L
LoneVoice
Guest
Originally posted by jimnyc
I'm aware of a few officials claiming it shouldn't take long to defeat the actual Iraqi military, but I haven't heard anyone state the overall occupation would be just as easy. Do you have any sources? (not saying it isn't true, I just haven't read it yet)
Honestly, I don't know what particulars make up the unemployment numbers. I'm confident the same criteria is being used that has always been used - at least this gives us a way to gauge the current climate compared to history.
What exactly do you mean by "Curious, are the 150k+ a month additional people in the job seeking market counted when it comes to counting unemployed?"? If they are making 150k+ per month, doesn't that mean they are employed? I'm honestly not sure what you're asking here.
Are you just trying to defend the war at all costs?
Bush's original claims were that this war and occupation would be relatively quick and painless. The major combat was quick, even quicker than expectations. The occupation has now flipped and is even more "major combat" than the first phase of the war. It's cost more American lives and alot of American dollars.
You made a mistake when you read his "150k seeking jobs" and yet responded with people making $150k.