Originally posted by petrosianpupilTisk, friggin' tisk, tisk. You know better than to call Iraq a disaster. It's way too early for that.
Bosnia and Somalia are not alone as examples of good US interventions.
But Vietnam??????
You should have left the French to clear up their own mess there.
Surely you are not so dim as to think Vietnam a success? mind you the way you defend the Iraq disaster, it shouldn't surprise me.
Originally posted by petrosianpupilAnd another thing, Ima have to disagree with Bosnia being a success.
Bosnia and Somalia are not alone as examples of good US interventions.
But Vietnam??????
You should have left the French to clear up their own mess there.
Surely you are not so dim as to think Vietnam a success? mind you the way you defend the Iraq disaster, it shouldn't surprise me.
Originally posted by MerkI disagree. Bin Laden and Saddam were ideologically opposed.
Slight correction there, Petro. Saddam wasn't as so much an enemy as he was unsupportive. Being unsupportive of AQ seems like enough for AQ to get mad at you.It's not like he was out knocking AQ heads.
Bin Laden was tremendously upset when the US stepped in at the first gulf war because he thought that it was his job.
Sure getting rid of Saddam, taken in isolation is a big plus. But his removal has strengthened AQ and made Iran more unpredictable.
I know from previous arguments that we differ on the timings of many historical interventions. But Iraq was a big mistake.
Originally posted by petrosianpupilA lot of people are ideologically opposed to Bin Ladedn, that doesn't make them enemies.
I disagree. Bin Laden and Saddam were ideologically opposed.
Bin Laden was tremendously upset when the US stepped in at the first gulf war because he thought that it was his job.
Sure getting rid of Saddam, taken in isolation is a big plus. But his removal has strengthened AQ and made Iran more unpredictable.
I know from previous arguments that we differ on the timings of many historical interventions. But Iraq was a big mistake.
I didn't agree with the Irag invasion either, at least, if Iraq qas intended to be the last military action taken in the WoT. It's way too soon to declare it a mistake though. Iraq may yet turn out as a great ally, but that will take time to discrern. The other thing with regards to the invasions effects on Iran is, we had already removed the their other enemy in the Taliban. We removed not one, but two of Irans enemies.
Also, if Iraq isn't intended to be the last country that we strike, then it was the perfect decision due it's location between Syria and Iran. At this point, we are on both sides of Iran, and between Israel and the U.S. Syria is in the same bad position that Iran is.
Originally posted by mrstabbyYou wait for a couple decades if you like. Islamic fundamentalist will never have the brains or the money or the firepower to take on the US.
Granted, it may have worked in the short term. Shouldn't you be more worried about the long term? We'll probably have to wait a couple of decades to find out how wise dedicating so many resources to the invasion was.
Im not worried about the long term. I am estatic that the US govt got into such a rage since 9/11 (and rightly so) that they decided to kick their butts. The spineless cowards have been taking pot shots at US interests for many decades now, and the US just talked and negotiated and pleaded and threatened, and went to the UN and asked for help, and talked again, and pleaded again, over and over.
Its now time to Kill them.
Ecc 3 1 For everything there is a season, and a time for very purpose under heaven:
2 a time to be born, and a time to die; a time to plant, and a time to pluck up that which is planted;
3 a time to kill
Dont bother telling me about the poor innocent Iraqis suffering
Originally posted by Rajk999That's great for you, but you really don't speak for me.
You wait for a couple decades if you like. Islamic fundamentalist will never have the brains or the money or the firepower to take on the US.
Im not worried about the long term. I am estatic that the US govt got into such a rage since 9/11 (and rightly so) that they decided to kick their butts. The spineless cowards have been taking pot shots at US intere ...[text shortened]... ;
3 [b] a time to kill
Dont bother telling me about the poor innocent Iraqis suffering[/b]
I don't think I'm going to vote for you in 08.
Originally posted by der schwarze Ritter"Appeasement generates a mentality that allows Europe to ignore nearly 500,000 victims of Saddam's torture and murder machinery and, motivated by the self-righteousness of the peace movement, has the gall to issue bad grades to George Bush... Even as it is uncovered that the loudest critics of the American action in Iraq made illicit billions, no, TENS of billions, in the corrupt U.N. Oil-for-Food program.
Is Europe like an old woman who, with shaking hands, frantically hides her last pieces of jewelry when she notices a robber breaking into a neighbor's house?
http://therealdonjohnson.townhall.com/g/609185bc-db3d-42dc-b27f-f1dfc14917bf?comments=true
"
Mathias Dapfner CEO, Axel Springer, AG
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterBiased is right - they echo the President's habit of describing every terrorist attack in Iraq as committed by "al Qaeda", irrespective of whether or not that happens to be the case.
You need to read the New York Times -- even their biased editorial columnists have admitted that the Surge worked.
Originally posted by Rajk999Of course they'll never "take them on", but they'll be more than happy to stage another attack on the scale of 9/11 if they continue to get the support because of America's actions.
You wait for a couple decades if you like. Islamic fundamentalist will never have the brains or the money or the firepower to take on the US.
Im not worried about the long term. I am estatic that the US govt got into such a rage since 9/11 (and rightly so) that they decided to kick their butts. The spineless cowards have been taking pot shots at US intere ...[text shortened]... ;
3 [b] a time to kill
Dont bother telling me about the poor innocent Iraqis suffering[/b]
Ignoring civilian casualties is making the situation much, much worse, and is going to cost you dearly in terms of support.
Originally posted by mrstabbyAnd the US will respond again this time in a more aggressive manner. Then the terrorists might strike again... .. and the cycle continues until one party gives in. I guarantee you one thing ... it wont be the US. The rest of the world can support who they like. America only needs one ally ... Israel. Together the US and Israel can pretty much destroy any terrorist threat.
Of course they'll never "take them on", but they'll be more than happy to stage another attack on the scale of 9/11 if they continue to get the support because of America's actions.
Ignoring civilian casualties is making the situation much, much worse, and is going to cost you dearly in terms of support.
You need to understand that there is RIGHT and there is WRONG. Terrorists and their dumb supporters are on the side of 'wrong'. Over the long haul 'right' wins every time.
I am not an American for the umpteenth time.
1 edit
Originally posted by Rajk999Not saying you are, it doesn't matter who you are if you kill civilians, it'll rally people to support the terrorists, at which point the right or wrong is defined by who's left at the end. Bertrand Russell famously said "War does not determine who is right - only who is left."
And the US will respond again this time in a more aggressive manner. Then the terrorists might strike again... .. and the cycle continues until one party gives in. I guarantee you one thing ... it wont be the US. The rest of the world can support who they like. America only needs one ally ... Israel. Together the US and Israel can pretty much destroy any ter Over the long haul 'right' wins every time.
I am not an American for the umpteenth time.
You are the one that needs to understand that right or wrong isn't defined by who's side you are on, but by actions (which invariably speak louder than words).
There's no "destroying" a terrorist threat, it's like pouring petrol on a fire to put it out.