Does anyone care we won the war in IRAQ?

[NoNukes]

i have realized that the liberals are going to do what ever it takes to taint the great victory in iraq
does anyone realize that war is over and it looks like we will be 100% gone in 6 months?
That there is a republic in place?
And that women vote and hold office?
I had no idea that the liberal media and there cock suckers would go to the level they have to make the troops look bad and make the success they fought hard for look like, well ask drock and that crew
i dont even know how to explain it
does anybody care we won?

what exactly did we win? A generation of traumatic head injuries?

and that women vote and hold office?

i'm sorry, i didn't get the memo - we went to iraq to advance women's rights? That's funny. I don't recall either the democrats or the republicans lamenting about the rights of women in iraq prior to the time we bombed them.


Its funny how when you start dropping bombs on people - all of a sudden, their social issues become so damn important. Who gives a fuck how many women are raped and never hold office in africa's waring nations? It doesn't matter - we aren't bombing congo, so fuck the people there. When we bomb you then we'll give a shit - until then - fuck you *******


do you wanna know how many americans gave a shit about how women were treated in afghanistan before we started bombing them?

fuck you, you worthless bag of shit.

bingo!!!!

 

[Unkotare]

[

the US was successful in Iraq at such a great speed because they paid off many of Saddam's people to do nothing.-

You are a true moron.

A true moron is a person who only has an insult as opposed to an intelligent retort.

Saddam complained loudly about his betrayal by his people who accepted money from the CIA to not resist. Perhaps like many things, it did not make it into the American media. I have a much better vantage point from where I live.

No, you don't. You are an incredible idiot and your "vantage point" is your head up your ass.

 

[NoNukes]

You are a true moron.

A true moron is a person who only has an insult as opposed to an intelligent retort.

Saddam complained loudly about his betrayal by his people who accepted money from the CIA to not resist. Perhaps like many things, it did not make it into the American media. I have a much better vantage point from where I live.

No, you don't. You are an incredible idiot and your "vantage point" is your head up your ass.

Thank you for once again proving my point.

 

[Douger]

I have realized that the liberals are going to do what ever it takes to taint the great victory in Iraq
Does anyone realize that war is over and it looks like we will be 100% gone in 6 months?
That there is a republic in place?
and that women vote and hold office?
I had no idea that the liberal media and there cock suckers would go to the level they have to make the troops look bad and make the success they fought hard for look like, well ask Drock and that crew
I dont even know how to explain it
DOES ANYBODY CARE WE WON?

Yeah meatheads !
Told to go break international law and invade a sovereign nation. " Doing my job sir. YES SIR !"
Iraq War Facts, Statistics at August 30, 2011 - Iraq War Casualties, Spending
6 months ? Brainwashed much ? You'll be there fifty years from now.
Iraq Facilities

 

[Unkotare]

If you were bright enough to understand what is wrong with your little theory I wouldn't need to point it out to you, so obviously it is a waste of time to do so. When you reach a minimum level of reasoning ability you will find there is much more to talk about.

 

[Vanquish]

If you were bright enough to understand what is wrong with your little theory I wouldn't need to point it out to you, so obviously it is a waste of time to do so. When you reach a minimum level of reasoning ability you will find there is much more to talk about.

Why do you even come to this forum board? Responses like that are not just ridiculous, they're a complete waste of time.

I'd be fine with the insults even if you had some actual MEAT to your comment. But you've got jack shit in this post. Come on now. Stop wasting everyone's time.

 

[Unkotare]

If you were bright enough to understand what is wrong with your little theory I wouldn't need to point it out to you, so obviously it is a waste of time to do so. When you reach a minimum level of reasoning ability you will find there is much more to talk about.

Why do you even come to this forum board? Responses like that are not just ridiculous, they're a complete waste of time.

I'd be fine with the insults even if you had some actual MEAT to your comment. But you've got jack shit in this post. Come on now. Stop wasting everyone's time.

If you care about your friend there, go try and help him reach that minimum level. Until then he (and you) will receive replies appropriate to your lack of comprehension.

 

[krogers521]

People should quit throwing around labels like rocks, this is a good example of divide and conquer, who should care about a war that should have never been started. Where tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands innocent people were killed, what we should care about is war criminals being hung from the highest tree. as an example. we should all hang our heads in shame!

 

[Unkotare]

who should care about a war that should have never been started. !

According to your expert analysis? Who the fuck are you again?

 

[NYcarbineer]

who should care about a war that should have never been started. !

According to your expert analysis? Who the fuck are you again?

Was the Iraq war necessary?

 

[NYcarbineer]

I have realized that the liberals are going to do what ever it takes to taint the great victory in Iraq
Does anyone realize that war is over and it looks like we will be 100% gone in 6 months?
That there is a republic in place?
and that women vote and hold office?
I had no idea that the liberal media and there cock suckers would go to the level they have to make the troops look bad and make the success they fought hard for look like, well ask Drock and that crew
I dont even know how to explain it
DOES ANYBODY CARE WE WON?

What exactly did we win? A generation of traumatic head injuries?

and that women vote and hold office?

I'm sorry, I didn't get the memo - we went to Iraq to advance women's rights? That's funny. I don't recall either the Democrats or the Republicans lamenting about the rights of women in Iraq prior to the time we bombed them.


Its funny how when you start dropping bombs on people - all of a sudden, their social issues become so damn important. Who gives a fuck how many women are raped and never hold office in Africa's waring nations? it doesn't matter - we aren't bombing Congo, so fuck the people there. When we BOMB you THEN we'll give a shit - until then - FUCK YOU *******


Do you wanna know how many Americans gave a shit about how women were treated in Afghanistan before we started bombing them?

'Liberating' the Iraqs, women's rights, democracy, all that crap the pro-war right started talking up only became important to them after the WMD thing turned out to be bullshit.

You notice now how the same crowd has broadly OPPOSED 'liberating' the Libyan people, bringing them democracy, women's rights, etc.?

They are as transparent as a pane of glass.

 

[MikeK]

Condi was protecting classified information
The yellow cake was discovered by US troops after the 2003 US invasion of Iraq at the Tuwaitha Nuclear Research Facility south of Baghdad, and was placed under the control of the International Atomic Energy Agency."
Evidence of WMDs presence in Iraq. - a knol by Luis T. Puig

You are clinging tenaciously to a web of lies. Again, go here and start unweaving it: snopes.com: Yellowcake Uranium Removed from Iraq

There was no WMD program. There were no WMDs. Any type of WMD-related materia found in Iraq were remnants and vestiges of the pre-1991 hostility with Iran, including chemicals we provided. There was no Al Qaeda in Iraq. Bush is a war criminal. So is Cheney. So is Condoleeza Rice. So are many member of the Bush Administration.

Learn the truth!

None of that matters. The Plain fact is Saddam went on letting us believe he still had them. He denied in Public, but blocked inspections and played games that led most of the worlds Intel Community to believe he was still hiding something. He played cat and mouse and the Cat called the Bluff. Had he fully cooperated with the Inspections, and not played any games, Bush would not have been able to use WMD as a reason to go into Iraq.

[...]

He wasn't playing cat & mouse.

The Bush Administration had more than sufficient covert and overt intelligence to be absolutely certain there was no significant weaponry in Iraq. The purpose of all of that back & forth dialogue was to reinforce the false claim about WMDs. Bush knew that Hussein had enemies, such as Iran, and for that reason he could not openly admit we had destroyed his military integrity and he was virtually defenseless. Thus all the bravado about, "The mother of all wars," etc.

Bush knew exactliy what he was doing. And if they ever get him in the Hague and try him for his war crimes the investigation will prove it. He has the blood of almost five thousand Americans on his hands, as well as that of hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis, including women and children, and he's directly responsible for the ruin of our economy.

He deserves to be imprisoned for the rest of his life.

 

[Unkotare]

who should care about a war that should have never been started. !

According to your expert analysis? Who the fuck are you again?

Was the Iraq war necessary?

Yes it was.

 

[flacaltenn]

Londoner:

I don't see anything NEW here that I haven't heard on "right wing talk radio". So what if the US has a bad track record of picking convienient volatile fools?

....

I think you make good points about Clinton and the Dems being true partners in the War. Regime change in Iraq was a Clinton policy, and it is relatively benign compared to the Carter Doctrine where the US openly declared that it would use military force to protect its access to oil. I think we tend underestimate the ways in which US intervention has lead to blowback. I think by focusing exclusively on Hussein's aggression, and not mentioning the long history of British colonialism followed by US and Soviet intervention in the region, we lose the necessary context for understanding (and perhaps) preventing blowback. I think it is naive to claim that the US is civilizing/saving/protecting the world from barbarians like Hussein (who, irony of ironies, thrives in a world where superpowers install brutal dictators like Hussein because these monsters are both willing and strong enough to protect the interests of the superpower).

Here is my wish. Why can't we just admit that life is a jungle, and bad stuff happens, sometimes because of us. Why does history - as written by the winners - have to be narrated with such self-serving garbage about fairness and freedom and humanitarian blah blah? What's wrong if we have blood in our gas tank, or if we have to play hardball in a region? Life is a bitch; go to the plains of Africa. Living things eat other living things. Superpowers are no different despite their press clippings. Regardless, I think its possible that Hussein's aggression, though absolutely real, was used as a context for an intervention that had nothing to do with his relative danger to the American homeland. The US had/has a much bigger problem: China and India are here - and their appetite for the black stuff is going up, way up. So we're doing what all powerful nations do: fighting for control over the resources that make the world go round.

(And yes, sometimes the subjects of control - that natives - take action and fight back - taking innocent lives)

Let's call a spade a spade. Britain wasn't on some grand civilizing mission, saving India - it was there for the salt. That's what capital does. It goes wherever it needs to go, and it occasionally spills blood. The US is like any other big powerful animal that needs to feed. I say have thy feast and be done with it! but please stop telling me how good you are. That insults my intelligence. (Surely you remember Michael soliciting Fredo's confession?)

Here's the problem you sanctimonious meatpie..

I can no more divorce myself from the evil bad decisions of my country than you can of yours. For me the GREATER mistake was the 12 years of locking down Iraq and bombing then daily -- than the "war of liberation and occupation". I am MORE embarrassed by the childish food fight on this thread over Bush's decision to MAKE a decision than I am about the lies that were promulgated to cover up the choices that SOMEONE had to make.

I noticed you completely bailed and didn't even the quote the part where I explained about the exact decision that BOTH the US and GB had to make in 2001. None of flaming partisians on this board picked up on that either. But the choice was to let Saddam out of containment or take the bastard down. Until one is prepared to weigh in on which they wanted -- they have NO -- ZERO credibility arguing about the results.

((For the record -- I was clearly in favor of lifting the sanctions and slowly renormalizing their worldly credentials -- until 9/11. The diff was Iraq's potential to extract vengeance by siding with militant factions and providing FUTURE support and haven. NOT anything that I could derive from history. So YES -- I supported Bush's/Blair's decision even WITH the wrongheaded justifications))

As for this "blood for oil" stinking herring. I guess you missed the part where the US and GB put a 14 year EMBARGO on Iraqi oil.. And let that sit in place WAY longer than other allies wished to tolerate their loss of oil. With the exception of the defense of Kuwait, there has NEVER BEEN a quid pro quo of life for oil. If I missed it -- then please tell me where my free, reduced cost oil is stored. And it's a chuckle to state the England went all the way to India for salt when your puny little island is surrounded by NOTHING but salt.

Take that Picadilly -- and ponder the purpose of your rants..

 

[NYcarbineer]

According to your expert analysis? Who the fuck are you again?

Was the Iraq war necessary?

Yes it was.

Why? Was Saddam more dangerous than the Soviet Union was for the 50 years of the Cold War?

 

[NYcarbineer]

[As for this "blood for oil" stinking herring. I guess you missed the part where the US and GB put a 14 year EMBARGO on Iraqi oil.. And let that sit in place WAY longer than other allies wished to tolerate their loss of oil. With the exception of the defense of Kuwait, there has NEVER BEEN a quid pro quo of life for oil. If I missed it -- then please tell me where my free, reduced cost oil is stored. And it's a chuckle to state the England went all the way to India for salt when your puny little island is surrounded by NOTHING but salt.

Take that Picadilly -- and ponder the purpose of your rants..

George Bush Sr. cites the vital interest in invading Iraq, Sep. 1990:

Iraq itself controls some 10 percent of the world's proven oil reserves. Iraq plus Kuwait controls twice that. An Iraq permitted to swallow Kuwait would have the economic and military power, as well as the arrogance, to intimidate and coerce its neighbors—neighbors who control the lion's share of the world's remaining oil reserves. We cannot permit a resource so vital to be dominated by one so ruthless.

Blood for oil, unequivocally, indisputably.

 

[Unkotare]

Was the Iraq war necessary?

Yes it was.

Why? Was Saddam more dangerous than the Soviet Union was for the 50 years of the Cold War?

In some ways yes, but the better question is if we could have prevented the Soviet threat from becoming what it did, wouldn't that have been worth it?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Yes it was.

Why? Was Saddam more dangerous than the Soviet Union was for the 50 years of the Cold War?

In some ways yes, but the better question is if we could have prevented the Soviet threat from becoming what it did, wouldn't that have been worth it?

You would have preferred an invasion of the Soviet Union at some point in the past compared to how the Cold War eventually played out?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Yes it was.

Why? Was Saddam more dangerous than the Soviet Union was for the 50 years of the Cold War?

In some ways yes, but the better question is if we could have prevented the Soviet threat from becoming what it did, wouldn't that have been worth it?

In some ways? And what would those ways be?

 

[flacaltenn]

[As for this "blood for oil" stinking herring. I guess you missed the part where the US and GB put a 14 year EMBARGO on Iraqi oil.. And let that sit in place WAY longer than other allies wished to tolerate their loss of oil. With the exception of the defense of Kuwait, there has NEVER BEEN a quid pro quo of life for oil. If I missed it -- then please tell me where my free, reduced cost oil is stored. And it's a chuckle to state the England went all the way to India for salt when your puny little island is surrounded by NOTHING but salt.

Take that Picadilly -- and ponder the purpose of your rants..

George Bush Sr. cites the vital interest in invading Iraq, Sep. 1990:

Iraq itself controls some 10 percent of the world's proven oil reserves. Iraq plus Kuwait controls twice that. An Iraq permitted to swallow Kuwait would have the economic and military power, as well as the arrogance, to intimidate and coerce its neighbors—neighbors who control the lion's share of the world's remaining oil reserves. We cannot permit a resource so vital to be dominated by one so ruthless.

Blood for oil, unequivocally, indisputably.

I said NYCarbo --- "with the exception of the defense of Kuwait".. Care to play again?

I'm a little sensitive about the undeserved overuse of this leftist canard. Especially when it was pulled out of the deck to describe our interests in Afghanistan..