LOGO
Terrorism Discuss the War on Terrorism

Reply to Thread New Thread
Old 03-09-2010, 11:25 PM   #21
melissa

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
324
Senior Member
Default
The withdrawl of troops does not mean a loss. Thats ridiculous.

Saddam and his regime are gone, Iraq has a new constitution, which they voted on, they have an elected government, and two years ago they said they were ready to stand on their own and take care of their own problems. Thats when the agreement was signed between the US and Iraq regarding the deployment of US troops.
US troops are leaving because the mission is accomplished.
As of 9/2/10 PBS reports Iraq has no government in place !

Margaret Warner reports from Baghdad on the growing frustration among Iraqis -- and allies -- that a government has yet to be formed five months after parliamentary elections.

Link; Google: Margaret warner reports from baghdad
melissa is offline


Old 03-09-2010, 11:28 PM   #22
FliveGell

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
401
Senior Member
Default
What Bush failed to do was settle a millenia old blood feud between Sunni and Shiite muslim. Neither will Obama. Boo who.

When the Ayatollahs are taking a dirt nap in Tehran, we can safely allow Iraq to dissolve into whatever natural state suits the people, instead of whatever suited the British.
FliveGell is offline


Old 03-09-2010, 11:28 PM   #23
arraxylap

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
448
Senior Member
Default
If we had won, there would be a stable Iraq, producing and exporting 5 million barrels of oil/day.
Define 'a stable Iraq.' We are past the era of the losing party trotting out with a white flag, or even surrendering in the wake of another country destroying every man woman and child in two of their cities. We aren't going to do that again, I feel fairly certain. I think the degree of stability required is purely subjective. I mean look how long we have had a presence in Germany and I have to question if it was really necessary after the first 5 years or so. Ramstein has been a BIG outlay for the US but with very little return, IMO.

I think it is debatable whether we should have ever been in Iraq and it was hotly debated for years. I find it VERY ironic that those who debated so hotly against us even being there now think we are pulling out too soon.
arraxylap is offline


Old 03-10-2010, 12:01 AM   #24
Ggskbpbz

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
480
Senior Member
Default
What Bush failed to do was settle a millenia old blood feud between Sunni and Shiite muslim. Neither will Obama. Boo who.

When the Ayatollahs are taking a dirt nap in Tehran, we can safely allow Iraq to dissolve into whatever natural state suits the people, instead of whatever suited the British.
The entire blame for the mess of the west lies with England, France, Spain and the Netherlands who discovered and claimed all the new virgin lands (uninhabited except for some natives) and began the never ending effort to Christianize those poor souls and teach them the way God intended them to live.
Ggskbpbz is offline


Old 03-10-2010, 12:23 AM   #25
SkeniaInhilla

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
397
Senior Member
Default
mateys,

after "misson accomplished", Paul Bremer, the mighty US viceroy in Iraq directed the Iraqi airport to reopen. to do so, a security firm was needed to man the decks at the airport, so the CPA (US Coalition Provisional Authority) searched fer a firm. this be what happened...

from Imperial Life in the Emerald City -

*clears throat*

Two well established firms - DynaCorp International and ArmorGroup International - also submitted bids. But Custer Battle's was the cheapest. More important, the firm promised to have guards on the ground weeks faster than any other firm, even though it had no more than a dozen security personnel on staff when the proposal was submitted.

Two days after the bid was submitted, the CPA informed Custer Battles that it had won. The contract was worth 16 million.

"We got the contract because we were young, dumb and didn't know better.", Custer said later. "Anyone with experience would have said they'd be there in eight weeks". a short time later, Custer Battles hires Robert Isakson, who be an ex FBI agent now with a contractin' company...

A few weeks later, Isakson said, he was approached by a Pakistani oil trader who was serving as an adviser to Custer Battles. The trader suggested they bid for a "cost-plus" government government contracts, which provide a reimbursement for expenses plus a fixed fee. When Isakson said that the profit margins were too low for him, the trader proposed using a shell company in Lebanon to inflate the costs of goods provided to the government to give the firm a 100 percent profit.

"If you do this, you're going to prison," Isakson said.
"Oh, no. We do this all the time," the trader said.
"Not with Americans you don't," Isakson responded. "Count me out, I'm not doing that." well mateys....shortly after this exchange, Mr. Battles...who wanted to proceed with this scheme, sent Mr. Isakson, his brother, and his 14 year old son (who was diagnosed with a terminal illness) packin'....

Company guards held the three at gunpoint before taking their weapons and identification cards and ejecting them from the airport. "You motherfuckers," Isakson shouted as he left, "you're scumbags". ye can guess what happened next, aye me friends?

Two months later, Custer Battles representatives accidently left a spreadsheet on a conference table after a meeting with CPA officials. There, in black and white, wre the numbers showing that the company had billed the CPA $9,801,550 for work that cost $3,738,592. eventually, this leads to a lawsuit...and the contract with the devious Mr. Battles was cancelled...but not till he'd made off with o'er a 100 million in contracts.

this be one story, but thar be legions like it.

the US military won the war...but President Bush and his many officers showed nothin' but endless incompetence managin' its aftermath.

the United States did not lose this war, rawrrrrrrr!

they just lost everthin' else in this sad tale.

- MeadHallPirate
SkeniaInhilla is offline


Old 03-10-2010, 12:25 AM   #26
AOE6q4bu

Join Date
Nov 2005
Posts
415
Senior Member
Default
The entire blame for the mess of the west lies with England, France, Spain and the Netherlands who discovered and claimed all the new virgin lands (uninhabited except for some natives) and began the never ending effort to Christianize those poor souls and teach them the way God intended them to live.
You forgot the Portuguese.

Men of War they are.
AOE6q4bu is offline


Old 03-10-2010, 01:51 AM   #27
Qwjyrgij

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
388
Senior Member
Default
When some President tells me why we were there, and what we accomplished or didn't accomplish - at that point I will comment on our efficacy. Right now, I'm for bringing every last man and woman back from that shithole ASAP. We'll figure it out later - and kids won't be dying along the way.
Qwjyrgij is offline


Old 03-10-2010, 02:23 AM   #28
CalBettaulp

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
342
Senior Member
Default
You forgot the Portuguese.

Men of War they are.
Surprise to me.

Portugal has 10 million people but 170 million speak Portuguese world wide.(17) times their number

England has 51 million people but 375 million speak English world wide.
(7.35) times their number.

Spain has 40 million people but 330 million speak Spanish world wide.
(8.25) times their number.

Germany has 82 million but 98 million speak German world wide.
(1.20) times their number.

France has 62 million but 113 million speak French world wide.
(1.80) times their number.
Netherlands has 16 million but 27 million speak Dutch world wide.

China has 1,330,000,000 but shows 836 million who speak Manderen Chinese world wide.

Based on current populations Portugal has high score per capita #1 (170,000,000)

Spain seems to be the #2 in conquest and spreading their language and culture world wide per capita. (330,00,000)

England follows as #3 (375,000,000)

Actually England, Spain and France dwarf the rest in numbers and set the stage for domination and claims of holy guidance in the battle for the hearts minds and asses of the unwashed leaving little for those who followed. Time has a habit of changing things like the shifting sands of the deserts and that may be what we are experiencing today.
CalBettaulp is offline


Old 03-10-2010, 02:33 AM   #29
GenrieAB

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
552
Senior Member
Default
Define 'a stable Iraq.' We are past the era of the losing party trotting out with a white flag, or even surrendering in the wake of another country destroying every man woman and child in two of their cities. We aren't going to do that again, I feel fairly certain. I think the degree of stability required is purely subjective. I mean look how long we have had a presence in Germany and I have to question if it was really necessary after the first 5 years or so. Ramstein has been a BIG outlay for the US but with very little return, IMO.

I think it is debatable whether we should have ever been in Iraq and it was hotly debated for years. I find it VERY ironic that those who debated so hotly against us even being there now think we are pulling out too soon.
A stable Iraq would be a country where there was no need for any foreign involvement to keep the government in power. There would be no foreign occupation forces in the country, no matter what you call them, all security would be provided by Iraqi forces. There is no stable Iraq, now or in the near future.

We failed dismally, for several reasons, terrible leadership, Bush was clueless, driven to invade by Karl Rove's need for a war for the election. From that standpoint, the war was an unqualified success, it got Bush re-elected. But other than that it really was a complete fuck up.

Besides poor leadership, which extended downwards from the top, there was a military that was ill prepared for this kind of mission, and they fucked it up royally.

But given the vast military resources of the US, it is possible to pretend that a humiliating defeat is really some kind of victory.
Don't hold your breathe for the ticker tape parade though...
GenrieAB is offline


Old 03-10-2010, 02:50 AM   #30
Peapeuddedbaw

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
426
Senior Member
Default
As of 9/2/10 PBS reports Iraq has no government in place !

Margaret Warner reports from Baghdad on the growing frustration among Iraqis -- and allies -- that a government has yet to be formed five months after parliamentary elections.

Link; Google: Margaret warner reports from baghdad
This is nothing unusual in that kind of voting system. Check out the last German election. It took them over a year to figure out who was going to form government.
Peapeuddedbaw is offline


Old 04-09-2010, 10:21 AM   #31
RsQhyZyR

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
432
Senior Member
Default
While a stable parliamentary Iraq is best, overthrowing a fascist dictator like Saddam is a good deed in itself.
Do you actually understand the meaning of the words you are using or are you simply repeating the media cliches?

Where did you see a "stable parliamentary Iraq"?

And how was Saddam "fascist"?

And if he was a "fascist", why did CIA plonked him on Iraqis in a first place?
RsQhyZyR is offline


Old 04-09-2010, 10:24 AM   #32
sFs4aOok

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
491
Senior Member
Default
U.S. ... lost the war with dignity.
There is no dignity in murder.
sFs4aOok is offline


Old 04-09-2010, 12:04 PM   #33
Wheldcobchoto

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
474
Senior Member
Default
we didnt lose a war....... although the left wishes we did
Wheldcobchoto is offline


Old 04-09-2010, 12:25 PM   #34
JulietOreira

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
584
Senior Member
Default
This is nothing unusual in that kind of voting system. Check out the last German election. It took them over a year to figure out who was going to form government.
I would say we have somewhat of a different situation in this case.
JulietOreira is offline


Old 04-09-2010, 12:35 PM   #35
NowFloabDow

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
447
Senior Member
Default
we didnt lose a war....... although the left wishes we did
Fairy Tales can come true it can happen to you if your young at heart.....
NowFloabDow is offline


Old 04-09-2010, 12:57 PM   #36
nanyaHgoc

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
445
Senior Member
Default
we didnt lose a war....... although the left wishes we did
Yeah, yeah, that's the ticket, we wanted it to turn out just like it did, that was our goal, to build an Iraqi government that wouldn't last a week without tens of thousands of foreign occupation forces to defend it against Iraqis.
nanyaHgoc is offline


Old 04-09-2010, 01:02 PM   #37
abOfU9nJ

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
469
Senior Member
Default
It's called Bush derangement syndrome. So much emotional investment in the destruction of the mans legacy that up has to be down, black has to be white. The "evil" talk radio host have been playing the audio pf Senator Obama claiming the surge would fail, followed by him saying he knew it would work, followed by Minister of Truth Gibbs saying him boss always know it would work, but only because the Sunnis stopped fighting us, all week. Those people have told so many lies they can't keep track.

It must have pained him terribly to call Bush patriotic earlier this week, but he's had plenty of opportunities since to blame Bush and berate businesses for failure to bend over and lube up for whatever new redistributive policy Obama and his cohorts can dream up.
abOfU9nJ is offline


Old 04-09-2010, 01:41 PM   #38
gariharlj

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
455
Senior Member
Default
It's called Bush derangement syndrome. So much emotional investment in the destruction of the mans legacy that up has to be down, black has to be white. The "evil" talk radio host have been playing the audio pf Senator Obama claiming the surge would fail, followed by him saying he knew it would work, followed by Minister of Truth Gibbs saying him boss always know it would work, but only because the Sunnis stopped fighting us, all week. Those people have told so many lies they can't keep track.

It must have pained him terribly to call Bush patriotic earlier this week, but he's had plenty of opportunities since to blame Bush and berate businesses for failure to bend over and lube up for whatever new redistributive policy Obama and his cohorts can dream up.
Wow, that was pretty slick, no one noticed that you were trying to change the subject and derail the thread because you don't like the reality.
gariharlj is offline


Old 04-09-2010, 01:49 PM   #39
untostaronaf

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
448
Senior Member
Default
Wow, that was pretty slick, no one noticed that you were trying to change the subject and derail the thread because you don't like the reality.
Your pretty slick yourself, giving the impression you like reality, while being dragged kicking and screaming through it.
untostaronaf is offline


Old 04-09-2010, 04:16 PM   #40
optormtix

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
485
Senior Member
Default
Your pretty slick yourself, giving the impression you like reality, while being dragged kicking and screaming through it.
You mean like the reality that the invasion of Iraq was a fiasco?
That the US leadership was either stupid or evil (no other option fits the facts).
That kind of reality?
I don't like it anymore than you do, but I don't try to pretend that it's something good and noble and honorable.
optormtix is offline



Reply to Thread New Thread

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:30 PM.
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
Design & Developed by Amodity.com
Copyright© Amodity