Liberals were right about Iraq

Yeah, we shouldn't have gone. Then Saddam would still be in power and more stuff like this would still be happening today:

"They took my husband away in front of me. I found his body in the morgue a few days later. He had multiple bullet wounds and his eyes had been gouged out," one woman tells me, forcefully twisting a tissue in her hands as if it somehow could ease her agony and erase the chilling memory.

She didn't want her story told, too afraid that she would meet the same fate as the man she loved.

Her husband's body bore the "signs of torture." How many times has that phrase been used? It's such a common phrase it's as if what really happened gets glossed over: skin scraped off their bodies, fingernails ripped out, horrifying screams of pain before death."

Oh well, I guess hind sight is 20/20?

From this article:

http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/03/12/iraq.women/index.html

 

Nonsense. Saddam wouldn't have been in power if we hadn't backed and endorsed him.

Thousands have died in the last 5 years, many Americans and many Iraqis. Long after Saddam was out of power.

Was Saddam worth the death of 10,000? 50,000?

The majority of the deaths in Iraq occurred after the provisional government came to power.

Not exactly a great record for neo-conservatives like yourself to hang your hat on.

 

We still made the right choice. period.

Just out of curiousity, if China dropped a nuke on Seattle today and killed everyone in the city. What would you do in response if you were president?

 

good point. I guess to some it was morally sound to destroy what we created.

 

How is that related? Are you saying Iraq dropped a nuke on us? Are you one of those that believe there's a link between Iraq and al Qaeda?

 

Well, first off I doubt he/she will answer the question. But to answer your question, what I'm curious about is WHEN is it ok to go to war? It seems with the way most libs think, we can never defend the country.

Considering what happened on 9-11, and that al queerdo was making more threats and Saddam was being a total prick, we couldn't afford to take the chance NOT to attack. Don't you remember how much of an ass Saddam was after the attacks?

We've captured numerous al queerdo leaders and there's no telling how many attacks have been avoided because of our awesome military.

We have not had a major attack on US soil since 9-11. Hmm... seems like Bush's ingenious plan is working.

Bottom line is you already know what our side thinks... and we know most of what you guys think.

BUT... based on how you guys have reacted to the war in Iraq the one thing we don't know is how kooky you will be during the next inevitable crisis.

And..since you guys are the ones that seem to know everything... I'd LOVE to see if you can answer the question (which you won't be able to).

if China dropped a nuke on Seattle today and killed everyone in the city. What would you do in response if you were president?

I think I'm gonna start a separate thread for this...

 

Uhhhm, ok, if 9-11 had to be avenged why not attack the monarchy in Saudi Arabia that bred the majority of the attackers?

Before 9-11 the last attack was the WTC bombing in 1993 so I guess by this logic Clinton's ingenious plan worked longer than Bush's has so far?

5 retaliatory nukes would be about right IMO

 

Ahh... at least you're willing to do 5 retalitory nukes. Maybe there is still hope for our country.

Clinton had the choice to kill bin laden, but chose to keep his buddy alive so he could carry out the 9-11 attacks.

 

When diplomatic solutions have failed, and it is made clear, in some form, that the other party is intent on escalating the conflict...

Not pre-emptive war with faulty intelligence...

Couldn't afford to take the chance not to attack? Were you concerned for the welfare of your family in the USA? Were you willing to pick up a rifle and go? If you were willing, did you? If not, it couldn't have been that important, right?

How much of an ass was he? When did he attack the US?

But the attack during Bush's watch was the single worst attack on US soil...

Well, because they actually attacked us, as opposed to a us initiating a pre-emptive war, I would retaliate in kind, with the force deemed appropriate by my council...

 

I've already been during the first gulf war and I doubt they'd let me go because of medical conditions. I'd go if I could, though!

The first attack on the WTC was in 1993. Clinton had the opportunity to kill bin laden but he chose not to. He had plenty of time to do something about it. I can guarantee you that Clinton and his administration were well aware that the shit was about to hit the fan while he was in. There's no way that bin laden and the gang first started plotting this on Bush's inauguration day.

Bottom line: Slick Willie is responsible for the deaths of the 9-11 attacks and for us being in Iraq right now.

 

And you're content knowing that our troops are over there, dying every day, in a pre-emptive war with no clearly defined goals... How would your family feel if it was you that died, and they were forced to live with no dad because of this war? What good will your sacrifice have brought?

We over-threw a dictator, but created a country with less running water than before... And, this is at the expense of the US taxpayers, which your children will most likely be footing the bill for...

Thanks for the service in gulf war part 1, but why do the pro-war always claim medical conditions when asked why they're not overseas? (see the video called operation chickenhawk)

 

First of all, they volunteered to join the military. When you join you know full well what you are getting into. In my case I even had two choices to get out... but once you take the final oath you are in for good.

Imagine how it feels to be over there fighting day in and day out and listening to a bunch of whimpy liberals spitting on the troops every day. What a shame. The war would have been won a long time ago if it weren't for the constant undermining efforts by the democrats.

Be thankful for the volunteers that have the courage to make a huge sacrifice so half the country can spit at them.

 

Uhm, no. "because" is not a rationale.

First of all, China wouldn't drop one nuke on Seattle and then wait for nuclear annihilation, so the example is implausible.

Do you want me to pretend I am brain damaged so I can answer your hypothetical?

You have a knack for being wrong.

That's a lie. Bush was warned of an impending Al Queda attack on US soil and did nothing. The FBI was tracking the hijackers, and warned that they were doing flight training, and Bush did nothing. On the day of the attacks, we couldn't even scramble interceptors. While Rudy Giuliani was grandstanding in NY, Bush was nowhere to be found.

However, since Bush 41, this nation has been under constant threat of manufactured tailor. Reports have shown that 5 of the 19 hijackers were trained by the US military in counter-intelligence.

 

Thanks for your service.

Did you make E-3?

 

What about those that enlisted before september 11th, did they know they would be sent to fight an unpopular, pre-emptive war?

What kind of medical condition would prevent re-enlistment, but allow a soldier to remain in until their ETS?

Who's spitting? Those that are trying to bring our troops out of harms way and help save them from the IEDs? Or are you referring to those that sit comfortably in their homes cheering on this war that taking the lives of our 18-22 year olds?

We would have found the WMD?

 

People like guerilla don't care how evil saddam was. A million in mass graves, yet you'll never seem him say a bad word about anything but Israel, the US, Christians, Jews and (non islamic) Soldiers. If you do criticize saddam (as you have), he'll try to turn it around to be the fault of the country he is currently occupying. Apparently he doesn't think anyone sees the consistent patterns.

You are correct, of course. Liberal were right all along.

Just ask Al Gore. In a eerie twist of fate, he once accused GHWB of not doing what GWB did.

 

GTech what do you have to say about what guerilla pointed out, that we put Saddam in power in the first place?

 

Already said it...that in every instance, no matter what, he'll try to blame America for the actions of others.

I'd also ask who "we" are? My "we" is the USA. I have no idea who his "we" are, but he's effectively convinced me it is not the USA.

Some people hate their country so much, they would sell their integrity to attack and it accuse it falsely. I'd like to think you were smarter than that though.

So what do you have to say about his dishonest assertion?

 

I'm reading it.. did we as in the U.S. not fund Saddam during the Iran-Iraq war?

 

only a retarded could support a war :-s

the world has no president. USA cant rule the world. :-s