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

[Katzndogz]

The war in Iraq was successful up to the point where obama snatched defeat from the jaws of victory.

 

[Mac1958]

The war in Iraq was successful up to the point where obama snatched defeat from the jaws of victory.

So should I assume, then, that you agree with the following, up until Obama's term:

"...and getting rid of him was worth the lives of thousands of American troops, thousands of American troops maimed for life, thousands of American troops emotionally/mentally shattered forever, thousands of young American military families destroyed, thousands of young American children who will never see their brave Dad again, hundreds of billions of dollars that we don't have, not to mention the clear possibility that all of our so-called fucking nation-building will ultimately fail anyway, when we finally are out of there and the bad guys return, and the fact that Saddam's death tipped the balance of power in the Middle East to Iran. YES! INDEED! IT WAS WORTH IT."

Correct?

.

 

[Mac1958]

The war in Iraq was successful up to the point where obama snatched defeat from the jaws of victory.

So should I assume, then, that you agree with the following, up until Obama's term:

"...and getting rid of him was worth the lives of thousands of American troops, thousands of American troops maimed for life, thousands of American troops emotionally/mentally shattered forever, thousands of young American military families destroyed, thousands of young American children who will never see their brave Dad again, hundreds of billions of dollars that we don't have, not to mention the clear possibility that all of our so-called fucking nation-building will ultimately fail anyway, when we finally are out of there and the bad guys return, and the fact that Saddam's death tipped the balance of power in the Middle East to Iran. YES! INDEED! IT WAS WORTH IT."

Correct?

.

Boy, I'm really having one heckuva time getting anyone to admit the Iraq war was worth the costs listed above - even those who continually defend it and who attack those who disagree with it.

Weird.

I wonder why that is.

Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?

.

 

[georgephillip]

The idiot socialist is a foreigner that gets a boner coming here continually try to claim Reagan made Saddam a monster since we supported Saddam against Iran and helped Saddam keep the Soviets out of Iraq.

Reagan was supposed to look into a crystal ball and see Saddam would later invade Kuwait over debts he owed while also threatening the Saudis oil supply too.

These same left-wing nuts picked Joe Lieberman for VP all the time knowing he would ditch the Democrap party later....because they are just that smart in their own minds.

You're too fucking stupid to be human.

Do you think Reagan could find Halabja on a map? (He couldn't find WWII)
Do you think he might have owned some Alcolac stock?

"The provision of chemical precursors from United States companies to Iraq was enabled by a Ronald Reagan administration policy that removed Iraq from the State Department's list of State Sponsors of Terrorism.

"Leaked portions of Iraq's 'Full, Final and Complete' disclosure of the sources for its weapons programs shows that thiodiglycol, a substance needed to manufacture mustard gas, was among the chemical precursors provided to Iraq from US companies such as Alcolac International and Phillips.

Halabja poison gas attack - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This country would be much more free if chicken shit like you were born dead.

That is sick
Dis agreeing with your fellow American does not mean you should conduct your self as such
RR had NOTHING to do with Kuwait
RR made no choices to kill, torture, rape millions
To put an entire region in turmoil
The US had 5,000 troops in Saudi, an event that gets lost in 9-11
The very reason OBL stated he masterminded 9-11. Why were they there?
To protect Saudi from Saddam
Basically, the very presence in Saudi Arabia of the 5,000 U.S. soldiers and fliers who are there to help protect them from Iraq, Iran and Saudi radicals.

For the Saudi royal family, American troops are both savior and embarrassment. Many in the fundamentalist Muslim population of that sprawling, oil-rich kingdom consider the presence of "foreign infidels" on sacred Saudi soil an insult to Islam. And they blame the Saudi royals, whom they accuse of corruption and immorality, for having brought the infidels in to begin with.

The U.S. troops keep an eagle eye on Iraq and Iran through daily surveillance flights, thus protecting both Saudi Arabia and our vital oil interests. The nervous Saudi rulers foot the bill, but they insist the troops not only keep their heads low, but stick them in the sand. There's little Saudi acknowledgment of the U.S. military presence sometimes even denial. American troops are urged to stay close to barracks, and they're forbidden to fly the American flag, even at their base.

Our Saudi Friends Let U.s. Troops Down . . . - New York Daily News

Saddam was a mad man that RR had nothing to do with his mental state, his murder of over 2 million according to the NY times

Your ignorance is sick.

Ronald Reagan was responsible for removing Saddam's Iraq from the State Department's list of terrorist countries in 1982, a month after he signed off on NSDD 114 which expanded US-Iraq relations generally.

"But it was Donald Rumsfeld’s trip to Baghdad which opened of the floodgates during 1985-90 for lucrative U.S. weapons exports–some $1.5 billion worth– including chemical/biological and nuclear weapons equipment and technology, along with critical components for missile delivery systems for all of the above. According to a 1994 GAO Letter Report (GAO/NSIAD-94-98) some 771 weapons export licenses for Iraq were approved during this six year period….not by our European allies, but by the U.S. Department of Commerce."

Who Armed Iraq? » Counterpunch: Tells the Facts, Names the Names

Ronald Reagan who didn't fight for his country in WWII made it possible for Saddam to amass the military firepower to invade Kuwait.

The Reagan Doctrine included ethnic cleansing, the mass murder of civilians, and the funding of a mercenary army (the Contras) to which he claimed to belong. Death squads through out El Salvador, Guatemala, and Nicaragua celebrated Reagan's doctrine because it allowed them a free hand to kill innocent civilians on behalf of the rich parasites that Reagan devoted his life to serving.

1999/05/20

 

[georgephillip]

What does the events of the 80s have to do with Kuwait?
Saddams surrender?
Ignoring terms of surrender (survival)
9-11
Al Qaeda taking up arms in Iraq prior to invasion?
550 metric tons of yellow cake in Iraq?
Harboring as well financing numerous terrorist organizations
torture
rape
murder (NY times claims 2 million)

Why do you people defends this maniac so much?

Why do you people defend those who profit from wars they are too cowardly to fight in?
Why do you people defend thiodiglycol?
Why do you people defend the murder, maiming, incarceration and displacement of millions of Iraqis at the hands of your own government since March of 2003?
Because Saddam was evil?
Clean your own stye first, and then name the greatest purveyor of violence on this planet.

The murdering, maiming went n long before 3/2003
Saddam made choices that the world could no longer tolerate
There were 34 countries that invaded Iraq

The greatest purveyor of violence? Where do I start?
Hitler?
Saddam?

That would be 2 at the top of the list. they both killed millions of people for no other reason that they were people

"April 4 is the anniversary of another significant but lesser known date in MLK’s life. It was on this date, in 1967, exactly one year before he was killed, King appeared at Riverside Church in New York City. He outlined why he opposed the Vietnam War. It would become known as his 'Beyond Vietnam' address.

"Today we will listen to another speech of King’s against the Vietnam War given shortly after his Riverside Church address.

He would call the United States 'the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today' and note that 'A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death.'"

The United States Is "The Greatest Purveyor of Violence in the World Today": We Hear From Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.

Hitler and Saddam killed millions for the same reasons US presidents have killed millions.
It puts more money in the pockets of the rich parasites who fund their political campaigns.

 

[JRK]

You're too fucking stupid to be human.

Do you think Reagan could find Halabja on a map? (He couldn't find WWII)
Do you think he might have owned some Alcolac stock?

"The provision of chemical precursors from United States companies to Iraq was enabled by a Ronald Reagan administration policy that removed Iraq from the State Department's list of State Sponsors of Terrorism.

"Leaked portions of Iraq's 'Full, Final and Complete' disclosure of the sources for its weapons programs shows that thiodiglycol, a substance needed to manufacture mustard gas, was among the chemical precursors provided to Iraq from US companies such as Alcolac International and Phillips.

Halabja poison gas attack - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This country would be much more free if chicken shit like you were born dead.

That is sick
Dis agreeing with your fellow American does not mean you should conduct your self as such
RR had NOTHING to do with Kuwait
RR made no choices to kill, torture, rape millions
To put an entire region in turmoil
The US had 5,000 troops in Saudi, an event that gets lost in 9-11
The very reason OBL stated he masterminded 9-11. Why were they there?
To protect Saudi from Saddam
Basically, the very presence in Saudi Arabia of the 5,000 U.S. soldiers and fliers who are there to help protect them from Iraq, Iran and Saudi radicals.

For the Saudi royal family, American troops are both savior and embarrassment. Many in the fundamentalist Muslim population of that sprawling, oil-rich kingdom consider the presence of "foreign infidels" on sacred Saudi soil an insult to Islam. And they blame the Saudi royals, whom they accuse of corruption and immorality, for having brought the infidels in to begin with.

The U.S. troops keep an eagle eye on Iraq and Iran through daily surveillance flights, thus protecting both Saudi Arabia and our vital oil interests. The nervous Saudi rulers foot the bill, but they insist the troops not only keep their heads low, but stick them in the sand. There's little Saudi acknowledgment of the U.S. military presence sometimes even denial. American troops are urged to stay close to barracks, and they're forbidden to fly the American flag, even at their base.

Our Saudi Friends Let U.s. Troops Down . . . - New York Daily News

Saddam was a mad man that RR had nothing to do with his mental state, his murder of over 2 million according to the NY times

Your ignorance is sick.

Ronald Reagan was responsible for removing Saddam's Iraq from the State Department's list of terrorist countries in 1982, a month after he signed off on NSDD 114 which expanded US-Iraq relations generally.

"But it was Donald Rumsfeld’s trip to Baghdad which opened of the floodgates during 1985-90 for lucrative U.S. weapons exports–some $1.5 billion worth– including chemical/biological and nuclear weapons equipment and technology, along with critical components for missile delivery systems for all of the above. According to a 1994 GAO Letter Report (GAO/NSIAD-94-98) some 771 weapons export licenses for Iraq were approved during this six year period….not by our European allies, but by the U.S. Department of Commerce."

Who Armed Iraq? » Counterpunch: Tells the Facts, Names the Names

Ronald Reagan who didn't fight for his country in WWII made it possible for Saddam to amass the military firepower to invade Kuwait.

The Reagan Doctrine included ethnic cleansing, the mass murder of civilians, and the funding of a mercenary army (the Contras) to which he claimed to belong. Death squads through out El Salvador, Guatemala, and Nicaragua celebrated Reagan's doctrine because it allowed them a free hand to kill innocent civilians on behalf of the rich parasites that Reagan devoted his life to serving.

1999/05/20

RR had nothing to do with Saddam being Saddam
You keep talking of alleged events that have nothing to do with the killing, torture and rape of millions of innocent Iraqis
You keep using a link that is nothing but a bunch of left wing hacks that have nothing to do with Kuwait
The UNs failure to control Saddam
9-11
Al Qaeda setting base up in Iraq BEFORE we invaded
1000s of WMDs still un accounted for, WMDs that according to Iraq and the UN existed, as well as those found prior to us invading as well as chemicals used in the making of mustard gas

You keep talking about events that have nothing to do with any of this
BTW, here is some others who had the same opinion as I did

[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." -- From a letter signed by Joe Lieberman, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara A. Milulski, Tom Daschle, & John Kerry among others on October 9, 1998

"This December will mark three years since United Nations inspectors last visited Iraq. There is no doubt that since that time, Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to refine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer- range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." -- From a December 6, 2001 letter signed by Bob Graham, Joe Lieberman, Harold Ford, & Tom Lantos among others

"Whereas Iraq has consistently breached its cease-fire agreement between Iraq and the United States, entered into on March 3, 1991, by failing to dismantle its weapons of mass destruction program, and refusing to permit monitoring and verification by United Nations inspections; Whereas Iraq has developed weapons of mass destruction, including chemical and biological capabilities, and has made positive progress toward developing nuclear weapons capabilities" -- From a joint resolution submitted by Tom Harkin and Arlen Specter on July 18, 2002

"Saddam's goal ... is to achieve the lifting of U.N. sanctions while retaining and enhancing Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. We cannot, we must not and we will not let him succeed." -- Madeline Albright, 1998

"(Saddam) will rebuild his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and some day, some way, I am certain he will use that arsenal again, as he has 10 times since 1983" -- National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, Feb 18, 1998

"Iraq made commitments after the Gulf War to completely dismantle all weapons of mass destruction, and unfortunately, Iraq has not lived up to its agreement." -- Barbara Boxer, November 8, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retained some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capability. Intelligence reports also indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons, but has not yet achieved nuclear capability." -- Robert Byrd, October 2002

"There's no question that Saddam Hussein is a threat... Yes, he has chemical and biological weapons. He's had those for a long time. But the United States right now is on a very much different defensive posture than we were before September 11th of 2001... He is, as far as we know, actively pursuing nuclear capabilities, though he doesn't have nuclear warheads yet. If he were to acquire nuclear weapons, I think our friends in the region would face greatly increased risks as would we." -- Wesley Clark on September 26, 2002

"What is at stake is how to answer the potential threat Iraq represents with the risk of proliferation of WMD. Baghdad's regime did use such weapons in the past. Today, a number of evidences may lead to think that, over the past four years, in the absence of international inspectors, this country has continued armament programs." -- Jacques Chirac, October 16, 2002

"The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow." -- Bill Clinton in 1998

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security." -- Hillary Clinton, October 10, 2002

"I am absolutely convinced that there are weapons...I saw evidence back in 1998 when we would see the inspectors being barred from gaining entry into a warehouse for three hours with trucks rolling up and then moving those trucks out." -- Clinton's Secretary of Defense William Cohen in April of 2003

"Iraq is not the only nation in the world to possess weapons of mass destruction, but it is the only nation with a leader who has used them against his own people." -- Tom Daschle in 1998

"Saddam Hussein's regime represents a grave threat to America and our allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades, Saddam Hussein has sought weapons of mass destruction through every available means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons. He has already used them against his neighbors and his own people, and is trying to build more. We know that he is doing everything he can to build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he gets closer to achieving that goal." -- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

"The debate over Iraq is not about politics. It is about national security. It should be clear that our national security requires Congress to send a clear message to Iraq and the world: America is united in its determination to eliminate forever the threat of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction." -- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

"I share the administration's goals in dealing with Iraq and its weapons of mass destruction." -- Dick Gephardt in September of 2002

"Iraq does pose a serious threat to the stability of the Persian Gulf and we should organize an international coalition to eliminate his access to weapons of mass destruction. Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to completely deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." -- Al Gore, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction." -- Bob Graham, December 2002

"Saddam Hussein is not the only deranged dictator who is willing to deprive his people in order to acquire weapons of mass destruction." -- Jim Jeffords, October 8, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." -- Ted Kennedy, September 27, 2002

"There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein's regime is a serious danger, that he is a tyrant, and that his pursuit of lethal weapons of mass destruction cannot be tolerated. He must be disarmed." -- Ted Kennedy, Sept 27, 2002

"I will be voting to give the president of the United States the authority to use force - if necessary - to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." -- John F. Kerry, Oct 2002

"The threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but as I said, it is not new. It has been with us since the end of that war, and particularly in the last 4 years we know after Operation Desert Fox failed to force him to reaccept them, that he has continued to build those weapons. He has had a free hand for 4 years to reconstitute these weapons, allowing the world, during the interval, to lose the focus we had on weapons of mass destruction and the issue of proliferation." -- John Kerry, October 9, 2002

"(W)e need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime. We all know the litany of his offenses. He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. ...And now he is miscalculating America�s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction. That is why the world, through the United Nations Security Council, has spoken with one voice, demanding that Iraq disclose its weapons programs and disarm. So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but it is not new. It has been with us since the end of the Persian Gulf War." -- John Kerry, Jan 23, 2003

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandates of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." -- Carl Levin, Sept 19, 2002

"Every day Saddam remains in power with chemical weapons, biological weapons, and the development of nuclear weapons is a day of danger for the United States." -- Joe Lieberman, August, 2002

"Over the years, Iraq has worked to develop nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. During 1991 - 1994, despite Iraq's denials, U.N. inspectors discovered and dismantled a large network of nuclear facilities that Iraq was using to develop nuclear weapons. Various reports indicate that Iraq is still actively pursuing nuclear weapons capability. There is no reason to think otherwise. Beyond nuclear weapons, Iraq has actively pursued biological and chemical weapons.U.N. inspectors have said that Iraq's claims about biological weapons is neither credible nor verifiable. In 1986, Iraq used chemical weapons against Iran, and later, against its own Kurdish population. While weapons inspections have been successful in the past, there have been no inspections since the end of 1998. There can be no doubt that Iraq has continued to pursue its goal of obtaining weapons of mass destruction." -- Patty Murray, October 9, 2002

"As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." -- Nancy Pelosi, December 16, 1998

"Even today, Iraq is not nearly disarmed. Based on highly credible intelligence, UNSCOM [the U.N. weapons inspectors] suspects that Iraq still has biological agents like anthrax, botulinum toxin, and clostridium perfringens in sufficient quantity to fill several dozen bombs and ballistic missile warheads, as well as the means to continue manufacturing these deadly agents. Iraq probably retains several tons of the highly toxic VX substance, as well as sarin nerve gas and mustard gas. This agent is stored in artillery shells, bombs, and ballistic missile warheads. And Iraq retains significant dual-use industrial infrastructure that can be used to rapidly reconstitute large-scale chemical weapons production." -- Ex-Un Weapons Inspector Scott Ritter in 1998

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years. And that may happen sooner if he can obtain access to enriched uranium from foreign sources -- something that is not that difficult in the current world. We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." -- John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002

"Saddam�s existing biological and chemical weapons capabilities pose a very real threat to America, now. Saddam has used chemical weapons before, both against Iraq�s enemies and against his own people. He is working to develop delivery systems like missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles that could bring these deadly weapons against U.S. forces and U.S. facilities in the Middle East." -- John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002

"Whether one agrees or disagrees with the Administration�s policy towards Iraq, I don�t think there can be any question about Saddam�s conduct. He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do. He lies and cheats; he snubs the mandate and authority of international weapons inspectors; and he games the system to keep buying time against enforcement of the just and legitimate demands of the United Nations, the Security Council, the United States and our allies. Those are simply the facts." -- Henry Waxman, Oct 10, 2002

RightWingNews.com :: Archives

 

[JRK]

Mac1958 you have joined the list of those who no longer deserve any consideration
It takes allot to join that list
I will pray for you, I hope you find peace with what ever it is that has you treating our fallen war heroes the way you do and also pray no marines ever catch you doing the same
That is not a threat Mac, you need to realize that every action has a re action

Mine is to ignore you
Good luck on being you Mac
with that attitude I can only pray you remain lucky enough for those same Marines you did such an in justice to on this message board keep your freedoms and you safety in tact
That is exactly what they were doing when they gave it all
all of them Mac

Army
Navy
Air Force
KBR employees
Coast gaurd

all of them put it on the line for you Mac

 

[JRK]

Why do you people defend those who profit from wars they are too cowardly to fight in?
Why do you people defend thiodiglycol?
Why do you people defend the murder, maiming, incarceration and displacement of millions of Iraqis at the hands of your own government since March of 2003?
Because Saddam was evil?
Clean your own stye first, and then name the greatest purveyor of violence on this planet.

The murdering, maiming went n long before 3/2003
Saddam made choices that the world could no longer tolerate
There were 34 countries that invaded Iraq

The greatest purveyor of violence? Where do I start?
Hitler?
Saddam?

That would be 2 at the top of the list. they both killed millions of people for no other reason that they were people

"April 4 is the anniversary of another significant but lesser known date in MLK’s life. It was on this date, in 1967, exactly one year before he was killed, King appeared at Riverside Church in New York City. He outlined why he opposed the Vietnam War. It would become known as his 'Beyond Vietnam' address.

"Today we will listen to another speech of King’s against the Vietnam War given shortly after his Riverside Church address.

He would call the United States 'the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today' and note that 'A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death.'"

The United States Is "The Greatest Purveyor of Violence in the World Today": We Hear From Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.

Hitler and Saddam killed millions for the same reasons US presidents have killed millions.
It puts more money in the pockets of the rich parasites who fund their political campaigns.

You know your about to join Mac
I have no issue with dis agreeing with the policies of the US govt, I have issues with some policies my self
I have no issue with dis agreeing with me
But to compare the US with Saddam or Hitler?
Your way out of line
There is no reality in the train of thought. That is so far far from reality I have nothing I can say to even debate that except you may be living in the wrong country with the way you feel about this one
Dude what ever your issue is, Bill Clinton did not cause it
Jimmy Carter
Obama
Bush 1 or 2

 

[georgephillip]

That is sick
Dis agreeing with your fellow American does not mean you should conduct your self as such
RR had NOTHING to do with Kuwait
RR made no choices to kill, torture, rape millions
To put an entire region in turmoil
The US had 5,000 troops in Saudi, an event that gets lost in 9-11
The very reason OBL stated he masterminded 9-11. Why were they there?
To protect Saudi from Saddam
Basically, the very presence in Saudi Arabia of the 5,000 U.S. soldiers and fliers who are there to help protect them from Iraq, Iran and Saudi radicals.

For the Saudi royal family, American troops are both savior and embarrassment. Many in the fundamentalist Muslim population of that sprawling, oil-rich kingdom consider the presence of "foreign infidels" on sacred Saudi soil an insult to Islam. And they blame the Saudi royals, whom they accuse of corruption and immorality, for having brought the infidels in to begin with.

The U.S. troops keep an eagle eye on Iraq and Iran through daily surveillance flights, thus protecting both Saudi Arabia and our vital oil interests. The nervous Saudi rulers foot the bill, but they insist the troops not only keep their heads low, but stick them in the sand. There's little Saudi acknowledgment of the U.S. military presence sometimes even denial. American troops are urged to stay close to barracks, and they're forbidden to fly the American flag, even at their base.

Our Saudi Friends Let U.s. Troops Down . . . - New York Daily News

Saddam was a mad man that RR had nothing to do with his mental state, his murder of over 2 million according to the NY times

Your ignorance is sick.

Ronald Reagan was responsible for removing Saddam's Iraq from the State Department's list of terrorist countries in 1982, a month after he signed off on NSDD 114 which expanded US-Iraq relations generally.

"But it was Donald Rumsfeld’s trip to Baghdad which opened of the floodgates during 1985-90 for lucrative U.S. weapons exports–some $1.5 billion worth– including chemical/biological and nuclear weapons equipment and technology, along with critical components for missile delivery systems for all of the above. According to a 1994 GAO Letter Report (GAO/NSIAD-94-98) some 771 weapons export licenses for Iraq were approved during this six year period….not by our European allies, but by the U.S. Department of Commerce."

Who Armed Iraq? » Counterpunch: Tells the Facts, Names the Names

Ronald Reagan who didn't fight for his country in WWII made it possible for Saddam to amass the military firepower to invade Kuwait.

The Reagan Doctrine included ethnic cleansing, the mass murder of civilians, and the funding of a mercenary army (the Contras) to which he claimed to belong. Death squads through out El Salvador, Guatemala, and Nicaragua celebrated Reagan's doctrine because it allowed them a free hand to kill innocent civilians on behalf of the rich parasites that Reagan devoted his life to serving.

1999/05/20

RR had nothing to do with Saddam being Saddam
You keep talking of alleged events that have nothing to do with the killing, torture and rape of millions of innocent Iraqis
You keep using a link that is nothing but a bunch of left wing hacks that have nothing to do with Kuwait
The UNs failure to control Saddam
9-11
Al Qaeda setting base up in Iraq BEFORE we invaded
1000s of WMDs still un accounted for, WMDs that according to Iraq and the UN existed, as well as those found prior to us invading as well as chemicals used in the making of mustard gas

You keep talking about events that have nothing to do with any of this
BTW, here is some others who had the same opinion as I did

[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." -- From a letter signed by Joe Lieberman, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara A. Milulski, Tom Daschle, & John Kerry among others on October 9, 1998

"This December will mark three years since United Nations inspectors last visited Iraq. There is no doubt that since that time, Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to refine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer- range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." -- From a December 6, 2001 letter signed by Bob Graham, Joe Lieberman, Harold Ford, & Tom Lantos among others

"Whereas Iraq has consistently breached its cease-fire agreement between Iraq and the United States, entered into on March 3, 1991, by failing to dismantle its weapons of mass destruction program, and refusing to permit monitoring and verification by United Nations inspections; Whereas Iraq has developed weapons of mass destruction, including chemical and biological capabilities, and has made positive progress toward developing nuclear weapons capabilities" -- From a joint resolution submitted by Tom Harkin and Arlen Specter on July 18, 2002

"Saddam's goal ... is to achieve the lifting of U.N. sanctions while retaining and enhancing Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. We cannot, we must not and we will not let him succeed." -- Madeline Albright, 1998

"(Saddam) will rebuild his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and some day, some way, I am certain he will use that arsenal again, as he has 10 times since 1983" -- National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, Feb 18, 1998

"Iraq made commitments after the Gulf War to completely dismantle all weapons of mass destruction, and unfortunately, Iraq has not lived up to its agreement." -- Barbara Boxer, November 8, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retained some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capability. Intelligence reports also indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons, but has not yet achieved nuclear capability." -- Robert Byrd, October 2002

"There's no question that Saddam Hussein is a threat... Yes, he has chemical and biological weapons. He's had those for a long time. But the United States right now is on a very much different defensive posture than we were before September 11th of 2001... He is, as far as we know, actively pursuing nuclear capabilities, though he doesn't have nuclear warheads yet. If he were to acquire nuclear weapons, I think our friends in the region would face greatly increased risks as would we." -- Wesley Clark on September 26, 2002

"What is at stake is how to answer the potential threat Iraq represents with the risk of proliferation of WMD. Baghdad's regime did use such weapons in the past. Today, a number of evidences may lead to think that, over the past four years, in the absence of international inspectors, this country has continued armament programs." -- Jacques Chirac, October 16, 2002

"The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow." -- Bill Clinton in 1998

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security." -- Hillary Clinton, October 10, 2002

"I am absolutely convinced that there are weapons...I saw evidence back in 1998 when we would see the inspectors being barred from gaining entry into a warehouse for three hours with trucks rolling up and then moving those trucks out." -- Clinton's Secretary of Defense William Cohen in April of 2003

"Iraq is not the only nation in the world to possess weapons of mass destruction, but it is the only nation with a leader who has used them against his own people." -- Tom Daschle in 1998

"Saddam Hussein's regime represents a grave threat to America and our allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades, Saddam Hussein has sought weapons of mass destruction through every available means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons. He has already used them against his neighbors and his own people, and is trying to build more. We know that he is doing everything he can to build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he gets closer to achieving that goal." -- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

"The debate over Iraq is not about politics. It is about national security. It should be clear that our national security requires Congress to send a clear message to Iraq and the world: America is united in its determination to eliminate forever the threat of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction." -- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

"I share the administration's goals in dealing with Iraq and its weapons of mass destruction." -- Dick Gephardt in September of 2002

"Iraq does pose a serious threat to the stability of the Persian Gulf and we should organize an international coalition to eliminate his access to weapons of mass destruction. Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to completely deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." -- Al Gore, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction." -- Bob Graham, December 2002

"Saddam Hussein is not the only deranged dictator who is willing to deprive his people in order to acquire weapons of mass destruction." -- Jim Jeffords, October 8, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." -- Ted Kennedy, September 27, 2002

"There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein's regime is a serious danger, that he is a tyrant, and that his pursuit of lethal weapons of mass destruction cannot be tolerated. He must be disarmed." -- Ted Kennedy, Sept 27, 2002

"I will be voting to give the president of the United States the authority to use force - if necessary - to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." -- John F. Kerry, Oct 2002

"The threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but as I said, it is not new. It has been with us since the end of that war, and particularly in the last 4 years we know after Operation Desert Fox failed to force him to reaccept them, that he has continued to build those weapons. He has had a free hand for 4 years to reconstitute these weapons, allowing the world, during the interval, to lose the focus we had on weapons of mass destruction and the issue of proliferation." -- John Kerry, October 9, 2002

"(W)e need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime. We all know the litany of his offenses. He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. ...And now he is miscalculating America�s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction. That is why the world, through the United Nations Security Council, has spoken with one voice, demanding that Iraq disclose its weapons programs and disarm. So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but it is not new. It has been with us since the end of the Persian Gulf War." -- John Kerry, Jan 23, 2003

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandates of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." -- Carl Levin, Sept 19, 2002

"Every day Saddam remains in power with chemical weapons, biological weapons, and the development of nuclear weapons is a day of danger for the United States." -- Joe Lieberman, August, 2002

"Over the years, Iraq has worked to develop nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. During 1991 - 1994, despite Iraq's denials, U.N. inspectors discovered and dismantled a large network of nuclear facilities that Iraq was using to develop nuclear weapons. Various reports indicate that Iraq is still actively pursuing nuclear weapons capability. There is no reason to think otherwise. Beyond nuclear weapons, Iraq has actively pursued biological and chemical weapons.U.N. inspectors have said that Iraq's claims about biological weapons is neither credible nor verifiable. In 1986, Iraq used chemical weapons against Iran, and later, against its own Kurdish population. While weapons inspections have been successful in the past, there have been no inspections since the end of 1998. There can be no doubt that Iraq has continued to pursue its goal of obtaining weapons of mass destruction." -- Patty Murray, October 9, 2002

"As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." -- Nancy Pelosi, December 16, 1998

"Even today, Iraq is not nearly disarmed. Based on highly credible intelligence, UNSCOM [the U.N. weapons inspectors] suspects that Iraq still has biological agents like anthrax, botulinum toxin, and clostridium perfringens in sufficient quantity to fill several dozen bombs and ballistic missile warheads, as well as the means to continue manufacturing these deadly agents. Iraq probably retains several tons of the highly toxic VX substance, as well as sarin nerve gas and mustard gas. This agent is stored in artillery shells, bombs, and ballistic missile warheads. And Iraq retains significant dual-use industrial infrastructure that can be used to rapidly reconstitute large-scale chemical weapons production." -- Ex-Un Weapons Inspector Scott Ritter in 1998

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years. And that may happen sooner if he can obtain access to enriched uranium from foreign sources -- something that is not that difficult in the current world. We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." -- John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002

"Saddam�s existing biological and chemical weapons capabilities pose a very real threat to America, now. Saddam has used chemical weapons before, both against Iraq�s enemies and against his own people. He is working to develop delivery systems like missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles that could bring these deadly weapons against U.S. forces and U.S. facilities in the Middle East." -- John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002

"Whether one agrees or disagrees with the Administration�s policy towards Iraq, I don�t think there can be any question about Saddam�s conduct. He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do. He lies and cheats; he snubs the mandate and authority of international weapons inspectors; and he games the system to keep buying time against enforcement of the just and legitimate demands of the United Nations, the Security Council, the United States and our allies. Those are simply the facts." -- Henry Waxman, Oct 10, 2002

RightWingNews.com :: Archives

How many US civilians did Saddam displace?

"The American invasion of Iraq and the war to follow caused an estimated four million Iraqis to flee their homes within four years, the largest exodus since the mass migrations associated with the creation of the state of Israel in 1948."

Iraqi Refugees News - Breaking World Iraq News - The New York Times

How many US civilians did Saddam murder, maim, or incarcerate.
How many US women were raped by Saddam's Republicans?
Why do you continually evade the war crimes committed by your government?
Are you ashamed you didn't take part in their commission?

 

[JRK]

Claiming the US is in the business of starting wars so KBR can make 1-3% profit feeding the troops is nuts
he chaos of working in the war zone, and a contract that limits profits, KBR's margins on its hazardous work are pretty marginal.
The Wall Street Journal notes that the Iraq contracts call for KBR to be reimbursed for its costs plus 1 percent. The company can also bill the military for a portion of its administration and overhead and can earn performance bonuses. KBR spends a lot of effort funneling taxpayer money to subcontractors, who may themselves be getting rich off of Iraq-related work. Meanwhile, the Iraq work has required KBR to incur big expenses of its own—higher insurance costs for operating in a hazardous region, recruiting costs for hiring new employees for dangerous duty, and administrative costs for handling a huge amount of new business quickly.
An excellent front-page article in yesterday's Wall Street Journal by Russell Gold shows that, depending on how you look at it, KBR has either made the best of a horrible situation or has screwed up big time. At times, KBR seems to function more like a dot-com on its last legs than the ultra-efficient logistics unit of a Fortune 500 company. Suppliers don't get paid and invoices are routinely lost. As KBR rushed into Iraq, "Many of its systems, from procurement to billing, got overloaded, creating a breeding ground for potential corruption and more inflated prices—not to mention inefficiency on a huge scale," Gold writes.
When you're a logistics company—and one working on a 1 percent profit margin—inefficiency is a killer. That's why for service companies like Halliburton, landing huge contracts is less than half the battle. Improperly executed, a huge contract can become a gigantic liability. So while KBR may land deals because of its connections and experience, it hasn't shown much ability of late to carry them out profitably.

Halliburton, the profitless war profiteer. - Slate Magazine

KBR provides the same service other companies do in places were there is no war, for the same or less profit
People need to look into this stuff before they just make this crap up or re peat lies

 

[JRK]

Your ignorance is sick.

Ronald Reagan was responsible for removing Saddam's Iraq from the State Department's list of terrorist countries in 1982, a month after he signed off on NSDD 114 which expanded US-Iraq relations generally.

"But it was Donald Rumsfeld’s trip to Baghdad which opened of the floodgates during 1985-90 for lucrative U.S. weapons exports–some $1.5 billion worth– including chemical/biological and nuclear weapons equipment and technology, along with critical components for missile delivery systems for all of the above. According to a 1994 GAO Letter Report (GAO/NSIAD-94-98) some 771 weapons export licenses for Iraq were approved during this six year period….not by our European allies, but by the U.S. Department of Commerce."

Who Armed Iraq? » Counterpunch: Tells the Facts, Names the Names

Ronald Reagan who didn't fight for his country in WWII made it possible for Saddam to amass the military firepower to invade Kuwait.

The Reagan Doctrine included ethnic cleansing, the mass murder of civilians, and the funding of a mercenary army (the Contras) to which he claimed to belong. Death squads through out El Salvador, Guatemala, and Nicaragua celebrated Reagan's doctrine because it allowed them a free hand to kill innocent civilians on behalf of the rich parasites that Reagan devoted his life to serving.

1999/05/20

RR had nothing to do with Saddam being Saddam
You keep talking of alleged events that have nothing to do with the killing, torture and rape of millions of innocent Iraqis
You keep using a link that is nothing but a bunch of left wing hacks that have nothing to do with Kuwait
The UNs failure to control Saddam
9-11
Al Qaeda setting base up in Iraq BEFORE we invaded
1000s of WMDs still un accounted for, WMDs that according to Iraq and the UN existed, as well as those found prior to us invading as well as chemicals used in the making of mustard gas

You keep talking about events that have nothing to do with any of this
BTW, here is some others who had the same opinion as I did

[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." -- From a letter signed by Joe Lieberman, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara A. Milulski, Tom Daschle, & John Kerry among others on October 9, 1998

"This December will mark three years since United Nations inspectors last visited Iraq. There is no doubt that since that time, Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to refine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer- range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." -- From a December 6, 2001 letter signed by Bob Graham, Joe Lieberman, Harold Ford, & Tom Lantos among others

"Whereas Iraq has consistently breached its cease-fire agreement between Iraq and the United States, entered into on March 3, 1991, by failing to dismantle its weapons of mass destruction program, and refusing to permit monitoring and verification by United Nations inspections; Whereas Iraq has developed weapons of mass destruction, including chemical and biological capabilities, and has made positive progress toward developing nuclear weapons capabilities" -- From a joint resolution submitted by Tom Harkin and Arlen Specter on July 18, 2002

"Saddam's goal ... is to achieve the lifting of U.N. sanctions while retaining and enhancing Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. We cannot, we must not and we will not let him succeed." -- Madeline Albright, 1998

"(Saddam) will rebuild his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and some day, some way, I am certain he will use that arsenal again, as he has 10 times since 1983" -- National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, Feb 18, 1998

"Iraq made commitments after the Gulf War to completely dismantle all weapons of mass destruction, and unfortunately, Iraq has not lived up to its agreement." -- Barbara Boxer, November 8, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retained some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capability. Intelligence reports also indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons, but has not yet achieved nuclear capability." -- Robert Byrd, October 2002

"There's no question that Saddam Hussein is a threat... Yes, he has chemical and biological weapons. He's had those for a long time. But the United States right now is on a very much different defensive posture than we were before September 11th of 2001... He is, as far as we know, actively pursuing nuclear capabilities, though he doesn't have nuclear warheads yet. If he were to acquire nuclear weapons, I think our friends in the region would face greatly increased risks as would we." -- Wesley Clark on September 26, 2002

"What is at stake is how to answer the potential threat Iraq represents with the risk of proliferation of WMD. Baghdad's regime did use such weapons in the past. Today, a number of evidences may lead to think that, over the past four years, in the absence of international inspectors, this country has continued armament programs." -- Jacques Chirac, October 16, 2002

"The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow." -- Bill Clinton in 1998

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security." -- Hillary Clinton, October 10, 2002

"I am absolutely convinced that there are weapons...I saw evidence back in 1998 when we would see the inspectors being barred from gaining entry into a warehouse for three hours with trucks rolling up and then moving those trucks out." -- Clinton's Secretary of Defense William Cohen in April of 2003

"Iraq is not the only nation in the world to possess weapons of mass destruction, but it is the only nation with a leader who has used them against his own people." -- Tom Daschle in 1998

"Saddam Hussein's regime represents a grave threat to America and our allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades, Saddam Hussein has sought weapons of mass destruction through every available means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons. He has already used them against his neighbors and his own people, and is trying to build more. We know that he is doing everything he can to build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he gets closer to achieving that goal." -- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

"The debate over Iraq is not about politics. It is about national security. It should be clear that our national security requires Congress to send a clear message to Iraq and the world: America is united in its determination to eliminate forever the threat of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction." -- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

"I share the administration's goals in dealing with Iraq and its weapons of mass destruction." -- Dick Gephardt in September of 2002

"Iraq does pose a serious threat to the stability of the Persian Gulf and we should organize an international coalition to eliminate his access to weapons of mass destruction. Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to completely deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." -- Al Gore, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction." -- Bob Graham, December 2002

"Saddam Hussein is not the only deranged dictator who is willing to deprive his people in order to acquire weapons of mass destruction." -- Jim Jeffords, October 8, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." -- Ted Kennedy, September 27, 2002

"There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein's regime is a serious danger, that he is a tyrant, and that his pursuit of lethal weapons of mass destruction cannot be tolerated. He must be disarmed." -- Ted Kennedy, Sept 27, 2002

"I will be voting to give the president of the United States the authority to use force - if necessary - to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." -- John F. Kerry, Oct 2002

"The threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but as I said, it is not new. It has been with us since the end of that war, and particularly in the last 4 years we know after Operation Desert Fox failed to force him to reaccept them, that he has continued to build those weapons. He has had a free hand for 4 years to reconstitute these weapons, allowing the world, during the interval, to lose the focus we had on weapons of mass destruction and the issue of proliferation." -- John Kerry, October 9, 2002

"(W)e need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime. We all know the litany of his offenses. He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. ...And now he is miscalculating America�s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction. That is why the world, through the United Nations Security Council, has spoken with one voice, demanding that Iraq disclose its weapons programs and disarm. So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but it is not new. It has been with us since the end of the Persian Gulf War." -- John Kerry, Jan 23, 2003

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandates of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." -- Carl Levin, Sept 19, 2002

"Every day Saddam remains in power with chemical weapons, biological weapons, and the development of nuclear weapons is a day of danger for the United States." -- Joe Lieberman, August, 2002

"Over the years, Iraq has worked to develop nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. During 1991 - 1994, despite Iraq's denials, U.N. inspectors discovered and dismantled a large network of nuclear facilities that Iraq was using to develop nuclear weapons. Various reports indicate that Iraq is still actively pursuing nuclear weapons capability. There is no reason to think otherwise. Beyond nuclear weapons, Iraq has actively pursued biological and chemical weapons.U.N. inspectors have said that Iraq's claims about biological weapons is neither credible nor verifiable. In 1986, Iraq used chemical weapons against Iran, and later, against its own Kurdish population. While weapons inspections have been successful in the past, there have been no inspections since the end of 1998. There can be no doubt that Iraq has continued to pursue its goal of obtaining weapons of mass destruction." -- Patty Murray, October 9, 2002

"As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." -- Nancy Pelosi, December 16, 1998

"Even today, Iraq is not nearly disarmed. Based on highly credible intelligence, UNSCOM [the U.N. weapons inspectors] suspects that Iraq still has biological agents like anthrax, botulinum toxin, and clostridium perfringens in sufficient quantity to fill several dozen bombs and ballistic missile warheads, as well as the means to continue manufacturing these deadly agents. Iraq probably retains several tons of the highly toxic VX substance, as well as sarin nerve gas and mustard gas. This agent is stored in artillery shells, bombs, and ballistic missile warheads. And Iraq retains significant dual-use industrial infrastructure that can be used to rapidly reconstitute large-scale chemical weapons production." -- Ex-Un Weapons Inspector Scott Ritter in 1998

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years. And that may happen sooner if he can obtain access to enriched uranium from foreign sources -- something that is not that difficult in the current world. We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." -- John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002

"Saddam�s existing biological and chemical weapons capabilities pose a very real threat to America, now. Saddam has used chemical weapons before, both against Iraq�s enemies and against his own people. He is working to develop delivery systems like missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles that could bring these deadly weapons against U.S. forces and U.S. facilities in the Middle East." -- John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002

"Whether one agrees or disagrees with the Administration�s policy towards Iraq, I don�t think there can be any question about Saddam�s conduct. He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do. He lies and cheats; he snubs the mandate and authority of international weapons inspectors; and he games the system to keep buying time against enforcement of the just and legitimate demands of the United Nations, the Security Council, the United States and our allies. Those are simply the facts." -- Henry Waxman, Oct 10, 2002

RightWingNews.com :: Archives

How many US civilians did Saddam displace?

"The American invasion of Iraq and the war to follow caused an estimated four million Iraqis to flee their homes within four years, the largest exodus since the mass migrations associated with the creation of the state of Israel in 1948."

Iraqi Refugees News - Breaking World Iraq News - The New York Times

How many US civilians did Saddam murder, maim, or incarcerate.
How many US women were raped by Saddam's Republicans?
Why do you continually evade the war crimes committed by your government?
Are you ashamed you didn't take part in their commission?

so your not an American?
Good Bye

 

[gxnelson]

1) REMOVE SADDAM
DONE
2) STABILIZE COUNTRY
DONE
3) HAVE A REPUBLIC BORN OF THESE EVENTS
DONE

Am missing something here?

1. I'll give you that.
2. What stabilization? It's still utter chaos there with no official governement, or one that can control itself.
3. See above.

But alone the justification for going to war was enough to cause failure. Not to mention plunging the country into debt.

 

[JRK]

Saddam killed 2 million Iraqis
without Al Qaeda and Saddam loyalist, no-one in Iraq would have been dis placed
the 34 countries that went there to fight those Saddam loyalist, Al Qaeda and other radicals were not there to harm any-one as there ROE would not allow it

Most Iraqis dis placed were displaced in towns like Falluja, Towns were the radicals took over as bases to try and break the countries effort to become a democratic/republic and to kill as many soldiers from the 34 countries that supported the effort to remove Saddam

 

[JRK]

1) REMOVE SADDAM
DONE
2) STABILIZE COUNTRY
DONE
3) HAVE A REPUBLIC BORN OF THESE EVENTS
DONE

Am missing something here?

1. I'll give you that.
2. What stabilization? It's still utter chaos there with no official governement, or one that can control itself.
3. See above.

But alone the justification for going to war was enough to cause failure. Not to mention plunging the country into debt.

That is an opinion
That if you feel that way, I respect it
Iraq has had numerous elections.
If you were to look at the number of murders and crooked politicians we have in this country every year from the outside would you see this country as stable?

according to the latest US Department of Justice survey of crime victims, more than 6.6 million violent crimes (murder, rape, assault and robbery) are committed in the US each year, of which about 20 percent, or 1.3 million, are inter-racial crimes.[citat
Crime in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It is just the way it is printed, think about it

 

[Mac1958]

Mac1958 you have joined the list of those who no longer deserve any consideration
It takes allot to join that list
I will pray for you, I hope you find peace with what ever it is that has you treating our fallen war heroes the way you do and also pray no marines ever catch you doing the same
That is not a threat Mac, you need to realize that every action has a re action

Mine is to ignore you
Good luck on being you Mac
with that attitude I can only pray you remain lucky enough for those same Marines you did such an in justice to on this message board keep your freedoms and you safety in tact
That is exactly what they were doing when they gave it all
all of them Mac

Army
Navy
Air Force
KBR employees
Coast gaurd

all of them put it on the line for you Mac

JRK, I can certainly understand why you have chosen to avoid my direct question, but I'll still post it one last time. No, I'm not expecting an answer:

Can you say the following was worth it?

"Getting rid of Saddam was worth the lives of thousands of American troops, thousands of American troops maimed for life, thousands of American troops emotionally/mentally shattered forever, thousands of young American military families destroyed, thousands of young American children who will never see their brave Dad again, hundreds of billions of dollars that we don't have, not to mention the clear possibility that all of our so-called fucking nation-building will ultimately fail anyway, when we finally are out of there and the bad guys return, and the fact that Saddam's death tipped the balance of power in the Middle East to Iran. YES! INDEED! IT WAS WORTH IT."

Keep hiding behind our brave troops, JRK. Keep saying that you'll "pray for me".

And by all means, keep telling us how you "support our troops" while refusing to confirm the above paragraph. Bull. You're just another armchair general.

You're also a coward, JRK, you won't even stand behind your own words. Avoid me all you want. And save your "prayers" for yourself. You need 'em more than I do.

.

 

[JRK]

Mac
Mac
What part of ignore don't you get?
Marines are there thinking about you this morning, more tomorrow

 

[Mac1958]

Mac
Mac
What part of ignore don't you get?
Marines are there thinking about you this morning, more tomorrow

I thought you were ignoring me.

Too funny.

Now, keep avoiding my direct question, and tell us how you "support the troops" you love to send into horrific situations.


.

 

[GoneBezerk]

It's just time to ignore the idiots. They lie to themselves about the facts to believe Bush was the boogeyman.

None of them served in the military and many of them hate the military, so fuck them.

 

[Mac1958]

It's just time to ignore the idiots. They lie to themselves about the facts to believe Bush was the boogeyman.

None of them served in the military and many of them hate the military, so fuck them.

Hey, GoneBezerk, great to have you join in! I have no doubt you'll be more than happy to answer this simple and direct question. Please review the following statement:

"Getting rid of Saddam was worth the lives of thousands of American troops, thousands of American troops maimed for life, thousands of American troops emotionally/mentally shattered forever, thousands of young American military families destroyed, thousands of young American children who will never see their brave Dad again, hundreds of billions of dollars that we don't have, not to mention the clear possibility that all of our so-called fucking nation-building will ultimately fail anyway, when we finally are out of there and the bad guys return, and the fact that Saddam's death tipped the balance of power in the Middle East to Iran."

Do you agree with this? I assume you do, since you appear to be defending the Iraq War. JRK doesn't seem willing to address this, he keeps avoiding. Surely you're more willing to show some backbone. Should be a simple call for ya. Easy as pie.

Yes or no, GoneBezerk? Do you agree with the above statement?

Yes or no?

.

 

[JRK]

It's just time to ignore the idiots. They lie to themselves about the facts to believe Bush was the boogeyman.

None of them served in the military and many of them hate the military, so fuck them.

I have little issue with those who dos agree with policy
I have serious issue with the lies and down right dis respect some show who either do not live in this country nor have no respect for the sacrifice so few have given for so many

Al Qaeda was in Iraq prior to invasion, that has been confirmed
Saddam had ignored the terms of surrender
That was confirmed
The press reports the killing in Iraq as though it is only in Iraq yet we had 6 million violent crimes in the US last year
does it matter if those killings are for drugs or control of a country?
You could write the story as though Mexico and the drug lords are at war with the US, same with the inter city violence to control "turf"

When I was young in cities like in south Florida the police made the drug dealers stamp there manila envelopes with there turf "signa" to maintain peace. No different than the different than creating a new govt as we have accomplished in Iraq

There will allways be problems

It is no different than the battles we fight in our streets to maintain peace

The cops remove the bad guys as Al Qaeda, Saddam loyalist and other terror groups suck as chezks (Muslims) and Iranians and Pakistani's

Saddam was removed
Al Qaeda was demolished
A democratic govt has been formed
Weapons and the 550 metric tons of yellow cake is gone and secure in Canada, it took until 2008
Rape, Torture as well as massive political executions are a thing of the past as Saddam had over seen
Bases were closed in Saudi and Kuwait, billions of dollars saved that would included the funding of the UNs failure to oversee Saddam's games
Iraq is re building and producing oil that without today fuel could be a unknown amount higher than it actually is

History will show this to be sad as well as a very controversial event that was the right thing to do

34 countries
I thank them all