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

[CurveLight]

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.

That's some seriously disturbing anti-Semitism.

 

[The Rabbi]

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.

Ah changing the goal posts I see. Good strategy when the actual answer would mean defeat.
Your definition of theocracy does not describe Iraq in the least. It does describe Iran and the Vatican though.
Keep guessing.

 

[CurveLight]

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.

Ah changing the goal posts I see. Good strategy when the actual answer would mean defeat.
Your definition of theocracy does not describe Iraq in the least. It does describe Iran and the Vatican though.
Keep guessing.

There is no guessing as you have demonstrated your affinity for ignoring pertinent information. A Theocracy is subject to religious authority and iraq's constitution states Islam is a fundamental source of its legislation. That is what separates it from an official religion of a State. X nation can have Y as its official religion but that doesn't mean that nation is governed by anything found within that religion. That is not the case with iraq as we can all clearly see it states it is a nation subject to religious authority by its legislation being fundamentally sourced from Islam. Now dance some more or man up.

 

[The Rabbi]

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.

Ah changing the goal posts I see. Good strategy when the actual answer would mean defeat.
Your definition of theocracy does not describe Iraq in the least. It does describe Iran and the Vatican though.
Keep guessing.

There is no guessing as you have demonstrated your affinity for ignoring pertinent information. A Theocracy is subject to religious authority and iraq's constitution states Islam is a fundamental source of its legislation. That is what separates it from an official religion of a State. X nation can have Y as its official religion but that doesn't mean that nation is governed by anything found within that religion. That is not the case with iraq as we can all clearly see it states it is a nation subject to religious authority by its legislation being fundamentally sourced from Islam. Now dance some more or man up.

What religious authority is Iraq subject to? It is no different than saying hte U.S. is a Christian nation (regardless of whether that is true or not, many people say it).
Vatican City is subject to the religious authoirty of the Pope. Iran is subject to the religious authority of the clerics. Iraq has no such institution.
You are grasping at straws here.

 

[CurveLight]

Ah changing the goal posts I see. Good strategy when the actual answer would mean defeat.
Your definition of theocracy does not describe Iraq in the least. It does describe Iran and the Vatican though.
Keep guessing.

There is no guessing as you have demonstrated your affinity for ignoring pertinent information. A Theocracy is subject to religious authority and iraq's constitution states Islam is a fundamental source of its legislation. That is what separates it from an official religion of a State. X nation can have Y as its official religion but that doesn't mean that nation is governed by anything found within that religion. That is not the case with iraq as we can all clearly see it states it is a nation subject to religious authority by its legislation being fundamentally sourced from Islam. Now dance some more or man up.

What religious authority is Iraq subject to? It is no different than saying hte U.S. is a Christian nation (regardless of whether that is true or not, many people say it).
Vatican City is subject to the religious authoirty of the Pope. Iran is subject to the religious authority of the clerics. Iraq has no such institution.
You are grasping at straws here.

Why do you keep ignoring the Iraq constitution says islam is a fundamental source of its legislation? Did you also ignore how it says no law that violates islam may be passed?

There is nothing in the US Constitution stating the bible is a fundamental source of legislation.

I really don't have the patience to deal with people like you.

 

[Polk]

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.

Except that the entire government of Iraq is filled with Iranian loyalists.

 

[Si modo]

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.

Except that the entire government of Iraq is filled with Iranian loyalists.

Support that claim with something of substance.

 

[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.

Except that the entire government of Iraq is filled with Iranian loyalists.

Even IF that is true, so what? Do you really want us to believe we invaded and occupied iraq and afghanistan to give iran de facto control of iraq? Do you think it's an accident we have set up permanent military bases on each side of iran? Do you realize Iran has always been one of the major targets?

 

[Polk]

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

Except that the entire government of Iraq is filled with Iranian loyalists.

Support that claim with something of substance.

Maliki spent large portions of his time in exile in Tehran.
The largest parties in the governing coalition are Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq (who's current and former leaders lived in exile in Tehran and organized pro-Iran militia movements during the Iran-Iraq War), the Badr Organization (military arm of the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq and also a pro-Iran militia movement during the Iran-Iraq War), and the Islamic Dawa Party (Maliki's personal party, which supported the Iranian Revolution, is funded by the Iranian government, and has committed terrorist attacks which have killed Americans).

 

[Si modo]

Except that the entire government of Iraq is filled with Iranian loyalists.

Support that claim with something of substance.

Maliki spent large portions of his time in exile in Tehran.
The largest parties in the governing coalition are Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq (who's current and former leaders lived in exile in Tehran and organized pro-Iran militia movements during the Iran-Iraq War), the Badr Organization (military arm of the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq and also a pro-Iran militia movement during the Iran-Iraq War), and the Islamic Dawa Party (Maliki's personal party, which supported the Iranian Revolution, is funded by the Iranian government, and has committed terrorist attacks which have killed Americans).

Ummm. Your words? I asked for something of substance. Support your claim that the entire government of Iraq is filled with Iranian loyalists.

 

[Polk]

Support that claim with something of substance.

Maliki spent large portions of his time in exile in Tehran.
The largest parties in the governing coalition are Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq (who's current and former leaders lived in exile in Tehran and organized pro-Iran militia movements during the Iran-Iraq War), the Badr Organization (military arm of the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq and also a pro-Iran militia movement during the Iran-Iraq War), and the Islamic Dawa Party (Maliki's personal party, which supported the Iranian Revolution, is funded by the Iranian government, and has committed terrorist attacks which have killed Americans).

Ummm. Your words? I asked for something of substance. Support your claim that the entire government of Iraq is filled with Iranian loyalists.

Everything I said is factual.

Maliki spend a large portion of his time in exile in Tehran: Leader Description

ISCI/Badr's Iran ties:
Sayed
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/obituaries/politics-obituaries/6100739/Abdul-Aziz-al-Hakim.html
IRAQ: Militia Groups - Council on Foreign Relations

Dawa's involvement in terrorist attacks against Americans:
frontline: target america: terrorist attacks on americans, 1979-1988

Dawa's ties to Iran (and more of a general primer overall):
Understanding the Iran Crisis - Council on Foreign Relations

 

[The Rabbi]

There is no guessing as you have demonstrated your affinity for ignoring pertinent information. A Theocracy is subject to religious authority and iraq's constitution states Islam is a fundamental source of its legislation. That is what separates it from an official religion of a State. X nation can have Y as its official religion but that doesn't mean that nation is governed by anything found within that religion. That is not the case with iraq as we can all clearly see it states it is a nation subject to religious authority by its legislation being fundamentally sourced from Islam. Now dance some more or man up.

What religious authority is Iraq subject to? It is no different than saying hte U.S. is a Christian nation (regardless of whether that is true or not, many people say it).
Vatican City is subject to the religious authoirty of the Pope. Iran is subject to the religious authority of the clerics. Iraq has no such institution.
You are grasping at straws here.

Why do you keep ignoring the Iraq constitution says islam is a fundamental source of its legislation? Did you also ignore how it says no law that violates islam may be passed?

There is nothing in the US Constitution stating the bible is a fundamental source of legislation.

I really don't have the patience to deal with people like you.

You won't answer the question because to answer it is to reveal you are wrong. Iraq is not ruled by any religious body. Islam is the source of law in Iraq about as much as Protestant Christianity is to the U.S., lack of mention of it notwithstanding.

 

[CurveLight]

Maliki spent large portions of his time in exile in Tehran.
The largest parties in the governing coalition are Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq (who's current and former leaders lived in exile in Tehran and organized pro-Iran militia movements during the Iran-Iraq War), the Badr Organization (military arm of the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq and also a pro-Iran militia movement during the Iran-Iraq War), and the Islamic Dawa Party (Maliki's personal party, which supported the Iranian Revolution, is funded by the Iranian government, and has committed terrorist attacks which have killed Americans).

Ummm. Your words? I asked for something of substance. Support your claim that the entire government of Iraq is filled with Iranian loyalists.

Everything I said is factual.

Maliki spend a large portion of his time in exile in Tehran: Leader Description

ISCI/Badr's Iran ties:
Sayed
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/obituaries/politics-obituaries/6100739/Abdul-Aziz-al-Hakim.html
IRAQ: Militia Groups - Council on Foreign Relations

Dawa's involvement in terrorist attacks against Americans:
frontline: target america: terrorist attacks on americans, 1979-1988

Dawa's ties to Iran (and more of a general primer overall):
Understanding the Iran Crisis - Council on Foreign Relations

You're citing basically the same people who swindled america into invading iraq as evidence iran is doing terrorism against americans in iraq. There is nothing there showing iraq's government is under any influence from iran.

 

[Varth Dader]

You won't answer the question because to answer it is to reveal you are wrong. Iraq is not ruled by any religious body. Islam is the source of law in Iraq about as much as Protestant Christianity is to the U.S., lack of mention of it notwithstanding.

Lack of mention of it notwithstanding?

That's the whole point!

I'd say the source of law in the US is witchcraft.

Lack of mention of it in the Constitution notwithstanding.

 

[CurveLight]

You won't answer the question because to answer it is to reveal you are wrong. Iraq is not ruled by any religious body. Islam is the source of law in Iraq about as much as Protestant Christianity is to the U.S., lack of mention of it notwithstanding.

Lack of mention of it notwithstanding?

That's the whole point!

I'd say the source of law in the US is witchcraft.

Lack of mention of it in the Constitution notwithstanding.

He completely ignored the fact Iraq's Constitution clearly states Islam is a "fundamental source" of its legislation.

 

[The Rabbi]

You won't answer the question because to answer it is to reveal you are wrong. Iraq is not ruled by any religious body. Islam is the source of law in Iraq about as much as Protestant Christianity is to the U.S., lack of mention of it notwithstanding.

Lack of mention of it notwithstanding?

That's the whole point!

I'd say the source of law in the US is witchcraft.

Lack of mention of it in the Constitution notwithstanding.

He completely ignored the fact Iraq's Constitution clearly states Islam is a "fundamental source" of its legislation.

And "our Creator" is the source of American law. Your point?
As to VArth Dader's stupid point: if he could show that the Founders practiced witchcraft, that basic tenets of witchcraft showed up in their other writings, that their world view was colored by witchcraft, he would have a point.
But since he can't, while the connection with protestant Christianity can be demonstrated, my point is entirely valid.

So do you understand the difference yet between the Vatican and Iran, where clerics control the law-making process, versus the United States and Iraq, where they dont?

 

[SFC Ollie]

We and the Iraqi people have won.

No news is good News

You won't read it in the morning paper or see it on the evening news, but the U.S. military has dramatically - and perhaps irreversibly - turned the corner in Iraq, as the nonpartisan Brookings Institution details in it's Iraq index:

* Iraq rates forth in the region in political freedom, behind Israel, Lebanon, and Morocco.

* Under Saddam Hussein, there were no commercial TV stations and no independent newspapers; by 2006 there were 54 commercial TV stations and 268 Independent newspapers and magazines.

*Pre-war Iraq had just 833,000 telephone subscribers; today there are 17.7 million cellular and 1.3 million land line phone subscribers.

* Attacks on energy installations and personnel have fallen from 30 per month in late 2004 to one per month in 2009.

* The size of Iraqs security force has grown from 30,000 in mid 2003 to 589,000 in late 2008.

* Monthly U.S. troop fatalities that once were as high as 137 now are in the single digits and low teens.

Iraq Index - Saban Center for Middle East Policy - - Brookings Institution

 

[CurveLight]

Lack of mention of it notwithstanding?

That's the whole point!

I'd say the source of law in the US is witchcraft.

Lack of mention of it in the Constitution notwithstanding.

He completely ignored the fact Iraq's Constitution clearly states Islam is a "fundamental source" of its legislation.

And "our Creator" is the source of American law. Your point?
As to VArth Dader's stupid point: if he could show that the Founders practiced witchcraft, that basic tenets of witchcraft showed up in their other writings, that their world view was colored by witchcraft, he would have a point.
But since he can't, while the connection with protestant Christianity can be demonstrated, my point is entirely valid.

So do you understand the difference yet between the Vatican and Iran, where clerics control the law-making process, versus the United States and Iraq, where they dont?

Where in our Constitution does it say anything about any religious text being the source of our legislation?

Yet again you completely ignored the relevant information. I'm not playing this game with you.

 

[CurveLight]

We and the Iraqi people have won.

No news is good News

You won't read it in the morning paper or see it on the evening news, but the U.S. military has dramatically - and perhaps irreversibly - turned the corner in Iraq, as the nonpartisan Brookings Institution details in it's Iraq index:

* Iraq rates forth in the region in political freedom, behind Israel, Lebanon, and Morocco.

* Under Saddam Hussein, there were no commercial TV stations and no independent newspapers; by 2006 there were 54 commercial TV stations and 268 Independent newspapers and magazines.

*Pre-war Iraq had just 833,000 telephone subscribers; today there are 17.7 million cellular and 1.3 million land line phone subscribers.

* Attacks on energy installations and personnel have fallen from 30 per month in late 2004 to one per month in 2009.

* The size of Iraqs security force has grown from 30,000 in mid 2003 to 589,000 in late 2008.

* Monthly U.S. troop fatalities that once were as high as 137 now are in the single digits and low teens.

Iraq Index - Saban Center for Middle East Policy - - Brookings Institution

That can easily be translated as a desperate attempt to try and justify a completely optional invasion and occupation. It's understandable as some must find a reason or justification for the many many sacrifices. But that dog won't hunt.

 

[The Rabbi]

He completely ignored the fact Iraq's Constitution clearly states Islam is a "fundamental source" of its legislation.

And "our Creator" is the source of American law. Your point?
As to VArth Dader's stupid point: if he could show that the Founders practiced witchcraft, that basic tenets of witchcraft showed up in their other writings, that their world view was colored by witchcraft, he would have a point.
But since he can't, while the connection with protestant Christianity can be demonstrated, my point is entirely valid.

So do you understand the difference yet between the Vatican and Iran, where clerics control the law-making process, versus the United States and Iraq, where they dont?

Where in our Constitution does it say anything about any religious text being the source of our legislation?

Yet again you completely ignored the relevant information. I'm not playing this game with you.

No, because you if you do you lose.
Do you understand the difference yet between the Vatican and Iran, where clerics control the political process, and the U.S. and Iraq, where they don't?
You won't answer the question because you know the answer shows the truth.