apologize for iraq, i don't think so.

[Jarhead]

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.

True...9/11 had nothing to do with Iraq.

But I took his comparisson another way.

We did not take possession of Bin Laden back in the 90's as we did not see him as worthy. We did not see him as a threat.

We were wrong and 3000 Americans died.

We attacked Iraq as we had reason to believe it was a threat.

Perhaps we were not prepared to make the same mistake twice.

Sadly, we were wrong again.

 

[Ringel05]

I love this argument. It's so full of emotive rationalizations from both sides.

 

[Mr. Peepers]

We attacked Iraq as we had reason to believe it was a threat.

Intelligence was cooked to create a "threat". War is good business and Shrub was looking for an "in" long before 9-11. And, boy has it been a cash cow. Mission accomplished... The whole admin. should be serving time for war crimes and fraud.

 

[Jarhead]

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

I suggest you understand where the blunder was.

Yes, there was a blunder...but attacking Iraq was not the blunder. World intel (not just US intel) gave the WORLD reason to believe there were WMD's...and so the WORLD (not just the US) agreed something had to be done.

The blunder was the execution of the war....not the war itself.

We did not prepare for the kind of warfare they were willing to undertake....using hospitals and school buildings as strongholds knowing we refused to intentionally go after them in such places.

So it was a WORLD blunder....not just a US blunder.

 

[Jarhead]

We attacked Iraq as we had reason to believe it was a threat.

Intelligence was cooked to create a "threat". War is good business and Shrub was looking for an "in" long before 9-11. And, boy has it been a cash cow. Mission accomplished... The whole admin. should be serving time for war crimes and fraud.

Really?

Bush had a way to doctor intel from other countries?

Wow.

 

[High_Gravity]

If war is "good for business" how come we are going broke after invading Iraq and Afghanistan? shoudn't we swimming from the profits of these wars?

 

[Trajan]

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.

pray tell, what war crime is that, exactly?

 

[Jarhead]

If war is "good for business" how come we are going broke after invading Iraq and Afghanistan? shoudn't we swimming from the profits of these wars?

couple that with the fact that Bush was able to cook the intel from England, France, Australia...and all fo rhis warmongering desires.

They actually believed those politicians that said "I voted for the war but that is becuase Bush cooked the intel"..

Funny...yet none of them were willing to prove the statement.

They knew their voter base was willing to accept that as fact.

They think you are idiots.....

 

[Jarhead]

We attacked Iraq as we had reason to believe it was a threat.

Intelligence was cooked to create a "threat". War is good business and Shrub was looking for an "in" long before 9-11. And, boy has it been a cash cow. Mission accomplished... The whole admin. should be serving time for war crimes and fraud.

Dont you need evidence to convict someone of a crime?

Lets see...

Hillary was running for President and she was asked by her base "how could you vote for the war"
Gee....ya think she had a reason to say "Bush cooked the intel"

Really?

OK...so tell me...if Bush cooked the intel and as a result 4000 men and women died AND trillions spoent....exactly why did congress that was of a democratic majority NOT do what they are supposed to do and prove that Bush cooked the intel and have him tried for crimes against his country?

Do you truly NOT see how the politicians you support continue to make you look silly?

 

[BlindBoo]

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

Perhap you could shed some light on how the Iraq invasion and occupation was connected to the al Queda attack on America on 9-11-01?

Not only is Iraq due an apology from the Bush Administration but the American people deserve one too.\!

 

[Dr.Drock]

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.

I agreed with the OP that an apology was stupid, I have no idea what words you're creating in your head about me saying we should apologize.

I think all the politicians who pushed the lie and the bill on americans should have a portion of their trust funds given to the children, widows, and injured vets of the war. Apologizing to dead people is stupid (I repeat) but if I were a politician I'd be on me knees begging and pleading for forgiveness to all the people who's lives my decision ruined.

If you feel that made the Iraqi civilians lives better, that's fine, I won't debate whether that's true or not. But either way that's not the responsibility of the US government or mine as a taxpayer.

 

[kaz]

I agreed with the OP that an apology was stupid, I have no idea what words you're creating in your head about me saying we should apologize.

I think all the politicians who pushed the lie and the bill on americans should have a portion of their trust funds given to the children, widows, and injured vets of the war. Apologizing to dead people is stupid (I repeat) but if I were a politician I'd be on me knees begging and pleading for forgiveness to all the people who's lives my decision ruined.

I went back and re-read, and I misunderstood that part, I thought you'd agreed with it. But you didn't, my apology on that one.

If you feel that made the Iraqi civilians lives better, that's fine, I won't debate whether that's true or not

OK, fair enough.

But either way that's not the responsibility of the US government or mine as a taxpayer.

Agreed, 100%. The problem with the Middle East and Republicans is they don't follow their own ideology. If we let oil prices go with the market and let private companies secure what they can internationally and drill freely in the US, then we'd have a sustainable system. By using the military as we do, we manipulate oil prices, foster dependency as pump prices are artificially low, pay more taxes as the cost of securing oil supplies (military, fighting terrorism, ...) is incorporated in the Federal budget. But since prices are too low at the pump, people pump more and conserve less exacerbating the problem that the market prices Republicans claim to support are not free to drive usage. See a supply and demand curve in any econ 101 course on what happens when prices are held lower then a sustainable supply can provide.

If Republicans just followed their supposed non-government intervention policy, prices would rise, we'd invest in other technologies and conserve and use less. But by ignoring their ideology, they cause a situation we need more and more oil which comes from places with bad guys, like the Middle East. We attract terrorists and then have to fight that.

As to Democrats, they are morons. They have no consistent ideology and no solutions. They selfishly call for cheap gas while blocking exploration and criticizing us for going to bad governments to get it. They voted for the war then claimed Bush who had been in office one year when the buildup began after 8 years of Clinton duped them and the Senate Intelligence committee. Which would take a mastermind, but they say he's a moron. He's apparently smarter then they are though.

 

[T-Bor]

Your English sucks, you write like a three year old. And your ideas and knowledge of current events is sorely lacking. Please point me to the link showing Saddam had these WMD's you speak of. IDIOT

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.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Saddam threatened the WHOLE WORLD chicken little?

 

[rdean]

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.

This is a democracy. Sometimes one side wins and sometimes the other side wins. Republicans are really good at calling Democrats "unpatriotic". Even though Republicans are the home to the confederate states. Only 6% of scientists are Republican. They aren't really into eduction. Just reading blogs on this board and you know Republicans have no respect for anyone other than extremist conservatives.

Point out that the Republican administration, working with Iraq, helped put in place an Iraqi constitution that makes "Islam" the "National Religion" and states in Article 2 that all legislation is to be based on Islam, Republicans will call that a lie. It's something they can look up on the internet and actually read word by word, but they don't.

Many Republicans now think Iraq is "free" and "better". When you point out that Iraqi women used to dress in western style clothes under Saddam and now they are enslaved and live in "burkes", right wingers refuse to believe it. They call that a "liberal lie".

So explaining to Republicans the disaster America, under Bush, created, if they don't believe it, then it's a "lie". That's their "world view". The few Republicans that admit Iraq is a disaster, blame it on the Iraqi people as being "unappreciative".

 

[washamericom]

T-Bor
Registered User
Member #3230 Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 681
Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Rep Power: 6


Your English sucks, you write like a three year old. And your ideas and knowledge of current events is sorely lacking. Please point me to the link showing Saddam had these WMD's you speak of. IDIOT


first of all, you ain't nobody, yer english stinks just as bad(ly) as anyone elses on this bored. if you need a link to find the harmony report... you are years in retard. obamadrone... second, why did saddam have 550 tons of yellowcake on 9/11 ? live prison chemical prison test labs... how numb are you people to still be proactively defending saddam hussein in 2011 ?

 

[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.

pray tell, what war crime is that, exactly?

The whole invasion.

Iraq never attacked the United States. It had, at many times in history, served as a proxy to further America's goals in the region, namely to thwart Iran's efforts to become a Middle Eastern Power. Iraq was a patsy..and ultimately became a victim of American greed for natural resources and regional control.

 

[Sallow]

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.

This is a democracy. Sometimes one side wins and sometimes the other side wins. Republicans are really good at calling Democrats "unpatriotic". Even though Republicans are the home to the confederate states. Only 6% of scientists are Republican. They aren't really into eduction. Just reading blogs on this board and you know Republicans have no respect for anyone other than extremist conservatives.

Point out that the Republican administration, working with Iraq, helped put in place an Iraqi constitution that makes "Islam" the "National Religion" and states in Article 2 that all legislation is to be based on Islam, Republicans will call that a lie. It's something they can look up on the internet and actually read word by word, but they don't.

Many Republicans now think Iraq is "free" and "better". When you point out that Iraqi women used to dress in western style clothes under Saddam and now they are enslaved and live in "burkes", right wingers refuse to believe it. They call that a "liberal lie".

So explaining to Republicans the disaster America, under Bush, created, if they don't believe it, then it's a "lie". That's their "world view". The few Republicans that admit Iraq is a disaster, blame it on the Iraqi people as being "unappreciative".

Good post.

 

[Gunny]

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.

Want to argue this one with some knowledge?

Saddam was better where he was than gone. It was predicted by the military in 1991 what would happen if we took him out and Bush I backed off.

He was the joker in the deck. He kept the shia and sunni separated. He split the ME. All tribal BS aside, removing Saddam from power has brought a confrontation of sunni, shia and Nationalist Turks trying to kill Kurds to fruition.

He was evil. But, the lesser of.

 

[washamericom]

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.

This is a democracy. Sometimes one side wins and sometimes the other side wins. Republicans are really good at calling Democrats "unpatriotic". Even though Republicans are the home to the confederate states. Only 6% of scientists are Republican. They aren't really into eduction. Just reading blogs on this board and you know Republicans have no respect for anyone other than extremist conservatives.

Point out that the Republican administration, working with Iraq, helped put in place an Iraqi constitution that makes "Islam" the "National Religion" and states in Article 2 that all legislation is to be based on Islam, Republicans will call that a lie. It's something they can look up on the internet and actually read word by word, but they don't.

Many Republicans now think Iraq is "free" and "better". When you point out that Iraqi women used to dress in western style clothes under Saddam and now they are enslaved and live in "burkes", right wingers refuse to believe it. They call that a "liberal lie".

So explaining to Republicans the disaster America, under Bush, created, if they don't believe it, then it's a "lie". That's their "world view". The few Republicans that admit Iraq is a disaster, blame it on the Iraqi people as being "unappreciative".

Good post.

milktoast