Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
You people who claim we lost the war in Iraq as we leave there and they are doing fine with a republic in place better think twice or at best look who is standing around you when you claim we lost that war just because GWB was the president and it was his war
I am not kidding. I know some gung ho marines who do not feel that way and I am clueless as to why any of you would feel that way
ARE U NUTS?
You people who claim we lost the war in Iraq as we leave there and they are doing fine with a republic in place better think twice or at best look who is standing around you when you claim we lost that war just because GWB was the president and it was his war
I am not kidding. I know some gung ho marines who do not feel that way and I am clueless as to why any of you would feel that way
ARE U NUTS?
The people who I hear saying something to the effect that Obama is admitting/conceding defeat (or whatever other terminology they use) by withdrawing all American troops from Iraq, are conservatives.
Now, what >I< believe is if the current president was a Republican, these self same people would be declaring victory in Iraq.
You people who claim we lost the war in Iraq as we leave there and they are doing fine with a republic in place better think twice or at best look who is standing around you when you claim we lost that war just because GWB was the president and it was his war
I am not kidding. I know some gung ho marines who do not feel that way and I am clueless as to why any of you would feel that way
ARE U NUTS?
The people who I hear saying something to the effect that Obama is admitting/conceding defeat (or whatever other terminology they use) by withdrawing all American troops from Iraq, are conservatives.
Now, what >I< believe is if the current president was a Republican, these self same people would be declaring victory in Iraq.
Thats not what they said
You can google what they really said
let me help
House Speaker John Boehner said he's concerned that the withdrawal could reverse progress made in Iraq, but he urged continued engagement between the two countries.
In a statement, Mr. Boehner said that despite U.S. soldiers leaving Iraq, "we owe it to them to continue engaging with the Iraqi government in a way that ensures our hard-fought gains translate into long-term success."
Boehner added: "I'm hopeful that both countries will work together to guarantee that a free and democratic Iraq remains a strong and stable partner for the United States in the Middle East."
I respectfully disagree with the President," McCain said. "This decision will be viewed as a strategic victory for our enemies in the Middle East, especially the Iranian regime, which has worked relentlessly to ensure a full withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq. It is a consequential failure of both the Obama Administration -- which has been more focused on withdrawing from Iraq than succeeding in Iraq since it came into office -- as well as the Iraqi government.
Politics, and in this same article no-one is trying to state that GWB did not set these events into place in 08
There concern was the general's have made no comments on these events
GOP slams, Dems praise Obama over Iraq withdrawal - Political Hotsheet - CBS News
Your read fox or the times, none of this is even mentioned
You people who claim we lost the war in Iraq as we leave there and they are doing fine with a republic in place better think twice or at best look who is standing around you when you claim we lost that war just because GWB was the president and it was his war
I am not kidding. I know some gung ho marines who do not feel that way and I am clueless as to why any of you would feel that way
ARE U NUTS?
The people who I hear saying something to the effect that Obama is admitting/conceding defeat (or whatever other terminology they use) by withdrawing all American troops from Iraq, are conservatives.
Now, what >I< believe is if the current president was a Republican, these self same people would be declaring victory in Iraq.
Thats not what they said
You can google what they really said
let me help
House Speaker John Boehner said he's concerned that the withdrawal could reverse progress made in Iraq, but he urged continued engagement between the two countries.
In a statement, Mr. Boehner said that despite U.S. soldiers leaving Iraq, "we owe it to them to continue engaging with the Iraqi government in a way that ensures our hard-fought gains translate into long-term success."
Boehner added: "I'm hopeful that both countries will work together to guarantee that a free and democratic Iraq remains a strong and stable partner for the United States in the Middle East."
I respectfully disagree with the President," McCain said. "This decision will be viewed as a strategic victory for our enemies in the Middle East, especially the Iranian regime, which has worked relentlessly to ensure a full withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq. It is a consequential failure of both the Obama Administration -- which has been more focused on withdrawing from Iraq than succeeding in Iraq since it came into office -- as well as the Iraqi government.
Politics, and in this same article no-one is trying to state that GWB did not set these events into place in 08
There concern was the general's have made no comments on these events
GOP slams, Dems praise Obama over Iraq withdrawal - Political Hotsheet - CBS News
Your read fox or the times, none of this is even mentioned
The people who I hear saying something to the effect that Obama is admitting/conceding defeat (or whatever other terminology they use) by withdrawing all American troops from Iraq, are conservatives.
Now, what >I< believe is if the current president was a Republican, these self same people would be declaring victory in Iraq.
Thats not what they said
You can google what they really said
let me help
House Speaker John Boehner said he's concerned that the withdrawal could reverse progress made in Iraq, but he urged continued engagement between the two countries.
In a statement, Mr. Boehner said that despite U.S. soldiers leaving Iraq, "we owe it to them to continue engaging with the Iraqi government in a way that ensures our hard-fought gains translate into long-term success."
Boehner added: "I'm hopeful that both countries will work together to guarantee that a free and democratic Iraq remains a strong and stable partner for the United States in the Middle East."
I respectfully disagree with the President," McCain said. "This decision will be viewed as a strategic victory for our enemies in the Middle East, especially the Iranian regime, which has worked relentlessly to ensure a full withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq. It is a consequential failure of both the Obama Administration -- which has been more focused on withdrawing from Iraq than succeeding in Iraq since it came into office -- as well as the Iraqi government.
Politics, and in this same article no-one is trying to state that GWB did not set these events into place in 08
There concern was the general's have made no comments on these events
GOP slams, Dems praise Obama over Iraq withdrawal - Political Hotsheet - CBS News
Your read fox or the times, none of this is even mentioned
Those GOP chuckleheads can't seem to get out of their own way.
First of all, the American people want the troops to come home. But let's forget that for the time being.
Leaving our troops in Iraq without legal immunity would be an invitation to an eventual prosecution of one or more American soldiers. What would we do then? Attack the country and its gov't that we claim is the legitimate democracy that we helped create after we liberated them from SH? How nuts is that?
Considering that the Iraqi Gov't doesn't want us there anymore, what better way could there be for the Iraqi gov't to unify the country than to unite against the US occupiers?
You people who claim we lost the war in Iraq as we leave there and they are doing fine with a republic in place better think twice or at best look who is standing around you when you claim we lost that war just because GWB was the president and it was his war
I am not kidding. I know some gung ho marines who do not feel that way and I am clueless as to why any of you would feel that way
ARE U NUTS?
I think you men are obsessed with who won and who lost that stupid war in Iraq!!! I don't see how that can be defined. We should never have gone there, stayed way too long, and now we are leaving. Thank God!!! Be happy about it and quit the preoccupation of who won. It doesn't matter. And by the time it's decided, if ever, we'll all probably be dead!!!
Mam That was a mess Saddam created, not us. Where would we be today if that mess would have been left alone?
Besides after the first few weeks we were fighting Al Qaeda for the most part
You people who claim we lost the war in Iraq as we leave there and they are doing fine with a republic in place better think twice or at best look who is standing around you when you claim we lost that war just because GWB was the president and it was his war
I am not kidding. I know some gung ho marines who do not feel that way and I am clueless as to why any of you would feel that way
ARE U NUTS?
Aside from the American soldiers killed in that war, more than 1 million Iraqis died.
Furthermore it destroyed the united states overarching strategy in the region which was to let Iran and Iraq threaten and saber rattle at each other while we sat back uninvolved.
Now Iran has no enemy on its border and moreover, has seen how costly it is for us to maintain an occupation on Muslim soil. All Irans recourses are focused on us instead of being focused on Iraq.
Furthermore there was no Al-Qaeda presence there before the war, now there is, not to mention numerous other terror groups.
The fact is the war in Iraq was a textbook example of an operation thats a tactical success but a strategic blunder.
Do you really think we won anything?
You people who claim we lost the war in Iraq as we leave there and they are doing fine with a republic in place better think twice or at best look who is standing around you when you claim we lost that war just because GWB was the president and it was his war
I am not kidding. I know some gung ho marines who do not feel that way and I am clueless as to why any of you would feel that way
ARE U NUTS?
Aside from the American soldiers killed in that war, more than 1 million Iraqis died.
Furthermore it destroyed the united states overarching strategy in the region which was to let Iran and Iraq threaten and saber rattle at each other while we sat back uninvolved.
Now Iran has no enemy on its border and moreover, has seen how costly it is for us to maintain an occupation on Muslim soil. All Irans recourses are focused on us instead of being focused on Iraq.
Furthermore there was no Al-Qaeda presence there before the war, now there is, not to mention numerous other terror groups.
The fact is the war in Iraq was a textbook example of an operation thats a tactical success but a strategic blunder.
Do you really think we won anything?
You people who claim we lost the war in Iraq as we leave there and they are doing fine with a republic in place better think twice or at best look who is standing around you when you claim we lost that war just because GWB was the president and it was his war
I am not kidding. I know some gung ho marines who do not feel that way and I am clueless as to why any of you would feel that way
ARE U NUTS?
Aside from the American soldiers killed in that war, more than 1 million Iraqis died.
Furthermore it destroyed the united states overarching strategy in the region which was to let Iran and Iraq threaten and saber rattle at each other while we sat back uninvolved.
Now Iran has no enemy on its border and moreover, has seen how costly it is for us to maintain an occupation on Muslim soil. All Irans recourses are focused on us instead of being focused on Iraq.
Furthermore there was no Al-Qaeda presence there before the war, now there is, not to mention numerous other terror groups.
The fact is the war in Iraq was a textbook example of an operation thats a tactical success but a strategic blunder.
Do you really think we won anything?
You assume al Qaeda wasn't there.
The evidence proves otherwise, however the presence of al Qaeda by itself does not delegitimize the war simply because al Qaeda is only one of a multitude of terrorist groups. Bush stated that not only terrorists but their supporters would be considered under the same umbrella. He spelled it out clearly, but the left successfully muddied the waters and narrowed the issue changing the focus from all guilty parties to only al Qaeda members. This short-sighted rhetoric is intentional.
Aside from the American soldiers killed in that war, more than 1 million Iraqis died.
Furthermore it destroyed the united state’s overarching strategy in the region which was to let Iran and Iraq threaten and saber rattle at each other while we sat back uninvolved.
Now Iran has no enemy on its border and moreover, has seen how costly it is for us to maintain an occupation on Muslim soil. All Iran’s recourses are focused on us instead of being focused on Iraq.
Furthermore there was no Al-Qaeda presence there before the war, now there is, not to mention numerous other terror groups.
The fact is the war in Iraq was a textbook example of an operation that’s a tactical success but a strategic blunder.
Do you really think we won anything?
You assume al Qaeda wasn't there.
The evidence proves otherwise, however the presence of al Qaeda by itself does not delegitimize the war simply because al Qaeda is only one of a multitude of terrorist groups. Bush stated that not only terrorists but their supporters would be considered under the same umbrella. He spelled it out clearly, but the left successfully muddied the waters and narrowed the issue changing the focus from all guilty parties to only al Qaeda members. This short-sighted rhetoric is intentional.
Typcial BS. President Bush singled out terrorist groups that had a world wide reach and their supporters. Clearly the April 1, 2001 threat assessment would have mentioned al Queda in Iraq. In fact the only al Queda cell was operating in the protected Kurdish area. Iraq did lend support to group operating in Palestine and Iran but they did not recieve any advanced weapons Iraq had.
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB55/patterns.pdf
Bush himself acknowledged there was no Al-Qaeda threat in Iraq prior to 2003, odd that his supporters make so much effort to call him a liar.
Bush himself acknowledged there was no Al-Qaeda threat in Iraq prior to 2003, odd that his supporters make so much effort to call him a liar.
what was he suppose to do publicly?
Abu Musab al-Zarqawi - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
privately?
The Weekly Standard reports that, before the invasion of Iraq, Zarqawi ran a "terrorist haven" in Kurdish northern Iraq.[36] According to a March 2003 British intelligence report, Zarqawi had set up "sleeper cells" in Baghdad before the Iraq war. The report stated "Reporting since (February) suggests that senior al Qaeda associate Abu Musab al-Zarqawi has established sleeper cells in Baghdad, to be activated during a U.S. occupation of the city...These cells apparently intend to attack U.S. targets using car bombs and other weapons. (It is also possible that they have received [chemical and biological] materials from terrorists in the [Kurdish Autonomous Zone]),...al Qaeda-associated terrorists continued to arrive in Baghdad in early March."[37]
In May 2004, a video appeared on an alleged al-Qaeda website showing a group of five men, their faces covered with keffiyeh or balaclavas, beheading American civilian Nicholas Berg, who had been abducted and taken hostage in Iraq weeks earlier. The CIA claimed that the speaker on the tape wielding the knife that killed Berg was al-Zarqawi. The video opens with the title "Abu Musa'b al-Zarqawi slaughters an American." The speaker states that the murder was in retaliation for US abuses at the Abu Ghraib prison (see Abu Ghraib prison abuse scandal).[38] Following the death of al-Zarqawi, CNN spoke with Nicholas's father and long-time anti-war activist Michael Berg, who stated that al-Zarqawi's killing would lead to further vengeance and was not a cause for rejoicing.[39]
Zarqawi is also believed to have personally beheaded another American civilian, Olin Eugene Armstrong, in September 2004.[40]
United States officials implicated Zarqawi in over 700 killings in Iraq during the invasion, mostly from bombings.[41] Since March 2004, that number rose to the thousands.[42] According to the United States State Department, Zarqawi was responsible for the Canal Hotel bombing of the United Nations Headquarters in Iraq on August 19, 2003. This attack killed twenty-two people, including the United Nations secretary general's special Iraqi envoy Sergio Vieira de Mello.[43] Zarqawi's biggest alleged atrocities in Iraq included the attacks on the Shia shrines in Karbala and Baghdad in March 2004, which killed over 180 people, and the car bomb attacks in Najaf and Karbala in December 2004, which claimed over 60 lives.[44] Zarqawi is believed by the former Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq to have written an intercepted letter to the al-Qaeda leadership in February 2004 on the progress of the "Iraqi jihad." However, al-Qaeda denied they had written the letter.[45] The U.S. military believes Zarqawi organized the February 2006 attack on the Al Askari Mosque in Samarra, in an attempt to trigger sectarian violence between Sunnis and Shi'ites in Iraq.[46]
Bush himself acknowledged there was no Al-Qaeda threat in Iraq prior to 2003, odd that his supporters make so much effort to call him a liar.
what was he suppose to do publicly?
Abu Musab al-Zarqawi - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
privately?
The Weekly Standard reports that, before the invasion of Iraq, Zarqawi ran a "terrorist haven" in Kurdish northern Iraq.[36] According to a March 2003 British intelligence report, Zarqawi had set up "sleeper cells" in Baghdad before the Iraq war. The report stated "Reporting since (February) suggests that senior al Qaeda associate Abu Musab al-Zarqawi has established sleeper cells in Baghdad, to be activated during a U.S. occupation of the city...These cells apparently intend to attack U.S. targets using car bombs and other weapons. (It is also possible that they have received [chemical and biological] materials from terrorists in the [Kurdish Autonomous Zone]),...al Qaeda-associated terrorists continued to arrive in Baghdad in early March."[37]
In May 2004, a video appeared on an alleged al-Qaeda website showing a group of five men, their faces covered with keffiyeh or balaclavas, beheading American civilian Nicholas Berg, who had been abducted and taken hostage in Iraq weeks earlier. The CIA claimed that the speaker on the tape wielding the knife that killed Berg was al-Zarqawi. The video opens with the title "Abu Musa'b al-Zarqawi slaughters an American." The speaker states that the murder was in retaliation for US abuses at the Abu Ghraib prison (see Abu Ghraib prison abuse scandal).[38] Following the death of al-Zarqawi, CNN spoke with Nicholas's father and long-time anti-war activist Michael Berg, who stated that al-Zarqawi's killing would lead to further vengeance and was not a cause for rejoicing.[39]
Zarqawi is also believed to have personally beheaded another American civilian, Olin Eugene Armstrong, in September 2004.[40]
United States officials implicated Zarqawi in over 700 killings in Iraq during the invasion, mostly from bombings.[41] Since March 2004, that number rose to the thousands.[42] According to the United States State Department, Zarqawi was responsible for the Canal Hotel bombing of the United Nations Headquarters in Iraq on August 19, 2003. This attack killed twenty-two people, including the United Nations secretary general's special Iraqi envoy Sergio Vieira de Mello.[43] Zarqawi's biggest alleged atrocities in Iraq included the attacks on the Shia shrines in Karbala and Baghdad in March 2004, which killed over 180 people, and the car bomb attacks in Najaf and Karbala in December 2004, which claimed over 60 lives.[44] Zarqawi is believed by the former Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq to have written an intercepted letter to the al-Qaeda leadership in February 2004 on the progress of the "Iraqi jihad." However, al-Qaeda denied they had written the letter.[45] The U.S. military believes Zarqawi organized the February 2006 attack on the Al Askari Mosque in Samarra, in an attempt to trigger sectarian violence between Sunnis and Shi'ites in Iraq.[46]
You're providing proof of them being there after we started a war. Of course Al-Qaeda are going to follow U.S. soldiers.
I said BEFORE 2003.
But you think Al-Qaeda was big in Iraq before 2003, Bush says the opposite, so to you Bush is lying. Why did he lie in your opinion?
what was he suppose to do publicly?
Abu Musab al-Zarqawi - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
privately?
The Weekly Standard reports that, before the invasion of Iraq, Zarqawi ran a "terrorist haven" in Kurdish northern Iraq.[36] According to a March 2003 British intelligence report, Zarqawi had set up "sleeper cells" in Baghdad before the Iraq war. The report stated "Reporting since (February) suggests that senior al Qaeda associate Abu Musab al-Zarqawi has established sleeper cells in Baghdad, to be activated during a U.S. occupation of the city...These cells apparently intend to attack U.S. targets using car bombs and other weapons. (It is also possible that they have received [chemical and biological] materials from terrorists in the [Kurdish Autonomous Zone]),...al Qaeda-associated terrorists continued to arrive in Baghdad in early March."[37]
In May 2004, a video appeared on an alleged al-Qaeda website showing a group of five men, their faces covered with keffiyeh or balaclavas, beheading American civilian Nicholas Berg, who had been abducted and taken hostage in Iraq weeks earlier. The CIA claimed that the speaker on the tape wielding the knife that killed Berg was al-Zarqawi. The video opens with the title "Abu Musa'b al-Zarqawi slaughters an American." The speaker states that the murder was in retaliation for US abuses at the Abu Ghraib prison (see Abu Ghraib prison abuse scandal).[38] Following the death of al-Zarqawi, CNN spoke with Nicholas's father and long-time anti-war activist Michael Berg, who stated that al-Zarqawi's killing would lead to further vengeance and was not a cause for rejoicing.[39]
Zarqawi is also believed to have personally beheaded another American civilian, Olin Eugene Armstrong, in September 2004.[40]
United States officials implicated Zarqawi in over 700 killings in Iraq during the invasion, mostly from bombings.[41] Since March 2004, that number rose to the thousands.[42] According to the United States State Department, Zarqawi was responsible for the Canal Hotel bombing of the United Nations Headquarters in Iraq on August 19, 2003. This attack killed twenty-two people, including the United Nations secretary general's special Iraqi envoy Sergio Vieira de Mello.[43] Zarqawi's biggest alleged atrocities in Iraq included the attacks on the Shia shrines in Karbala and Baghdad in March 2004, which killed over 180 people, and the car bomb attacks in Najaf and Karbala in December 2004, which claimed over 60 lives.[44] Zarqawi is believed by the former Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq to have written an intercepted letter to the al-Qaeda leadership in February 2004 on the progress of the "Iraqi jihad." However, al-Qaeda denied they had written the letter.[45] The U.S. military believes Zarqawi organized the February 2006 attack on the Al Askari Mosque in Samarra, in an attempt to trigger sectarian violence between Sunnis and Shi'ites in Iraq.[46]
You're providing proof of them being there after we started a war. Of course Al-Qaeda are going to follow U.S. soldiers.
I said BEFORE 2003.
But you think Al-Qaeda was big in Iraq before 2003, Bush says the opposite, so to you Bush is lying. Why did he lie in your opinion?
would you let some-one know you want to bomb into 1000 pieces you know where is?
You're providing proof of them being there after we started a war. Of course Al-Qaeda are going to follow U.S. soldiers.
I said BEFORE 2003.
But you think Al-Qaeda was big in Iraq before 2003, Bush says the opposite, so to you Bush is lying. Why did he lie in your opinion?
would you let some-one know you want to bomb into 1000 pieces you know where is?
He said this in December of 2008.
Bush Admits No Al-Qaeda in Pre-Occupation Iraq - Hal_M - Open Salon
That site has a link to the interview.
would you let some-one know you want to bomb into 1000 pieces you know where is?
He said this in December of 2008.
Bush Admits No Al-Qaeda in Pre-Occupation Iraq - Hal_M - Open Salon
That site has a link to the interview.
I have not tried to deny it
In the defense of this country I would suspect there have been many lies told
