Ridemonkey said:But N8, the United States has just as many, if not more ties with Al Q operatives. The US trained and financed them for years...so there's more faulty logic. I'm sorry, at some point people just have to accept that they're separate issues.
Sorry, I don't buy that.If only Clinton hadn't been thinking with his little head, Al_Q would not be an issue today and perhaps one could argue that if Bin Ladin was eliminated back in the mid 90's, Iraq would not have been invaded in 2003.
Ridemonkey said:Sorry, I don't buy that.
I'm willing to bet Bush would have found an excuse to get into Iraq one way or another.
Ridemonkey said:Sorry, I don't buy that.
I'm willing to bet Bush would have found an excuse to get into Iraq one way or another. Iraq is not, and never has been about Al Queda.
You can't say how things are going there. Most of the media (less fox) in a way wants bush to look bad. The only people who realy know how things are going in iraq are the iraqies and our troops.Echo said:I suppose I should get in touch with reality and start parroting how well things are going over there, and how the insurgency is about to be defeated
Yeah, those reporters (imbedded or not) that are on location in Iraq... they have no idea what's going on.TheMontashu said:The only people who realy know how things are going in iraq are the iraqies and our troops.
I think speed an meth are the same thingBullitrider said:(kinda like speed mixed with meth)
ohio said:Yeah, those reporters (imbedded or not) that are on location in Iraq... they have no idea what's going on.
That's alot closer than we are.N8 said:For the most part they don't. It's a fact the vast majority of reporters in Iraq never venture out the the "Green Zone"...
Wasn't that my point?H8R said:That's alot closer than we are.
Let's admit: WE don't know what the f8ck is going on there.
H8R said:That's alot closer than we are.
Let's admit: WE don't know what the f8ck is going on there.
Is it not true that Bush had already drawn up war plans for the invasion of Iraq pre-9/11? Have there not been many people who have come out of the administration saying Bush had a hard on for invading from day 1?N8 said:I think you are much mistaken. If 9/11 would have never happend, Saddam would still be in power and moving to develope nukes. Sure, we'd lob an occational cruise missile at his installations every now and again, but would not have invaded.
I know, and none of them are reservists, right?N8 said:True, but I have numerous friends and fellow collogues who are either over there, or have been there, who do know what's up.
Did you know Cheney had energy meetings pre 9/11 which was kept private? I always wondered what was the topics of discussion...Changleen said:Is it not true that Bush had already drawn up war plans for the invasion of Iraq pre-9/11? Have there not been many people who have come out of the administration saying Bush had a hard on for invading from day 1?
Ya sure. Overlook the daily carbombings, destroyed infrastructure, lack of power or water, proliferance of weapons, attacks on civilians, threats and shroud of fear the people live under and you're all set.N8 said:Iraq has a really good chance of making it.
New constitution, elected government, trained security forces, and moderinzed infrastructure all contribute to a 'better than before' Iraq. And given the amount of oil in the country, they should be able to fully realize a better way of life in about 10 years hence.
Transcend said:Ya sure. Overlook the daily carbombings, destroyed infrastructure, lack of power or water, proliferance of weapons, attacks on civilians, threats and shroud of fear the people live under and you're all set.
H8R said:Wait....Are we talking about Oakland CA or Iraq?
Silver said:It says that if Iraq happens to be 1929 or 1987, you're ****ed unless you sold short...
PonySoldier said:Nope if they would just come clean on it being about tidying up Shrub1 and Dickheads failure to finish the job in '91 I would be far less angry about their venal attempts to claim it as Al Queda or the "War on Terror"
What makes you think PonySoldier is a liberal?gschuette said:DO you know anything about history? We could not invade Iraq. The goal was to push the Iraqis out of Kuwait then go home. We did finish the job. You liberals don't really pay much attention to fact or use much reason do you?
Because it's all about timing. Investing $10,000 at the peak in 1929 would have meant that after the crash (assuming you invested in an index fund, which wasn't around, but let's pretend it was) you had lost 83% of the value. (If you had stayed in to 1932, where the bottom was)gschuette said:Last I checked the market is at a higher value now than it was then so how is that even an argument?
gschuette said:DO you know anything about history? We could not invade Iraq. The goal was to push the Iraqis out of Kuwait then go home. We did finish the job. You liberals don't really pay much attention to fact or use much reason do you?
PonySoldier said:We did invade Iraq, my wife spent a fair amount of time in Iraq with 1st AD. Perhaps it is you who should read a bit more on history..The Shrub1 administration made some gross errors in judgement in thinking that the Iraqi populace was going to overthrow the Saddam regime. Most soldiers involved in the Gulf War that I have interacted with wanted to go to Bahgdad and close the deal then. I view the current Iraqi issue to simply be an extension of the 1st failed attempt.
We also have taken an additional 1800+ casualties because of this..I believe some of the cries to display leniency came from upper echelon Military People concerned that the coalition would splinter if the Westerners would drive on Bahgdad and overthrow an Arab government..N8 said:Agreed, Bush 1 should have ignored the cries of the left and driven straight to Bahgdad, imprisoned Saddam and set up a new governemt.
At least we'd have a 10+ year start on where we are now.
You called me a liberal too without knowing a damn thing about me. Is everyone who isn't a warmongering Bush ass-kisser a liberal to you?gschuette said:Dunno. He doesn't seem to pro-Bush here but I could be seeing this wrong. I don't come to the political forum unless I am bored. Maybe I mis-read his posts.
PonySoldier said:We also have taken an additional 1800+ casualties because of this..I believe some of the cries to display leniency came from upper echelon Military People concerned that the coalition would splinter if the Westerners would drive on Bahgdad and overthrow an Arab government..
Or even better had US CIA not trained and assisted 22 years old Saddam Husein in the attempt to assassinate then Iraqi Prime Minister Abd Qasim in 1959.N8 said:Agreed, Bush 1 should have ignored the cries of the left and driven straight to Bahgdad, imprisoned Saddam and set up a new governemt.
At least we'd have a 10+ year start on where we are now.
In hindsight it shouldn't have been a concern, Bahgdad was 90 miles away and the Iraqi military was done and the populace was far more sympathetic to having westerners on Iraqi soil then they currently are..The arab world in general would have been far more accepting then than now..N8 said:I think it would have held together if it had come to it.
PonySoldier said:In hindsight it shouldn't have been a concern, Bahgdad was 90 miles away and the Iraqi military was done and the populace was far more sympathetic to having westerners on Iraqi soil then they currently are..The arab world in general would have been far more accepting then than now..
Echo said:You called me a liberal too without knowing a damn thing about me. Is everyone who isn't a warmongering Bush ass-kisser a liberal to you?