apologize for iraq, i don't think so.

[washamericom]

the view is the link if you want to hear, i wouldn't bother.
saddam was a monster that wanted to conquer the world.
i'm glad he's dead, we woe the war. the weapons of m d matter not to me. he had plenty of weapons of mass destruction. the policy is payback for the democrat lie telling presidential wind up doll called clinton. apologise? you should be thanking us. nice try.

 

[Bill O'Olberman]

I wouldnt apologize for the Iraq War either. But was it the correct policy decision, no. Should the US face some criticism, yes.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Yeah not really a point in apologizing to dead americans and Iraqis, doesn't do them much good.

I'm glad money is taken out of my paycheck every 2 weeks to pay for unconstitutional wars that result in my american brothers and sisters dead. I wish I had a better job so I could donate more to that great, moral cause.

 

[Sallow]

the view is the link if you want to hear, i wouldn't bother.
saddam was a monster that wanted to conquer the world.
i'm glad he's dead, we woe the war. the weapons of m d matter not to me. he had plenty of weapons of mass destruction. the policy is payback for the democrat lie telling presidential wind up doll called clinton. apologise? you should be thanking us. nice try.

Well your wrong on all counts. But you are welcome to defend a war crime.

 

[washamericom]

Yeah not really a point in apologizing to dead americans and Iraqis, doesn't do them much good.

I'm glad money is taken out of my paycheck every 2 weeks to pay for unconstitutional wars that result in my american brothers and sisters dead. I wish I had a better job so I could donate more to that great, moral cause.

remember 9/11 maybe go back to school, maybe in libya

 

[Nosmo King]

the view is the link if you want to hear, i wouldn't bother.
saddam was a monster that wanted to conquer the world.
i'm glad he's dead, we woe the war. the weapons of m d matter not to me. he had plenty of weapons of mass destruction. the policy is payback for the democrat lie telling wind up doll icalled clinton. apologise? you should be thanking us. nice try.

At least you're not letting facts muddy your opinion.

Incidentally, try that button that says "abc" with the check mark underneath. I believe we 'woe' the war too, but I don't think that's precisely what you meant.

 

[Bill O'Olberman]

Yeah not really a point in apologizing to dead americans and Iraqis, doesn't do them much good.

I'm glad money is taken out of my paycheck every 2 weeks to pay for unconstitutional wars that result in my american brothers and sisters dead. I wish I had a better job so I could donate more to that great, moral cause.

remember 9/11 maybe go back to school, maybe in libya

I remember 9/11 vividly. I also remember that Iraq had NOTHING to do with 9/11. I dont believe Libya did either.

 

[washamericom]

the view is the link if you want to hear, i wouldn't bother.
saddam was a monster that wanted to conquer the world.
i'm glad he's dead, we woe the war. the weapons of m d matter not to me. he had plenty of weapons of mass destruction. the policy is payback for the democrat lie telling presidential wind up doll called clinton. apologise? you should be thanking us. nice try.

Well your wrong on all counts. But you are welcome to defend a war crime.

thanks. and if it were, i would, but it's not so i won't. no crime, no time, only dim and unrealistic ideas about the way the world's monsters work. go ahead and defend saddam if you like, it's a free country.

 

[High_Gravity]

The only thing I would apologize for is not preparing for the occupation well enough.

 

[Sunni Man]

saddam was a monster that wanted to conquer the world.

You are even more idiotic that I thought.

When did Saddam ever threaten the whole world?

In fact, he was never a threat to America.

Nor did he have the means to invade anyone except one small country called Kuwait.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Yeah not really a point in apologizing to dead americans and Iraqis, doesn't do them much good.

I'm glad money is taken out of my paycheck every 2 weeks to pay for unconstitutional wars that result in my american brothers and sisters dead. I wish I had a better job so I could donate more to that great, moral cause.

remember 9/11 maybe go back to school, maybe in libya

I was in school for a long time, maybe your government classes taught you the Constitution says it's ok to use US taxpayer dollars in order to enforce UN sanctions and save foreignors from a dictator.

I mean it's not like we have any budget issues, or economic issues or tax issues here to worry about, let's just spend trillions on foreign adventures, we gotta test our military equipment one way or another.

How come those of you Iraq War supporters aren't demanding war with every brutal dictator? If you truly hated Saddam, why don't you bash the Reagan administration or supporting him? Choose a side and stick to it kids.

 

[rightwinger]

Diverting the War on Terrorism to attack Iraq?

4000 American dead, 10s of thousands wounded
Two trillion dollars and counting
No WMDs


One of the biggest strategic blunders in US History

 

[Mr. Peepers]

thanks. and if it were, i would, but it's not so i won't. no crime, no time, only dim and unrealistic ideas about the way the world's monsters work. go ahead and defend saddam if you like, it's a free country.

Well, we did prop him up and help put him into power... so it's really the least we can do.

 

[kaz]

Yeah not really a point in apologizing to dead americans and Iraqis, doesn't do them much good.

I'm glad money is taken out of my paycheck every 2 weeks to pay for unconstitutional wars that result in my american brothers and sisters dead. I wish I had a better job so I could donate more to that great, moral cause.

remember 9/11 maybe go back to school, maybe in libya

Hussein was a monster and I have no sympathy for him, he got what he deserved. The Iraq people are certainly a lot better off. The Military hugely supports the war, so apologizing to them is a lame political ploy, that's all. So while I agree with Dr. Drock in his opposition to the war, I don't agree with his reasoning and his statements just cater to the Left's revisionist position on the war and their 50/50 culpability with the Republicans in getting into it.

What I do want to ask is why we are there in the first place. Until Nixon in 1969, the Democrats drove US involvement on foreign soil and in foreign wars. The Republicans mostly opposed it. Then the roles largely switched and Republicans drove it all the time and Democrats opposed foreign wars when they weren't in the White House. Why did Republicans abandon that? The fact is that if we weren't all over the middle east, then these wars wouldn't be brought to our house. And we have no business going there.

Again, unlike Dr. Drock and the liberals I'm not saying that in an anti-American way, an anti- military way. We're certainly trying to do the right thing over there and there are endless bad guys to fight I feel nothing for when they die. But still, I ask, why is it our problem at all? Why don't we bring ALL the troops home, not just the fighting units. And let them murder each other. And then if they attack us, I'm all for all out retaliation.

 

[Sallow]

the view is the link if you want to hear, i wouldn't bother.
saddam was a monster that wanted to conquer the world.
i'm glad he's dead, we woe the war. the weapons of m d matter not to me. he had plenty of weapons of mass destruction. the policy is payback for the democrat lie telling presidential wind up doll called clinton. apologise? you should be thanking us. nice try.

Well your wrong on all counts. But you are welcome to defend a war crime.

thanks. and if it were, i would, but it's not so i won't. no crime, no time, only dim and unrealistic ideas about the way the world's monsters work. go ahead and defend saddam if you like, it's a free country.

No need. Our laws, our Constitution..and international law speak strongly against the use of force against a country that did not attack you first.

 

[washamericom]

the view is the link if you want to hear, i wouldn't bother.
saddam was a monster that wanted to conquer the world.
i'm glad he's dead, we won the war. the weapons of m d matter not to me. he had plenty of weapons of mass destruction. the policy is payback for the democrat lie telling wind up doll icalled clinton. apologise? you should be thanking us. nice try.

At least you're not letting facts muddy your opinion.

Incidentally, try that button that says "abc" with the check mark underneath. I believe we 'woe' the war too, but I don't think that's precisely what you meant.[/QUOT

i fixed it.... thanks mrs nedermyer. nobody hates war more than the people fighting it. woe would work too
incidentally mrs n., how would the little button with the abc distinguish the subtlety in my meaning, they're both words and woefully, the word was spelled correctly? how would the abc button help, indeed. so we don't know everything do we ?

 

[Dr.Drock]

Yeah not really a point in apologizing to dead americans and Iraqis, doesn't do them much good.

I'm glad money is taken out of my paycheck every 2 weeks to pay for unconstitutional wars that result in my american brothers and sisters dead. I wish I had a better job so I could donate more to that great, moral cause.

remember 9/11 maybe go back to school, maybe in libya

Hussein was a monster and I have no sympathy for him, he got what he deserved. The Iraq people are certainly a lot better off. The Military hugely supports the war, so apologizing to them is a lame political ploy, that's all. So while I agree with Dr. Drock in his opposition to the war, I don't agree with his reasoning and his statements just cater to the Left's revisionist position on the war and their 50/50 culpability with the Republicans in getting into it.

What I do want to ask is why we are there in the first place. Until Nixon in 1969, the Democrats drove US involvement on foreign soil and in foreign wars. The Republicans mostly opposed it. Then the roles largely switched and Republicans drove it all the time and Democrats opposed foreign wars when they weren't in the White House. Why did Republicans abandon that? The fact is that if we weren't all over the middle east, then these wars wouldn't be brought to our house. And we have no business going there.

Again, unlike Dr. Drock and the liberals I'm not saying that in an anti-American way, an anti- military way. We're certainly trying to do the right thing over there and there are endless bad guys to fight I feel nothing for when they die. But still, I ask, why is it our problem at all? Why don't we bring ALL the troops home, not just the fighting units. And let them murder each other. And then if they attack us, I'm all for all out retaliation.

I think you need to read up on what the words liberal and conservative actually mean.

There's nothing conservative about spending trillions of US taxpayer dollars in order to enforce UN restrictions and save people from a meanyhead dictator, everything about the Iraq War is liberal.

I have never, and will never, vote for a democrat. The Democrats in Congress, the majority of them cheered on the war. You need to think about revising all those assumption boxes you have in your head that you try and fit everyone into.

Name something I've said that's anti-american.

 

[washamericom]

i think history will see how it all works out, i'm happy for the next generation in iraq, that say "tell me about saddam hussein, what kind of man was he".
i'm sorry for the kids in iraq that died with their eyes open from mustard gas from saddam, i can post some photos if you like. all americans are not wanting to be selfish socialistic isolationists, if we did we'd move to france or switz, and soak up the freedom provided by the u.s.
according to your logic we had no business in japan or germany.
they turned out ok too. you like hitler?, have a soft spot in your heart for the castro brothers? they're really not so bad once you get used to them.

 

[kaz]

remember 9/11 maybe go back to school, maybe in libya

Hussein was a monster and I have no sympathy for him, he got what he deserved. The Iraq people are certainly a lot better off. The Military hugely supports the war, so apologizing to them is a lame political ploy, that's all. So while I agree with Dr. Drock in his opposition to the war, I don't agree with his reasoning and his statements just cater to the Left's revisionist position on the war and their 50/50 culpability with the Republicans in getting into it.

What I do want to ask is why we are there in the first place. Until Nixon in 1969, the Democrats drove US involvement on foreign soil and in foreign wars. The Republicans mostly opposed it. Then the roles largely switched and Republicans drove it all the time and Democrats opposed foreign wars when they weren't in the White House. Why did Republicans abandon that? The fact is that if we weren't all over the middle east, then these wars wouldn't be brought to our house. And we have no business going there.

Again, unlike Dr. Drock and the liberals I'm not saying that in an anti-American way, an anti- military way. We're certainly trying to do the right thing over there and there are endless bad guys to fight I feel nothing for when they die. But still, I ask, why is it our problem at all? Why don't we bring ALL the troops home, not just the fighting units. And let them murder each other. And then if they attack us, I'm all for all out retaliation.

I think you need to read up on what the words liberal and conservative actually mean.

There's nothing conservative about spending trillions of US taxpayer dollars in order to enforce UN restrictions and save people from a meanyhead dictator, everything about the Iraq War is liberal.

I have never, and will never, vote for a democrat. The Democrats in Congress, the majority of them cheered on the war. You need to think about revising all those assumption boxes you have in your head that you try and fit everyone into.

Name something I've said that's anti-american.

I didn't call you a liberal. I said your stupid reference to an apology to the military (who support the war) and the Iraqis (who benefited from it) was a lame political ploy that caters to the left. The Left benefits from what you said. The truth doesn't. Did you actually read the rest of it? I think I made pretty clear what I'm talking about. And I said nothing about the spending trillions other then...helllo....I'm against the wars. But you didn't reference money the first time, you introduced it now as if I was supposed to have addressed the money for the war I'm against. I addressed what you said, apology to the troops and Iraqis. Silly me.

 

[Sunni Man]

according to your logic we had no business in japan or germany.

Major difference retard.

Germany and Japan declared war on the United States and then attacked.

Iraq's Saddam never attacked or declared war on America.