That is true for many a nation on Earth. It is not our job to invade them and forcibly install 'democracy'. And no, just because we are unable to provide this wonderful service to all the oppressed peoples of the world does not mean we should be allowed to pick and choose for whom we DO provide it. We could at least have chosen any number of other nations to invade which have/had at the time much more visible and solid ties to AQ/terrorism. We started out well with Afghanistan, but the rest is, as they say, history.
That fvcking made sense. Attack this, invade that, ...USA has never been this nosy since World War II.
INT they aren't going to get it so stop arguing with them. You would be better off going and arguing with your wall or spouse. (2 arguments that once again can't be won) The only was they will get it is if they or someone they love is blown the hell up. Just let's wait and see.
You are going to wait and see if someone I love gets blown the hell up? Then I'll 'get it'? Wow, you are smart, very smart. Like magnavox.
Even one day they got blown up, they'd still blame the stupid Iraq war as the reason that they get blown up.
Your so called "great Bush government" didn't plan Iraq out well did they? Saddam has been cought for a while now and theres still suicide bombings going on, cival war is about to break out, your government could of taken more time to think this through but of course you'll defend Bush even if he nuked half the world
i think my sig is nice, here are some things it says free from bigotry open to new ideas for progress, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others broad-minded. Tending to give freely; generous That sounds very fair and nice to me, see the word generous and broad-minded and free from bigotry? can't say that about Neo Cons
Where can we possibly go from here in Iraq? We levelled Fallujah, we had an excursion to the Syrian border, and the insurgency continues. "Last throes" has become a grim joke. The Iraqi security forces we're training has become an even grimmer one. We don't have more troops to spend, and a draft is out of the question. How do we, in Andrew Northrup's memorable phrase, unshit the bed?
I got neg repped for the first post in the thread. Of ALL the posts one could choose to neg rep me for around here, this doof doof chooses post 1 of this thread. It was revenge rep, so I was waiting for it. But choosing that post doesn't really follow the theme of the game. Hmm, must review rules... This really IS fun.
It's worse than we thought. Last throes is "wishful thinking." Meanwhile, a recent internal poll conducted for the US-led coalition found that nearly 45 percent of the population supported the insurgent attacks, making accurate intelligence difficult to obtain. Only 15 percent of those polled said they strongly supported the US-led coalition. The war's steady cycle of US and Iraqi offensives, insurgent pullbacks, and resurgent enemy attacks, has led the new Iraqi government -- with US backing -- to make overtures through Sunni intermediaries in recent days to some elements of the insurgency. We'd better hope that Al Qaeda's inroads in the insurgency aren't as great as advertised by the flypaper crowd, because if they are, we're going to start negotiating with them.
58 more dead in Iraq. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/4689809.stm say, karl, are you going to make mention of the 100+ dead over the past WEEK in your "good news from glorious iraq" threads? this stuff is tragic.
Re: 58 more dead in Iraq. Why would you mention that in a thread for good news? Am i missing something? Just because some things are going badly doesnt also proclude other things from going well. I dont get the fits some of you have over a good news in iraq thread.
Re: 58 more dead in Iraq. Because Own Goal Hat Trick, and others who shall not be mentioned by name, are cheering on the insurgency. In other words, it's good news to them when innocent Iraqis are blown up.
Re: 58 more dead in Iraq. 58 dead in one attack. When suicide bombers attacked London, more than 50 people died. The world cried out, with moments of silence and British flags around the world, ostensibly because the people were innocent, on their way to work, friends and family with loved ones left behind. However, the constant stream of statistics continues to come from Iraq. Is an Iraqi man filling up his gas tank on his way to work any less innocent than a Londoner? Will there be moments of silence for him? Will we wave Iraqi flags at halftime and stand shoulder-to-shoulder with the Iraqi people who are suffering these suicide bombers on a daily basis? We will acknowledge that the storm of violence the innocent of Iraq suffer is due to our own poor planning and mismanagement, or is the long line of innocent dead just more 'collateral damage?' Oh, and the reason we get stirred up about the 'good news' threads is varied, but includes (1) Building schools in foreign countries instead of at home, (2) Building electrical plants in foreign countries instead of at home, (3) Building 25 million dollar schools by large connected government contractors instead of nice 10 million dollar schools at home, (4) The electricity and sewage still doesn't work all day, (5) The Iraq people don't seem to involved in all of this good news, and (6) Talking about new sidewalks when 25 or so people get blowed up a day seems a bit silly. Good News from Iraq reminds me of an old saying: No matter how much mayo you put on a crap sandwich, it's still a crap sandwich.
Re: 58 more dead in Iraq. No, but we will acknowledge that the storm of violence is due to evil terrorists. I will never make excuses for the actions of terrorists.