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

[idb]

The 4000 women and men who sacrificed there Lives did it because they felt it was the right thing to do. Who are you to question that?
as far as the money goes, BHO failed stimulus cost as much as the IRAQI war
WMDs gone
yellow cake gone
A man who had killed over 1 million people, gone
Lied to the world when he was given 100s of chances

Is this private?
Wouldn't it be tragic if the 4,000 people were deceived and died for a false cause?

Naw, feel free to jump in at any time.

Oh and if the mark is 1 million killed, how many Asians died when we secretly bombed Laos and Cambodia, not to mention the Christmas Carpet bombing of Hanoi? Does that mean Johnson and Nixon should have been hung?

No...according to JRK's theory, it was all justified because a lot of brave Americans died there and we would be dishonouring their memories to suggest otherwise.
I fail to see the correlation myself.

 

[JRK]

Is this private?
Wouldn't it be tragic if the 4,000 people were deceived and died for a false cause?

Naw, feel free to jump in at any time.

Oh and if the mark is 1 million killed, how many Asians died when we secretly bombed Laos and Cambodia, not to mention the Christmas Carpet bombing of Hanoi? Does that mean Johnson and Nixon should have been hung?

No...according to JRK's theory, it was all justified because a lot of brave Americans died there and we would be dishonouring their memories to suggest otherwise.
I fail to see the correlation myself.

My theory is its none of your business why those young men and women chose to go over there and risk it all
I can tell you this, they have a different view of those events than either of you do
I wrote a thread that pin points the amount of mis information you guys live on. I am serious
This thread has nothing to do with anything but one, and that one is not Hanoi, Laos or Cambodia
More mis information. Its all you have

 

[JRK]

Is this private?
Wouldn't it be tragic if the 4,000 people were deceived and died for a false cause?

You know those 4000 kids dont think they were lied to
You have no right questioning those kids courage
YOU HAVE NO RIGHT
You dont like GWB, thats your cross to bear. Those kids knew what they were getting into when they volunteered
LET IT GO
ITS NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS
THAT WAS THERE CHOICE, RESPECT IT OR SHUT UP

Aaaahh...false moral outrage!!!
You lose.

false moral outrage?

You have went to far over the line bud with this. you lack of respect for those kids will come back and haunt you one day

 

[Bfgrn]

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

Am missing something here?

Iran is thrilled. We removed their mortal enemy and the only country that served as a buffer.

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

 

[idb]

Naw, feel free to jump in at any time.

Oh and if the mark is 1 million killed, how many Asians died when we secretly bombed Laos and Cambodia, not to mention the Christmas Carpet bombing of Hanoi? Does that mean Johnson and Nixon should have been hung?

No...according to JRK's theory, it was all justified because a lot of brave Americans died there and we would be dishonouring their memories to suggest otherwise.
I fail to see the correlation myself.

My theory is its none of your business why those young men and women chose to go over there and risk it all
I can tell you this, they have a different view of those events than either of you do
I wrote a thread that pin points the amount of mis information you guys live on. I am serious
This thread has nothing to do with anything but one, and that one is not Hanoi, Laos or Cambodia
More mis information. Its all you have

I don't think I suggested any reason why they went over there.
I have no beef with them or their personal motivation.
I agree that they are very brave.

My point isn't about them, it's about your frothy-mouthed false outrage showing that you have nothing left to argue with.

 

[idb]

You know those 4000 kids dont think they were lied to
You have no right questioning those kids courage
YOU HAVE NO RIGHT
You dont like GWB, thats your cross to bear. Those kids knew what they were getting into when they volunteered
LET IT GO
ITS NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS
THAT WAS THERE CHOICE, RESPECT IT OR SHUT UP

Aaaahh...false moral outrage!!!
You lose.

false moral outrage?

You have went to far over the line bud with this. you lack of respect for those kids will come back and haunt you one day

Good grief!
Please quote where I or anyone here has shown "lack of respect for these kids".

 

[JRK]

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

Am missing something here?

Iran is thrilled. We removed their mortal enemy and the only country that served as a buffer.

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

Saddam Hussein killed close to 1 million of his own people. If I gave you a M-16 and you went and killed 1 million people with it, is that my fault?
Is it me that would need to be punished for what you did?
Buffer? after 9-11 there will be no more need for buffers. You screw up and you will get the Saddam treatment every time every day

 

[JRK]

Aaaahh...false moral outrage!!!
You lose.

false moral outrage?

You have went to far over the line bud with this. you lack of respect for those kids will come back and haunt you one day

Good grief!
Please quote where I or anyone here has shown "lack of respect for these kids".

Bud If I have to tell you how far you have went over the line with all of this, it should suffice to say that should do it
you can question me 7-24s 365
we can debate what a WMD is and what A stock pile of WMDs are
i dont care
you can cal GWB every name in the book
I dont care

Those kids volunteered and put everything they have on the line because they feel the very same way I do
every-time you say one of them gave there life because they were lied too, I want you to find one that is doing this because he believes in it and look him in the face and start explaining to him what a fool he or she is
that they have been lied to and that there sacrifice is for nothing
go ahead

 

[idb]

false moral outrage?

You have went to far over the line bud with this. you lack of respect for those kids will come back and haunt you one day

Good grief!
Please quote where I or anyone here has shown "lack of respect for these kids".

Bud If I have to tell you how far you have went over the line with all of this, it should suffice to say that should do it
you can question me 7-24s 365
we can debate what a WMD is and what A stock pile of WMDs are
i dont care
you can cal GWB every name in the book
I dont care

Those kids volunteered and put everything they have on the line because they feel the very same way I do
every-time you say one of them gave there life because they were lied too, I want you to find one that is doing this because he believes in it and look him in the face and start explaining to him what a fool he or she is
that they have been lied to and that there sacrifice is for nothing
go ahead

Like I said...lost...

 

[Bfgrn]

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

Am missing something here?

Iran is thrilled. We removed their mortal enemy and the only country that served as a buffer.

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

Saddam Hussein killed close to 1 million of his own people. If I gave you a M-16 and you went and killed 1 million people with it, is that my fault?
Is it me that would need to be punished for what you did?
Buffer? after 9-11 there will be no more need for buffers. You screw up and you will get the Saddam treatment every time every day

 

[Nic_Driver]

Good grief!
Please quote where I or anyone here has shown "lack of respect for these kids".

Bud If I have to tell you how far you have went over the line with all of this, it should suffice to say that should do it
you can question me 7-24s 365
we can debate what a WMD is and what A stock pile of WMDs are
i dont care
you can cal GWB every name in the book
I dont care

Those kids volunteered and put everything they have on the line because they feel the very same way I do
every-time you say one of them gave there life because they were lied too, I want you to find one that is doing this because he believes in it and look him in the face and start explaining to him what a fool he or she is
that they have been lied to and that there sacrifice is for nothing
go ahead

Like I said...lost...

It's funny to watch from my seat idb.

 

[idb]

Bud If I have to tell you how far you have went over the line with all of this, it should suffice to say that should do it
you can question me 7-24s 365
we can debate what a WMD is and what A stock pile of WMDs are
i dont care
you can cal GWB every name in the book
I dont care

Those kids volunteered and put everything they have on the line because they feel the very same way I do
every-time you say one of them gave there life because they were lied too, I want you to find one that is doing this because he believes in it and look him in the face and start explaining to him what a fool he or she is
that they have been lied to and that there sacrifice is for nothing
go ahead

Like I said...lost...

It's funny to watch from my seat idb.

I'm worried about being put on 'ignore' now.

 

[kaz]

Kaz is not a hater, merely a partisan who is arguing with very poor material. If Kaz thinks Obama is a commie marxist, then either Kaz is ignorant or mentally feeble, malignantly motivated, or simply playing out a poor hand. I vote for the last.

I'm ignorant and you don't know what the word "partisan" means? I'm arguing with Republicans that we don't belong in the middle east and I'm arguing with liberals that they are supporting a party with the same policies as the Republicans they oppose. And that's partisan, not supporting either party.

Maybe you have a point, you're not ignorant, you're just stupid. Do you know the difference between ignorant and stupid? Probably not...

Read what I wrote, huh? I concluded that you are "simply playing out a poor hand."

You said I say Obama's a Marxist. I do say that, but only because he is. Once again you prove he's not by foaming at the mouth rather then answering the simple question. Which plank of the Communist manifesto Obama's not in agreement with. Wow, what a whack job, I think someone who's ideology is consistent with the communist manifesto is a Marxist. You counter that by spinning in circles and drooling. Well played...not....

Maybe you can answer a simpler question since you're completely whiffing on the first one. You said I'm a "partisan." Since you tell me I'm not a Republican, you are. But obviously the Democrats don't call Obama a "Marxist." So what "Party" am I acting "Partisan" on behalf of exactly?

 

[Too Tall]

Lets see?

1. We diverted focus away from the war on terrorism
2. We invaded a country that was not involved in terrorism and was not a threat
3. We dedicated too few troops to control the country after the invasion
4. We engaged in torture
5. We ended up with 4000 American dead and close to 100,000 Iraqi civilians dead

According to the United Nations, many Democrat Senators and Congressmen, (who voted to go to war) the free world's intelligence community and even Al Gore and Bill Clinton, Saddam Hussein was a very real threat.

 

[Nic_Driver]

Lets see?

1. We diverted focus away from the war on terrorism
2. We invaded a country that was not involved in terrorism and was not a threat
3. We dedicated too few troops to control the country after the invasion
4. We engaged in torture
5. We ended up with 4000 American dead and close to 100,000 Iraqi civilians dead

According to the United Nations, many Democrat Senators and Congressmen, (who voted to go to war) the free world's intelligence community and even Al Gore and Bill Clinton, Saddam Hussein was a very real threat.

No one voted to go to war, your premise is flawed.

 

[Nic_Driver]

Like I said...lost...

It's funny to watch from my seat idb.

I'm worried about being put on 'ignore' now.

It's like 'timeout' only better.

You don't have to deal with his ignorance directly.

 

[rightwinger]

Lets see?

1. We diverted focus away from the war on terrorism
2. We invaded a country that was not involved in terrorism and was not a threat
3. We dedicated too few troops to control the country after the invasion
4. We engaged in torture
5. We ended up with 4000 American dead and close to 100,000 Iraqi civilians dead

According to the United Nations, many Democrat Senators and Congressmen, (who voted to go to war) the free world's intelligence community and even Al Gore and Bill Clinton, Saddam Hussein was a very real threat.

He had not been a threat since he got his ass kicked ten years earlier

Not worth 4000 American deaths

 

[Contumacious]

According to the United Nations, many Democrat Senators and Congressmen, (who voted to go to war) the free world's intelligence community and even Al Gore and Bill Clinton, Saddam Hussein was a very real threat.

Saddam was indeed a threat.

AIPAC , PNAC and the neocrazies wanted Saddam dead because it was in ***THEIR*** best interest.

.

 

[francoHFW]

Don't forget the 150k maimed, and 100k Iraqis is way conservative. 2-3 trillion dollars for nuthin'. Stupidest war evahhhh. Ruined the Aghan war too.And thanks for the depression, and paralyzing the country since 1/2010...

 

[Raoul_Duke]

answer me 1 question
If this yellow cake was just sitting around from the 80s or early 90s. Why did it take until 2008 to get it out of there?

The yellowcake was in Iraq in a monitored location and under IAEA seal. It wasn't removed because it didn't have to be, if one ounce of it had been removed the IAEA would have known. It had been monitored for twelve years and was still totally intact in 2003 when Saddam let inspectors back into Iraq. It only went missing when the US failed to secure the site it was at after we invaded.

And of course it's irrelevant anyway because, as I just pointed out, even the Bush administration finally admitted that Saddam didn't have any WMD programme.

Do you have a link to that, and answer me this
why does the department of defense go to congress in 2006 and provide proof that there are over 500 munitions that meet the criteria as a WMD just so GWB can later say thats a lie?

this is called a link and a passage from the link'
ASHINGTON, June 29, 2006 – The 500 munitions discovered throughout Iraq since 2003 and discussed in a National Ground Intelligence Center report meet the criteria of weapons of mass destruction, the center's commander said here today.
"These are chemical weapons as defined under the Chemical Weapons Convention, and yes ... they do constitute weapons of mass destruction," Army Col. John Chu told the House Armed Services Committee
that would be the passage
The armed service committee would be congress
here comes the link
Defense.gov News Article: Munitions Found in Iraq Meet WMD Criteria, Official Says

OK, I'll answer both your posts here. Firstly the number of people Saddam killed. However you break the number down, the vast majority of the people he killed including the genocide against the kurds at Halabja were from when he seized power until the beginning of the Gulf War, a period during which we supported him the whole time. So don't you think it's hypocritical of war supporters to use those deaths as a reason to invade Iraq when America supported and armed Saddam during the preiod when most of those deaths occurred.

Secondly the WMD thing. A press release by the DOD from during the Iraq war period is meaningless. What they actually found were a bunch of old artillery shells from the Iran-Iraq war. These shells were battlefield munitions, limited to a specific area and weren't very effective when they asctually were used twenty years before they were found. Saddam's chemical weapons had a shelf life of a few days at best so they were completely useless decades after they were made. Useless battlefield munitions can only be described as WMD if you've come up with nothing and are desperate to back up your original claims, which is something you and the DOD have in common here.

Here are some links for you :


The U.S. Defense Department’s “Militarily Critical Technologies List” (MCTL) is “a detailed compendium of technologies" that the department advocates as “critical to maintaining superior US military capabilities. It applies to all mission areas, especially counter-proliferation.” Written in 1998, it was recently re-published with updates for 2002.

So what is the MCTL’s opinion of Iraq's chemical weapons program? In making its chemical nerve agents, “The Iraqis . . . produce[d] a . . . mixture which was inherently unstable,” says the report. “When the Iraqis produced chemical munitions they appeared to adhere to a ‘make and use’ regimen. Judging by the information Iraq gave the United Nations, later verified by on-site inspections, Iraq had poor product quality for their nerve agents. This low quality was likely due to a lack of purification. They had to get the agent to the front promptly or have it degrade in the munition.”

Furthermore, says this Defense Department report, “The chemical munitions found in Iraq after the [first] Gulf War contained badly deteriorated agents and a significant proportion were visibly leaking.” The shelf life of these poorly made agents were said to be a few weeks at best -- hardly the stuff of vast chemical weapons stores.

There was some talk shortly before the first Gulf War that the Iraqis had been creating binary chemical weapons, in which the relatively non-toxic ingredients of the agent remain unmixed until just before the weapon is used; this allows the user to bypass any worry about shelf life or toxicity. But according to the MCTL, “The Iraqis had a small number of bastardized binary munitions in which some unfortunate individual was to pour one ingredient into the other from a Jerry can prior to use” -- an action few soldiers were willing to perform.

Lies About Iraq’s Weapons Are Past Expiration Date | | AlterNet

The IAEA team is visiting the Tuwaitha site, which is 50 kilometres (30 miles) south of Baghdad, under close American guard.

The visit was agreed after weeks of pleading by the IAEA, which has kept the radiological materials at the site safely under UN seal for 12 years.

BBC NEWS | Middle East | Missing Iraq uranium 'secured'


At a warehouse about 400 yards outside Tuwaitha, the Marines secured what they called the "Yellow Cake" facility. Named "Location C" by international inspectors, the building had been placed under seal by investigators in 1991 to keep fissionable material from being reused in Iraq's atomic weapons program.

The Marines, who insist they never broke the IAEA's seals, discovered high levels of radioactivity behind an open steel door, where blue barrels of uranium water filled the storeroom.

Fate of Al-Tuwaitha nuclear material unclear - Pittsburgh Tribune-Review



And here's the Bush administration saying the same thing :

MR. FLEISCHER: Well, the IAEA is different. The IAEA is going in, that's the International Atomic Energy --

Q: Right.

MR. FLEISCHER: They're going in to look at the nuclear facility.

Q: Right. Just to make certain that the facility is intact?

MR. FLEISCHER: That's correct. The search for WMD involves biological and chemical, which was not headed by IAEA.

Q: Well, why not have the other agency go in and be able to work without any --

MR. FLEISCHER: Because IAEA is going in to take a look at actual inventoried items that they, themselves, knew precisely where they were, what their status was, because they inventoried them. That wasn't the case with the chemical and biological. What the United Nations concluded about the chemical and biological is he had tons of it -- anthrax, VX, sarin -- but it was not accounted for. They had accounted for these nuclear materials. And that's why the difference.

http://usinfo.state.gov/cgi-bin/was...p;amp;amp;t=/products/washfile/newsitem.shtml