Simple Question: Did we (USA) win Iraq War?

[CurveLight]

There was a definition of victory given in this very thread. All those goals and objectives were met.
What is ludicrous is the Left trying still to snatch defeat out of the jaws of victory. They tried so hard during the war itself that I guess it is now habit.
You can argue all day long whether it was worth it or not. You can argue the same about WW1 and WW2. But it doesn't change teh facts on the ground.

Where is the definition of victory? I'm curious to see how "installing an islamic theocracy" fits in that definition. Is it already time to say "It's been posted so go find it yourself." Can you give a definition in your own words?

It was in the first post made here.
Is Iraq an "Islamic theocracy"?? By that measure Italy is a Catholic theocracy.

The op does not have a definition of victory. It has a half-assed dishonest laundry list that looks like it was put together by a 3rd grade class. As suspected, you cannot give a definition of victory in your own terms.

Iraq is an Islamic theocracy as defined by its own Constitution. Why do you deny this? The best you can do is try to deflect with Italy? Also, it wouldn't be a "Catholic" theocracy but a Christian one. Catholic is not a religion......it is a denomination of Christianity. Do I dare ask how in the joogles you compare italy to iraq?


ARE YOU AWARE VATICAN CITY IS NOT A CITY UNDER THE ITALIAN GOVERNMENT?


You look so desperate to deflect you say anything without even knowing what in the hell you are talking about.

 

[The Rabbi]

Where is the definition of victory? I'm curious to see how "installing an islamic theocracy" fits in that definition. Is it already time to say "It's been posted so go find it yourself." Can you give a definition in your own words?

It was in the first post made here.
Is Iraq an "Islamic theocracy"?? By that measure Italy is a Catholic theocracy.

The op does not have a definition of victory. It has a half-assed dishonest laundry list that looks like it was put together by a 3rd grade class. As suspected, you cannot give a definition of victory in your own terms.

Iraq is an Islamic theocracy as defined by its own Constitution. Why do you deny this? The best you can do is try to deflect with Italy? Also, it wouldn't be a "Catholic" theocracy but a Christian one. Catholic is not a religion......it is a denomination of Christianity. Do I dare ask how in the joogles you compare italy to iraq?


ARE YOU AWARE VATICAN CITY IS NOT A CITY UNDER THE ITALIAN GOVERNMENT?


You look so desperate to deflect you say anything without even knowing what in the hell you are talking about.

Dismissing valid and cogent points makes you look like a loon.
Do you understand what "theocracy" means?

 

[CurveLight]

It was in the first post made here.
Is Iraq an "Islamic theocracy"?? By that measure Italy is a Catholic theocracy.

The op does not have a definition of victory. It has a half-assed dishonest laundry list that looks like it was put together by a 3rd grade class. As suspected, you cannot give a definition of victory in your own terms.

Iraq is an Islamic theocracy as defined by its own Constitution. Why do you deny this? The best you can do is try to deflect with Italy? Also, it wouldn't be a "Catholic" theocracy but a Christian one. Catholic is not a religion......it is a denomination of Christianity. Do I dare ask how in the joogles you compare italy to iraq?


ARE YOU AWARE VATICAN CITY IS NOT A CITY UNDER THE ITALIAN GOVERNMENT?


You look so desperate to deflect you say anything without even knowing what in the hell you are talking about.

Dismissing valid and cogent points makes you look like a loon.
Do you understand what "theocracy" means?

You tried to reference Italy because of Vatican City but you didn't know VC is not under the Italian government and you want to follow that up by calling someone else a loon? Rotfl!

I know the section of the Iraq Constitution showing it is a theocracy has already been posted. You want to ignore it again? Do you really want to further embarrass yourself by trying to deny something that has been public knowledge for years? Is your next move to try and claim in a Theocracy only one religion can exist therefore Iraq cannot be a Theocracy? Aren't you tired and weary of this backwards approach? It would be so much less work and not nearly as embarrassing if you simply let the facts shape your opinions. Instead, you form your opinions out of some bizarre wish list then when proven wrong you ignore it and call other people names. Do the majority of posters on here put up with that garbage?



For the third time, please give a definition of victory in iraq in your own words. Can you? It doesn't look like you can......

 

[The Rabbi]

The op does not have a definition of victory. It has a half-assed dishonest laundry list that looks like it was put together by a 3rd grade class. As suspected, you cannot give a definition of victory in your own terms.

Iraq is an Islamic theocracy as defined by its own Constitution. Why do you deny this? The best you can do is try to deflect with Italy? Also, it wouldn't be a "Catholic" theocracy but a Christian one. Catholic is not a religion......it is a denomination of Christianity. Do I dare ask how in the joogles you compare italy to iraq?


ARE YOU AWARE VATICAN CITY IS NOT A CITY UNDER THE ITALIAN GOVERNMENT?


You look so desperate to deflect you say anything without even knowing what in the hell you are talking about.

Dismissing valid and cogent points makes you look like a loon.
Do you understand what "theocracy" means?

You tried to reference Italy because of Vatican City but you didn't know VC is not under the Italian government and you want to follow that up by calling someone else a loon? Rotfl!

I know the section of the Iraq Constitution showing it is a theocracy has already been posted. You want to ignore it again? Do you really want to further embarrass yourself by trying to deny something that has been public knowledge for years? Is your next move to try and claim in a Theocracy only one religion can exist therefore Iraq cannot be a Theocracy? Aren't you tired and weary of this backwards approach? It would be so much less work and not nearly as embarrassing if you simply let the facts shape your opinions. Instead, you form your opinions out of some bizarre wish list then when proven wrong you ignore it and call other people names. Do the majority of posters on here put up with that garbage?



For the third time, please give a definition of victory in iraq in your own words. Can you? It doesn't look like you can......

You are right: Italy has no official religion. My bad.
However Lichtenstein does, namely Catholicism. So I guess that can be the example of a theocracy now. Or Monaco.
I seriously doubt you understand the difference between theocracy and an official religion in a country.
What is wrong with the definition of victory given in the OP?

 

[CurveLight]

Dismissing valid and cogent points makes you look like a loon.
Do you understand what "theocracy" means?

You tried to reference Italy because of Vatican City but you didn't know VC is not under the Italian government and you want to follow that up by calling someone else a loon? Rotfl!

I know the section of the Iraq Constitution showing it is a theocracy has already been posted. You want to ignore it again? Do you really want to further embarrass yourself by trying to deny something that has been public knowledge for years? Is your next move to try and claim in a Theocracy only one religion can exist therefore Iraq cannot be a Theocracy? Aren't you tired and weary of this backwards approach? It would be so much less work and not nearly as embarrassing if you simply let the facts shape your opinions. Instead, you form your opinions out of some bizarre wish list then when proven wrong you ignore it and call other people names. Do the majority of posters on here put up with that garbage?



For the third time, please give a definition of victory in iraq in your own words. Can you? It doesn't look like you can......

You are right: Italy has no official religion. My bad.
However Lichtenstein does, namely Catholicism. So I guess that can be the example of a theocracy now. Or Monaco.
I seriously doubt you understand the difference between theocracy and an official religion in a country.
What is wrong with the definition of victory given in the OP?

The op does not contain a definition of victory. It has a laundry list of which the majority is not complete. For the fourth (or fifth) time, can you give a definition of victory in iraq in your own words?

Let's look at what a theocracy means:

The·oc·ra·cy *(th-kr-s&#65532

n. pl. the·oc·ra·cies

1. A government ruled by or subject to religious authority.

2. A state so governed.
theocracy - definition of theocracy by the Free Online Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia.

Now let's look at the relevant portion from the Iraq Constitution:

(from the Preamble)

"In the name of God, the most merciful, the most compassionate

We have honored the sons of Adam......"

"Acknowledging God's right over us, and in fulfillment of the call of our homeland and citizens, and in response to the call of our religious and national leaderships and the determination of our great (religious) authorities and of our leaders and reformers..."

(from Section 1 Article 2)

First: Islam is the official religion of the State and it is a fundamental source of legislation:

A. No law that contradicts the established provisions of Islam may be established.
Full Text of Iraqi Constitution - washingtonpost.com


Do you see where it says Islam is a fundamental source of legislation? Now please read the dictionary definition of a Theocracy. A State can have an Official religion without it also being a "fundamental source of legislation." By trying to deny Iraq is an Islamic theocracy via Official State religions you have simply helped prove why Iraq is an Islamic Theocracy.



Are you really going to try to claim it is simply the official religion of iraq? Is that your escape plan?

 

[HUGGY]

No, the intellectual dishonesty is from the Left, which refuses to admit the obvious. Instead of admitting that yes, we won the war in Iraq by any measure, they insist either: The war wasn't worth it (a totally different question) or It's too early to tell (which it isnt).

It is funny: The Left cannot admit they were wrong. Cannot admit they were wrong on the surge. Cannot admit we won the war. Cannot admit they have been wrong on every foreign policy question over the last 40 years.

Only a rabid moron would try to make this about left or right or east and west, up and down. Fuck you.. you war mongering asshole jew. By any rational standard what we did to Iraq was a fucking war crime. Piss on you and those in israel that promoted this fucking abomination.

How does one's religion (jew) enter your argument?

He might be a war mongerer, but I don't see how you injecting religion in this debate does anything but paint you as a racist.

If you do not subscribe to the belief that "the project for a new american century" cosigners such as Krystol and Abhrams beat the drums louder than anyone then I guess you must conclude me a racist.

The jews wanted Iraq neutralized. Oh I'm sorry...you didn't know israel is a jewish state?

 

[CurveLight]

Only a rabid moron would try to make this about left or right or east and west, up and down. Fuck you.. you war mongering asshole jew. By any rational standard what we did to Iraq was a fucking war crime. Piss on you and those in israel that promoted this fucking abomination.

How does one's religion (jew) enter your argument?

He might be a war mongerer, but I don't see how you injecting religion in this debate does anything but paint you as a racist.

If you do not subscribe to the belief that "the project for a new american century" cosigners such as Krystol and Abhrams beat the drums louder than anyone then I guess you must conclude me a racist.

The jews wanted Iraq neutralized. Oh I'm sorry...you didn't know israel is a jewish state?

The problem is trying to exploit the PNAC as representative of all Jews. It looks like anti-Semitism no matter how much spin is put on.

 

[Polk]

How the hell is handing a big chunk of land over to de facto Iranian control a win for the US?

 

[CurveLight]

How the hell is handing a big chunk of land over to de facto Iranian control a win for the US?

Iran is no where near in control of any significant portion of Iraq.

 

[The Rabbi]

You tried to reference Italy because of Vatican City but you didn't know VC is not under the Italian government and you want to follow that up by calling someone else a loon? Rotfl!

I know the section of the Iraq Constitution showing it is a theocracy has already been posted. You want to ignore it again? Do you really want to further embarrass yourself by trying to deny something that has been public knowledge for years? Is your next move to try and claim in a Theocracy only one religion can exist therefore Iraq cannot be a Theocracy? Aren't you tired and weary of this backwards approach? It would be so much less work and not nearly as embarrassing if you simply let the facts shape your opinions. Instead, you form your opinions out of some bizarre wish list then when proven wrong you ignore it and call other people names. Do the majority of posters on here put up with that garbage?



For the third time, please give a definition of victory in iraq in your own words. Can you? It doesn't look like you can......

You are right: Italy has no official religion. My bad.
However Lichtenstein does, namely Catholicism. So I guess that can be the example of a theocracy now. Or Monaco.
I seriously doubt you understand the difference between theocracy and an official religion in a country.
What is wrong with the definition of victory given in the OP?

The op does not contain a definition of victory. It has a laundry list of which the majority is not complete. For the fourth (or fifth) time, can you give a definition of victory in iraq in your own words?

Let's look at what a theocracy means:

The·oc·ra·cy *(th-kr-s&#65532

n. pl. the·oc·ra·cies

1. A government ruled by or subject to religious authority.

2. A state so governed.
theocracy - definition of theocracy by the Free Online Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia.

Now let's look at the relevant portion from the Iraq Constitution:

(from the Preamble)

"In the name of God, the most merciful, the most compassionate

We have honored the sons of Adam......"

"Acknowledging God's right over us, and in fulfillment of the call of our homeland and citizens, and in response to the call of our religious and national leaderships and the determination of our great (religious) authorities and of our leaders and reformers..."

(from Section 1 Article 2)

First: Islam is the official religion of the State and it is a fundamental source of legislation:

A. No law that contradicts the established provisions of Islam may be established.
Full Text of Iraqi Constitution - washingtonpost.com


Do you see where it says Islam is a fundamental source of legislation? Now please read the dictionary definition of a Theocracy. A State can have an Official religion without it also being a "fundamental source of legislation." By trying to deny Iraq is an Islamic theocracy via Official State religions you have simply helped prove why Iraq is an Islamic Theocracy.



Are you really going to try to claim it is simply the official religion of iraq? Is that your escape plan?

That is the case. Sorry if that doesn't meet with your preconceived notions of failure. But there you have it.
Vatican City, which you rightly bring up as an example of a theocracy, should tell you how wrong you are. Who is the head of Vatican City? The Pope. Who is the head of Iraq? Some mullah? Some cleric or other? Nope. See the difference?
Maybe you'd like to explain how this wasn't done democratically and represents the will of the people?

 

[HUGGY]

How does one's religion (jew) enter your argument?

He might be a war mongerer, but I don't see how you injecting religion in this debate does anything but paint you as a racist.

If you do not subscribe to the belief that "the project for a new american century" cosigners such as Krystol and Abhrams beat the drums louder than anyone then I guess you must conclude me a racist.

The jews wanted Iraq neutralized. Oh I'm sorry...you didn't know israel is a jewish state?

The problem is trying to exploit the PNAC as representative of all Jews. It looks like anti-Semitism no matter how much spin is put on.

I'm not concerned with what it "looks" like. One cannot in any good conscience distance the center of judaism from the remainder of the jews in the world. The amount of support of Israels war crimes is the only differentation among those not actually living in thier "homeland". Any jew that pays any tribute in gold to Israel is a participant. If the "good" jews of the world wanted to apply preassure against aparthied and mass murder they would and could. Our incestuous relationship with Israel should be ended immediately. Our forfathers warned us against foreign entanglements and one of my heros Dwight Eisenhower warned against the political military industrial complex which is fascistic at its extreme. The jews have commited geniocide .
I have no illusions that the world is not for the most part still a festering shit hole. But..somehow we must take a stand against wrong. Every time I see a filthy neo con wrap himself in our flag I want to burn it for it has been soiled. They shout how great our land of freedom is ..stolen from the natives that lived here long before us and that flag reminds me of the small pox infested blankets these good americans gave them to wrap up in. This nation was founded on fine principals and then immediately shit on by people like those in Israel that "claim" others property in the name of thier fake religion and the same manifest destiny that served as the excuse for the geniocde we commited here.

I don't give a flying fuck if the jews don't like it. We have seen this in our humanity before. I say no more. If they are such good people...prove it.

 

[The Rabbi]

Anyone suggested you seek professional help? Lately?

 

[Varth Dader]

Only a rabid moron would try to make this about left or right or east and west, up and down. Fuck you.. you war mongering asshole jew. By any rational standard what we did to Iraq was a fucking war crime. Piss on you and those in israel that promoted this fucking abomination.

How does one's religion (jew) enter your argument?

He might be a war mongerer, but I don't see how you injecting religion in this debate does anything but paint you as a racist.

If you do not subscribe to the belief that "the project for a new american century" cosigners such as Krystol and Abhrams beat the drums louder than anyone then I guess you must conclude me a racist.

The jews wanted Iraq neutralized. Oh I'm sorry...you didn't know israel is a jewish state?

You are using the same technique that allows people to paint Palestians as a group with the terrorist brush, thanks to the actions of a few.

There are lots of jews that are fighting the right fight as well. People that write for Haaretz like Amira Hass, or people like Max Blumenthal, or people that belong to tons of pro-peace pro-human rights group. Just because some people in the PNAC were jewish, doesn't mean that jews do thing X or thing Y.

 

[Wry Catcher]

It was in the first post made here.
Is Iraq an "Islamic theocracy"?? By that measure Italy is a Catholic theocracy.

The op does not have a definition of victory. It has a half-assed dishonest laundry list that looks like it was put together by a 3rd grade class. As suspected, you cannot give a definition of victory in your own terms.

Iraq is an Islamic theocracy as defined by its own Constitution. Why do you deny this? The best you can do is try to deflect with Italy? Also, it wouldn't be a "Catholic" theocracy but a Christian one. Catholic is not a religion......it is a denomination of Christianity. Do I dare ask how in the joogles you compare italy to iraq?


ARE YOU AWARE VATICAN CITY IS NOT A CITY UNDER THE ITALIAN GOVERNMENT?


You look so desperate to deflect you say anything without even knowing what in the hell you are talking about.

Dismissing valid and cogent points makes you look like a loon.
Do you understand what "theocracy" means?

Rabbi, are you Si modo or California girl in drag? If not you act much like dwiddle dumb or dwiddle dumber.

 

[The Rabbi]

The op does not have a definition of victory. It has a half-assed dishonest laundry list that looks like it was put together by a 3rd grade class. As suspected, you cannot give a definition of victory in your own terms.

Iraq is an Islamic theocracy as defined by its own Constitution. Why do you deny this? The best you can do is try to deflect with Italy? Also, it wouldn't be a "Catholic" theocracy but a Christian one. Catholic is not a religion......it is a denomination of Christianity. Do I dare ask how in the joogles you compare italy to iraq?


ARE YOU AWARE VATICAN CITY IS NOT A CITY UNDER THE ITALIAN GOVERNMENT?


You look so desperate to deflect you say anything without even knowing what in the hell you are talking about.

Dismissing valid and cogent points makes you look like a loon.
Do you understand what "theocracy" means?

Rabbi, are you Si modo or California girl in drag? If not you act much like dwiddle dumb or dwiddle dumber.

Great response. Not.
I would be happy to be in the company of thsoe two, who can form a coherent thought based on something other than Keith Olbermann talking points.
Do you recognize the difference between a theocracy like the Vatican and a state religion like in Monaco and Iraq or not?

 

[Cold Fusion38]

How does one's religion (jew) enter your argument?

He might be a war mongerer, but I don't see how you injecting religion in this debate does anything but paint you as a racist.

If you do not subscribe to the belief that "the project for a new american century" cosigners such as Krystol and Abhrams beat the drums louder than anyone then I guess you must conclude me a racist.

The jews wanted Iraq neutralized. Oh I'm sorry...you didn't know israel is a jewish state?

You are using the same technique that allows people to paint Palestians as a group with the terrorist brush, thanks to the actions of a few.

There are lots of jews that are fighting the right fight as well. People that write for Haaretz like Amira Hass, or people like Max Blumenthal, or people that belong to tons of pro-peace pro-human rights group. Just because some people in the PNAC were jewish, doesn't mean that jews do thing X or thing Y.

Certainly not ALL Jews but certainley the nation of ISRAEL!

 

[Varth Dader]

Certainly not ALL Jews but certainley the nation of ISRAEL!

Using that logic, the terrible Bush years could be blamed on all Americans, regardless of how they individually voted.

 

[JakeStarkey]

All Americans, of course, are collectively responsible for the Bush years, some more than others.

 

[CurveLight]

You are right: Italy has no official religion. My bad.
However Lichtenstein does, namely Catholicism. So I guess that can be the example of a theocracy now. Or Monaco.
I seriously doubt you understand the difference between theocracy and an official religion in a country.
What is wrong with the definition of victory given in the OP?

The op does not contain a definition of victory. It has a laundry list of which the majority is not complete. For the fourth (or fifth) time, can you give a definition of victory in iraq in your own words?

Let's look at what a theocracy means:

The·oc·ra·cy *(th-kr-s&#65532

n. pl. the·oc·ra·cies

1. A government ruled by or subject to religious authority.

2. A state so governed.
theocracy - definition of theocracy by the Free Online Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia.

Now let's look at the relevant portion from the Iraq Constitution:

(from the Preamble)

"In the name of God, the most merciful, the most compassionate

We have honored the sons of Adam......"

"Acknowledging God's right over us, and in fulfillment of the call of our homeland and citizens, and in response to the call of our religious and national leaderships and the determination of our great (religious) authorities and of our leaders and reformers..."

(from Section 1 Article 2)

First: Islam is the official religion of the State and it is a fundamental source of legislation:

A. No law that contradicts the established provisions of Islam may be established.
Full Text of Iraqi Constitution - washingtonpost.com


Do you see where it says Islam is a fundamental source of legislation? Now please read the dictionary definition of a Theocracy. A State can have an Official religion without it also being a "fundamental source of legislation." By trying to deny Iraq is an Islamic theocracy via Official State religions you have simply helped prove why Iraq is an Islamic Theocracy.



Are you really going to try to claim it is simply the official religion of iraq? Is that your escape plan?

That is the case. Sorry if that doesn't meet with your preconceived notions of failure. But there you have it.
Vatican City, which you rightly bring up as an example of a theocracy, should tell you how wrong you are. Who is the head of Vatican City? The Pope. Who is the head of Iraq? Some mullah? Some cleric or other? Nope. See the difference?
Maybe you'd like to explain how this wasn't done democratically and represents the will of the people?

Like I guessed would happen.....you completely ignored every thing that was posted. You cannot create your own personal definition of a Theocracy just to avoid admitting iraq is one.

 

[CurveLight]

Dismissing valid and cogent points makes you look like a loon.
Do you understand what "theocracy" means?

Rabbi, are you Si modo or California girl in drag? If not you act much like dwiddle dumb or dwiddle dumber.

Great response. Not.
I would be happy to be in the company of thsoe two, who can form a coherent thought based on something other than Keith Olbermann talking points.
Do you recognize the difference between a theocracy like the Vatican and a state religion like in Monaco and Iraq or not?

I posted the def and you completely ignored it then tried to write your own personal definition of a theocracy. It is you who completely fails to understand the difference. I'm dumb for even continuing this when you have already proven you willfully ignore any and all information that shows you are wrong.