" soldiers right under our noses. We were doomed from the beginning. We just couldn't accept that. It is truly pathetic that such heinously stupid group of people have gottan together and have been running the most powerfull nation on Earth for the past five years. I pray that our remaining soldiers will be able to return home without the loss of too much life. I am currently writing a letter to Rumsfeld himself, telling him what a lousy job he is doing. I think you all should do the same.
Buck Fush.With countrymen like this, who needs terrorist attacks. This kind of attitude will destroy the US if it is not crushed.

With countrymen like this, who needs terrorist attacks. This kind of attitude will destroy the US if it is not crushed.

Don't worry, the US still stands after losing in vietnam for the same reason. They´re doing fine today, aren't they?

Who thinks that war was a success btw?

ps - that bit about crushing an attitude sounds awfully hitlerish - do you consider yourself a patriot, a fascist, or both?

No you fool we have not won the war, and we never will. Without the aid of other, stronger allies, it is impossible for us to fight such an insurgency. Our idiot administration never had a plan to begin with. Saddam never posed a threat. Never (mis)underestimate the predictability of stupidity.

Why is it impossible? Most insurgencies in the modern era have failed. Until the insurgents can organise and operate in large units, their ability to control territory is rahter limited and they are pretty much resticted to operating as small units at best and using hit and run tactics.

yes youre a perfect example of it, 4-5 car bombs a day against civilan targests and convoys does very little to the US military. You seem to ignore the fact that hundreds tend to die in this car bomb attacks are people usually LINEING UP TO WORK FOR THE NEW IRAQ....

the people are being killed by the hundreds and yet they still line up to work for the new iraq, because they have the courage to face those kinds of people, face it you were anti iraq to begin with so dont even try to act like you were anything else before this story. just because your buried in daily negativity doesnt mean thats the way the war is actually being fought...viet nam is a perfect example of that, north vietnam stated in the late 90;s that the USA had indeed soundly defeated them in every battle, but they knew if they just kept things up long enough the american public would rebel..which is exactly what happened, and exactly what they are trying in iraq...

and YOURE stupidty and sheepness is what is driving it home even more...US soldiers are dying because of you and a your projection of negativity.

OK. Here's what I'm trying to say. I hate Bush and his dumbass administration. I SUPPORT OUR TROOPS!!!!

(Why am I replying...only adding fuel to the fire...aw fuck it)

The argument that the U.S. hit Iraq to topple Saddam is way off.
For one: yes, it really was all about the WMDs (I am getting so fucking sick of that acronym) and not a horrible dictator who did horrible things (no need to flog a dead horse by naming said horrible things). Therefore, the whole pretense of going to war with Iraq was wrong.
However, Saddam was an evil bastard, right? Right. Him being gone is a good thing, right? Right. So the war is justifiable, right? Sorry, not this time. There was one very simple way to get rid of Saddam, his body doubles, his subourdinates, and anyone else the U.S. didn't approve with who could grab some power after Saddam was gone:
:sniper:
That's right, assasinations. Lots of them. Still ruthless, and supportive of an abhorent trade, but would have saved many Iraqi AND American lives. It would also have saved the U.S. a good chunk of change as well. A war bill of nearly a trillion dollars (or has it gone past that mark by this point?) could have been swapped with a bill of - at most - about a billion dollars paid to the best hitmen the world has to offer.
And there's plenty to choose from too! Japan has a good reputation for capable killers, as does Switzerland (best mercs in the world, the Swiss are), and hell, there's probably a good number of homegrown American sharpshooters that could have fit the part as well (although an American getting caught in the act would probably be more of an international shit-storm compared to the others).
Yes it would violate international law, but so what? The American government already proved they were willing to do that by going to war without the U.N's approval (poor U.N, they're like that big quiet kid who cries at lunch hour on the bleachers; looks imposing and tough, but all he can do is whine, complain, and try to stop other kids from fighting).

Anyway, don't listen to me, I'm just applying my two cents. And if you DO listen to me, and agree with what I'm saying; stop right now, I'm brainwashing you unintentionally.

I back you up 100%. I know we had tried this on him with precision bombing, but we certainly could have tried harder!!!

Did the Soviets lose at Stalingrad after losing countless men?

The Soviets were fighting much larger scale battles. Also, they had what, 5 million men? We have what? 100 thousand? Also, we're not allowed to go around killing anyone who is a suspect which is sad. If we want to win this we need to fight more aggressivly. I wish Patton was in charge of this. He was a real man.

ALSO
I have no clue what came over me yesterday. I RETRACT MY PREVIOUS STATEMENT We are definatly going to win the war in Iraq. I was watching the news and I learned that the insurgents were buying military uniforms and they tortured and killed a man while US marines were in the vacinity. But then of course, out of 107 Iraqi battalions, I think only 4 are ready. I truly do feel sorry for the Iraqis, and I sure as hell admire their bravery of standing in line, knowing that they could be shot at or bombed. I wish one of our soldiers would just pop a .45 in Rumsfeld's head while he's giving a speech. SIC SEMPER TYRANUS! :sniper:

Ok, just over 2000 Coalition soldiers have died in Iraq. Over a million have served in Iraq.

Thus, 0.2% have died in Iraq. One hell of a death trap.

Yep.....we have lost.

Lets say around 30,000 Iraqis have died due to the war, killed by insurgents or Coalition soldiers. Iraq has a population of just over 26 million.

Thus, 0.115% have died due to the war.

Please correct me if my math is wrong, I don't think it is.

I realize that I didn't count the wounded.

We aren't argueing to say "your an asshole I am right"

Sadly almost eveyone one of these arguments ends that way.

CLICK HERE TO READ (http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewSpecialReports.asp?Page=\SpecialReports\archive\200508\SPE20050825a.html)

These people are VERY supportive of our troops, so much so that they are risking the health of our wounded just so they can let these troops know how they feel.

Anti-war protestors need to understand something, it is ok to protest the war, but once they cross the line and try to use dead soldiers as a weapon against the administration their message will be lost, and most protests do cross that line.

How many times do these anti-war protestors ask our returning soldiers how they feel about the war? Never, you want to know why? Because 70% of soldiers returning from Iraq say they would volunteer for another tour of duty after seeing the horrors that Saddam's Regime committed and after helping the Iraqis to get back on their feet. The troops on the ground know what is going on better than anyone else, if they say that what they are doing is having a positive effect and they would continue to do so I have no choice but to take their word for it. If you want a more accurate picture of what is going on in Iraq turn on the Faith Channel, where they will actually show some positive things that our troops are doing in Iraq and they do some research before posting casualty reports.

Anyway this whole Iraq situation is misrepresented to begin with. If bush wanted to go in he should have just said that Saddam gassed as many kurds as he did and torture and blah blah, but those were second to WMD's. At least that is the impression I got. And people are on here promoting invading NK and Iran...Do they know how spread out we are? How poorly the modern world looks on imperialism? How close we are to starting the draft??

Tell me, how many Americans would have supported a war to remove a man from power who had used chemical weapons on his neighbors, used chemical weapons on his own people, invaded a sovereign nation, tortured his people on a regular basis, gave funding to suicide bombers in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, had been actively seeking nuclear weapons, and on top of all that was one of the leader of one of only two nations to officially voice support for the attacks of 9/11?

Sadly, the answer is not many. Not enough to make a case for going to war against Iraq. But, you tell the people that they are under constant threat from nuclear attacks and they will get al hot and worked up into a frenzy.

Tell me, how many Americans would have supported a war to remove a man from power who had used chemical weapons on his neighbors, used chemical weapons on his own people, invaded a sovereign nation, tortured his people on a regular basis, gave funding to suicide bombers in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, had been actively seeking nuclear weapons, and on top of all that was one of the leader of one of only two nations to officially voice support for the attacks of 9/11?

Sadly, the answer is not many. Not enough to make a case for going to war against Iraq.
Not many is probably due to the fact that Reagan and Bush Sr. actually supported the person you described, even though they knew that he was committing these atrocities and even gave him the chemicals and equipment to do so. I call it first class hypocrisy.

But, you tell the people that they are under constant threat from nuclear attacks and they will get al hot and worked up into a frenzy.
Yeah, like through the lies of Bush the Lesser?

With countrymen like this, who needs terrorist attacks. This kind of attitude will destroy the US if it is not crushed.

Your right... lets arrest them all. They're publishing terrorist propoganda in the papers to demorilize America... no longer! No more protesting either, its a threat to the war effort! :rolleyes:

Before you know it we'll become the very thing Bush claims we are fighting against.

Even if Saddam didn't have missles aiming at Israel, or Iran, or whatever, why don't you spend a day in Saddam's torture chambers? That'd be fun. Or have half your family disappear for no reason? Oh, that's alright, at least we aren't getting liberated. That'd suck. I hope the only people who can do something never do, and just sit on their hands while we die.

I'm all for invading Iran. And North Korea at that.

The torture and disappearing you are writing about happened on a daily basis on many latin america countries between the 50`s and late 80`s, ordered by dictators installed and supported by the US to fight against communism.

Ok, just over 2000 Coalition soldiers have died in Iraq. Over a million have served in Iraq.

Thus, 0.2% have died in Iraq. One hell of a death trap.

Yep.....we have lost.

Lets say around 30,000 Iraqis have died due to the war, killed by insurgents or Coalition soldiers. Iraq has a population of just over 26 million.

Thus, 0.115% have died due to the war.

Please correct me if my math is wrong, I don't think it is.

I realize that I didn't count the wounded.Those numbers are woefully underreported. Thousands more have been murdered by George Bush and his Bushiveks.

CLICK HERE TO READ (http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewSpecialReports.asp?Page=\SpecialReports\archive\200508\SPE20050825a.html)

These people are VERY supportive of our troops, so much so that they are risking the health of our wounded just so they can let these troops know how they feel.

Anti-war protestors need to understand something, it is ok to protest the war, but once they cross the line and try to use dead soldiers as a weapon against the administration their message will be lost, and most protests do cross that line.

How many times do these anti-war protestors ask our returning soldiers how they feel about the war? Never, you want to know why? Because 70% of soldiers returning from Iraq say they would volunteer for another tour of duty after seeing the horrors that Saddam's Regime committed and after helping the Iraqis to get back on their feet. The troops on the ground know what is going on better than anyone else, if they say that what they are doing is having a positive effect and they would continue to do so I have no choice but to take their word for it. If you want a more accurate picture of what is going on in Iraq turn on the Faith Channel, where they will actually show some positive things that our troops are doing in Iraq and they do some research before posting casualty reports.

70% you say? I'd like to see something more reputable than your word to back that up, please?

Antre_Travarious']Those numbers are woefully underreported. Thousands more have been murdered by George Bush and his Bushiveks.

While we're at it, I'd like to see a reputable source for that as well.

While we're at it, I'd like to see a reputable source for that as well.


I Googled "Civillian deaths in Iraq" and this was the top one:

http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2005/07/318997.html

I have never seen this site before, and cant attest to its inpartiality.

It puts the death toll in Iraq at over 100,000 since the start of the Invasion, and Occupation.

I Googled "Civillian deaths in Iraq" and this was the top one:

http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2005/07/318997.html

I have never seen this site before, and cant attest to its inpartiality.

It puts the death toll in Iraq at over 100,000 since the start of the Invasion, and Occupation.

It also says that Allied Forces are responsible for 37% of those deaths. I don't know.

It also says that Allied Forces are responsible for 37% of those deaths. I don't know.


Oh...heres this:

Faced with the weight of the evidence, even the BBC was forced yesterday into reporting, probably for the first time in two years, that the widespread killing of Iraqi civilians by US forces is a continuing, serious, and barely acknowledged reality. Previous attempts by John Simpson to describe the extent of US killing were blocked, probably after intervention from the Prime Minister's office in Baghdad.

Interesting, if its true.

I Googled "Civillian deaths in Iraq" and this was the top one:

http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2005/07/318997.html

I have never seen this site before, and cant attest to its inpartiality.

It puts the death toll in Iraq at over 100,000 since the start of the Invasion, and Occupation.This is the result of Bush and his cronies waging wars to steal oil and kill America's and Iraq's youth.

Antre_Travarious']This is the result of Bush and his cronies waging wars to steal oil and kill America's and Iraq's youth.

I believe that the 100,00 death toll has been proven wrong. Maybe you should read some blogs by soldiers serving in Iraq, they don't seem to be there to kill Iraqis. But you can continue to believe in your crazy theories about the reason for going to war, after all you do live in a free country I'm guessing.

If you truely think that american soldiers are running death squads thru Iraq, there is no point in even trying to debate with you. You have already been brainwashed into thinking that soldiers are mindless killing machines, and nothing to the contrary will ever convince you otherwise.

I was in Iraq. I lead troops into combat in iraq. American troops do not target civilians. Period. We only engage those who present a clear and present danger to us. We withhold fire even if we do have a target, but is running into a crowd. We expose ourselves to greater danger in our efforts to minimise civilian casulaties.

Would i go back to Iraq? If i have to, I will. If not, I won't. My reasons for not really wanting to go back have more to do with economics than the conditions over there. Most of my soldiers would go back if they had to and not bitch. Mostly they are not going to volinteer because being 10,000 miles from family and friends sucks.

Its not near as bad over there as the news makes it sound. Most of the news coverage that is sent back here bears almost no reseblance to reality. Don't believe me? Ask someone who has been there. There are over a million of us, we aren't all that hard to find.

Antre_Travarious']Those numbers are woefully underreported. Thousands more have been murdered by George Bush and his Bushiveks.

Actually, the civilian death tool is around 20,000 and not even half of that by us! most of those that died were done by the terrorists and NOT coalition soldiers.

Ok, just over 2000 Coalition soldiers have died in Iraq. Over a million have served in Iraq.

WRONG!!!!!! We didn't have over a million serving in Iraq Novoga. Not even close.

Thus, 0.2% have died in Iraq. One hell of a death trap.

Yep.....we have lost.

Wrong again.

Lets say around 30,000 Iraqis have died due to the war, killed by insurgents or Coalition soldiers. Iraq has a population of just over 26 million.

Thus, 0.115% have died due to the war.

Please correct me if my math is wrong, I don't think it is.

I realize that I didn't count the wounded.

Considering you are using bad numbers from the start, yes your numbers are wrong. Also, the Death toll for civilians is around 20,000 and not 300,000 so your numbers are wrong there too.

Antre_Travarious']This is the result of Bush and his cronies waging wars to steal oil and kill America's and Iraq's youth.

You do know that we're not stealing oil right? yes I thought you did. Stop reporting the lies that you have been fed please?

Its not near as bad over there as the news makes it sound. Most of the news coverage that is sent back here bears almost no reseblance to reality. Don't believe me? Ask someone who has been there. There are over a million of us, we aren't all that hard to find.

My father was over there and you are right regarding the conditions. It isn't as bad as the media is reporting. That is why I stopped listening to media reports. Keep up the good work Gun toting civilians and thanks for serving our country :)

There are over a million of us, we aren't all that hard to find.

At last check, there were what, some 100k+ but not over 200k soldiers in Iraq weren't there?

What happened. Did you guys undergo mitosis or something?

My father was over there and you are right regarding the conditions. It isn't as bad as the media is reporting. That is why I stopped listening to media reports. Keep up the good work Gun toting civilians and thanks for serving our country :)
According to my calculations, 496 US troops died during the first 8 months of 2004. This year the total is 543 for the first eight months of 2005.

According to my calculations, 496 US troops died during the first 8 months of 2004. This year the total is 543 for the first eight months of 2005.

The total amount overpasses 1,800, I guess counting the 2003 casualties.

Apparently, you didn't read all of it. It is a rather long document. Twenty-Eight pages if you want to print it out. I've read half of it and it seems to me that they are favoring democracy more than you think they are.

He read 14 pages. Must've been a slack day for the TV guides.

Force levels are at about 150, 000 but they are being rotated in and out so that it is possible that 1 million servicpeople have been in Iraq..just not all at the same time . The reporting about conditions and alot of other things going on in Iraq has been very poor , I have family there and friends also in Afghanistan , Its like they are reporting on a different world according to the people who are there . They seldom if ever get it right . If you talk to the people on the ground you get a whole different veiw . Are you Suprised ? :rolleyes:

I Googled "Civillian deaths in Iraq" and this was the top one:

http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2005/07/318997.html

I have never seen this site before, and cant attest to its inpartiality.

It puts the death toll in Iraq at over 100,000 since the start of the Invasion, and Occupation.


That number is from a John Hopkins study published in Lancet. However, the actual estimate is anywhere from 8k to 194k and the lead author of the study made a comment that she beiled the death toll was about 98,000 but could be higher. According to her own study, she could be correct but the figure could also be much lower. What she did was pick the halfway point in the range between the low and high figures. The media has rounded it up to 100k but they often fail to mention the range.

And it is that enormous range that makes it nigh-impossible to make judgements based upon it. One thing's for certain - Iraq is definitely not the safe nation Bush must have imagined it to be.

As for oil, that may have been a factor, but if there was an intention to safeguard oil reserves and reduce oil prices as a result (by means of increasing supply) it seems to have backfired looking at the upward trajectory of oil prices in the last two years.