Your kindness is magnanimous! As a token of my appreciation, I offer: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/14...4/002-6150961-0412833?n=1000&s=books&v=glance This software will help you find the clue to where that oil is
Last week? Let's see, last week I was helping Dick Cheney hide some barrels of Iraqi oil underneath the Whitehouse. While I was there, I whipped out my metal detector and was able to find those medals John Kerry through over the fence years ago. Strange week!
A one-sided peace simply is not possible. Our enemies want a war, and they are going to do whatever is necessary to get one. If we refuse to participate in this war, they will simply attack us until we stop refusing. Our only possible course is to win this war. Afghanistan and Iraq are merely two fronts among dozens of fronts in a war that will likely last longer than anyone here will live. I am not the most eloquent fellow. If you have not already, I strongly recommend that you read Tribes.
Iraq posed no threat & harbored no terrorists! We made a war out of nothing! Pakistan, Syria, Iran and Jordan are all greater threats than Iraq.
Even Saudi Arabia seems to generate more Terrorists than Iraq. The majority of the 9/11 hijackers were Saudi. Even most of the terrorists in Iraq now have flocked there from other countries, very few are Iraqi. Despite all of these postings nobody has come up with an adequate answer as to what we have actually achieved in Iraq. If the war wasn't for oil as many people claim, then what was it for? I don't accept it was to combat the threat of WMD. It's since become evident that this was the excuse to go to war rather then the real reason. No evidence has emerged of any of the nuclear materials that were cited or Iraqs ability to depoy long range weapons that were cited. It was claimed by a UK weapons expert who advised the security services that the intelligence community deliberately misled the public through the media to back-up these claims. This came to light during the Hutton report in to the suicide of Dr Kelly in which the BBC reported that an intelligence source leaked the fact that evidence against Iraq had been 'sexed up' http://www.the-hutton-inquiry.org.uk/ In my eyes the the current administrations look bad any way you look at it. If the war was against terrorism, thein it is flawed as Iraq is and was insignificant in terms or international terrorism. There are far bigger countries to go after such as Iran, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. In fact any terrorist training camps in Iraq were in Kurdish controled northern Iraq - who are our allies. Looking for an achievement in this is impossible, terrorist attacks worldwide have increased, probably because Iraq was the wrong target, it resulted in the emergence of more popular terrorist leaders, and Bin Laden still hasent been caught. Probably because he never was in Iraq, my guess is Pakisan. If it was against WMD then where are they? Why have none been found - or indeen more telling any evidence of any having existed? This scenario either makes our goverments look at best, incompetant and willing to go to war based on inaccurate and fale information, or at worst liars, willing to lie to their own people if they knew the truth behind the 'sexing up' of the intelligence community information. Again, looking from a sucess point of view, then this also has to be a failiure, no weapons have been found, and no evidence of any having existed. So either way you look at it, it's a big fat failiure that cost milions of taxpayer $$$ and even more lives.
Billions!!!! And I don't think anyone believes Iraq is a success. Some people say it is but I don't think they truly believe that.
Yeah, I'd have to agree with that. I'm yet to hear anyone cite one good thing that's come from the war. Well Saddam fell, but there's plenty worse dictators out there making many more people suffer the world over. That was never a justification for going.
We're also working on each of those fronts through coordinated diplomacy and military force. Focusing on a single front gives a distorted picture of the war. Yes, a single front has little value in itself. What good did invading Normandy do? Were we at war with the French who lived on Omaha beach?
Good stuff, as always, WIll! 1. Within budget? 2. Mission accomplished? 3. Islamic law? 4. Permanent bases. (Muslims love that!) 5. You forgot his other friends 6. 'The 350 Billion Dollar no-fly zone' 7. Was that WMD? 8. Piece of cake, eh?
Did someone tell zarqawi that? He was there before the war as well as terrorist training camps. In fact, recent release of documents from Iraq shows that saddam was working towards terrorist hits in the US. Some people just don't care though. It's that old "spank me daddy, I've been naughty" syndrome. The same people that use that as an excuse would also be against war with those countries. Of course, now that Syria has Iraq's WMD, you do make a valid point. And now that 20 tons of chemical wmd made their way from Iraq to Jordan in a plot that was stopped, short of killing 20,000 people (was it 20,000 or 80,000 Rob?), one could also submit that Jordan has quite a bit of Iraq's chemical wmd also. The little things that count, nothing special. What's a million dead people in mass graves and acid baths? Oh, that's right, those were not conditions for saddam to avoid war 92,000 lives saved! Oh, the despair!
Nope, just follow the threads here at DP You'd be surprised at how many people have selective memory loss for things well discussed here. I guess it has to fit their agenda, to remember. Besides, I saw picture on photobucket.com that said it also!
Matt: This is a war with militant Islamists. You can paint it up pretty with any of a dozen other colors, but that is who is actively seeking to destroy western civilization. Note that I do not agree that this is a war on Islam. There is a great distance between Islamists and Muslims.
Matt: If my post was insufficiently clear, I am certain that the fault was my terse and skeletal writing style. For a detailed explanation of this whole conflict, from our side, I refer you to The Pentagon's New Map: War and Peace in the Twenty-first Century.
Sorry GTech, but you're making up fact again, source please? Zarqawi was in Iraq, but in the Kurdish controled north, again to remind you that these guys are our allies in the war. Source BBC News Do you have any souce for these supposed documents that have been released? Zarqawi in fact had very little power before the invasion, his rise to prominence has been aided by the invasion and has let to 1000's more deluded muslims flocking to him angy at the invasion of Iraq. So I suppose that's one thing that you can arge George has achieved.