What is the difference between WWII and Liberation of Iraq???

[Friends]

American troops were greeted as liberators in Italy and France. They were not greeted as liberators in Iraq.

When Americans occupied Germany and Japan the Germans and Japanese did not resist. When Americans occupied Iraq the Iraqis did resist. Indeed, the war did not really begin until Saddam had been defeated.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Pearl Harbor


Bush attacking Iraq for 9-11 would be like FDR attacking China for Pearl Harbor

Good thing neither happened then.

I do seem to remember attacking Iraq

We did.

Needlessly, unfortunately, and illegally.

 

[bripat9643]

Pearl Harbor


Bush attacking Iraq for 9-11 would be like FDR attacking China for Pearl Harbor

Bush didn't attack Iraq for 9/11, you fucking dipstick.

 

[bripat9643]

Good thing neither happened then.

I do seem to remember attacking Iraq

We did.

Needlessly, unfortunately, and illegally.

ROFL! What law did he break?

 

[Billo_Really]

ROFL! What law did he break?

Article 51 of the UN Charter.

Next question?

 

[rightwinger]

The main difference is that WWII really was Mission Accomplished

 

[Billo_Really]

I think it’s just crazy. It's part of that worldview that led us to where we are. Think about it. The United States went and negotiated with and supported Saddam Hussein himself against Iran under this notion that sometimes my enemy is my friend. The enemy of my enemy is my friend. That emboldened Saddam Hussein and allowed him to invade Kuwait. It made us go to war that we did not finish and did not take Saddam Hussein out.
Former Rep. Tom DeLay (R-Texas) 12/11/06 (The Hill)

Regime change is illegal, according to international law.

 

[Billo_Really]

Then how do you guys explain Obama's support for the terrorist front group Muslim Brotherhood?

This should be amusing...

That's nothing compared to us providing material support to al Qaeda in Syria.

 

[Billo_Really]

The main difference is that WWII really was Mission Accomplished

It did have quite an ending.

 

[Bfgrn]

Then how do you guys explain Obama's support for the terrorist front group Muslim Brotherhood?

This should be amusing...

Ray McGovern, a retired CIA agent whose expertise was the old Soviet Union and the Eastern Bloc countries says the propaganda coming out of Fox News is at the same level as Pravda. But I suspect most Russians knew Pravda was propaganda.

Muslim Brotherhood conspiracy theories

In the United States, conspiracy theories surrounding the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood organization are sometimes put forward by political activists, especially those affiliated with the neoconservative and counterjihad movements. These conspiracy theories include: that the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) has been taken over by the Muslim Brotherhood; that the Obama administration is advancing the Brotherhood's goals; and that Huma Abedin, a member of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's staff, is advancing the Brotherhood's agenda.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I took the time and effort to find you a new avatar Daveboy. You are welcome!

Yawn...pretending the MB ISN'T a terrorist front group. Too predictable. Got anything more entertaining?

Meanwhile, your terrorist-edited Wiki link is hereby discredited:

FBI Chief: Muslim Brotherhood Supports Terrorism :: The Investigative Project on Terrorism

Elements of the Muslim Brotherhood, the Islamist group whose ideology has inspired terrorists such as Osama bin Laden, are in the United States and have supported terrorism here and overseas, FBI Director Robert Mueller told a House committee Thursday.

Mueller joined seven other Obama administration intelligence and law enforcement officials at a hearing of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. They spoke of the Brotherhood's U.S. ties as word spread in Egypt that President Hosni Mubarak was prepared to resign. Mubarak has repeatedly said his administration, in place since 1981, is the one thing keeping an Islamic state led by the Brotherhood from taking over Egypt.

While Mueller, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper and other witnesses spelled out a variety of threats, they and some committee members highlighted the Brotherhood's ties in the United States. It was a significant departure from earlier hearings, which focused on groups more directly involved with terrorism.

--

Clapper's "secular" reference is odd, given the Brotherhood's motto is "Allah is our objective. The Prophet is our leader. The Qur'an is our law. Jihad is our way. Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope."

--

During the hearing, Myrick said she was also concerned about the Brotherhood's attitudes toward government. "The danger of the Muslim Brotherhood is not just encouraging terrorism through their ideology, but also trying to take over government, so everyone has to succumb and live under their ideology," Myrick said.

The scope of the Brotherhood's vision for the United States was spelled out in a 1991 document called the "Explanatory Memorandum." In that memo, which federal prosecutors introduced as evidence in two trials of the now-defunct Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development, Brotherhood leaders said they planned to create an Islamic state in the United States.

In that document, the Brotherhood's stated goal was "a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and "sabotaging" its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God's religion is made victorious over all other religions."

The memo also listed 29 organizations working in the United States to further the Brotherhood's goals. They include the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), the Muslim Students Association (MSA), the North American Islamic Trust (NAIT) and the Islamic Association of Palestine (IAP). The IAP and the Holy Land Foundation shared many members and directors, including those who founded the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR).​

I'm sorry, I guess I picked the wrong avatar for you...

The Global Reach of Conservative Conspiracy Theories

You are a RETARD.

 

[BlindBoo]

Japan attacked us. Germany declared war on us.

You don't really understand global/petro politics do you?

When Iraq invaded Kuwait on 2 August 1990 the dominate rationale was Iraq would be controlling Kuwait's oil but shipping lanes and could have put a strangle hold on at that time US OIL importation!

For someone living in their parents basement, this would not be a concern... but for people that make decisions that affect millions of people's lives,
it was vital to national security that Kuwait not remain in Iraq control..
Simple as that!

So perhaps you can explain why our ambassador to Iraq didn't tell Saddam that we would defend Kuwait as if we had a mutual defense pact with them when Saddam was asking about possible military action in the crisis. Also while your at it, why did President Bush (41) claim to the American public that the Iraqi invasion was a surprise attack when in fact it is well documented that he, President Bush, had been informed for months of the nature of the conflict, as well as the build-up of Iraq forces on the border.

 

[Spoonman]

Do most of you think the US military methodically, systematically plan to "air raid villages and killing civilians"?

Do most of you think that of the 100,000 Iraqi civilian deaths almost all were done by the US military?

If you do, why? Why would you think YOUR fellow Americans would methodically, systematically, without hesitation shoot innocent men,women children?

Why would you believe that most of the 100,000 Iraqi deaths were at the hands of Americans... and not the terrorists? WhY?

I do NOT believe our military has ever Methodically and without any forethought planned the destruction of civilians.

Yet many of you blame the US military for most of the 100,000 Iraqi deaths! And if you do not only do I feel sorry for you but you are dead wrong!

From 2003 liberation of Iraq through 2012 here are the numbers:
Period Starting

• 1-Jan-03 7,338
• 1-Jul-03 220
• 1-Jan-04 1,051
• 1-Jul-04 1,724
• 1-Jan-05 430
• 1-Jul-05 583
• 1-Jan-06 393
• 1-Jul-06 498
• 1-Jan-07 678
• 1-Jul-07 645
• 1-Jan-08 427
• 1-Jul-08 101
• 1-Jan-09 45
• 1-Jul-09 23
• 1-Jan-10 11
• 1-Jul-10 6
• 1-Jan-11 9
• 1-Jul-11 7
• Total 14,189

Civilian deaths from violence in 2012 :: Iraq Body Count

View attachment 26557

14,189 Iraqi deaths that can be attributed to US troops !
NOT 100,000 as many of you America haters suggest!

The difference between WWII and Liberation of Iraq is the Allies in WWII bombed to destroy war making industries and in doing so bombed civilians!
Calculations of the death-toll from the Anglo-American bombing of Dresden in February 1945 have varied widely, but never ceased to be dramatic. Figures suggested have ranged from 35,000 through 100,000, and even up to half a million at the wilder fringes of speculation.
Death Toll Debate: How Many Died in the Bombing of Dresden? - SPIEGEL ONLINE

"Within the first two to four months of the bombings, the acute effects killed 90,000–166,000 people in Hiroshima and 60,000–80,000 in Nagasaki, with roughly half of the deaths in each city occurring on the first day."
Nearly 300,000 directly from the atomic blasts!
Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

What is the difference between WWII and Liberation of Iraq civilian death tolls is ignorance on the part of people today regarding the Liberation of Iraq!
Instead of hearing/reading positive media output as WWII "journalists" did.. we have the "if it bleeds and hurts GOP.. IT LEADS" hacks!
These hacks during Iraq repeated rare stories. Abu Ghraib constant headlines yet ONLY 20 US soldiers were involved... YET we heard/read daily
the vicious treatment these 20 soldiers did and ASSUMED ALL OUR TROOPS did that!

Again... the Major difference between WWII and Liberation of Iraq is during WWII millions of civilians were killed by the ALLIES but the MSM
knowing that would incite the terrorists of WWII didn't do what the idiots did during Liberation of Iraq!
Not only were less then 15% of known Iraqi civilians deaths at the hands of US troops... BUT our MSM has NEVER told us that! NEVER!
I found that out from the above web site!
WHY??

we didn't have political correctness to get in the way of getting the job done with WWII

 

[healthmyths]

Japan attacked us. Germany declared war on us.

You don't really understand global/petro politics do you?

When Iraq invaded Kuwait on 2 August 1990 the dominate rationale was Iraq would be controlling Kuwait's oil but shipping lanes and could have put a strangle hold on at that time US OIL importation!

For someone living in their parents basement, this would not be a concern... but for people that make decisions that affect millions of people's lives,
it was vital to national security that Kuwait not remain in Iraq control..
Simple as that!

So perhaps you can explain why our ambassador to Iraq didn't tell Saddam that we would defend Kuwait as if we had a mutual defense pact with them when Saddam was asking about possible military action in the crisis. Also while your at it, why did President Bush (41) claim to the American public that the Iraqi invasion was a surprise attack when in fact it is well documented that he, President Bush, had been informed for months of the nature of the conflict, as well as the build-up of Iraq forces on the border.

OK... YOU want FACTS or hysteria, hyperbole,etc....?

Did the US Really Give Saddam Fake OK to Invade Kuwait?
Twenty years ago there was a witch-hunt in Washington over why nobody had forecast that Saddam Hussein would invade and occupy Kuwait. A chief casualty of this was April Glaspie, the US ambassador in Baghdad, who had met for two hours with the Iraqi leader on 25 July 1990, a week before the invasion. During this meeting she was alleged to have "given a green light for the invasion" or at least not made clear that the US would use military force to reverse an Iraqi takeover of Kuwait.

What comes shining through is that the Iraqi leader never made clear that he was thinking of annexing the emirate as Iraq’s 19th province.
Notorious though he was for his bloodcurdling and exaggerated threats, for once he was not threatening enough.
Everybody suspected he was conducting a heavy-handed diplomatic offensive to squeeze concessions, financial and possibly territorial, out of the Kuwaitis.
Almost nobody predicted a full-scale invasion and occupation of Kuwait, in large part because this was an amazingly foolish move by Saddam, bound to provoke a backlash far beyond Iraq’s power to resist.

The April Glaspie cable reveals little that was not known before. She did not tell Saddam not to invade Kuwait because neither she nor anybody else thought he would be stupid enough to do so.

Did the US Really Give Saddam Fake OK to Invade Kuwait? » CounterPunch: Tells the Facts, Names the Names