Why would anyone continue to claim the iraqi war was a failure?

[BlindBoo]

He's exactly correct.

id the US have the right to take action against Iraq

Yes they did. Recalling that its resolution 678 (1990) authorized Member States to use all necessary means to uphold and implement its resolution 660 (1990) of 2 August 1990 and all relevant resolutions subsequent to resolution 660 (1990) and to restore international peace and security in the area, 13. Recalls, in that context, that the Council has repeatedly warned Iraq that it will face serious consequences as a result of its continued violations of its obligations;
Resolution 1441 in full
Did the peope of Iraq want the coalition of the willing to remove saddam?

Yes they did. The ICG conducted interviews with Iraqis before the war. Not only did they say that they wanted the coalition of the willing to remove Saddam, they claimed that they were willing to live in occupation and suffer the violence that may follow.
ICG IRAQ Briefing
Do the poeple of Iraq want the Coalition to stay? And do they agree with the removing of Saddam Hussain

The people of Iraq have been polled by Oxford Research International many times since the liberation of Iraq. The polls show that the Iraqi people are positive about the removal of Saddam Hussein and the coalition in Iraq. The 2005 poll was less positive. No poll was done in 2006-2007, but one could guess that things would have been more neagative in 2006 early 2007, since the surge of late 2007 we have seen many tribal leaders have joined with the collation forces to rid Iraq of Al Quada. Deaths are down, loses to US forces are down and one could expect a more positive view again.
Oxford Research International Poll 2003
Oxford Research International Poll February 2004
Oxford Research International Poll March 2004
Oxford Research International Poll June 2004
Oxford Research International Poll November 2005

did japan have the right to take action against the United States? they used the same reasoning Bush did when they attacked Pearl harbor. "take away their ability to make war."

Didn't FDR empose a blockade or embargo on Japan?

 

[JRK]

id the US have the right to take action against Iraq

Yes they did. Recalling that its resolution 678 (1990) authorized Member States to use all necessary means to uphold and implement its resolution 660 (1990) of 2 August 1990 and all relevant resolutions subsequent to resolution 660 (1990) and to restore international peace and security in the area, 13. Recalls, in that context, that the Council has repeatedly warned Iraq that it will face serious consequences as a result of its continued violations of its obligations;
Resolution 1441 in full
Did the peope of Iraq want the coalition of the willing to remove saddam?

Yes they did. The ICG conducted interviews with Iraqis before the war. Not only did they say that they wanted the coalition of the willing to remove Saddam, they claimed that they were willing to live in occupation and suffer the violence that may follow.
ICG IRAQ Briefing
Do the poeple of Iraq want the Coalition to stay? And do they agree with the removing of Saddam Hussain

The people of Iraq have been polled by Oxford Research International many times since the liberation of Iraq. The polls show that the Iraqi people are positive about the removal of Saddam Hussein and the coalition in Iraq. The 2005 poll was less positive. No poll was done in 2006-2007, but one could guess that things would have been more neagative in 2006 early 2007, since the surge of late 2007 we have seen many tribal leaders have joined with the collation forces to rid Iraq of Al Quada. Deaths are down, loses to US forces are down and one could expect a more positive view again.
Oxford Research International Poll 2003
Oxford Research International Poll February 2004
Oxford Research International Poll March 2004
Oxford Research International Poll June 2004
Oxford Research International Poll November 2005

did japan have the right to take action against the United States? they used the same reasoning Bush did when they attacked Pearl harbor. "take away their ability to make war."

Didn't FDR empose a blockade or embargo on Japan?

well another one goes on the ignore list
I will not discuss anything with people who have conducted there selves the way they have

 

[BlindBoo]

id the US have the right to take action against Iraq

Yes they did. Recalling that its resolution 678 (1990) authorized Member States to use all necessary means to uphold and implement its resolution 660 (1990) of 2 August 1990 and all relevant resolutions subsequent to resolution 660 (1990) and to restore international peace and security in the area, 13. Recalls, in that context, that the Council has repeatedly warned Iraq that it will face serious consequences as a result of its continued violations of its obligations;
Resolution 1441 in full
Did the peope of Iraq want the coalition of the willing to remove saddam?

Yes they did. The ICG conducted interviews with Iraqis before the war. Not only did they say that they wanted the coalition of the willing to remove Saddam, they claimed that they were willing to live in occupation and suffer the violence that may follow.
ICG IRAQ Briefing
Do the poeple of Iraq want the Coalition to stay? And do they agree with the removing of Saddam Hussain

The people of Iraq have been polled by Oxford Research International many times since the liberation of Iraq. The polls show that the Iraqi people are positive about the removal of Saddam Hussein and the coalition in Iraq. The 2005 poll was less positive. No poll was done in 2006-2007, but one could guess that things would have been more neagative in 2006 early 2007, since the surge of late 2007 we have seen many tribal leaders have joined with the collation forces to rid Iraq of Al Quada. Deaths are down, loses to US forces are down and one could expect a more positive view again.
Oxford Research International Poll 2003
Oxford Research International Poll February 2004
Oxford Research International Poll March 2004
Oxford Research International Poll June 2004
Oxford Research International Poll November 2005

did japan have the right to take action against the United States? they used the same reasoning Bush did when they attacked Pearl harbor. "take away their ability to make war."

that is not what congress voted in favor of.

They voted in favor of invading Iraq to either confiscate wmd's or ensure there were no wmd's as Iraq was bound by a treaty that was designed to allow Iraq its sovereignty despite its actions against kuwait but ensure it could not take the same kind of action again or any other hostile action against its neighbors.

Interesting hoiw all of you seemed to have forgotten.

I blame the media.

No. They voted to give the Preisdent the power to use force if Iraq was a threat or if Iraq had anything to do with 9-11.

SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.
(a) 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--
defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq ; and
enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq .


(b) PRESIDENTIAL DETERMINATION- In connection with the exercise of the authority granted in subsection (a) to use force the President shall, prior to such exercise or as soon thereafter as may be feasible, but no later than 48 hours after exercising such authority, make available to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President pro tempore of the Senate his determination that--
reliance by the United States on further diplomatic or other peaceful means alone either (A) will not adequately protect the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq or (B) is not likely to lead to enforcement of all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq ; and
acting pursuant to this joint resolution is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorist and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.

 

[JRK]

Were the UN weapons inspectors kicked out of Iraq?

Yes they were, many people try to say that they were not kicked out but left because the west were going to bomb Iraq.
The truth is they were going to bomb Iraq because Saddam had stopped the inspections “ 31 Oct 1998 Iraq announces that it will cease all forms of interaction
with UNSCOM and its Chairman and to halt all UNSCOM's activities inside
Iraq, including monitoring. The Security Council, in a statement to the
press, unanimously condemn Iraq's decision to cease all cooperation with
UNSCOM.”
United Nations Chronology
Facts about the Iraq War

 

[JakeStarkey]

We lost in Iraq: our national prestige, our international honor, trillions on trillions of dollars, and a weakened position in the Middle East.

But, but we won the war. We deposed the governement of a country that had been ravaged with war and sanctions for nearly 30 year. The greatest Rah-Rah moment for the psudo-conned (liberal militatrist) since Grenada.

SNIP

We don't want to read your lies, JRK, only the fact (the real fact) you are wrong on the subject and wrong for America.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Well it seems everyone who disagrees with JRK on Iraq is on ignore now.


In other words, he'll just be talking to himself on his Iraq threads.

 

[JRK]

Suspend Elections | Beverly Perdue | Audio | The Daily Caller
hell they have free elections in Iraq

 

[BlindBoo]

We lost in Iraq: our national prestige, our international honor, trillions on trillions of dollars, and a weakened position in the Middle East.

But, but we won the war. We deposed the governement of a country that had been ravaged with war and sanctions for nearly 30 year. The greatest Rah-Rah moment for the psudo-conned (liberal militatrist) since Grenada.

both of your opinions are just that
factless opinions

Boo you owe me an apology from you accusing me of claims I did not make, you went over the line bud
You can be anti American did the right thing in Iraq all you want, that's your business, but to lie about me to provide cover for your feelings with me is mine
fix it

I owe you absolutely nothing.

Are you saying we didn't win the war?

Are you saying Iraq had not been ravage by war of sanctions for nearly 30 years?

What are you saying?

If anything you owe all kinds of people on this thread an apology.

 

[JRK]

But, but we won the war. We deposed the governement of a country that had been ravaged with war and sanctions for nearly 30 year. The greatest Rah-Rah moment for the psudo-conned (liberal militatrist) since Grenada.

both of your opinions are just that
factless opinions

Boo you owe me an apology from you accusing me of claims I did not make, you went over the line bud
You can be anti American did the right thing in Iraq all you want, that's your business, but to lie about me to provide cover for your feelings with me is mine
fix it

I owe you absolutely nothing.

Are you saying we didn't win the war?

Are you saying Iraq had not been ravage by war of sanctions for nearly 30 years?

What are you saying?

If anything you owe all kinds of people on this thread an apology.

Boo Do you recall this?

It was not our issue that Al Qaeda attacked us 9-11-2001
were we suppose to ignore this?
Most all of the casualties and the expense in Iraq came from fighting Al Qaeda, not Iraqis

There is also evidence that around this time Bin Ladin sent out a number
of feelers to the Iraqi regime, offering some cooperation. None are reported
to have received a significant response.According to one report, Saddam Hussein’s efforts at this time to rebuild relations with the Saudis and other Middle
Eastern regimes led him to stay clear of Bin Ladin.74
In mid-1998,the situation reversed;it was Iraq that reportedly took the initiative.In March 1998,after Bin Ladin’s public fatwa against the United States,
two al Qaeda members reportedly went to Iraq to meet with Iraqi intelligence. In July, an Iraqi delegation traveled to Afghanistan to meet first with
the Taliban and then with Bin Ladin. Sources reported that one, or perhaps
both, of these meetings was apparently arranged through Bin Ladin’s Egyptian deputy, Zawahiri, who had ties of his own to the Iraqis. In 1998, Iraq was
under intensifying U.S. pressure, which culminated in a series of large air
attacks in December.75
Similar meetings between Iraqi officials and Bin Ladin or his aides may have
occurred in 1999 during a period of some reported strains with the Taliban.
According to the reporting,Iraqi officials offered Bin Ladin a safe haven in Iraq.
Bin Ladin declined, apparently judging that his circumstances in Afghanistan
remained more favorable than the Iraqi alternative. The reports describe
friendly contacts and indicate some common themes in both sides’ hatred of
the United States. But to date we have seen no evidence that these or the earlier contacts ever developed into a collaborative operational relationship. Nor
have we seen evidence indicating that Iraq cooperated with al Qaeda in developing or carrying out any attacks against the United States.(Nor have they found evidence that this did not occur, any way this is from the 9-11 commission)
http://wanews.org/docs/911report.pdf

Also
Page Not Found - The Washington Post
Al Qaeda Found Responsible For Iraq Bomb Attacks Killing 66 at Pat Dollard
Al-Qaeda - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Suicide attackers and car bombs hit cities across Iraq on Monday, killing at least 60 people in apparently coordinated assaults authorities blamed on al Qaeda affiliates intent on destabilizing the government.
Bombs, attacks hit Iraqi cities, at least 60 dead | Reuters

You've lost again.

Bush: No Iraq link to 9/11 found - seattlepi.com

"No, we've had no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved with September the 11th," Bush said.

Read more: Bush: No Iraq link to 9/11 found - seattlepi.com
__________________


No you stated right here that "I lost again" but if you would have read the post as it is I clearly had the "there was no evidence that Saddam" quote in my thread
Why did you lie about me? make a mis leading statement about my character?
and exactly who is it I owe an apology too bud?

The others I put on my ignore list were beyond extreme, that was the first time you attacked my character
why?
I dont give a shit your a flaming liberal, but at least be honest about it, who and what you believe in should not require those actions
Now I am sure your going right back on my ignore list
so good luck with who and what you are

 

[BlindBoo]

id the US have the right to take action against Iraq

Yes they did. Recalling that its resolution 678 (1990) authorized Member States to use all necessary means to uphold and implement its resolution 660 (1990) of 2 August 1990 and all relevant resolutions subsequent to resolution 660 (1990) and to restore international peace and security in the area, 13. Recalls, in that context, that the Council has repeatedly warned Iraq that it will face serious consequences as a result of its continued violations of its obligations;
Resolution 1441 in full
Did the peope of Iraq want the coalition of the willing to remove saddam?

Yes they did. The ICG conducted interviews with Iraqis before the war. Not only did they say that they wanted the coalition of the willing to remove Saddam, they claimed that they were willing to live in occupation and suffer the violence that may follow.
ICG IRAQ Briefing
Do the poeple of Iraq want the Coalition to stay? And do they agree with the removing of Saddam Hussain

The people of Iraq have been polled by Oxford Research International many times since the liberation of Iraq. The polls show that the Iraqi people are positive about the removal of Saddam Hussein and the coalition in Iraq. The 2005 poll was less positive. No poll was done in 2006-2007, but one could guess that things would have been more neagative in 2006 early 2007, since the surge of late 2007 we have seen many tribal leaders have joined with the collation forces to rid Iraq of Al Quada. Deaths are down, loses to US forces are down and one could expect a more positive view again.
Oxford Research International Poll 2003
Oxford Research International Poll February 2004
Oxford Research International Poll March 2004
Oxford Research International Poll June 2004
Oxford Research International Poll November 2005

By recalling the previous resolutions SCR 1441 superceeded them. Having no military trigger 1441's only recourse if Iraq failed to co-operate was for the SC to reconviene to discuss what to do next. That is the only reason it passed the counsul anyway. Bush breached that resolution by starting the invasion and not allowing to inspectors the time they needed to prove Iraq was in compliance.

Boo you have got something to fix
yuu made an accusation about me that is not true
FIX IT

Jrk

You are incorrect.

 

[BlindBoo]

did japan have the right to take action against the United States? they used the same reasoning Bush did when they attacked Pearl harbor. "take away their ability to make war."

Didn't FDR empose a blockade or embargo on Japan?

well another one goes on the ignore list
I will not discuss anything with people who have conducted there selves the way they have

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

Did you stomp you feet and move your arms up and down while posting that little tantrum?

 

[BlindBoo]

both of your opinions are just that
factless opinions

Boo you owe me an apology from you accusing me of claims I did not make, you went over the line bud
You can be anti American did the right thing in Iraq all you want, that's your business, but to lie about me to provide cover for your feelings with me is mine
fix it

I owe you absolutely nothing.

Are you saying we didn't win the war?

Are you saying Iraq had not been ravage by war of sanctions for nearly 30 years?

What are you saying?

If anything you owe all kinds of people on this thread an apology.

Boo Do you recall this?

It was not our issue that Al Qaeda attacked us 9-11-2001
were we suppose to ignore this?
Most all of the casualties and the expense in Iraq came from fighting Al Qaeda, not Iraqis

There is also evidence that around this time Bin Ladin sent out a number
of feelers to the Iraqi regime, offering some cooperation. None are reported
to have received a significant response.According to one report, Saddam Hussein’s efforts at this time to rebuild relations with the Saudis and other Middle
Eastern regimes led him to stay clear of Bin Ladin.74
In mid-1998,the situation reversed;it was Iraq that reportedly took the initiative.In March 1998,after Bin Ladin’s public fatwa against the United States,
two al Qaeda members reportedly went to Iraq to meet with Iraqi intelligence. In July, an Iraqi delegation traveled to Afghanistan to meet first with
the Taliban and then with Bin Ladin. Sources reported that one, or perhaps
both, of these meetings was apparently arranged through Bin Ladin’s Egyptian deputy, Zawahiri, who had ties of his own to the Iraqis. In 1998, Iraq was
under intensifying U.S. pressure, which culminated in a series of large air
attacks in December.75
Similar meetings between Iraqi officials and Bin Ladin or his aides may have
occurred in 1999 during a period of some reported strains with the Taliban.
According to the reporting,Iraqi officials offered Bin Ladin a safe haven in Iraq.
Bin Ladin declined, apparently judging that his circumstances in Afghanistan
remained more favorable than the Iraqi alternative. The reports describe
friendly contacts and indicate some common themes in both sides’ hatred of
the United States. But to date we have seen no evidence that these or the earlier contacts ever developed into a collaborative operational relationship. Nor
have we seen evidence indicating that Iraq cooperated with al Qaeda in developing or carrying out any attacks against the United States.(Nor have they found evidence that this did not occur, any way this is from the 9-11 commission)
http://wanews.org/docs/911report.pdf

Also
Page Not Found - The Washington Post
Al Qaeda Found Responsible For Iraq Bomb Attacks Killing 66 at Pat Dollard
Al-Qaeda - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Suicide attackers and car bombs hit cities across Iraq on Monday, killing at least 60 people in apparently coordinated assaults authorities blamed on al Qaeda affiliates intent on destabilizing the government.
Bombs, attacks hit Iraqi cities, at least 60 dead | Reuters

You've lost again.

Bush: No Iraq link to 9/11 found - seattlepi.com

"No, we've had no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved with September the 11th," Bush said.

Read more: Bush: No Iraq link to 9/11 found - seattlepi.com
__________________


No you stated right here that "I lost again" but if you would have read the post as it is I clearly had the "there was no evidence that Saddam" quote in my thread
Why did you lie about me? make a mis leading statement about my character?
and exactly who is it I owe an apology too bud?

The others I put on my ignore list were beyond extreme, that was the first time you attacked my character
why?
I dont give a shit your a flaming liberal, but at least be honest about it, who and what you believe in should not require those actions
Now I am sure your going right back on my ignore list
so good luck with who and what you are

Whaaaaaaa.....you disgust me by calling me a flaming liberal. I shall no longer deal with you. Whaaaaaaaa......


Hahaha just kidding. You are a first class liar. Please put me on ignore.

 

[JRK]

Didn't FDR empose a blockade or embargo on Japan?

well another one goes on the ignore list
I will not discuss anything with people who have conducted there selves the way they have

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

Did you stomp you feet and move your arms up and down while posting that little tantrum?

You think treating your fellow american this way on shit you made up is funny?
man you have got allot to learn in life
Tantrum?
good luck bud, like I said before with who and what you are
let me give you some good advice
when you attack a mans character in a public forum with something that is a mis representation of that person, taken out of context, its no joking matter
I could care less, not every-one is like me Boo

 

[JakeStarkey]

both of your opinions are just that
factless opinions

Boo you owe me an apology from you accusing me of claims I did not make, you went over the line bud
You can be anti American did the right thing in Iraq all you want, that's your business, but to lie about me to provide cover for your feelings with me is mine
fix it

I owe you absolutely nothing.

Are you saying we didn't win the war?

Are you saying Iraq had not been ravage by war of sanctions for nearly 30 years?

What are you saying?

If anything you owe all kinds of people on this thread an apology.

SNIP

JRK, you are wrong, son, and none of lying and crying changes it.

 

[Dr.Drock]

well another one goes on the ignore list
I will not discuss anything with people who have conducted there selves the way they have

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

Did you stomp you feet and move your arms up and down while posting that little tantrum?

You think treating your fellow american this way on shit you made up is funny?
man you have got allot to learn in life
Tantrum?
good luck bud, like I said before with who and what you are
let me give you some good advice
when you attack a mans character in a public forum with something that is a mis representation of that person, taken out of context, its no joking matter
I could care less, not every-one is like me Boo

We did impose an embargo on Japan, why would that be the instance he chose to start his tantrum throwing today?

 

[JakeStarkey]

JRK will throw tantrums when his lack of integrity is called out. Tough luck. He is flatly integrity valueless.

 

[Nic_Driver]

Well it seems everyone who disagrees with JRK on Iraq is on ignore now.


In other words, he'll just be talking to himself on his Iraq threads.

 

[BlindBoo]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

Did you stomp you feet and move your arms up and down while posting that little tantrum?

You think treating your fellow american this way on shit you made up is funny?
man you have got allot to learn in life
Tantrum?
good luck bud, like I said before with who and what you are
let me give you some good advice
when you attack a mans character in a public forum with something that is a mis representation of that person, taken out of context, its no joking matter
I could care less, not every-one is like me Boo

We did impose an embargo on Japan, why would that be the instance he chose to start his tantrum throwing today?

Because he doesn't know the history leading up to the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor and therefore cannot put it into historical perspective.

 

[JRK]

Wonder what kind of spin we get here
good reading

An overwhelming aspiration to normalcy.
Perhaps the most widespread wish expressed to ICG
was that Iraq finally turn the page of its Iranian and
Kuwaiti wars and of its confrontation with the
outside world. Many of the Iraqis interviewed by
ICG shared the view of having been mere pawns
who have paid for the follies of others. A typical
sentiment was:
What we want is simply a dose of stability.
We have suffered enough due to our leaders’
mistakes. We want to become a normal
country once again, a state that enjoys good
relations with its neighbours and that is no
longer an international pariah. (thank you US troops)
33
Increasingly nostalgic recollections of an earlier era
of economic prosperity and modernisation reinforce
feelings of collective humiliation and national
disgrace. “Before the war and the sanctions, our dinar
was strong and our purchasing power was the envy
of the Arab world. We want to return to the period of
prosperity our parents lived through in the 1970s.”
34

2. A reliance on the outside. For many Iraqis
interviewed by ICG, returning to normalcy today
requires yielding to a foreign power. Memories of the
failed 1991 uprising and its bloody consequences
remain vivid, and few appear ready to take up arms

look at this from back in the day, and anyone would question our success here?
A heavy and prolonged international – and,
especially, U.S. – presence is both anticipated and
desired as an insurance policy against civil strife and
instability and as a guarantor of massive international
aid. Expressing a view voiced by a number of Iraqis,
a civil servant explained:
If the Americans are committed to
overthrowing the regime they also must be
committed to rebuilding a country they directly
contributed to destroy over the past twelve
years as a result of their uncompromising
attitude toward sanctions, disarmament and the
various other pretexts they invoked. If Iraq’s
reconstruction does not become a priority, then
it would be better to stick to the status quo. At
least Saddam knows us well, and he knows
how to manage the violent tendencies of our
society. The United States must guarantee law
and order, and they must oversee Iraq’s rapid
reconstruction.
38
Still in Japan after 66
in and out in 8 years in Iraq

Central but as yet passive figures in the unfolding
drama, the Iraqi people appear eager for some way,
any way, to alter the status quo. ICG’s limited survey
suggests that many Iraqis are willing to embrace a
U.S.-led war

http://wanews.org/docs/iraq street.pdf

 

[JakeStarkey]

JRK's right wing progressive neo-con prattle makes no sense.