Does anyone care we won the war in IRAQ?

[Unkotare]

[

BTW, how many casualties do you estimate would have occurred in a WWIII with the Soviet Union?

A war between the US and the USSR would not necessarily been part of a world war.

 

[idb]

By allowing those people the chance, is it not what our mission was?
By that does it not make it a success?
I have been saying that in 100 different ways
I agree,
thank you

You've been flopping about like a landed fish JRK, I've hardly read a consistent, coherent argument from you.

That's because you only see what you want to see.

Yep, and I would love to see a consistent, coherent argument.

 

[Unkotare]

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?

I think it's great that we won. But does it really matter? That is the question we must ask ourselves. Was it worth the cost in American casualties and taxpayer money? If we ever can call Afghanistan a win, will it really matter? If Saddam was still there, would it matter? Would it have any effect on the US or the average American? To me, the answer to all those questions is a resounding "no", and I actually supported our involvement. Looking back though, I just can't see where it was worth it.

Then you're not paying attention.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Is this sarcasm or are you getting the words liberal and conservative mixed up. It's hard to tell.

I cannot respond until I understand the question.
There is no doubt what my thread sates
this is why the question confuses me

Your thread 'sates'?

Your thread sates your desire to be a troll. Like every one of your threads.

I never thought I'd see a poster dumber than the Rabbi on here, but,

congratulations.

 

[NYcarbineer]

[

BTW, how many casualties do you estimate would have occurred in a WWIII with the Soviet Union?

A war between the US and the USSR would not necessarily been part of a world war.

Ok, then how many casualties do you estimate would have occurred in a war between the US and the Soviet Union?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Are you under the impression that every situation is the same, and that every situation suggests the same response? Are you really that thick-headed?

You're the one who proclaimed that millions dying in a foreign country were a vital national interest of the US, sufficient to warrant our intervening militarily to try to prevent it.

And so they are. That doesn't mean every situation calls for the same response, meathead. President Bush saved the lives of many, many millions of people in Africa without the use of military force. Try putting some water on that one brain cell and see if it will divide.

Oh, so war isn't necessarily NECESSARY to deal with a situation? And yet, starting a war with the Soviet Union was necessary?

 

[NYcarbineer]

So...why the lies from the administration about the reasons to invade?.

There were no "lies."

Colin Powell went to the UN with fake pictures of WMD's that did not exist. If that is not lying,

by all means, tell us the word you think best describes it.

 

[Unkotare]

[

BTW, how many casualties do you estimate would have occurred in a WWIII with the Soviet Union?

A war between the US and the USSR would not necessarily been part of a world war.

Ok, then how many casualties do you estimate would have occurred in a war between the US and the Soviet Union?

My alternate reality calculator is broken just now, but I'm pretty sure it would come in under 60 million.

 

[Unkotare]

So...why the lies from the administration about the reasons to invade?.

There were no "lies."

Colin Powell went to the UN with fake pictures of WMD's that did not exist. .

No, he did not.

 

[Unkotare]

You're the one who proclaimed that millions dying in a foreign country were a vital national interest of the US, sufficient to warrant our intervening militarily to try to prevent it.

And so they are. That doesn't mean every situation calls for the same response, meathead. President Bush saved the lives of many, many millions of people in Africa without the use of military force. Try putting some water on that one brain cell and see if it will divide.

Oh, so war isn't necessarily NECESSARY to deal with a situation? ?

Not with every situation. Have you not been paying attention, meathead?

 

[JRK]

BUt that wasn't our legal justificiation. Our justification was to get rid of WMD's that weren't actually there. He didn't have weapons of mass destruction.

The end result was that we've tried to impose modern forms of government on people who have no use for them.

What we should be doing is establishing energy independence.

Another liberal myth
all though the stock piles the UN stated Saddam had were never found
There was over 500 illegal munitions found that meet the criteria of a WMD
there fore the war was a legal war
It can also be said the 550 metric tons of yellow cake sold to Canada in 2008 was sufficient to make the war legal
it is sort of a double whammy
There is no grey area here
The war as congress mandated it was legal, this was decided in the courts before we invaded

I'm just curious. How many times would you have to be shown that what you're claiming has been debunked as horseshit before you'd stop posting it?

your debunking this, not me
Defense.gov News Article: Munitions Found in Iraq Meet WMD Criteria, Official Says
from the DOD to congress, DEBUNK THAT
WASHINGTON, June 29, 2006 – The 500 munitions discovered throughout Iraq since 2003 and discussed in a National Ground Intelligence Center report meet the criteria of weapons of mass destruction, the center's commander said here today.
"These are chemical weapons as defined under the Chemical Weapons Convention, and yes ... they do constitute weapons of mass destruction," Army Col. John Chu told the House Armed Services Committee.

You owe me apology, stop with lies

And as far the yellow cake goes

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080707/pl_afp/usiraqcanadauraniumnuclear_080707154601

Quote, July 7, 2008: "At Iraq's request, the US military this year transferred hundreds of metric tons of yellowcake uranium from Iraq to Canada in a secret, weeks-long operation, a Pentagon spokesman said Monday.

The 550 metric tons of uranium, which was sold to a Canadian company, was moved by truck convoy to Baghdad's "Green Zone," then flown by military aircraft to a third country where it was put on a ship for Canada, said Bryan Whitman, the spokesman.

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

 

[JRK]

You've been flopping about like a landed fish JRK, I've hardly read a consistent, coherent argument from you.

That's because you only see what you want to see.

Yep, and I would love to see a consistent, coherent argument.

4,000 women run for office in Iraq - CNN
Four thousand women are running for office in Iraq's provincial elections Saturday, and many of them will be guaranteed seats under an electoral quota system.

Regardless of the votes their candidates receive, parties are required to give every third seat to a woman, according to a report this week from the International Crisis Group.

The ultimate share of seats held by women will depend on the distribution of votes among parties, the report said.

Some women candidates say these elections -- only the second provincial elections since the fall of Saddam Hussein -- are a chance to improve their standing in Iraqi society.

Defense.gov News Article: Munitions Found in Iraq Meet WMD Criteria, Official Says
WASHINGTON, June 29, 2006 – The 500 munitions discovered throughout Iraq since 2003 and discussed in a National Ground Intelligence Center report meet the criteria of weapons of mass destruction, the center's commander said here today.
"These are chemical weapons as defined under the Chemical Weapons Convention, and yes ... they do constitute weapons of mass destruction," Army Col. John Chu told the House Armed Services Committee.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080707/pl_afp/usiraqcanadauraniumnuclear_080707154601

Quote, July 7, 2008: "At Iraq's request, the US military this year transferred hundreds of metric tons of yellowcake uranium from Iraq to Canada in a secret, weeks-long operation, a Pentagon spokesman said Monday.

The 550 metric tons of uranium, which was sold to a Canadian company, was moved by truck convoy to Baghdad's "Green Zone," then flown by military aircraft to a third country where it was put on a ship for Canada, said Bryan Whitman, the spokesman.

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."

Is that coherent enough for you?
now sense discussing these matters with the spam masters has lost its place with me
go find a group of Marines and explain to them your feelings on there success
I have nothing else to say to the children who post on this message board

 

[G.T.]

http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/186379-this-country-is-in-deep-trouble.html

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...how-do-we-get-the-liberal-to-debate-them.html

http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/186220-does-anyone-care-we-won-the-war-in-iraq.html

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...nue-to-claim-the-iraqi-war-was-a-failure.html

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...s-become-the-mountain-of-mis-information.html

http://www.usmessageboard.com/general/186319-i-am-really-sorry-but-i-have-got-to-ask.html

 

[JRK]

http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/186379-this-country-is-in-deep-trouble.html

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...how-do-we-get-the-liberal-to-debate-them.html

http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/186220-does-anyone-care-we-won-the-war-in-iraq.html

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...nue-to-claim-the-iraqi-war-was-a-failure.html

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...s-become-the-mountain-of-mis-information.html

http://www.usmessageboard.com/general/186319-i-am-really-sorry-but-i-have-got-to-ask.html

Not sure what your trying to prove, but you made the ignore list
congrats

 

[G.T.]

The point is you're making the same lame thread over and over and over again, and my post was to point that out for the mods to see. You're flooding/spamming, is what it's called in "message board etiquette."

 

[JRK]

The point is you're making the same lame thread over and over and over again, and my post was to point that out for the mods to see. You're flooding/spamming, is what it's called in "message board etiquette."

I have no reason to spam anything
each thread is a different subject and yes I am amazed at the mind set of many of these people who respond to these messages

Especially about Iraq and the mountain of mis information that has flooded this message board

 

[Dr.Drock]

Oh, and just for the record for those who might care,

The new Iraqi Constitution established an Islamic theocracy.

That's what's confusing.

A lot of the muslim haters, saying we should live in fear from Hezbollah terrorists are the ones screaming the loudest in favor of spreading Islam and installing agents with Hezbollah ties.

 

[G.T.]

The point is you're making the same lame thread over and over and over again, and my post was to point that out for the mods to see. You're flooding/spamming, is what it's called in "message board etiquette."

I have no reason to spam anything
each thread is a different subject and yes I am amazed at the mind set of many of these people who respond to these messages

Especially about Iraq and the mountain of mis information that has flooded this message board

no, the subjects have all been the same.
rehash the iraq meme that you have, and call liberals stupid.

you're spamming, you're making the same thread over and over and over. if you have more to say about iraq, keep it to one iraq thread. instead, you're bringing it back up thread after thread, which is redundant and down-right obsessive.

 

[Dr.Drock]

The point is you're making the same lame thread over and over and over again, and my post was to point that out for the mods to see. You're flooding/spamming, is what it's called in "message board etiquette."

I have no reason to spam anything
each thread is a different subject and yes I am amazed at the mind set of many of these people who respond to these messages

Especially about Iraq and the mountain of mis information that has flooded this message board

no, the subjects have all been the same.
rehash the iraq meme that you have, and call liberals stupid.

you're spamming, you're making the same thread over and over and over. if you have more to say about iraq, keep it to one iraq thread. instead, you're bringing it back up thread after thread, which is redundant and down-right obsessive.

Once all his talking points get debunked in one thread, he starts another in hopes ppl will forget about the last one.

 

[Full-Auto]

The point is you're making the same lame thread over and over and over again, and my post was to point that out for the mods to see. You're flooding/spamming, is what it's called in "message board etiquette."

I have no reason to spam anything
each thread is a different subject and yes I am amazed at the mind set of many of these people who respond to these messages

Especially about Iraq and the mountain of mis information that has flooded this message board

no, the subjects have all been the same.
rehash the iraq meme that you have, and call liberals stupid.

you're spamming, you're making the same thread over and over and over. if you have more to say about iraq, keep it to one iraq thread. instead, you're bringing it back up thread after thread, which is redundant and down-right obsessive.

Tissue?