Can anybody tell me why we really went to war
ericn1300
08-27-2008, 09:27 PM
in Iraq? Nobody I've talked to seems to know, other than Bush played on the emotions of 9-11 to achieve his personal goals. Check out the cost of war http://www.nationalpriorities.org/costofwar_home and put in your own state to see what this unnecessary war is costing your community.
KustmAce
08-28-2008, 02:17 AM
Very simple: Weapons of mass destruction...oh wait...No it was terrorists...oh wait...um...I don't remember...
I think it says in here somewhere:
http://www.alternet.org/story/16274/
Or here:
http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2008/03/19/iraq_five/
Oh wait...no...definitely here:
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0713-01.htm
I think it says in here somewhere:
http://www.alternet.org/story/16274/
Or here:
http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2008/03/19/iraq_five/
Oh wait...no...definitely here:
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0713-01.htm
2strokebloke
08-28-2008, 02:41 AM
It's simple really:
This is a brain, it thinks:
http://www.morphonix.com/software/education/science/brain/game/specimens/images/wet_brain.gif
This is not a brain, it doesn't think:
http://greenerpractices.files.wordpress.com/2008/05/george-bush-sour.jpg
This is a brain, it thinks:
http://www.morphonix.com/software/education/science/brain/game/specimens/images/wet_brain.gif
This is not a brain, it doesn't think:
http://greenerpractices.files.wordpress.com/2008/05/george-bush-sour.jpg
BNaylor
08-28-2008, 08:34 AM
Obviously the anti-war movement is ineffective today for whatever reasons. Or maybe it was the oil. :eek:
Likewise, can anyone tell me why we went to war in Vietnam? 58,000 KIA and 400,000 wounded. I still don't know the real reason why the politicians got us into it. :screwy:
In today's dollars the Vietnam War which lasted at least 10 years costs more than the Iraq War, however, take note that the Iraq War budget and spending to date only makes up 1% of the GDP. See link below.
Yet the Iraq war has consumed less of the nation's gross domestic product than other pricey conflicts. The Iraq war's costs represented 1 percent of GDP in the peak year of the war. World War II, with a $4.1 trillion price tag in 2008 dollars, was nearly 36 percent of GDP and the Vietnam War was 2.3 percent of GDP in that wars' peak years.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/07/25/national/main4296368.shtml
Obviously wars and national security is not cheap. :grinno:
American Revolution: $1.8 billion; GDP figure not available
War of 1812: $1.2 billion; 2.2 percent
Civil War, Union: $45.2 billion; 11.3 percent
Civil War, Confederacy: $15.2 billion; GDP figure not available
World War I: $253 billion; 13.6 percent
World War II: $4.1 trillion; 35.8 percent
Korean War: $320 billion; 4.2 percent
Vietnam War: $686 billion; 2.3 percent
Gulf War: $96 billion; 0.3 percent
Iraq War: $648 billion; 1 percent
Afghanistan/Global war on terror: $171 billion; 0.3 percent
Post 9/11 domestic security: $33 billion; 0.1 percent
Post 9/11 operations: $859 billion; 1.2 percent
Likewise, can anyone tell me why we went to war in Vietnam? 58,000 KIA and 400,000 wounded. I still don't know the real reason why the politicians got us into it. :screwy:
In today's dollars the Vietnam War which lasted at least 10 years costs more than the Iraq War, however, take note that the Iraq War budget and spending to date only makes up 1% of the GDP. See link below.
Yet the Iraq war has consumed less of the nation's gross domestic product than other pricey conflicts. The Iraq war's costs represented 1 percent of GDP in the peak year of the war. World War II, with a $4.1 trillion price tag in 2008 dollars, was nearly 36 percent of GDP and the Vietnam War was 2.3 percent of GDP in that wars' peak years.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/07/25/national/main4296368.shtml
Obviously wars and national security is not cheap. :grinno:
American Revolution: $1.8 billion; GDP figure not available
War of 1812: $1.2 billion; 2.2 percent
Civil War, Union: $45.2 billion; 11.3 percent
Civil War, Confederacy: $15.2 billion; GDP figure not available
World War I: $253 billion; 13.6 percent
World War II: $4.1 trillion; 35.8 percent
Korean War: $320 billion; 4.2 percent
Vietnam War: $686 billion; 2.3 percent
Gulf War: $96 billion; 0.3 percent
Iraq War: $648 billion; 1 percent
Afghanistan/Global war on terror: $171 billion; 0.3 percent
Post 9/11 domestic security: $33 billion; 0.1 percent
Post 9/11 operations: $859 billion; 1.2 percent
2strokebloke
08-28-2008, 03:40 PM
We got into Vietnam because the French wanted our help, and the U.S. was still anti communist at that time so it seemed to make sense to help the French keep communists out of south Vietnam.
The real question is why we bothered to stay there for so long.
The real question is why we bothered to stay there for so long.
BNaylor
08-28-2008, 04:13 PM
We got into Vietnam because the French wanted our help, and the U.S. was still anti communist at that time so it seemed to make sense to help the French keep communists out of south Vietnam.
The real question is why we bothered to stay there for so long.
Obviously you or the historians have no real clue as to the real reasons just like the rest of us. The "dominoes effect" or theory as applied to Indo China and anti-communism is baloney. Sounds good for the naive. I don't buy those reason(s). One primary reason was the U.S. Industrial-Military complex, i.e. big business. The contracts back then with Bell-Textron alone were for 10 years. Probably the same reason we are in Iraq although there are other companies as major players.
So are you saying the U.S. is no longer anti-communist? Thats real funny because the last recent government security clearance questionnaire I filled out asked if I was ever or currently a member of the Communist Party. Unless you have been living on another planet we are still technically in a cold war with Russia and closely watch their military and review their war doctrine. We still have nukes pointed at them. Our military stills trains against symmetrical warfare in addition to counter-insurgency warfare. Speaking of Russia you don't hear much about or major criticism about their invasion of Georgia.
The real question is why we bothered to stay there for so long.
Obviously you or the historians have no real clue as to the real reasons just like the rest of us. The "dominoes effect" or theory as applied to Indo China and anti-communism is baloney. Sounds good for the naive. I don't buy those reason(s). One primary reason was the U.S. Industrial-Military complex, i.e. big business. The contracts back then with Bell-Textron alone were for 10 years. Probably the same reason we are in Iraq although there are other companies as major players.
So are you saying the U.S. is no longer anti-communist? Thats real funny because the last recent government security clearance questionnaire I filled out asked if I was ever or currently a member of the Communist Party. Unless you have been living on another planet we are still technically in a cold war with Russia and closely watch their military and review their war doctrine. We still have nukes pointed at them. Our military stills trains against symmetrical warfare in addition to counter-insurgency warfare. Speaking of Russia you don't hear much about or major criticism about their invasion of Georgia.
2strokebloke
08-28-2008, 06:54 PM
The way we bend over for china, almost makes it seem like we're pro communist some times.:redface:
I mean obviously there is always economic or industrial incentive to back war, but in the case of Vietnam it was to help out the French.
If it were purely for the sake of the military-industrial complex, we could have jumped into Vietnam earlier than we did, since communists had occupied the northern half of vietnam for over a decade before the U.S. started sending people there in any appreciable numbers.
Even though the French did not officially have control over South Vietnam, a lot of French people were still involved in the government there, and a lot of industry was run by the French.
I mean obviously there is always economic or industrial incentive to back war, but in the case of Vietnam it was to help out the French.
If it were purely for the sake of the military-industrial complex, we could have jumped into Vietnam earlier than we did, since communists had occupied the northern half of vietnam for over a decade before the U.S. started sending people there in any appreciable numbers.
Even though the French did not officially have control over South Vietnam, a lot of French people were still involved in the government there, and a lot of industry was run by the French.
ericn1300
08-28-2008, 07:47 PM
Obviously wars and national security is not cheap. :grinno:
The war in Iraq had nothing to do with "national security" until the war started producing even more terrorists.
The war in Iraq had nothing to do with "national security" until the war started producing even more terrorists.
blazee
08-28-2008, 10:26 PM
It's simple.... power. The Iraq war is just an extension of the "War on Terror". George Bush is not the fool he appears to be, he is however a puppet, this entire thing was carefully orchestrated (including the 9/11 attacks), the men behind the curtain are making billions on this preplanned perpetual war. The goal is to 1) Gain money/power. 2) Gain control over more governments 3) Take away rights/liberties "for our protection" 4) Weaken our economy and destroy the value of our dollar all to make us vulnerable to the ultimate objective.... a New World Order. Wars are great for this because patriotism replaces common sense making it easy to slip anything by the population. Patriotism, Racism, Gay Bashing, Liberal Vs Conservative, Democrat Vs Republican, Religion, etc. are all ways to manipulate the ignorant into adopting the group mentality, and keep the people divided and weak. It doesn't matter which candidate gets elected or what party they are with, the overall agenda is the same. Abortion, Gun Control, and Gay Marriage are intentionally divisive, perpetual issues meant to make it appear as though the parties are against each other, in order to keep their sheep divided. If people were united and knew what was really going on they would attempt to use their constitutional right to overthrow a government that no longer served the people. I say attempt because measures have been taken to prevent that as well, FEMA has converted old schools, hospitals, and prisons all across the country in to concentration camps that have been authorized for use against American citizens. Any movement against the government will classify you as an "unlawful enemy combatant" which means they can do anything they want to you, because after being labeled you are no longer protected by the constitution or the Geneva Convention. To protect the "Continuity of Government", laws have been put in place through presidential directives (bypassing congress) that allows the president to gain complete control of all three branches of government in what he alone deems to be a state of emergency caused by threats that are foreign or domestic. Once he seizes control, Congress is not allowed to inquire/examine/know the reason for a period of 6 months. The directives allow for suspension of the constitution for all Americans, allows the government to round up American citizens into concentration camps, authorizes using Americans as slave labor, authorizes the government to seize all property/possessions, Seize all trains, planes, boats/ships, and cars on American soil, Seize all fuel, Seize all food.
Oh God, my tin foil cap just got a tear... that's enough for now, I've got to go make another one.
Oh God, my tin foil cap just got a tear... that's enough for now, I've got to go make another one.
BNaylor
08-28-2008, 10:34 PM
The way we bend over for china, almost makes it seem like we're pro communist some times.:redface:
I think many would agree with that comment considering China is still Communist. :screwy:
I mean obviously there is always economic or industrial incentive to back war, but in the case of Vietnam it was to help out the French.
If it were purely for the sake of the military-industrial complex, we could have jumped into Vietnam earlier than we did, since communists had occupied the northern half of vietnam for over a decade before the U.S. started sending people there in any appreciable numbers.Even though the French did not officially have control over South Vietnam, a lot of French people were still involved in the government there, and a lot of industry was run by the French.
The history of Vietnam from 1950 and up to include U.S. involvement was very complex and there is no simple answer or reason. The main U.S. involvement and the escalation of the Vietnam War started in 1965 and went out of control until 1975 when Saigon fell. Technically the French left Vietnam in principle and in defeat not later than 1956. Anyways, substitute French with "Roman Catholic" and "John F. Kennedy" I would probably agree. The religious influence was a stronger factor than admitted. Diem was a wealthy devote Roman Catholic and a puppet of the U.S. administration. Even V.P. LBJ himself made a special trip to S. Vietnam in 1961. However, as usual the U.S. decided to back the wrong guy. Many of the people that fled from North to South were the same and supported the French so that exodus was welcomed. Note that the Catholic church had a lot of assets in Vietnam so go figure. The problem is the majority of the Vietnamese people were Buddhist. :runaround:
The war in Iraq had nothing to do with "national security" until the war started producing even more terrorists.
How do you know for sure? Until the final chapters of credible history books I don't know about that. :grinno:
More terrorists? What proof do you have to support that unfounded assertion other than your self serving liberal anti-war position? Has the U.S. been attacked by any of these so called terrorists since 9/11? Last time I checked many of the would be terrorists (Hadjis) including Al Qaeda fighters were sucked into Iraq and killed or imprisoned. Although you'll probably never admit it the troop surge is working!!!!!!
You missed the last three parts below so I lumped it into one sentence. Looks like more money has been spent there and rightfully so.
Obviously wars and national security is not cheap. :grinno:
American Revolution: $1.8 billion; GDP figure not available
War of 1812: $1.2 billion; 2.2 percent
Civil War, Union: $45.2 billion; 11.3 percent
Civil War, Confederacy: $15.2 billion; GDP figure not available
World War I: $253 billion; 13.6 percent
World War II: $4.1 trillion; 35.8 percent
Korean War: $320 billion; 4.2 percent
Vietnam War: $686 billion; 2.3 percent
Gulf War: $96 billion; 0.3 percent
Iraq War: $648 billion; 1 percent
Afghanistan/Global war on terror: $171 billion; 0.3 percent <-----
Post 9/11 domestic security: $33 billion; 0.1 percent <---------
Post 9/11 operations: $859 billion; 1.2 percent <--------
I think many would agree with that comment considering China is still Communist. :screwy:
I mean obviously there is always economic or industrial incentive to back war, but in the case of Vietnam it was to help out the French.
If it were purely for the sake of the military-industrial complex, we could have jumped into Vietnam earlier than we did, since communists had occupied the northern half of vietnam for over a decade before the U.S. started sending people there in any appreciable numbers.Even though the French did not officially have control over South Vietnam, a lot of French people were still involved in the government there, and a lot of industry was run by the French.
The history of Vietnam from 1950 and up to include U.S. involvement was very complex and there is no simple answer or reason. The main U.S. involvement and the escalation of the Vietnam War started in 1965 and went out of control until 1975 when Saigon fell. Technically the French left Vietnam in principle and in defeat not later than 1956. Anyways, substitute French with "Roman Catholic" and "John F. Kennedy" I would probably agree. The religious influence was a stronger factor than admitted. Diem was a wealthy devote Roman Catholic and a puppet of the U.S. administration. Even V.P. LBJ himself made a special trip to S. Vietnam in 1961. However, as usual the U.S. decided to back the wrong guy. Many of the people that fled from North to South were the same and supported the French so that exodus was welcomed. Note that the Catholic church had a lot of assets in Vietnam so go figure. The problem is the majority of the Vietnamese people were Buddhist. :runaround:
The war in Iraq had nothing to do with "national security" until the war started producing even more terrorists.
How do you know for sure? Until the final chapters of credible history books I don't know about that. :grinno:
More terrorists? What proof do you have to support that unfounded assertion other than your self serving liberal anti-war position? Has the U.S. been attacked by any of these so called terrorists since 9/11? Last time I checked many of the would be terrorists (Hadjis) including Al Qaeda fighters were sucked into Iraq and killed or imprisoned. Although you'll probably never admit it the troop surge is working!!!!!!
You missed the last three parts below so I lumped it into one sentence. Looks like more money has been spent there and rightfully so.
Obviously wars and national security is not cheap. :grinno:
American Revolution: $1.8 billion; GDP figure not available
War of 1812: $1.2 billion; 2.2 percent
Civil War, Union: $45.2 billion; 11.3 percent
Civil War, Confederacy: $15.2 billion; GDP figure not available
World War I: $253 billion; 13.6 percent
World War II: $4.1 trillion; 35.8 percent
Korean War: $320 billion; 4.2 percent
Vietnam War: $686 billion; 2.3 percent
Gulf War: $96 billion; 0.3 percent
Iraq War: $648 billion; 1 percent
Afghanistan/Global war on terror: $171 billion; 0.3 percent <-----
Post 9/11 domestic security: $33 billion; 0.1 percent <---------
Post 9/11 operations: $859 billion; 1.2 percent <--------
BNaylor
08-29-2008, 12:19 AM
ericn1300,
A pic is worth a thousand words. I posted these two pics just for your edification. That is your man Obama with my brother in-law who is one of the US Marine Battalion Commanders (LT. COL) for the area visited. Those pics were taken during Obama's recent visit to Iraq. Ramadi, Iraq which is located in Anbar province - Sunni Triangle. Take note that Obama is not wearing any body armor or LBA gear.
Obviously I have more inside information than you do due to my military background so I can put my money where my mouth is. Also, I work with the US Army's Counter-Insurgency Program related to Iraq. However, you are entitled to your opinions and armchair quarterbacking within reason even though I disagree with you on hot button topics therefore will continue to weigh-in against you or others on most political topics posted.
http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y186/lizzywiz/obama_jr_02.jpg
http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y186/lizzywiz/obama_jr.jpg
:popcorn:
A pic is worth a thousand words. I posted these two pics just for your edification. That is your man Obama with my brother in-law who is one of the US Marine Battalion Commanders (LT. COL) for the area visited. Those pics were taken during Obama's recent visit to Iraq. Ramadi, Iraq which is located in Anbar province - Sunni Triangle. Take note that Obama is not wearing any body armor or LBA gear.
Obviously I have more inside information than you do due to my military background so I can put my money where my mouth is. Also, I work with the US Army's Counter-Insurgency Program related to Iraq. However, you are entitled to your opinions and armchair quarterbacking within reason even though I disagree with you on hot button topics therefore will continue to weigh-in against you or others on most political topics posted.
http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y186/lizzywiz/obama_jr_02.jpg
http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y186/lizzywiz/obama_jr.jpg
:popcorn:
2strokebloke
08-29-2008, 05:46 AM
I think many would agree with that comment considering China is still Communist. :screwy:
So you're going to say that Russia is communist but China isn't? :uhoh:
So you're going to say that Russia is communist but China isn't? :uhoh:
Scrapper
08-29-2008, 05:51 AM
i was in armed forses i think we needed tarket pratice. you no like on the job training.
BNaylor
08-29-2008, 08:31 AM
So you're going to say that Russia is communist but China isn't? :uhoh:
Technically we all know Russia is not supposed to be communist anymore but it is a socialistic state and basically just a revamped version of the Soviet Union. Putin's reforms are not really classified as democratic. But obviously they like capitalism now. Plus they still have the largest stockpile of nuclear weapons in the world.
It looks like Putin has been smoking loco weed considering his recent propaganda. :screwy:
Mr. Putin said in a CNN interview the United States had armed and trained the Georgian army and pushed it into conflict with Russia, and said he suspects the crisis was purposefully created to give an advantage for one of the U.S. candidates - who he did not identify.
The Putin remarks drew a swift response from the White House, where Press Secretary Dana Perino said the Russian leader's suggestion was patently false, and sounded irrational.
There were similar remarks from State Department Deputy Spokesman Robert Wood, who said Moscow appears to be trying to shift blame for what it did in Georgia, and what it has not done -- in failing to heed terms of the French-brokered cease-fire.
"Any charges that the U.S. instigated this conflict are ludicrous," Wood said. "What we need to focus on is what Russia's done. Russia still occupies parts of Georgia and it's in violation of its obligations under the cease-fire agreement, and we want to see Russia comply with its obligations. And charges that the United States had anything to do with instigating this conflict, I mean as I said, they're just ludicrous."
http://voanews.com/english/2008-08-28-voa58.cfm
As of today there are only 5 recognized one-party communist countries:
People's Republic of China
Republic of Cuba
Democratic People's Republic of Korea (North Korea)
Lao People's Democratic Republic (Laos)
Socialist Republic of Vietnam
Technically we all know Russia is not supposed to be communist anymore but it is a socialistic state and basically just a revamped version of the Soviet Union. Putin's reforms are not really classified as democratic. But obviously they like capitalism now. Plus they still have the largest stockpile of nuclear weapons in the world.
It looks like Putin has been smoking loco weed considering his recent propaganda. :screwy:
Mr. Putin said in a CNN interview the United States had armed and trained the Georgian army and pushed it into conflict with Russia, and said he suspects the crisis was purposefully created to give an advantage for one of the U.S. candidates - who he did not identify.
The Putin remarks drew a swift response from the White House, where Press Secretary Dana Perino said the Russian leader's suggestion was patently false, and sounded irrational.
There were similar remarks from State Department Deputy Spokesman Robert Wood, who said Moscow appears to be trying to shift blame for what it did in Georgia, and what it has not done -- in failing to heed terms of the French-brokered cease-fire.
"Any charges that the U.S. instigated this conflict are ludicrous," Wood said. "What we need to focus on is what Russia's done. Russia still occupies parts of Georgia and it's in violation of its obligations under the cease-fire agreement, and we want to see Russia comply with its obligations. And charges that the United States had anything to do with instigating this conflict, I mean as I said, they're just ludicrous."
http://voanews.com/english/2008-08-28-voa58.cfm
As of today there are only 5 recognized one-party communist countries:
People's Republic of China
Republic of Cuba
Democratic People's Republic of Korea (North Korea)
Lao People's Democratic Republic (Laos)
Socialist Republic of Vietnam
blindeyed
08-30-2008, 11:09 PM
blazee.. I'm glad to see I'm not the only one realizes that :cheers:
BNaylor
08-31-2008, 01:51 PM
FEMA, New World Order, Executive Orders, Concentration Camps? I have no clue about that and probably prefer to stay that way. :lol:
Man, this is some whacky stuff. :screwy:
American Concentration Camps (http://www.apfn.org/apfn/camps.htm)
Executive Orders (http://www.apfn.org/thewinds/archive/government/fema7-97.html)
The part about FEMA is a good laugh especially after Katrina. :rofl:
Man, this is some whacky stuff. :screwy:
American Concentration Camps (http://www.apfn.org/apfn/camps.htm)
Executive Orders (http://www.apfn.org/thewinds/archive/government/fema7-97.html)
The part about FEMA is a good laugh especially after Katrina. :rofl:
MagicRat
09-01-2008, 11:55 AM
Technically we all know Russia is not supposed to be communist anymore but it is a socialistic state and basically just a revamped version of the Soviet Union. Putin's reforms are not really classified as democratic. But obviously they like capitalism now. Plus they still have the largest stockpile of nuclear weapons in the world.
Russia (sorry, USSR) stopped being effectively Communist in the 1920's. Stalin completed the move towards a totalitarian state where the means of production was not in the hands of the people, but was in the hands of a thuggish group of gangsters.
Today, Russia is still in the hands of a thuggish group of gangsters, albeit rich ones. I would not even call it a 'socialist' state. It is not; unlike a true socialist state, the Russian government cares little for the plight of the individual citizen. Instead, the concern is the accumulation of wealth and power. In this sense, it is little changed from the USSR, as noted above.
IMO NATO really needs to get off their arse and contain Russian ambitions; including allowing Ukraine to join NATO, the EU and any other western organization it wants.
I would also say Georgia should be allowed to join, but with a change of government. Regardless of Russias military intervention in Georgia, the fact that Georgia invaded the breakaway republics first, after 16 years of relative peace tells me they are not responsible enough to join NATO, at present.
The problem with confronting Russia at present is the fact that they supply Europe with so much oil and gas.
Realistically NATO needs to ensure that Russia becomes governed by a more Western - friendly gang of thugs. :smile:
Russia (sorry, USSR) stopped being effectively Communist in the 1920's. Stalin completed the move towards a totalitarian state where the means of production was not in the hands of the people, but was in the hands of a thuggish group of gangsters.
Today, Russia is still in the hands of a thuggish group of gangsters, albeit rich ones. I would not even call it a 'socialist' state. It is not; unlike a true socialist state, the Russian government cares little for the plight of the individual citizen. Instead, the concern is the accumulation of wealth and power. In this sense, it is little changed from the USSR, as noted above.
IMO NATO really needs to get off their arse and contain Russian ambitions; including allowing Ukraine to join NATO, the EU and any other western organization it wants.
I would also say Georgia should be allowed to join, but with a change of government. Regardless of Russias military intervention in Georgia, the fact that Georgia invaded the breakaway republics first, after 16 years of relative peace tells me they are not responsible enough to join NATO, at present.
The problem with confronting Russia at present is the fact that they supply Europe with so much oil and gas.
Realistically NATO needs to ensure that Russia becomes governed by a more Western - friendly gang of thugs. :smile:
BNaylor
09-01-2008, 12:18 PM
I couldn't have said that better myself albeit with the exception of adding "well armed gangsters".
I would not hold my breath on NATO. I spent my last tour in Germany with NATO SHAPE as an Air Defense Systems Tactical Evaluator back with my service in the US Army in Europe. Too political in nature and everyone wants to be the boss plus poor command and control. I'm surprised Canada is still a member. A lot of political fallout from the deployment of the Royal Canadian Defense Forces to Afghanistan in a NATO role. We helped train that regiment back in February here in El Paso and Southern New Mexico. Fine service members though. And yes we train foreign forces in our country so that is no new revelation or even bad like the so called Patriot or Militia groups believe. :screwy:
As to the oil and gas situation in Europe just look at Ukraine. Sad there and you can see how the Soviet Union and now Russia ran that country into the ground and now hold them hostage over the oil and gas.
I would not hold my breath on NATO. I spent my last tour in Germany with NATO SHAPE as an Air Defense Systems Tactical Evaluator back with my service in the US Army in Europe. Too political in nature and everyone wants to be the boss plus poor command and control. I'm surprised Canada is still a member. A lot of political fallout from the deployment of the Royal Canadian Defense Forces to Afghanistan in a NATO role. We helped train that regiment back in February here in El Paso and Southern New Mexico. Fine service members though. And yes we train foreign forces in our country so that is no new revelation or even bad like the so called Patriot or Militia groups believe. :screwy:
As to the oil and gas situation in Europe just look at Ukraine. Sad there and you can see how the Soviet Union and now Russia ran that country into the ground and now hold them hostage over the oil and gas.
MagicRat
09-01-2008, 02:19 PM
A lot of political fallout from the deployment of the Royal Canadian Defense Forces to Afghanistan in a NATO role. .
What kind of fallout?
I am genuinely interested to hear what occurred because the Canadian press does not report much on the Canadian role in NATO and Afghanistan, except when soldiers are killed or severely wounded.
What kind of fallout?
I am genuinely interested to hear what occurred because the Canadian press does not report much on the Canadian role in NATO and Afghanistan, except when soldiers are killed or severely wounded.
Scrapper
09-01-2008, 02:41 PM
yah i live in indiana and i go to danville il, and you wouldn't believe the younger kids that have blowed off legs,arms or they been burnt. it's really sad.bush you have went after binloden before he started another war in iraq. but i done my time i'm getting close to 50 and i'd go over there if they would take me. but theres no turning back on these wars were in it and got to stay in it thanks to bush...
BNaylor
09-01-2008, 02:48 PM
What kind of fallout?
I am genuinely interested to hear what occurred because the Canadian press does not report much on the Canadian role in NATO and Afghanistan, except when soldiers are killed or severely wounded.
:confused:
Man, that is sad. In reality you should know more about that then me. Eh? I can only pass along hearsay comments from your troops that were here since any discussion winds up in politics regardless of our roles. They mentioned Canada has elements in various provinces that are just anti NATO and mainly anti U.S. since the U.S. has command and control over the Canadian Forces and any country in a NATO role while deployed there. There were demonstrations in B.C., etc. and they preferred not to see the troops deploy to Afghanistan. One of the cable stations I think the Discovery Channel will be airing a documentary on their ventures starting here and while in Afghanistan to include the political aspects. Don't miss it. I should be in some of the footage. :wink:
However, no real political fallout in the U.S. especially since your troops dumped several million dollars into the economy here. Here are some pics of that training which centers around the War on Terror in Afghanistan and the Insurgency. See link.
Royal Canadian Regiment Training (http://gallery.elpasotimes.com/photoweek/photosUNIT/index.shtml)
but i done my time i'm getting close to 50 and i'd go over there if they would take me. but theres no turning back on these wars were in it and got to stay in it thanks to bush...
Many of us old timers help out in other ways without having to go over there.
I am genuinely interested to hear what occurred because the Canadian press does not report much on the Canadian role in NATO and Afghanistan, except when soldiers are killed or severely wounded.
:confused:
Man, that is sad. In reality you should know more about that then me. Eh? I can only pass along hearsay comments from your troops that were here since any discussion winds up in politics regardless of our roles. They mentioned Canada has elements in various provinces that are just anti NATO and mainly anti U.S. since the U.S. has command and control over the Canadian Forces and any country in a NATO role while deployed there. There were demonstrations in B.C., etc. and they preferred not to see the troops deploy to Afghanistan. One of the cable stations I think the Discovery Channel will be airing a documentary on their ventures starting here and while in Afghanistan to include the political aspects. Don't miss it. I should be in some of the footage. :wink:
However, no real political fallout in the U.S. especially since your troops dumped several million dollars into the economy here. Here are some pics of that training which centers around the War on Terror in Afghanistan and the Insurgency. See link.
Royal Canadian Regiment Training (http://gallery.elpasotimes.com/photoweek/photosUNIT/index.shtml)
but i done my time i'm getting close to 50 and i'd go over there if they would take me. but theres no turning back on these wars were in it and got to stay in it thanks to bush...
Many of us old timers help out in other ways without having to go over there.
Scrapper
09-02-2008, 03:17 AM
yes but look at the women and kids they use to bolw themselfs up and useing the kids also. they cant be a man and stick to there guns so they use women and i think bush got off to wront start just because they tryed to assanate his dad. cowardley bastersed..
2strokebloke
09-02-2008, 08:31 PM
Yeah it's easy for Bush to sit back in his chair, sending thousands of other people die... I wonder if he'll ever recognize the irony that he's responsible for sending many more people to their deaths than the terrorists who attacked the WTC? But if he hasn't figured that out by now, I don't think he ever will.
Instead of protecting Americans, he actually removed them from the country and put them in harms way. Honestly I can't see any logic behind this policy at all.
Instead of protecting Americans, he actually removed them from the country and put them in harms way. Honestly I can't see any logic behind this policy at all.
Scrapper
09-02-2008, 09:57 PM
because hewan ted to make in the history book's. have ever ask your self wheres all the duffle bag money? he claimed to over in bagdad yah right.lol.
he should have told them be out of bagdad were going to blow the fers off the map. and how do we fill about buying gas they never in there life had to worry about gas i'm talking bush,chaney they got both of there hands in it by stock.chaney hid the most of his vice pressdent oh he has a hart trouble my ass.ewwwwwww you got me on a role i can say more wait until next time.
he should have told them be out of bagdad were going to blow the fers off the map. and how do we fill about buying gas they never in there life had to worry about gas i'm talking bush,chaney they got both of there hands in it by stock.chaney hid the most of his vice pressdent oh he has a hart trouble my ass.ewwwwwww you got me on a role i can say more wait until next time.
off the edge
09-02-2008, 10:29 PM
You ever watch the movie Canadian Bacon
It is preety much whats happening right now
It is preety much whats happening right now
YogsVR4
09-06-2008, 09:34 PM
If only we'd all sit around and sing Kumbya, everybody would just get along :screwy:
Never pay again for live sex! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=1) | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=3) | Chat for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=5)
Never pay again for live sex! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=1) | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=3) | Chat for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=5)
Damien
09-19-2008, 12:50 PM
The war in Iraq had nothing to do with "national security" until the war started producing even more terrorists.
And you have proof of this? Oh, I forgot that all you geniuses on here have top secret clearance to know what's actually going on. :rolleyes:
So, Canada and Russia going to war?
And you have proof of this? Oh, I forgot that all you geniuses on here have top secret clearance to know what's actually going on. :rolleyes:
So, Canada and Russia going to war?
ericn1300
09-19-2008, 04:39 PM
And you have proof of this? Oh, I forgot that all you geniuses on here have top secret clearance to know what's actually going on. :rolleyes:
Here's the poop from people that have top secret clearance, or sources that do.
Iraq war created a terrorist flood, American spymasters warn Bush
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/sep/24/usa.iraq
Iraq New Terror Breeding Ground
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A7460-2005Jan13?language=printer
Studies: War radicalized most foreign fighters in Iraq
http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0718/dailyUpdate.html
Intelligence Report to Assess Threat Posed by Terrorists
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/28/politics/28intel.html?_r=1&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&adxnnlx=1221859399-5HLZ+BXIbjZHaUhtIXSZBQ
And even Karl Rove said ‘I Wish The Iraq War Never Existed,’ It Was ‘Osama Bin Laden’s Idea’
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/04/19/rove-history-iraq/
Here's the poop from people that have top secret clearance, or sources that do.
Iraq war created a terrorist flood, American spymasters warn Bush
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/sep/24/usa.iraq
Iraq New Terror Breeding Ground
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A7460-2005Jan13?language=printer
Studies: War radicalized most foreign fighters in Iraq
http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0718/dailyUpdate.html
Intelligence Report to Assess Threat Posed by Terrorists
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/28/politics/28intel.html?_r=1&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&adxnnlx=1221859399-5HLZ+BXIbjZHaUhtIXSZBQ
And even Karl Rove said ‘I Wish The Iraq War Never Existed,’ It Was ‘Osama Bin Laden’s Idea’
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/04/19/rove-history-iraq/
BNaylor
09-19-2008, 05:13 PM
Here's the poop from people that have top secret clearance, or sources that do.
Thats old news. Look at the dates of your links. The discussion why we are there or really went to war is a moot issue now and really not on the minds of Americans anymore with the exception of the far left MoveOn.org types and people that do not have a life. Reality check time. The real issue is how and when do we get out. Our troops have neutralized the Foreign Fighters, Sunni Insurgents, Iranian Operatives and Al Qaeda. The hot bed area of Iraq - Anbar province was recently turned over to the Iraqi Security forces. Even your buddy Obama doesn't need to wear any body armor and admits the situation has turned around meaning the troop surge is working. I posted these pics earlier. These were taken when he visited Ramadi,, Anbar province in July. The Marine LTCOL in the pics is my brother in law and we stay in touch via email.
http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y186/lizzywiz/obama_jr_02.jpg
http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y186/lizzywiz/obama_jr.jpg
Thats old news. Look at the dates of your links. The discussion why we are there or really went to war is a moot issue now and really not on the minds of Americans anymore with the exception of the far left MoveOn.org types and people that do not have a life. Reality check time. The real issue is how and when do we get out. Our troops have neutralized the Foreign Fighters, Sunni Insurgents, Iranian Operatives and Al Qaeda. The hot bed area of Iraq - Anbar province was recently turned over to the Iraqi Security forces. Even your buddy Obama doesn't need to wear any body armor and admits the situation has turned around meaning the troop surge is working. I posted these pics earlier. These were taken when he visited Ramadi,, Anbar province in July. The Marine LTCOL in the pics is my brother in law and we stay in touch via email.
http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y186/lizzywiz/obama_jr_02.jpg
http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y186/lizzywiz/obama_jr.jpg
ericn1300
09-19-2008, 07:46 PM
Even your buddy Obama doesn't need to wear any body armor and admits the situation has turned around meaning the troop surge is working. I posted these pics earlier. These were taken when he visited Ramadi,, Anbar province in July. The Marine LTCOL in the pics is my brother in law and we stay in touch via email.=
The dates on the links don't mean shit. You haven't "flip flopped" ever in your life and why should the terrorists. They are enemies for life now, thanks to Bush invading and occupying their country and killing civilians.
Obama didn't need body armor because he stayed in camp and held a low profile as he met with the military leaders for meaningful meetings rather than making a political event out of it like McCain did with the convoy's and helicopter cover and all the expenses that went along with his political stunt.
The "surge" was to to late and to little, the Generals called for more men before the invasion. Iraqi's continue to die every day in the void left by the invasion, and the anger against Americans will go on for generations.
I'm grateful for your family's service, and all the others whom have served, but this war in the end will be as Vietnam was, unresolved.
The dates on the links don't mean shit. You haven't "flip flopped" ever in your life and why should the terrorists. They are enemies for life now, thanks to Bush invading and occupying their country and killing civilians.
Obama didn't need body armor because he stayed in camp and held a low profile as he met with the military leaders for meaningful meetings rather than making a political event out of it like McCain did with the convoy's and helicopter cover and all the expenses that went along with his political stunt.
The "surge" was to to late and to little, the Generals called for more men before the invasion. Iraqi's continue to die every day in the void left by the invasion, and the anger against Americans will go on for generations.
I'm grateful for your family's service, and all the others whom have served, but this war in the end will be as Vietnam was, unresolved.
BNaylor
09-19-2008, 09:27 PM
The dates on the links don't mean shit. You haven't "flip flopped" ever in your life and why should the terrorists. They are enemies for life now, thanks to Bush invading and occupying their country and killing civilians.
:rolleyes:
There is nothing I hate worse than arm chair quarterback left wing liberals that think they know what is going on over in Iraq, how the people feel and what the ramifications are for this country. You're beating a dead horse.
Rank speculation on your part but when have you personally talked to any Iraqi(s) about whether they have any anger for Americans? Don't confuse your anger with theirs. Not the same thing. I've talked to hundreds of them the past couple of years that we use to help train our troops before deployment to Iraq. They paint a different story than your misplaced views and beliefs.
I'm grateful for your family's service, and all the others whom have served, but this war in the end will be as Vietnam was, unresolved.
Also, really no comparison with Vietnam. Your comparing apples to oranges. :shakehead
As far as service or sacrifice to this country that is something you'll never know about. :grinno:
:rolleyes:
There is nothing I hate worse than arm chair quarterback left wing liberals that think they know what is going on over in Iraq, how the people feel and what the ramifications are for this country. You're beating a dead horse.
Rank speculation on your part but when have you personally talked to any Iraqi(s) about whether they have any anger for Americans? Don't confuse your anger with theirs. Not the same thing. I've talked to hundreds of them the past couple of years that we use to help train our troops before deployment to Iraq. They paint a different story than your misplaced views and beliefs.
I'm grateful for your family's service, and all the others whom have served, but this war in the end will be as Vietnam was, unresolved.
Also, really no comparison with Vietnam. Your comparing apples to oranges. :shakehead
As far as service or sacrifice to this country that is something you'll never know about. :grinno:
Damien
09-20-2008, 08:50 PM
Here's the poop from people that have top secret clearance, or sources that do.
Iraq war created a terrorist flood, American spymasters warn Bush
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/sep/24/usa.iraq
Iraq New Terror Breeding Ground
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A7460-2005Jan13?language=printer
Studies: War radicalized most foreign fighters in Iraq
http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0718/dailyUpdate.html
Intelligence Report to Assess Threat Posed by Terrorists
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/28/politics/28intel.html?_r=1&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&adxnnlx=1221859399-5HLZ+BXIbjZHaUhtIXSZBQ
And even Karl Rove said ‘I Wish The Iraq War Never Existed,’ It Was ‘Osama Bin Laden’s Idea’
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/04/19/rove-history-iraq/
*whistles*
(Pst! You can skip to the end for the simple explanation or read through as to why this is pointless and your being wrong)
Yo, Einstein, um, Top Secret means just that. Here's a link to learn the definition of secret. It's from Webster's or do you not trust them?
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/secret
Heck, I could fill ya in on stuff that WAS and stuff that actually still is. ;) I know this because it ain't on the internet! *gasp* Wait, where'd you get your sources? Oh right, obviously somewhere that's not secret.
You do realize your making an argument with no evidence other than what you're allowed to know. You're as...think polite...ignorant as the people standing outside Area 51 wanting to know what's inside. You ain't gonna know so just deal. Now if you don't believe in war or this war or however you want to word, w00t! Vote for Obama and he'll pull out quicker than teenagers without a condom or BC...maybe that's a bad example. :rolleyes:
Never the less, don't use media sources, especially Top Secret ones, remember they're suppose to be secret!!! (shhhhh!!!) that are allowed to know what the government wants.
And wow...just read two of the links (I know I typed that before I read them but it was ok) because you posted links to released reports. Man oh man! That's some serious classified $hit!!! I'm so glad they tell us everything! Heck remember that long spaceship seen in the late 50's and 60's? Oh wait, that's right it was just the SR-71 everyone knew about years later when the US reveled their new plane. And I thought I was on to something. This Top Secret stuff is confusing.
By the way, if you managed to decode that definition of secret then I'm sure the sarcasm here wouldn't be too hard.
But to make my point clear and answer you're original question in which is quite funny that you asked a question you already knew the answer to apparently *breathes* no, we can't tell you. Can anyone? Well, yeah, but will they, no.
Iraq war created a terrorist flood, American spymasters warn Bush
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/sep/24/usa.iraq
Iraq New Terror Breeding Ground
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A7460-2005Jan13?language=printer
Studies: War radicalized most foreign fighters in Iraq
http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0718/dailyUpdate.html
Intelligence Report to Assess Threat Posed by Terrorists
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/28/politics/28intel.html?_r=1&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&adxnnlx=1221859399-5HLZ+BXIbjZHaUhtIXSZBQ
And even Karl Rove said ‘I Wish The Iraq War Never Existed,’ It Was ‘Osama Bin Laden’s Idea’
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/04/19/rove-history-iraq/
*whistles*
(Pst! You can skip to the end for the simple explanation or read through as to why this is pointless and your being wrong)
Yo, Einstein, um, Top Secret means just that. Here's a link to learn the definition of secret. It's from Webster's or do you not trust them?
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/secret
Heck, I could fill ya in on stuff that WAS and stuff that actually still is. ;) I know this because it ain't on the internet! *gasp* Wait, where'd you get your sources? Oh right, obviously somewhere that's not secret.
You do realize your making an argument with no evidence other than what you're allowed to know. You're as...think polite...ignorant as the people standing outside Area 51 wanting to know what's inside. You ain't gonna know so just deal. Now if you don't believe in war or this war or however you want to word, w00t! Vote for Obama and he'll pull out quicker than teenagers without a condom or BC...maybe that's a bad example. :rolleyes:
Never the less, don't use media sources, especially Top Secret ones, remember they're suppose to be secret!!! (shhhhh!!!) that are allowed to know what the government wants.
And wow...just read two of the links (I know I typed that before I read them but it was ok) because you posted links to released reports. Man oh man! That's some serious classified $hit!!! I'm so glad they tell us everything! Heck remember that long spaceship seen in the late 50's and 60's? Oh wait, that's right it was just the SR-71 everyone knew about years later when the US reveled their new plane. And I thought I was on to something. This Top Secret stuff is confusing.
By the way, if you managed to decode that definition of secret then I'm sure the sarcasm here wouldn't be too hard.
But to make my point clear and answer you're original question in which is quite funny that you asked a question you already knew the answer to apparently *breathes* no, we can't tell you. Can anyone? Well, yeah, but will they, no.
ericn1300
09-23-2008, 07:20 PM
*whistles* ...
Here's a link to learn the definition of secret. It's from Webster's or do you not trust them?
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/secret
Heck, I could fill ya in on stuff that WAS and stuff that actually still is. ;) I know this because it ain't on the internet!....
Do you have credentials to back up that last statement quoted?
Here's a link to learn the definition of secret. It's from Webster's or do you not trust them?
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/secret
Heck, I could fill ya in on stuff that WAS and stuff that actually still is. ;) I know this because it ain't on the internet!....
Do you have credentials to back up that last statement quoted?
J-Ri
09-25-2008, 05:17 PM
I'm going to skip over all these BS complaints and skip to the answer, sorry if someone already said this.
The war in Iraq had nothing to do with "national security" until the war started producing even more terrorists.
That is absolutely rediculous (and the reason I'm not going to keep reading your anit-America pro-everyoneelse crap). Who hijacked the planes on Sept 11 2001? Very simply put, the terrorists want to kill all Americans who don't agree with them. We can fight them here and lose 1,000s of American lives every day, or we can fight them there and save those lives but spend a bit of money doing it. I do feel bad for the innocent civilians who get caught up in it there, but they are few and far between. Now to sound a bit cold, if they had stood up to tyrants in the first place, they'd be fine right now. I know it goes back many generations, but why should we give them special treatment because they were weak? In America, we don't let someone walk all over us simply because we "fear" them, at least not the America that I love. That's why we still have (some) freedom, at least for now. If anyone tries to take our rights away, we will fight to the death to maintain those rights.
To get back on topic, the terrorists are cowards, refusing to fight fair. It's damn hard to find someone who runs off and blends into the population. How do you find someone who hides a bomb on the roadside and kills or injures dozens? How do you find someone who blows up a building and then runs into a group of people who refuse to help locate that person because they are afraid of what will happen? The war will continue until the locals stop giving in to fear, or until baraqi wins the election and caves in and they actually invade and then the real Americans fight them off like the iraquis should be doing right now. Of course, that SOB will try to disarm us first, weakening the country as a whole.
Quit listening to the media's biased take on things and actually think about it for yourselves. Does it honestly make sense that we went to fight a group for murdering thousands of our own, but they'll stop attacking if we leave them alone? If the media says "Everything's OK", who's going to turn on the news? They're competing for business, and whoever makes the most interesting product gets the customers. I could be wrong, but I'm fairly sure that the number of US soldiers killed in Iraq is still less than the number of Americans murdered on 9/11, and I KNOW that more people are killed in the city of Detroit in a month than in the whole country of Iraq in the same month. I'm not saying those are good numbers, but it's not the bloodbath the democrats would have us believe, and we're fighting for freedom. Anyone have anything against freedom?
The war in Iraq had nothing to do with "national security" until the war started producing even more terrorists.
That is absolutely rediculous (and the reason I'm not going to keep reading your anit-America pro-everyoneelse crap). Who hijacked the planes on Sept 11 2001? Very simply put, the terrorists want to kill all Americans who don't agree with them. We can fight them here and lose 1,000s of American lives every day, or we can fight them there and save those lives but spend a bit of money doing it. I do feel bad for the innocent civilians who get caught up in it there, but they are few and far between. Now to sound a bit cold, if they had stood up to tyrants in the first place, they'd be fine right now. I know it goes back many generations, but why should we give them special treatment because they were weak? In America, we don't let someone walk all over us simply because we "fear" them, at least not the America that I love. That's why we still have (some) freedom, at least for now. If anyone tries to take our rights away, we will fight to the death to maintain those rights.
To get back on topic, the terrorists are cowards, refusing to fight fair. It's damn hard to find someone who runs off and blends into the population. How do you find someone who hides a bomb on the roadside and kills or injures dozens? How do you find someone who blows up a building and then runs into a group of people who refuse to help locate that person because they are afraid of what will happen? The war will continue until the locals stop giving in to fear, or until baraqi wins the election and caves in and they actually invade and then the real Americans fight them off like the iraquis should be doing right now. Of course, that SOB will try to disarm us first, weakening the country as a whole.
Quit listening to the media's biased take on things and actually think about it for yourselves. Does it honestly make sense that we went to fight a group for murdering thousands of our own, but they'll stop attacking if we leave them alone? If the media says "Everything's OK", who's going to turn on the news? They're competing for business, and whoever makes the most interesting product gets the customers. I could be wrong, but I'm fairly sure that the number of US soldiers killed in Iraq is still less than the number of Americans murdered on 9/11, and I KNOW that more people are killed in the city of Detroit in a month than in the whole country of Iraq in the same month. I'm not saying those are good numbers, but it's not the bloodbath the democrats would have us believe, and we're fighting for freedom. Anyone have anything against freedom?
2strokebloke
09-26-2008, 10:15 AM
Not to be too pedant here J-Ri - but the government isn't exactly an un-biased source of information on themselves.
Secondly even if you believe what they have to say about themselves, then you know that they went to Iraq because of weapons of mass destruction. Then later they admitted they had acted on dubious information. (though this is either a really poor lie, or means they acted with excessive stupidity - both of which are far more anti-American than anything that has been said in this thread)
Exactly where you got your terrorist/freedom propaganda spiel, or the idea that Iraq = terrorists, is a mystery to me.
Freedom? Freedom my ass, the American people got slapped with unwarranted wire tapping and an even bigger, costlier government (from a president who is supposedly "conservative" - I have no idea what dictionary Bush must be using) - because they whipped everybody into a frenzy instead of acting with cool heads and common sense. That is profoundly anti American.
From a historical perspective this war is totally un-American. The U.S. traditionally has been a conservative power, we didn't rush into WWI or WWII, and even though we shouldn't have anyway, we didn't even rush into Vietnam.
Probably the only thing that comes close to remarkable stupidity on the behalf of both the government and the people being stupid enough to believe the government's propaganda and the media's fear mongering was the "bombing" of the Maine in 1898... which if you give a damn about this country or its history you probably know the story.
But hey - acting on no facts, but just speculation and fear was a good way to connect the Maine accident to Spain and thus get the U.S. the Phillipines, Guam, and Puerto Rico... (oh and Guantanamo)
Secondly even if you believe what they have to say about themselves, then you know that they went to Iraq because of weapons of mass destruction. Then later they admitted they had acted on dubious information. (though this is either a really poor lie, or means they acted with excessive stupidity - both of which are far more anti-American than anything that has been said in this thread)
Exactly where you got your terrorist/freedom propaganda spiel, or the idea that Iraq = terrorists, is a mystery to me.
Freedom? Freedom my ass, the American people got slapped with unwarranted wire tapping and an even bigger, costlier government (from a president who is supposedly "conservative" - I have no idea what dictionary Bush must be using) - because they whipped everybody into a frenzy instead of acting with cool heads and common sense. That is profoundly anti American.
From a historical perspective this war is totally un-American. The U.S. traditionally has been a conservative power, we didn't rush into WWI or WWII, and even though we shouldn't have anyway, we didn't even rush into Vietnam.
Probably the only thing that comes close to remarkable stupidity on the behalf of both the government and the people being stupid enough to believe the government's propaganda and the media's fear mongering was the "bombing" of the Maine in 1898... which if you give a damn about this country or its history you probably know the story.
But hey - acting on no facts, but just speculation and fear was a good way to connect the Maine accident to Spain and thus get the U.S. the Phillipines, Guam, and Puerto Rico... (oh and Guantanamo)
BNaylor
09-27-2008, 11:38 AM
Probably the only thing that comes close to remarkable stupidity on the behalf of both the government and the people being stupid enough to believe the government's propaganda and the media's fear mongering was the "bombing" of the Maine in 1898... which if you give a damn about this country or its history you probably know the story.
But hey - acting on no facts, but just speculation and fear was a good way to connect the Maine accident to Spain and thus get the U.S. the Phillipines, Guam, and Puerto Rico... (oh and Guantanamo)
Hey you forgot a few more recent wars like the Korean War and Gulf War 1. :sly:
The history books have been rewritten a few times on the USS Maine incident in Havana Harbor, Cuba so maybe that is a poor example. The history books were changed around 1976 and up when Admiral Rickover came out with his investigation and book. However, National Geographic's conclusion based on a scientific study using computer simulation is we will probably never know the real reason so there is still much dispute about it. It stated the spontaneous combustion coal furnace theory and the small mine and an outside explosion are equally feasible. The times and geo-political climate relating to all the previous wars were different and IMO comparing them is like comparing apples to oranges.
IMO the bottom line is until the real top secret classified information is declassified in the future or Bush makes a revelation after his presidency is over or in some obscure document or recording at his presidential library we may never know. But how and why we got there is a moot issue. How and when do we get out.
I've talked to many of the troops going to Iraq over the past few years and they feel good about what they are doing in Iraq so lets not discredit them and their sacrifice for this country, regardless of the reasons for going to war and your disdain for Bush who is still the Commander in Chief until January. Many of our troops have been there at least 3 times now to include volunteering to go back. Just because they are doing what they are ordered to do does that make them anti-American too? :screwy:.........:shakehead
But hey - acting on no facts, but just speculation and fear was a good way to connect the Maine accident to Spain and thus get the U.S. the Phillipines, Guam, and Puerto Rico... (oh and Guantanamo)
Hey you forgot a few more recent wars like the Korean War and Gulf War 1. :sly:
The history books have been rewritten a few times on the USS Maine incident in Havana Harbor, Cuba so maybe that is a poor example. The history books were changed around 1976 and up when Admiral Rickover came out with his investigation and book. However, National Geographic's conclusion based on a scientific study using computer simulation is we will probably never know the real reason so there is still much dispute about it. It stated the spontaneous combustion coal furnace theory and the small mine and an outside explosion are equally feasible. The times and geo-political climate relating to all the previous wars were different and IMO comparing them is like comparing apples to oranges.
IMO the bottom line is until the real top secret classified information is declassified in the future or Bush makes a revelation after his presidency is over or in some obscure document or recording at his presidential library we may never know. But how and why we got there is a moot issue. How and when do we get out.
I've talked to many of the troops going to Iraq over the past few years and they feel good about what they are doing in Iraq so lets not discredit them and their sacrifice for this country, regardless of the reasons for going to war and your disdain for Bush who is still the Commander in Chief until January. Many of our troops have been there at least 3 times now to include volunteering to go back. Just because they are doing what they are ordered to do does that make them anti-American too? :screwy:.........:shakehead
2strokebloke
09-27-2008, 02:14 PM
Would it be a problem if they were ordered to do something un-American? Just working for the government doesn't make you an exemplary adherent of American values and ideals by default. Which I suppose has been well proven in my opinion by Bush jr. and Clinton in recent years.
Some times entire groups operate in error, even if their intentions are good.:2cents:
Some times entire groups operate in error, even if their intentions are good.:2cents:
BNaylor
09-27-2008, 02:35 PM
Would it be a problem if they were ordered to do something un-American? Just working for the government doesn't make you an exemplary adherent of American values and ideals by default.
Define un-American.
So are you saying you are a classic example of an exemplary American based on your values, beliefs or opinions? You are entitled to your opinions but that doesn't mean you are correct or anyone has to agree with them. :grinno:
Out of curiosity what have you done for this country in any capacity whether right or wrong, good, bad or indifferent? Ever served the US Government in any capacity?
Define un-American.
So are you saying you are a classic example of an exemplary American based on your values, beliefs or opinions? You are entitled to your opinions but that doesn't mean you are correct or anyone has to agree with them. :grinno:
Out of curiosity what have you done for this country in any capacity whether right or wrong, good, bad or indifferent? Ever served the US Government in any capacity?
gob 455
09-27-2008, 02:48 PM
If the war on Islamic radicals is a game we have to play, make it an away game! People have been second guessing the government sense governments have existed. That's the nature of people, to not fully trust the people in charge. That's why we have elections. This keeps the same group of people from making the decisions for ever. War isn't good for business. We've spent trillions of dollars on war in our 200+ year history, a good portion of which we have not nor will ever be re-payed for. I doubt Iraq or Afghanistan will be any different. But, if we can get a democratic style government to stay in this region of the world, we would all benefit. Is this a fools errand, only time will tell. I hope that it dose, and I vote for the people I think can make that happen. That is all we can do.
2strokebloke
09-27-2008, 07:15 PM
Define un-American.
So are you saying you are a classic example of an exemplary American based on your values, beliefs or opinions? You are entitled to your opinions but that doesn't mean you are correct or anyone has to agree with them. :grinno:
If I'm not supposed to say something is un-American, then it'd be best if nobody else attempted to use "un-American" as a description of actions, or logic. :2cents:
I would not have used the term, but was using it in a reply to somebody who did. Of course you apparently don't care about their usage, just mine.:wink:
Out of curiosity what have you done for this country in any capacity whether right or wrong, good, bad or indifferent?
Do you mean, for example writing letters to my representatives, going to town meetings, or buying American products and having a flag in my yard, or like recycling and growing my own vegetables, or maybe preserving historic sites or cleaning up parks and giving tours?
Or did you mean stuff like killing foreigners or going to hippie protests?
In any event what difference should it make? Even presidents sometimes have good ideas.:lol:
So are you saying you are a classic example of an exemplary American based on your values, beliefs or opinions? You are entitled to your opinions but that doesn't mean you are correct or anyone has to agree with them. :grinno:
If I'm not supposed to say something is un-American, then it'd be best if nobody else attempted to use "un-American" as a description of actions, or logic. :2cents:
I would not have used the term, but was using it in a reply to somebody who did. Of course you apparently don't care about their usage, just mine.:wink:
Out of curiosity what have you done for this country in any capacity whether right or wrong, good, bad or indifferent?
Do you mean, for example writing letters to my representatives, going to town meetings, or buying American products and having a flag in my yard, or like recycling and growing my own vegetables, or maybe preserving historic sites or cleaning up parks and giving tours?
Or did you mean stuff like killing foreigners or going to hippie protests?
In any event what difference should it make? Even presidents sometimes have good ideas.:lol:
KustmAce
09-29-2008, 05:07 AM
To get back on topic, the terrorists are cowards, refusing to fight fair. It's damn hard to find someone who runs off and blends into the population. How do you find someone who hides a bomb on the roadside and kills or injures dozens? How do you find someone who blows up a building and then runs into a group of people who refuse to help locate that person because they are afraid of what will happen?
Cowards? That has to be the stupidest thing I have heard in this thread yet. And there is some ridiculous shit in here.
If some other country invaded the US for some reason that is unbeknown to anyone, I wouldn't be marching down the street with no armor and inferior weapons to tangle head on with a far superior army. I would be fighting a guerrilla war too.
No, cowardice would be running from the fight. These guys are fighting, and kicking our ass.
BNaylor- You keep saying you have spoken to so many soldiers who feel what they are doing is good and right. Well guess what, I have spoken to many soldiers as well, including a large handful of kids I went to high school with, unanimously agreeing that the war in Iraq is a scam, and we shouldn't be there.
Two sides to every story. And still, throughout this entire thread, I have still not been convinced of why we actually went to war. I have read a lot of typical right-wing talking points, as usual, but nothing substantial. :disappoin
Cowards? That has to be the stupidest thing I have heard in this thread yet. And there is some ridiculous shit in here.
If some other country invaded the US for some reason that is unbeknown to anyone, I wouldn't be marching down the street with no armor and inferior weapons to tangle head on with a far superior army. I would be fighting a guerrilla war too.
No, cowardice would be running from the fight. These guys are fighting, and kicking our ass.
BNaylor- You keep saying you have spoken to so many soldiers who feel what they are doing is good and right. Well guess what, I have spoken to many soldiers as well, including a large handful of kids I went to high school with, unanimously agreeing that the war in Iraq is a scam, and we shouldn't be there.
Two sides to every story. And still, throughout this entire thread, I have still not been convinced of why we actually went to war. I have read a lot of typical right-wing talking points, as usual, but nothing substantial. :disappoin
BNaylor
09-29-2008, 11:32 AM
If some other country invaded the US for some reason that is unbeknown to anyone, I wouldn't be marching down the street with no armor and inferior weapons to tangle head on with a far superior army. I would be fighting a guerrilla war too.
No, cowardice would be running from the fight. These guys are fighting, and kicking our ass.
:rolleyes:
How would you know? Have you served in Iraq? Sheer misplaced speculation on your part and all I see is more armchair quarterback opinions and demogogery. We have a counter-insurgency program that is working as evidenced by the results of the troop surge and conditions on the ground. Most of Iraq has been pacified and the insurgency is a joke. Contrary to your misplaced opinion they are losing and from whats left of them they do run from the fight. The most interesting revelation is even Obama changed his tune on the War in Iraq and now the Demo keyword is democraticization of Iraq and other areas of the Middle East. :runaround:
BNaylor- You keep saying you have spoken to so many soldiers who feel what they are doing is good and right. Well guess what, I have spoken to many soldiers as well, including a large handful of kids I went to high school with, unanimously agreeing that the war in Iraq is a scam, and we shouldn't be there.
KustmACE - Wow! Talking to high school kids. Thats a real laugh. :rofl: It sounds like you're been talking to the wrong people. The same ones that thought serving in the military would be a free ride to a college education? No one put a gun to their heads to join the military and then wind up in Iraq if what you are saying is true which I seriously doubt. Last time I checked military service in this country is voluntary. I speak from real experience and not speculation. I am a soldier. I work with the US Army's Counter-Insurgency program where we train the troops, many of which are National Guard units prior to deployment to Iraq. As a matter of fact we trained members of the Colorado National Guard last fall and I talked to hundreds of them. They paint a much different picture and had no reservations about going back to Iraq considering many of them served over there while on regular active duty and then decided to join the Guard when they got out. Many of the Colorado National Guard troops including ones in the regular Army are assigned here to one of our biggest task forces where we teach our troops everything needed to effectively fight whats left of the insurgency and come home safely.
If the war was such a scam then why does your Democrat Governor Bill Ritter (D) support it or have much different views than you. :screwy:
GOV. RITTER VISITS COLORADO TROOPS IN IRAQ
OFFICE OF GOV. BILL RITTER, JR.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
WEDNESDAY, DEC. 12, 2007
Gov. Bill Ritter is in Iraq visiting Colorado National Guard troops at the invitation of the U.S. Departments of Defense and State, part of a fact-finding program that allows governors to experience conditions in the Middle East first-hand.
Gov. Ritter toured and stayed overnight in the International Zone in Baghdad, and also met with troops from the 332nd Expeditionary Fighter Squadron, which includes more than 200 Colorado National Guard members, and the 5th Battalion, 19th Special Forces Group, which also includes Colorado National Guard members. Gov. Ritter visited several military installations, neighborhoods and a local hospital in Iraq.
"These men and women are serving under very difficult conditions," Gov. Ritter said during a conference call from Kuwait this morning. "But their morale is high and they seem very heartened that I'm here on their turf, on their territory, to gain a better understanding of the work they are doing. It's extremely helpful for me, as the commander in chief of the Colorado National Guard, to be on the ground to see the conditions they are serving in and how they are making a difference."
More than 600 Colorado Air and Army National Guard troops are currently deployed to Iraq, Kuwait and other areas in the Middle East, more than at any other time in recent Colorado history. Colorado Air National Guard members have logged more than 5,000 combat hours and flown more than 500 consecutive combat sorties without failure since 2003.
http://www.colorado.gov/cs/Satellite/GovRitter/GOVR/1197451528864
No, cowardice would be running from the fight. These guys are fighting, and kicking our ass.
:rolleyes:
How would you know? Have you served in Iraq? Sheer misplaced speculation on your part and all I see is more armchair quarterback opinions and demogogery. We have a counter-insurgency program that is working as evidenced by the results of the troop surge and conditions on the ground. Most of Iraq has been pacified and the insurgency is a joke. Contrary to your misplaced opinion they are losing and from whats left of them they do run from the fight. The most interesting revelation is even Obama changed his tune on the War in Iraq and now the Demo keyword is democraticization of Iraq and other areas of the Middle East. :runaround:
BNaylor- You keep saying you have spoken to so many soldiers who feel what they are doing is good and right. Well guess what, I have spoken to many soldiers as well, including a large handful of kids I went to high school with, unanimously agreeing that the war in Iraq is a scam, and we shouldn't be there.
KustmACE - Wow! Talking to high school kids. Thats a real laugh. :rofl: It sounds like you're been talking to the wrong people. The same ones that thought serving in the military would be a free ride to a college education? No one put a gun to their heads to join the military and then wind up in Iraq if what you are saying is true which I seriously doubt. Last time I checked military service in this country is voluntary. I speak from real experience and not speculation. I am a soldier. I work with the US Army's Counter-Insurgency program where we train the troops, many of which are National Guard units prior to deployment to Iraq. As a matter of fact we trained members of the Colorado National Guard last fall and I talked to hundreds of them. They paint a much different picture and had no reservations about going back to Iraq considering many of them served over there while on regular active duty and then decided to join the Guard when they got out. Many of the Colorado National Guard troops including ones in the regular Army are assigned here to one of our biggest task forces where we teach our troops everything needed to effectively fight whats left of the insurgency and come home safely.
If the war was such a scam then why does your Democrat Governor Bill Ritter (D) support it or have much different views than you. :screwy:
GOV. RITTER VISITS COLORADO TROOPS IN IRAQ
OFFICE OF GOV. BILL RITTER, JR.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
WEDNESDAY, DEC. 12, 2007
Gov. Bill Ritter is in Iraq visiting Colorado National Guard troops at the invitation of the U.S. Departments of Defense and State, part of a fact-finding program that allows governors to experience conditions in the Middle East first-hand.
Gov. Ritter toured and stayed overnight in the International Zone in Baghdad, and also met with troops from the 332nd Expeditionary Fighter Squadron, which includes more than 200 Colorado National Guard members, and the 5th Battalion, 19th Special Forces Group, which also includes Colorado National Guard members. Gov. Ritter visited several military installations, neighborhoods and a local hospital in Iraq.
"These men and women are serving under very difficult conditions," Gov. Ritter said during a conference call from Kuwait this morning. "But their morale is high and they seem very heartened that I'm here on their turf, on their territory, to gain a better understanding of the work they are doing. It's extremely helpful for me, as the commander in chief of the Colorado National Guard, to be on the ground to see the conditions they are serving in and how they are making a difference."
More than 600 Colorado Air and Army National Guard troops are currently deployed to Iraq, Kuwait and other areas in the Middle East, more than at any other time in recent Colorado history. Colorado Air National Guard members have logged more than 5,000 combat hours and flown more than 500 consecutive combat sorties without failure since 2003.
http://www.colorado.gov/cs/Satellite/GovRitter/GOVR/1197451528864
KustmAce
09-29-2008, 01:51 PM
:rolleyes:
How would you know? Have you served in Iraq? Sheer misplaced speculation on your part and all I see is more armchair quarterback opinions and demogogery. We have a counter-insurgency program that is working as evidenced by the results of the troop surge and conditions on the ground. Most of Iraq has been pacified and the insurgency is a joke. Contrary to your misplaced opinion they are losing and from whats left of them they do run from the fight. The most interesting revelation is even Obama changed his tune on the War in Iraq and now the Demo keyword is democraticization of Iraq and other areas of the Middle East. :runaround:
You seem to be forgetting about the other four years we have been at war.
KustmACE - Wow! Talking to high school kids. Thats a real laugh. :rofl: It sounds like you're been talking to the wrong people. The same ones that thought serving in the military would be a free ride to a college education? No one put a gun to their heads to join the military and then wind up in Iraq if what you are saying is true which I seriously doubt. Last time I checked military service in this country is voluntary.
Wow, do you feel good about yourself? These are my friends you are now insulting. High schoolers? Try reading you insensitive prick. Friends from high school, not in high school.. The same ones that are serving along side you and the troops you train. How does it feel to insult them? How about the ones that have gone back for their second and third tours? I said they didn't support the war, I didn't say they ran from it.
If you'll recall, Bush LIED to the us. My friends enlisted because what they thought they were doing was right. When the truth came out, that's when the opinions changed. So Bob, I hope it served your purpose well, to hide behind a keyboard and tell me how my good friends who are serving, who have been wounded, and one killed, only joined for a "free ride". Its embarrassing to know that you wear the same uniform they do.[/quote]
If the war was such a scam then why does your Democrat Governor Bill Ritter (D) support it or have much different views than you. :screwy:
[/i]
Now your just embarrassing yourself. Its called thinking for yourself, not jerking off for the party. Try it sometime.
How would you know? Have you served in Iraq? Sheer misplaced speculation on your part and all I see is more armchair quarterback opinions and demogogery. We have a counter-insurgency program that is working as evidenced by the results of the troop surge and conditions on the ground. Most of Iraq has been pacified and the insurgency is a joke. Contrary to your misplaced opinion they are losing and from whats left of them they do run from the fight. The most interesting revelation is even Obama changed his tune on the War in Iraq and now the Demo keyword is democraticization of Iraq and other areas of the Middle East. :runaround:
You seem to be forgetting about the other four years we have been at war.
KustmACE - Wow! Talking to high school kids. Thats a real laugh. :rofl: It sounds like you're been talking to the wrong people. The same ones that thought serving in the military would be a free ride to a college education? No one put a gun to their heads to join the military and then wind up in Iraq if what you are saying is true which I seriously doubt. Last time I checked military service in this country is voluntary.
Wow, do you feel good about yourself? These are my friends you are now insulting. High schoolers? Try reading you insensitive prick. Friends from high school, not in high school.. The same ones that are serving along side you and the troops you train. How does it feel to insult them? How about the ones that have gone back for their second and third tours? I said they didn't support the war, I didn't say they ran from it.
If you'll recall, Bush LIED to the us. My friends enlisted because what they thought they were doing was right. When the truth came out, that's when the opinions changed. So Bob, I hope it served your purpose well, to hide behind a keyboard and tell me how my good friends who are serving, who have been wounded, and one killed, only joined for a "free ride". Its embarrassing to know that you wear the same uniform they do.[/quote]
If the war was such a scam then why does your Democrat Governor Bill Ritter (D) support it or have much different views than you. :screwy:
[/i]
Now your just embarrassing yourself. Its called thinking for yourself, not jerking off for the party. Try it sometime.
BNaylor
09-29-2008, 02:03 PM
Wow, do you feel good about yourself? These are my friends you are now insulting. High schoolers? Try reading you insensitive prick. Friends from high school, not in high school.. The same ones that are serving along side you and the troops you train. How does it feel to insult them? How about the ones that have gone back for their second and third tours? I said they didn't support the war, I didn't say they ran from it.
:shakehead
You're the one that brought them into the discussion not me so blame yourself. You lose the argument when you have to bring up what your friends did and not what you did personally. So obviously you know nothing about these matters from first hand personal experience. Plus I have two boys in the service that signed up right out of high school.
Rather immature are you? Reverting to name calling. You know better than that. :nono: Grow up!
I will give them credit when due and thank them for serving our country.
:shakehead
You're the one that brought them into the discussion not me so blame yourself. You lose the argument when you have to bring up what your friends did and not what you did personally. So obviously you know nothing about these matters from first hand personal experience. Plus I have two boys in the service that signed up right out of high school.
Rather immature are you? Reverting to name calling. You know better than that. :nono: Grow up!
I will give them credit when due and thank them for serving our country.
KustmAce
09-29-2008, 02:17 PM
:shakehead
You're the one that brought them into the discussion not me so blame yourself. You lose the argument when you have to bring up what your friends did and not what you did personally. So obviously you know nothing about these matters from first hand personal experience. Plus I have two boys in the service that signed up right out of high school.
Rather immature are you? Reverting to name calling. You know better than that. :nono: Grow up!
I will give them credit when due and thank them for serving our country.
Well, I guess since I have never served in Iraq, I don't get a say right?
And still, throughout this entire thread, I have still not been convinced of why we actually went to war. I have read a lot of typical right-wing talking points, as usual, but nothing substantial.
You're the one that brought them into the discussion not me so blame yourself. You lose the argument when you have to bring up what your friends did and not what you did personally. So obviously you know nothing about these matters from first hand personal experience. Plus I have two boys in the service that signed up right out of high school.
Rather immature are you? Reverting to name calling. You know better than that. :nono: Grow up!
I will give them credit when due and thank them for serving our country.
Well, I guess since I have never served in Iraq, I don't get a say right?
And still, throughout this entire thread, I have still not been convinced of why we actually went to war. I have read a lot of typical right-wing talking points, as usual, but nothing substantial.
2strokebloke
09-29-2008, 02:18 PM
You know if we're bring up other peoples opinions on the subject, my step father who spent two years in iraq helping rebuild infrastructure thinks the war isn't worth it, effort, money or lives (It may be worth mentioning he was formerly in the Air Force to boot).
I don't know how many years Bnaylor has spent in Iraq though or what he may have done there either for them or us. Although I honestly don't understand why he has to be so condescending towards other members...
I don't know how many years Bnaylor has spent in Iraq though or what he may have done there either for them or us. Although I honestly don't understand why he has to be so condescending towards other members...
BNaylor
09-29-2008, 05:15 PM
Well, I guess since I have never served in Iraq, I don't get a say right?
You can say whatever you want but that doesn't mean I or others have to agree with it or accept it. All I did was challenge your message which I am entitled to and since you addressed a comment to me specifically. But if you can't handle the heat to include opposing viewpoints with supporting reasonable facts or carry on a civil debate by reverting to childish name calling which is totally uncalled for then that is not my problem. :nono:
You know if we're bring up other peoples opinions on the subject, my step father who spent two years in iraq helping rebuild infrastructure thinks the war isn't worth it, effort, money or lives (It may be worth mentioning he was formerly in the Air Force to boot).
Your stepfather? I just fell out of my chair again. :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
Now this is getting really ridiculous. All this anecdotal hearsay to justify your opinion? :screwy:
I don't know how many years Bnaylor has spent in Iraq though or what he may have done there either for them or us. Although I honestly don't understand why he has to be so condescending towards other members...
:rolleyes:
I have lived and worked as a Military Advisor in the Middle East for over 3 years based out of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. I speak Arabic. I was there during the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait and served in Gulf War 1. As far as Operation Iraqi Freedom and as I mentioned earlier which you failed to take notice of I work with the Army's Counter-Insurgency program where we train our troops which includes regular forces, reserves and national guard (all branches - Army, Air Force, Marines and Navy) before they deploy to Iraq and Afghanistan so they can accomplish the mission, comply with the strict rules of engagement, and come home safely to their families. Over 10,000 troops to date and another 3000 this month and November. This is above and beyond my regular job and life.
Furthermore, I help sponsor Iraqis that decided to move to the U.S. and help find them jobs working as advisors and translators. And through community service organizations and special programs I help send care packages to both our troops and the Iraqi people.
And what have you done other than criticize the war? Talk is cheap.
Sorry if I may sound condescending but what do you expect after seeing the replies in this thread that should have been closed from the start. We've had enough debate on the Iraq War over the past several years on AF and it serves no purpose beating it to death. It isn't even a significant issue on the minds of Americans for the upcoming elections anymore.
You can say whatever you want but that doesn't mean I or others have to agree with it or accept it. All I did was challenge your message which I am entitled to and since you addressed a comment to me specifically. But if you can't handle the heat to include opposing viewpoints with supporting reasonable facts or carry on a civil debate by reverting to childish name calling which is totally uncalled for then that is not my problem. :nono:
You know if we're bring up other peoples opinions on the subject, my step father who spent two years in iraq helping rebuild infrastructure thinks the war isn't worth it, effort, money or lives (It may be worth mentioning he was formerly in the Air Force to boot).
Your stepfather? I just fell out of my chair again. :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
Now this is getting really ridiculous. All this anecdotal hearsay to justify your opinion? :screwy:
I don't know how many years Bnaylor has spent in Iraq though or what he may have done there either for them or us. Although I honestly don't understand why he has to be so condescending towards other members...
:rolleyes:
I have lived and worked as a Military Advisor in the Middle East for over 3 years based out of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. I speak Arabic. I was there during the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait and served in Gulf War 1. As far as Operation Iraqi Freedom and as I mentioned earlier which you failed to take notice of I work with the Army's Counter-Insurgency program where we train our troops which includes regular forces, reserves and national guard (all branches - Army, Air Force, Marines and Navy) before they deploy to Iraq and Afghanistan so they can accomplish the mission, comply with the strict rules of engagement, and come home safely to their families. Over 10,000 troops to date and another 3000 this month and November. This is above and beyond my regular job and life.
Furthermore, I help sponsor Iraqis that decided to move to the U.S. and help find them jobs working as advisors and translators. And through community service organizations and special programs I help send care packages to both our troops and the Iraqi people.
And what have you done other than criticize the war? Talk is cheap.
Sorry if I may sound condescending but what do you expect after seeing the replies in this thread that should have been closed from the start. We've had enough debate on the Iraq War over the past several years on AF and it serves no purpose beating it to death. It isn't even a significant issue on the minds of Americans for the upcoming elections anymore.
2strokebloke
09-29-2008, 10:03 PM
Well now I know why I'll never see you say anything unbiased on the subject.
I'm glad you're getting making a living off it though. :smile:
Sorry if I may sound condescending but what do you expect after seeing the replies in this thread that should have been closed from the start. We've had enough debate on the Iraq War over the past several years on AF and it serves no purpose beating it to death. It isn't even a significant issue on the minds of Americans for the upcoming elections anymore.
If people are talking about it, there must still be people for whom it is an issue. After all, even you are participating in the discussion. If it weren't an issue to you, you wouldn't waste your time writing in this thread.:tongue:
I'm glad you're getting making a living off it though. :smile:
Sorry if I may sound condescending but what do you expect after seeing the replies in this thread that should have been closed from the start. We've had enough debate on the Iraq War over the past several years on AF and it serves no purpose beating it to death. It isn't even a significant issue on the minds of Americans for the upcoming elections anymore.
If people are talking about it, there must still be people for whom it is an issue. After all, even you are participating in the discussion. If it weren't an issue to you, you wouldn't waste your time writing in this thread.:tongue:
gatoratoy227
09-30-2008, 03:21 AM
i really don't see any reason for us to be over there the money that is being spent to rebuild Iraq may have a better effect if it was being used to help the economy in the u.s. thats just me tho
but what the f#ck does Brian know, right?
but what the f#ck does Brian know, right?
2strokebloke
10-01-2008, 03:06 PM
i really don't see any reason for us to be over there the money that is being spent to rebuild Iraq may have a better effect if it was being used to help the economy in the u.s. thats just me tho
but what the f#ck does Brian know, right?
Spending Americans' money in America? Why would that be good for the U.S. ?:confused: :icon16:
but what the f#ck does Brian know, right?
Spending Americans' money in America? Why would that be good for the U.S. ?:confused: :icon16:
Scrapper
10-01-2008, 03:36 PM
bush shoul've finished one war before starting before starting another war in my opion. i think he went after hussain because he tryed to have bush sr. asanated he got ahead of ourseleves. but then benloden attacked us first. we never went over there just to play in the sand.
ericn1300
10-01-2008, 10:13 PM
Nobody has truly answered the question and the cost of the war has grown to over $558 billion dollars, and no end seems to be in sight.
That's $558 billion dollars that could have been spent otherwise: http://www.nationalpriorities.org/costofwar_home
look up the alternatives for your state on the interactive site and tell me the surge was worth American's suffering to pay for this?
That's $558 billion dollars that could have been spent otherwise: http://www.nationalpriorities.org/costofwar_home
look up the alternatives for your state on the interactive site and tell me the surge was worth American's suffering to pay for this?
Automotive Network, Inc., Copyright ©2025