How many years should we stay in Iraq?

[PsyOps]

Are we still in Europe and Japan?

 

[RangerJohn]

Are we still in Europe and Japan?

If I answer then I'll have to kill all of you to maintain any type of deniability.

 

[forestal]

I never said it wasn't a violent place, nor did I intend to imply that either.

The point I'm trying to make, is that if we want the Iraqis to have a peaceful country, it's never going to happen as long as we're around.

...a garden spot of peace, love and joy before we got there. The cradle of civilization.

 

[forestal]

Then we'll lose. We don't have 10 years to occupy that country before our army is broke. We have two.

I was watching an interview the other night and the general said historically it takes 10 years to win a war against insurgents. I think we will always be in the region from here on.

 

[PsyOps]

Then we'll lose. We don't have 10 years to occupy that country before our army is broke. We have two.

No matter how this Iraq thing stacks up, you will believe we'll lose. That's all you talk about is losing. The concept of winning does not appear to be a part of your vocabulary.

This country was founded with the belief that, even against the greatest of odds, we would win. And we did. WWI and WWII were fought with the same vigilance. But slowly Americans have become a lazy, impatient and selfish group. How can we possibly win with this against us? I don’t know which is our greater enemy.

 

[forestal]

Maybe you should ask Bush to make Al Qaeda fight all of us, not just the men and women in uniform.

And by that I mean activate the draft because we don't have enough troops to do what needs to be done, and we aren't paying the taxes it takes to fund this conflict either, we're borrowing that money from the Chinese (so your children can pay it back, with interest).

And how about some money for the first responders in New York who now have a whole host myriad diseases related to the toxic dust that they breathed in for weeks after the attack on 9/11 (after the Bush administration said it was safe to work there).

etc, etc. No, we'll never defeat these guys with one hand tied behind our back and wasting our time in a war that was never necessary.

No matter how this Iraq thing stacks up, you will believe we'll lose. That's all you talk about is losing. The concept of winning does not appear to be a part of your vocabulary.

This country was founded with the belief that, even against the greatest of odds, we would win. And we did. WWI and WWII were fought with the same vigilance. But slowly Americans have become a lazy, impatient and selfish group. How can we possibly win with this against us? I don’t know which is our greater enemy.

 

[PsyOps]

Maybe you should ask Bush to make Al Qaeda fight all of us, not just the men and women in uniform.

And by that I mean activate the draft because we don't have enough troops to do what needs to be done, and we aren't paying the taxes it takes to fund this conflict either, we're borrowing that money from the Chinese (so your children can pay it back, with interest).

And how about some money for the first responders in New York who now have a whole host myriad diseases related to the toxic dust that they breathed in for weeks after the attack on 9/11 (after the Bush administration said it was safe to work there).

etc, etc. No, we'll never defeat these guys with one hand tied behind our back and wasting our time in a war that was never necessary.

I've said it over and over, half of the equation to winning a war is having the people supportive of it. You liberals have screamed so loud about how this is the wrong war and an illegal war and Bush lied, even though it was you liberals that screamed the loudest, when Clinton was president, about how dangerous Saddam was and needed to be removed from power, and then stood side-by-side with Bush and sent our troops to war. It's a complete hypocrisy. now that we have done it (exactly what you liberals screamed about) you want to back-pedal.

al Qaeda started this war by coming to this country and killing 3000 innocent people. After years of ignoring the problem you propose to continue on that path. Then you go on to propose rediculous things like the draft. If only we had support in defeating this enemy just that moral support alone would give very little reason for al Qaeda to go on. But you wont have it. You prefer, for purely political reasons to castigate everything Bush does. Not one form of credit or praise will come from your thoughts.

I'm inlcinded to say screw it, let's haveit your way (the liberals' way) and toss the towel in. Let's let them win; only to say when comes to bite us in the a$$ I can sit back and say I told you so.

They want us dead Forest. How simple can I be about this. They will try to kill us whether we fight them or not. not fighting them will only make it easier for them. You can't see this. All you can see is your political hatred for Bush. Not until the bomb hits you right in the face will you understand, I suppose.

 

[forestal]

Sigh, I guess you need reminding that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 and there were no terrorists there when we started dropping bombs.

I've said it over and over, half of the equation to winning a war is having the people supportive of it. You liberals have screamed so loud about how this is the wrong war and an illegal war and Bush lied, even though it was you liberals that screamed the loudest, when Clinton was president, about how dangerous Saddam was and needed to be removed from power, and then stood side-by-side with Bush and sent our troops to war. It's a complete hypocrisy. now that we have done it (exactly what you liberals screamed about) you want to back-pedal.

al Qaeda started this war by coming to this country and killing 3000 innocent people. After years of ignoring the problem you propose to continue on that path. Then you go on to propose rediculous things like the draft. If only we had support in defeating this enemy just that moral support alone would give very little reason for al Qaeda to go on. But you wont have it. You prefer, for purely political reasons to castigate everything Bush does. Not one form of credit or praise will come from your thoughts.

I'm inlcinded to say screw it, let's haveit your way (the liberals' way) and toss the towel in. Let's let them win; only to say when comes to bite us in the a$$ I can sit back and say I told you so.

They want us dead Forest. How simple can I be about this. They will try to kill us whether we fight them or not. not fighting them will only make it easier for them. You can't see this. All you can see is your political hatred for Bush. Not until the bomb hits you right in the face will you understand, I suppose.

 

[MMDad]

there were no terrorists there when we started dropping bombs.

I love it when you show us how stupid you are! You are freaking hilarious!

 

[PsyOps]

Sigh, I guess you need reminding that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 and there were no terrorists there when we started dropping bombs.

That's so lame forest. Please show anywhere in any post I have made that stated Iraq had anything to do with 911. You keep raising that point.

And there were no terrorists in Iraq when the bombs started dropping? Facts Forest! Ever heard of Ansar al-Islam? AND it has been reported that Zarqawi was in Iraq prior to the invasion:
Zarqawi Trail

2001 - Zarqawi leaves Afghanistan during US invasion, passing through Iran to Iraq, sets up camp in Iraq with the radical group Ansar al-Islam

Zarqawi history

Later, Zarqawi supposedly traveled to Iraq to have his wounded leg treated at a hospital run by Uday Hussein. In the summer of 2002, Zarqawi was reported to have settled in northern Iraq, where he joined the Islamist Ansar al-Islam group that fought against the Kurdish-nationalist forces in the region

I'm simply pointing out the facts behind why we are at war with al Qaeda and Iraq. Those facts point to both the GOP and democrats sending us there. Now that they have done this they need to support what they started and stop this lame blame game. As I said, moral support from home is half the battle of winning. If we have a movement to demoralize the war and our troops, how do expect us to win?

 

[aps45819]

Maybe you should ask Bush to make Al Qaeda fight all of us, not just the men and women in uniform.

That sounds like your plan.

If they're not busy killing the infidel invaders in Bagdad, they'll be free to plan and execute attacks here.

 

[SamSpade]

Sigh, I guess you need reminding that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11

Mostly correct and utterly irrelevant. Our war on terror is against terrorist organizations with a global reach, and regimes that support them or supply them.

Maybe you're under this James Bond/Man from U.N.C.L.E./Get Smart mentality that all global terror is under one roof a la SPECTRE/THRUSH/KAOS? Sorry to burst your bubble, but even if there is absolutely zero connection between al-Qaeda and Iraq, it is irrelevant. Iran is also exporting terror as is North Korea and al-Qaeda isn't running the show THERE either.

and there were no terrorists there when we started dropping bombs.

Absurd. The stack of evidence is so high it's staggering. What IS different is there weren't a lot of splinter group in Iraq fomenting random violence. Hell, you had a head of state PAYING Palestinian families for suicide bombers.

 

[Ken King]

Mostly correct and utterly irrelevant. Our war on terror is against terrorist organizations with a global reach, and regimes that support them or supply them.

Maybe you're under this Maxwell Smart mentality that all global terror is under one roof a la KAOS? Sorry to burst your bubble, but even if there is absolutely zero connection between al-Qaeda and Iraq, it is irrelevant. Iran is also exporting terror as is North Korea and al-Qaeda isn't running the show THERE either.




Absurd. The stack of evidence is so high it's staggering. What IS different is there weren't a lot of splinter group in Iraq fomenting random violence. Hell, you had a head of state PAYING Palestinian families for suicide bombers.

Another difference is that many forgot about all the criminal thugs that Saddam set free as we were initially attacking thus littering the country with the worst of what they thought were their vermin. As I recall thousands were set upon the people of Iraq and our troops to feed what became the insurgency.

I think "forestal" has been speaking to the bottom of his shoe for way too long.

 

[forestal]

Maybe we wouldn't have had so much to worry about from Iran if our good allies in Pakistan hadn't given them nuclear know-how, or if the White House hadn't blown the cover of a CIA agent trying to prevent Iran from getting nuclear technology..blown her cover to try and cover their own lies about WMD's in Iraq....

I think George Bush, through his own stupid policies, is as much responsible for promoting terrorism against the U.S. as Usama Bin Laden.

Mostly correct and utterly irrelevant. Our war on terror is against terrorist organizations with a global reach, and regimes that support them or supply them.

Maybe you're under this James Bond/Man from U.N.C.L.E./Get Smart mentality that all global terror is under one roof a la SPECTRE/THRUSH/KAOS? Sorry to burst your bubble, but even if there is absolutely zero connection between al-Qaeda and Iraq, it is irrelevant. Iran is also exporting terror as is North Korea and al-Qaeda isn't running the show THERE either.




Absurd. The stack of evidence is so high it's staggering. What IS different is there weren't a lot of splinter group in Iraq fomenting random violence. Hell, you had a head of state PAYING Palestinian families for suicide bombers.

 

[PsyOps]

Maybe we wouldn't have had so much to worry about from Iran if our good allies in Pakistan hadn't given them nuclear know-how, or if the White House hadn't blown the cover of a CIA agent trying to prevent Iran from getting nuclear technology..blown her cover to try and cover their own lies about WMD's in Iraq....

I think George Bush, through his own stupid policies, is as much responsible for promoting terrorism against the U.S. as Usama Bin Laden.

Wow, so much falacy, so little time.

First of all, you keep forgetting that if Bush did out Plame (which he didn't) he has the authority to do so. When the president declassifies something or someone it is not called "blowing their cover". And as we are learning in the Libby trial the whole leak accusation isn't panning out. I think we are going to learn that it was Wilson that ultimately leaked this whole thing in a corrupt attempt to take down the Bush admin; all because Bush pissed Wilson off.

Secondly, the details of Plames work is still considered classified. So information regarding her involvement in tracking nukes in Iran is purely speculative. Her job would not have been to PREVENT Iran from getting nukes. She would have only been able to confirm it and from what sources. And if Plame was working on Iran/nuke proliferation her role would have been but a small part of a huge intelligence effort which answered the question anyway. We know Iran has them.

Thirdly the majority of the nuclear technology in Iranian hands came from Russia not Pakistan. But the science and materials originally came from the US prior to the Iranian revolution.

Fourth, it doesn't surprise me that you believe Bush to be as evil as Bin Laden. It's just this sort of rhetoric, propagated by the left in this country, that has given the terrorists a huge will to go on fighting us.

 

[forestal]

You need some correcting, bub. Here it comes...

Could you please provide some information where Bush announces that he's declassifying Valerie Plame's covert identity? If I recall the CIA was mighty pissed when her name appeared in the newspapers, and instigated the whole investigation. If the President had declassified her covert identity, wouldn't you assume that he would have notified the CIA ahead of time, or even retro-actively? But such a thing hasn't happened, or else we wouldn't have had this whole investigation.

Wow, so much falacy, so little time.

First of all, you keep forgetting that if Bush did out Plame (which he didn't) he has the authority to do so. When the president declassifies something or someone it is not called "blowing their cover". And as we are learning in the Libby trial the whole leak accusation isn't panning out. I think we are going to learn that it was Wilson that ultimately leaked this whole thing in a corrupt attempt to take down the Bush admin; all because Bush pissed Wilson off.

Secondly, the details of Plames work is still considered classified. So information regarding her involvement in tracking nukes in Iran is purely speculative. Her job would not have been to PREVENT Iran from getting nukes. She would have only been able to confirm it and from what sources. And if Plame was working on Iran/nuke proliferation her role would have been but a small part of a huge intelligence effort which answered the question anyway. We know Iran has them.

Thirdly the majority of the nuclear technology in Iranian hands came from Russia not Pakistan. But the science and materials originally came from the US prior to the Iranian revolution.

Fourth, it doesn't surprise me that you believe Bush to be as evil as Bin Laden. It's just this sort of rhetoric, propagated by the left in this country, that has given the terrorists a huge will to go on fighting us.

 

[PsyOps]

You need some correcting, bub. Here it comes...

Could you please provide some information where Bush announces that he's declassifying Valerie Plame's covert identity? If I recall the CIA was mighty pissed when her name appeared in the newspapers, and instigated the whole investigation. If the President had declassified her covert identity, wouldn't you assume that he would have notified the CIA ahead of time, or even retro-actively? But such a thing hasn't happened, or else we wouldn't have had this whole investigation.

Pay attention Forest... I said IF. IF Bush decided to "expose" Valery Plame, the CIA being "pissed" means nothing. They don't get to make this decision. And yes, he would have notified the CIA, THAT'S WHY BUSH DIDN'T DO THIS. There has been no evidence produced that Plame was even exposed. Many believed everyone already knew who she was.

Bottom line, the whole P(lame) investigation has been reduced to one guy (Scooter Libby) on trial for lying under oath; and even that whole thing is falling apart. This is nothing more than another lame attempt by you Bush haters to blame Bush for something else.

 

[tater]

Our presence is the reason why there will be no peace until we leave. It is a destabilizing factor.

Also, we are risk losing the readiness of our military, if we haven't already lost it.

There is no military solution to the problems in Iraq.

You think it's bad now.... wait and see what happens if the Dems push their agenda for their goal of failure for the U.S.A. (and G.W.) to supposedly help them win in '08. Pathetic that these people would rather undermine our troops and have us LOSE A WAR and threaten our future security from these crazy radicals that want to kill ALL OF US, than to have us, our military (and G.W.) succeed. Another thing.... and I wish the conservatives and Bush would harp on it more.... but it makes me sick when I hear about Libs saying "why did we even go to Iraq, they didn't fly planes into the towers". Well, when G.W. was standing on that smoking mound on 9/11, and also in his address just after that... (back when the whole country was united in wanting justice).... He said that we would root them out wherever they were AND anyone who supported and harbored them, no matter how long it took. Paraphrasing, of course.

 

[rack'm]

You think it's bad now.... wait and see what happens if the Dems push their agenda for their goal of failure for the U.S.A. (and G.W.) to supposedly help them win in '08. Pathetic that these people would rather undermine our troops and have us LOSE A WAR and threaten our future security from these crazy radicals that want to kill ALL OF US, than to have us, our military (and G.W.) succeed. Another thing.... and I wish the conservatives and Bush would harp on it more.... but it makes me sick when I hear about Libs saying "why did we even go to Iraq, they didn't fly planes into the towers". Well, when G.W. was standing on that smoking mound on 9/11, and also in his address just after that... (back when the whole country was united in wanting justice).... He said that we would root them out wherever they were AND anyone who supported and harbored them, no matter how long it took. Paraphrasing, of course.

All they are worried about is winning at all cost.

I hope all is well my brother.

 

[tater]

All they are worried about is winning at all cost.

I hope all is well my brother.

Hey there my fellow pool sparring partner! (I'm guessing it is you, just with another name) How goes it? Still kickin a$$ around the felt?