Iraq told us to LEAVE "their" country - PERIOD!

[deltex1]

Accepting an offer from Saddam is the same as accepting an offer from Khomeini in the iran negotiations...or Abbas in the Palestinian negotiations. Where has that gotten us in the past 30 years? W was not going to diddle with Saddam after 911. The degree to which Saddams wmd were a threat was overblown...but the degree that Saddam had to go was a logical decision at the time. We could have put a bullet in his head instead but we chose to go the honorable route with all the trappings of guilt attendant to being the good guys. Time we got over the good guy image and become the force that adversaries are terrified of...for demonstrated reasons.

Happy new year, Foo...one year closer to recovery.

 

[Carib Gyal]

Cari 10446657

Wait! Wait! Did we say LEAVE!?! HAHA! We meant come back!

They meant 'leave' in 2008 an The Bush Admin agreed it was time to go. Six years later a new threat emerged amidst the turmoil in Syria so they invited 'airstrikes' and 'advisers' to come in. Do you have a problem with that?

I have a problem with the US being errand boys to whatever some Iraqi tells them to do. Leave, stay, come back, airstrikes only, no boots on the ground, some boots on the ground, jump and kick.

US policy should be decided by the US. Obama removed the troops and ended it. Then he sent them back and started it. This go-round it's all on him.

 

[JoeB131]

Oh...that's why congress voted not to invade Iraq...I missed that part of Foo's history of the war on terror.

Congress authorized Bush to use force as a last resort if all other methods failed.

Bush did not exercise all those other methods.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Yea, that's a real shame. If Republicans hadn't disbanded the Iraqi Military, there is a very good chance Isis wouldn't exist. In fact, if they hadn't disbanded the Iraqi military, their scheme concerning Iraq might have worked. But their own stupidity shot them in the foot.

Well, it's more than that. The Generals in the Pentagon said it would take 500,000 troops to occupy Iraq. Bush didn't start a draft or increase the size of the army to do that. So the country collapsed into chaos.

Should have just blanketed the place with neutron bombs and nerve gas. That way, you only need a few thousand troops for the cleanup.

 

[JoeB131]

Accepting an offer from Saddam is the same as accepting an offer from Khomeini in the iran negotiations...or Abbas in the Palestinian negotiations. Where has that gotten us in the past 30 years?

Mostly, it's kept us out of wars. My question is, why do we keep sticking our dicks into the middle east hornet's nest and keep complaining about getting stung. We could take all the money we spend fighting wars and propping up the Zionist Entity and invest it in energy research and development and be an energy exporter instead of an energy importer.

W was not going to diddle with Saddam after 911. The degree to which Saddams wmd were a threat was overblown...but the degree that Saddam had to go was a logical decision at the time.

Well, it wasn't a logical decision. Saddam just plain old didn't have WMD's. Even if he did, we had more, so do the Zionists. Overthrowing Saddam would unleash Shi'ite nationalism, cause the country to break up (which it effectively has) and would have strengthened the position of Iran in the region. Worse than that, we took a situation where most of the world sympathized with us after 9/11- even the Islamic world - and instead replaced those images with the images of Lyndy England torturing naked Iraqi prisoners.

We could have put a bullet in his head instead but we chose to go the honorable route with all the trappings of guilt attendant to being the good guys. Time we got over the good guy image and become the force that adversaries are terrified of...for demonstrated reasons.

There's a whole lot of problems with assassinating leaders. There was a reason why Churchill and FDR didn't work with von Staufenberg and the German General who were trying to assassinate Hitler. You can assassinate leaders, but they just get replaced with guys with the same attitude.

And of course, if you fail, you just end up looking stupid.

Finally, if assassinating leaders becomes okay, it's only a matter of time before someone assassinates ours. Probably easier, because frankly, just about anyone can get a gun in this country, apparently.

 

[JoeB131]

Should have just blanketed the place with neutron bombs and nerve gas. That way, you only need a few thousand troops for the cleanup.

Right. **** those women and children.

Now, realizing that you are a stupid person, Ditchy, but Neutron bombs render places uninhabitable for DECADES, not minutes. That's why we never made any.

 

[deltex1]

Accepting an offer from Saddam is the same as accepting an offer from Khomeini in the iran negotiations...or Abbas in the Palestinian negotiations. Where has that gotten us in the past 30 years?

Mostly, it's kept us out of wars. My question is, why do we keep sticking our dicks into the middle east hornet's nest and keep complaining about getting stung. We could take all the money we spend fighting wars and propping up the Zionist Entity and invest it in energy research and development and be an energy exporter instead of an energy importer.

W was not going to diddle with Saddam after 911. The degree to which Saddams wmd were a threat was overblown...but the degree that Saddam had to go was a logical decision at the time.

Well, it wasn't a logical decision. Saddam just plain old didn't have WMD's. Even if he did, we had more, so do the Zionists. Overthrowing Saddam would unleash Shi'ite nationalism, cause the country to break up (which it effectively has) and would have strengthened the position of Iran in the region. Worse than that, we took a situation where most of the world sympathized with us after 9/11- even the Islamic world - and instead replaced those images with the images of Lyndy England torturing naked Iraqi prisoners.

We could have put a bullet in his head instead but we chose to go the honorable route with all the trappings of guilt attendant to being the good guys. Time we got over the good guy image and become the force that adversaries are terrified of...for demonstrated reasons.

There's a whole lot of problems with assassinating leaders. There was a reason why Churchill and FDR didn't work with von Staufenberg and the German General who were trying to assassinate Hitler. You can assassinate leaders, but they just get replaced with guys with the same attitude.

And of course, if you fail, you just end up looking stupid.

Finally, if assassinating leaders becomes okay, it's only a matter of time before someone assassinates ours. Probably easier, because frankly, just about anyone can get a gun in this country, apparently.

And so, rather than kill Assad we watch as 200000 of his people get killed. If these guys are bad, and want us damaged, kill them directly. As far as our leader being vulnerable...there's plenty more where he came from.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

DT 10452712

W was not going to diddle with Saddam after 911.

That is not what he told members of Congress when he asked for an authorization to use force 'to keep the peace' Deltex:

Bush43 2002-10-07

"I have asked Congress to authorize the use of America's military, if it proves necessary, to enforce U.N. Security Council demands."

Bush got the authorization from Congress in October and promptly sent Powell to the UN to diddle with Saddam about his disarmament obligations with that world body. Why did he 'diddle' with Saddam if he was not going to 'diddle' with Saddam? You make no sense as usual.

 

[JoeB131]

And so, rather than kill Assad we watch as 200000 of his people get killed. If these guys are bad, and want us damaged, kill them directly. As far as our leader being vulnerable...there's plenty more where he came from.

Do you really think there would not still be a civil war if Assad were killed tomorrow? Someone else in his family would just take his place.

No, assassination isn't used as a tool of statecraft for a reason. It's just a terrible idea.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Should have just blanketed the place with neutron bombs and nerve gas. That way, you only need a few thousand troops for the cleanup.

Right. **** those women and children.

Now, realizing that you are a stupid person, Ditchy, but Neutron bombs render places uninhabitable for DECADES, not minutes. That's why we never made any.

That's the whole idea...render the place an uninhabitable wasteland for the next couple million years...problem solved.

 

[JoeB131]

Should have just blanketed the place with neutron bombs and nerve gas. That way, you only need a few thousand troops for the cleanup.

Right. **** those women and children.

Now, realizing that you are a stupid person, Ditchy, but Neutron bombs render places uninhabitable for DECADES, not minutes. That's why we never made any.

That's the whole idea...render the place an uninhabitable wasteland for the next couple million years...problem solved.

You know, ditchy, there's a point where you go from "annoying troll" to "Crazy person".

You've just crossed it.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Talk about pure projection, dude...you crossed that line about 54,000 posts ago!

Serious question: do you EVER leave your house?

 

[Unkotare]

That's the whole idea...render the place an uninhabitable wasteland for the next couple million years....

Like the inside of your head?

 

[rdean]

Yea, that's a real shame. If Republicans hadn't disbanded the Iraqi Military, there is a very good chance Isis wouldn't exist. In fact, if they hadn't disbanded the Iraqi military, their scheme concerning Iraq might have worked. But their own stupidity shot them in the foot.

Well, it's more than that. The Generals in the Pentagon said it would take 500,000 troops to occupy Iraq. Bush didn't start a draft or increase the size of the army to do that. So the country collapsed into chaos.

You said: Well, it's more than that. The Generals in the Pentagon said it would take 500,000 troops to occupy Iraq. Bush didn't start a draft or increase the size of the army to do that. So the country collapsed into chaos.

500,000 troops to occupy Iraq? Why? The Shiite and Sunni religions are descended from different sons of Mohamed. They have been at war for a thousand years. Only a strong arm dictator like Saddam could keep them from fighting by being brutal. Clearly, once they were "free", they were free to kill each other.

This is the problem, Republicans, in their arrogant ignorance didn't even bother to learn anything about the region or it's people before they indulged in that unfortunate invasion. Republicans are bullies. They didn't bother to learn because they don't care. The GOP operates from a position of ignorance. Any dipshit in the world would have known to study a country you were going to invade before you invaded it so there wouldn't be any surprises.

Even John McCain, 5 years after the beginning of the Iraq war didn't know the difference between Shiite and Sunni. How stupid can you be?

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/03/18/mccain-misspeaks-on-iran-al-qaeda/?_r=0

“We continue to be concerned about Iranian taking Al Qaeda into Iran, training them and sending them back,’’ Mr. McCain said at the news conference. Asked about that statement, Mr. McCain said: “Well, it’s common knowledge and has been reported in the media that Al Qaeda is going back into Iran and receiving training and are coming back into Iraq from Iran. That’s well known. And it's unfortunate."

It was not until he got a whispered correction from Senator Joseph I. Lieberman of Connecticut, who was traveling with Mr. McCain on the trip, which is a Congressional delegation, that Mr. McCain corrected himself.

----------------

You can even watch the entire video of this exchange on Youtube.

 

[rdean]

Yea, that's a real shame. If Republicans hadn't disbanded the Iraqi Military, there is a very good chance Isis wouldn't exist. In fact, if they hadn't disbanded the Iraqi military, their scheme concerning Iraq might have worked. But their own stupidity shot them in the foot.

Well, it's more than that. The Generals in the Pentagon said it would take 500,000 troops to occupy Iraq. Bush didn't start a draft or increase the size of the army to do that. So the country collapsed into chaos.

You said: Well, it's more than that. The Generals in the Pentagon said it would take 500,000 troops to occupy Iraq. Bush didn't start a draft or increase the size of the army to do that. So the country collapsed into chaos.

500,000 troops to occupy Iraq? Why? The Shiite and Sunni religions are descended from different sons of Mohamed. They have been at war for a thousand years. Only a strong arm dictator like Saddam could keep them from fighting by being brutal. Clearly, once they were "free", they were free to kill each other.

This is the problem, Republicans, in their arrogant ignorance didn't even bother to learn anything about the region or it's people before they indulged in that unfortunate invasion. Republicans are bullies. They didn't bother to learn because they don't care. The GOP operates from a position of ignorance. Any dipshit in the world would have known to study a country you were going to invade before you invaded it so there wouldn't be any surprises.

Even John McCain, 5 years after the beginning of the Iraq war didn't know the difference between Shiite and Sunni. How stupid can you be?

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/03/18/mccain-misspeaks-on-iran-al-qaeda/?_r=0

“We continue to be concerned about Iranian taking Al Qaeda into Iran, training them and sending them back,’’ Mr. McCain said at the news conference. Asked about that statement, Mr. McCain said: “Well, it’s common knowledge and has been reported in the media that Al Qaeda is going back into Iran and receiving training and are coming back into Iraq from Iran. That’s well known. And it's unfortunate."

It was not until he got a whispered correction from Senator Joseph I. Lieberman of Connecticut, who was traveling with Mr. McCain on the trip, which is a Congressional delegation, that Mr. McCain corrected himself.

----------------

You can even watch the entire video of this exchange on Youtube.

You would think that after a post like this, Republicans, at least some Republicans would come back with "Oh, I learned something". But they never do. Because they have lost the ability.