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

[Cold Fusion38]

Oh and Rabbi you keep sqwaking about destroying their army like it was some kind of acheivment. THEY HAD NO ARMY!!! A couple of troops of determined GIRL SCOUTS could have toppled Iraqs army.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Samson is the voice of reason and life for Americans.

The Rabbi is the voice of death for Americans. Such reasoning has placed our troops in a zero sum environment. We will leave in the next 18 months, and the Iraqis will ally with their fellow Shi'ites, the Iranians.

America is resilient and will overcome the mistakes of the GOP and the Bush administrations. Americans will never allow those criminal cretins anywhere never the levers of power again. Notice how the Mitch McConnell pubs sigh and cry, while the Dems figure out how to make health reform happen. The issue is among the Dems, not the pubs until they repent and rejoin the fold of America centrism.

 

[The Rabbi]

Oh and Rabbi you keep sqwaking about destroying their army like it was some kind of acheivment. THEY HAD NO ARMY!!! A couple of troops of determined GIRL SCOUTS could have toppled Iraqs army.

Wow, are you fucking stupid, engaging in gross revisionism, outright lying, or just can't read? I vote all of the above:
Iraq's military capabilities in 2002 ... - Google Books

 

[The Rabbi]

Meanwhile I will continue to ask what possible metric could lead you to the conclusion that we have lost a war that saw us defeat the enemy's army, imprison their leader, take control over all their cities and install a government more to our liking. If that's defeat I want more of it.

No, I don't think the USA has "won" the war, nor do I think it will.

And I'm not happy about it, and I supported the invasion.

I believe Rumsfield's plan was to replace Saddam with a Democratic Government that would stabilize the region, and appease the US public after 9/11.

Unhappily I've begun to realize that there is no precedent for this happening, and every precedent for believing it will not ever happen. Metrics for Democracy in Iraq, if we want to stretch our imagination about the definition of democracy, is 26 years of history. Metrics for Brutal Dictatorships in Iraq (and all Islamic countries) are, practically speaking, almost the entire balance of recorded history.

So I conclude the US chances are slim to none.

And what in the world makes you think we "lost" a war that ended with U.S troops in control over every major part of Iraq and the former regime's leaders dead or in jail?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Because your revisionism will not wash, Rab. The Iraqis will ally with the Iranians the second we are out of Iraq. That will be the final seal on our loss in Iraq.

 

[The Rabbi]

This message is hidden because JakeStarkey is on your ignore list.

The most intelligent post from Jake I have seen yet.....

 

[Samson]

And what in the world makes you think we "lost" a war that ended with U.S troops in control over every major part of Iraq and the former regime's leaders dead or in jail?

Because I don't think the goal was, or is, for US troops to control Iraq.

 

[The Rabbi]

And what in the world makes you think we "lost" a war that ended with U.S troops in control over every major part of Iraq and the former regime's leaders dead or in jail?

Because I don't think the goal was, or is, for US troops to control Iraq.

What is the goal of war generally?

AUTHORIZATION- The President is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in order to--

(1) defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and

(2) enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The U.S. president has no legal authority internationally to enforce U.N. resolutions, Rab. Have you noticed that major Bush admin foreign policy wonks are not traveling internationally and haven't recently? Got any idea why?

 

[Samson]

And what in the world makes you think we "lost" a war that ended with U.S troops in control over every major part of Iraq and the former regime's leaders dead or in jail?

Because I don't think the goal was, or is, for US troops to control Iraq.

What is the goal of war generally?

AUTHORIZATION- The President is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in order to--

(1) defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and

(2) enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq.

In my opinion, the goal of war "generally" is conquest, which only describes two wars that America has fought:

1. War with Mexico
2. War with Spain

Is Iraq as much of a threat now as it was before the war? No

But has all threat been eliminated? No.

If all threat was eliminated, then there would be no US troops in Iraq. Therefore I cannot conceed Iraq is NOT a continuing threat to the national security of the USA, and the USA has NOT won the war.

I believe the definition for American victory in Iraq (or, if you prefer, when Iraq will no longer be a threat to US security) will be the same as it has been for Victory in Germany and Victory in Japan: The establishment of Legitamate Democracies.

The probability of this happening is very small.

 

[The Rabbi]

Because I don't think the goal was, or is, for US troops to control Iraq.

What is the goal of war generally?

AUTHORIZATION- The President is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in order to--

(1) defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and

(2) enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq.

In my opinion, the goal of war "generally" is conquest, which only describes two wars that America has fought:

1. War with Mexico
2. War with Spain

Is Iraq as much of a threat now as it was before the war? No

But has all threat been eliminated? No.

If all threat was eliminated, then there would be no US troops in Iraq. Therefore I cannot conceed Iraq is NOT a continuing threat to the national security of the USA, and the USA has NOT won the war.

I believe the definition for American victory in Iraq (or, if you prefer, when Iraq will no longer be a threat to US security) will be the same as it has been for Victory in Germany and Victory in Japan: The establishment of Legitamate Democracies.

The probability of this happening is very small.

So the Revolutionary War, War of 1812, Civil War, WW1, WW2, Korea, Vietnam were not wars? Or their goals were wrong? Or what? Do you even know?
All the threat that Saddam's regime posed has been eliminated. Therefore it is not a continuing threat.
As for "legitimate democracy" I don't know what you'd call this:
Iraq clears way for parliamentary elections - Yahoo! News

 

[Cold Fusion38]

What is the goal of war generally?

In my opinion, the goal of war "generally" is conquest, which only describes two wars that America has fought:

1. War with Mexico
2. War with Spain

Is Iraq as much of a threat now as it was before the war? No

But has all threat been eliminated? No.

If all threat was eliminated, then there would be no US troops in Iraq. Therefore I cannot conceed Iraq is NOT a continuing threat to the national security of the USA, and the USA has NOT won the war.

I believe the definition for American victory in Iraq (or, if you prefer, when Iraq will no longer be a threat to US security) will be the same as it has been for Victory in Germany and Victory in Japan: The establishment of Legitamate Democracies.

The probability of this happening is very small.

So the Revolutionary War, War of 1812, Civil War, WW1, WW2, Korea, Vietnam were not wars? Or their goals were wrong? Or what? Do you even know?
All the threat that Saddam's regime posed has been eliminated. Therefore it is not a continuing threat.
As for "legitimate democracy" I don't know what you'd call this:
Iraq clears way for parliamentary elections - Yahoo! News

Your CONTINUED attempt to compare this BS war with REAL wars just shows how UNBELEIVABLY ignorant of the war in Iraq.

 

[The Rabbi]

In my opinion, the goal of war "generally" is conquest, which only describes two wars that America has fought:

1. War with Mexico
2. War with Spain

Is Iraq as much of a threat now as it was before the war? No

But has all threat been eliminated? No.

If all threat was eliminated, then there would be no US troops in Iraq. Therefore I cannot conceed Iraq is NOT a continuing threat to the national security of the USA, and the USA has NOT won the war.

I believe the definition for American victory in Iraq (or, if you prefer, when Iraq will no longer be a threat to US security) will be the same as it has been for Victory in Germany and Victory in Japan: The establishment of Legitamate Democracies.

The probability of this happening is very small.

So the Revolutionary War, War of 1812, Civil War, WW1, WW2, Korea, Vietnam were not wars? Or their goals were wrong? Or what? Do you even know?
All the threat that Saddam's regime posed has been eliminated. Therefore it is not a continuing threat.
As for "legitimate democracy" I don't know what you'd call this:
Iraq clears way for parliamentary elections - Yahoo! News

Your CONTINUED attempt to compare this BS war with REAL wars just shows how UNBELEIVABLY ignorant of the war in Iraq.

You posted that a troop of girl scouts could run over the largest army in the Gulf and I'm the one who is unbelievably ignorant??
You need to check your meds.

 

[Samson]

What is the goal of war generally?

In my opinion, the goal of war "generally" is conquest, which only describes two wars that America has fought:

1. War with Mexico
2. War with Spain

Is Iraq as much of a threat now as it was before the war? No

But has all threat been eliminated? No.

If all threat was eliminated, then there would be no US troops in Iraq. Therefore I cannot conceed Iraq is NOT a continuing threat to the national security of the USA, and the USA has NOT won the war.

I believe the definition for American victory in Iraq (or, if you prefer, when Iraq will no longer be a threat to US security) will be the same as it has been for Victory in Germany and Victory in Japan: The establishment of Legitamate Democracies.

The probability of this happening is very small.

So the Revolutionary War, War of 1812, Civil War, WW1, WW2, Korea, Vietnam were not wars? Or their goals were wrong? Or what? Do you even know?
All the threat that Saddam's regime posed has been eliminated. Therefore it is not a continuing threat.
As for "legitimate democracy" I don't know what you'd call this:
Iraq clears way for parliamentary elections - Yahoo! News

I was answering the question:

"What is the Goal of War, GENERALLY?"

My answer was "Conquest."

No, I do not believe the USA conquered GB in the Revolutionary War or the War of 1812. I don't believe the USA conquered itself in the Civil War. I don't believe Germany became part of the USA after WWI or WWII. Ditto with Japan....

Do I really need to walk you through Korea and Vietnam?

So what do you think the goal of war should be, generally?

 

[Cold Fusion38]

So the Revolutionary War, War of 1812, Civil War, WW1, WW2, Korea, Vietnam were not wars? Or their goals were wrong? Or what? Do you even know?
All the threat that Saddam's regime posed has been eliminated. Therefore it is not a continuing threat.
As for "legitimate democracy" I don't know what you'd call this:
Iraq clears way for parliamentary elections - Yahoo! News

Your CONTINUED attempt to compare this BS war with REAL wars just shows how UNBELEIVABLY ignorant of the war in Iraq.

You posted that a troop of girl scouts could run over the largest army in the Gulf and I'm the one who is unbelievably ignorant??
You need to check your meds.

Largest army in the Gulf!!!??? PROVE IT!!! The Iraqi army NEVER recovered from GWI. They had NOTHING!!! A few anti aircraft sites that were LAUGHABLY out of date......Is that he largest military in the gulf? The Iraqis were surrendering to CAMER CREWS in GWI and we pulled out the "Shock and Awe" and DECIMATED their forces without even having to go "in country" in GWII. You are just 100% ignorant of military forces and tactics.

 

[Cold Fusion38]

In my opinion, the goal of war "generally" is conquest, which only describes two wars that America has fought:

1. War with Mexico
2. War with Spain

Is Iraq as much of a threat now as it was before the war? No

But has all threat been eliminated? No.

If all threat was eliminated, then there would be no US troops in Iraq. Therefore I cannot conceed Iraq is NOT a continuing threat to the national security of the USA, and the USA has NOT won the war.

I believe the definition for American victory in Iraq (or, if you prefer, when Iraq will no longer be a threat to US security) will be the same as it has been for Victory in Germany and Victory in Japan: The establishment of Legitamate Democracies.

The probability of this happening is very small.

So the Revolutionary War, War of 1812, Civil War, WW1, WW2, Korea, Vietnam were not wars? Or their goals were wrong? Or what? Do you even know?
All the threat that Saddam's regime posed has been eliminated. Therefore it is not a continuing threat.
As for "legitimate democracy" I don't know what you'd call this:
Iraq clears way for parliamentary elections - Yahoo! News

I was answering the question:

"What is the Goal of War, GENERALLY?"

My answer was "Conquest."

No, I do not believe the USA conquered GB in the Revolutionary War or the War of 1812. I don't believe the USA conquered itself in the Civil War. I don't believe Germany became part of the USA after WWI or WWII. Ditto with Japan....

Do I really need to walk you through Korea and Vietnam?

So what do you think the goal of war should be, generally?

I'll answer for Rabbi........OCCUPATION!

 

[The Rabbi]

Your CONTINUED attempt to compare this BS war with REAL wars just shows how UNBELEIVABLY ignorant of the war in Iraq.

You posted that a troop of girl scouts could run over the largest army in the Gulf and I'm the one who is unbelievably ignorant??
You need to check your meds.

Largest army in the Gulf!!!??? PROVE IT!!! The Iraqi army NEVER recovered from GWI. They had NOTHING!!! A few anti aircraft sites that were LAUGHABLY out of date......Is that he largest military in the gulf? The Iraqis were surrendering to CAMER CREWS in GWI and we pulled out the "Shock and Awe" and DECIMATED their forces without even having to go "in country" in GWII. You are just 100% ignorant of military forces and tactics.

Wow, are you fucking stupid, engaging in gross revisionism, outright lying, or just can't read? I vote all of the above:
Iraq's military capabilities in 2002 ... - Google Books

I hadn't considered the possibility you were also too lazy to click a link and read it. Let's add that to your long list of shortcomings.

 

[The Rabbi]

In my opinion, the goal of war "generally" is conquest, which only describes two wars that America has fought:

1. War with Mexico
2. War with Spain

Is Iraq as much of a threat now as it was before the war? No

But has all threat been eliminated? No.

If all threat was eliminated, then there would be no US troops in Iraq. Therefore I cannot conceed Iraq is NOT a continuing threat to the national security of the USA, and the USA has NOT won the war.

I believe the definition for American victory in Iraq (or, if you prefer, when Iraq will no longer be a threat to US security) will be the same as it has been for Victory in Germany and Victory in Japan: The establishment of Legitamate Democracies.

The probability of this happening is very small.

So the Revolutionary War, War of 1812, Civil War, WW1, WW2, Korea, Vietnam were not wars? Or their goals were wrong? Or what? Do you even know?
All the threat that Saddam's regime posed has been eliminated. Therefore it is not a continuing threat.
As for "legitimate democracy" I don't know what you'd call this:
Iraq clears way for parliamentary elections - Yahoo! News

I was answering the question:

"What is the Goal of War, GENERALLY?"

My answer was "Conquest."

No, I do not believe the USA conquered GB in the Revolutionary War or the War of 1812. I don't believe the USA conquered itself in the Civil War. I don't believe Germany became part of the USA after WWI or WWII. Ditto with Japan....

Do I really need to walk you through Korea and Vietnam?

So what do you think the goal of war should be, generally?

The goal of war should be to achieve the country's objectives they failed to achieve by any other means. Typically that involves rendering the opposing country's military force ineffective. Often it means replacing the country's government and/or dictating terms of surrender.
So on that basis looks like we won.
Still waiting to hear on what basis we lost.

 

[Cold Fusion38]

CONSCRIPTS!!! ONE THIRD REGULAR LONG TERM!!! Large #s of COMBAT WORN and OBSOLECENT!!! 300 combat aircraft with POTENTIAL operational status.........................ALL OF THIS FROM.....YOUR LINK. GAWD ARE YOU REALLY THIS GD DUMB!!! Did you think I wouldn't READ IT!!!??? Obviously YOU didn't.

 

[Cold Fusion38]

Sorry Rabbi I just TOASTED you with YOUR OWN SOURCE!!! Maybe you should STFU before you make yourself look any more ignorant then you already appear.