The verdicts on Iraq progress

#26
#26
therealUT said:
Yes, although Congress in 1998 made it official US policy to use force against Iraq if they continued to interfere in the inspection process, the decision to use force against Iraq was wholly GWBs idea.

Also, you said the reasons kept shifting, Oklavol. Funny, they are pretty much laid out right there in October of 2002. The first reason being that Iraq was not in compliance with the resolutions that brought about the end of our efforts against Hussein in the early 90s.

You are great at revisionist history, Oklavol...that is if no one else is willing to dig up the research to prove you categorically wrong. Guess this wasn't your lucky day.
Click to expand...

So we went to war for WMD"s. Then where are they?

Funny Saddam has all these stockpiles of WMD's and doesn't even use them on troops invading his country who are trying to hunt him down and kill him? It does sound odd.

I guess he would rather hide them to make Bush look back then to actually use them on enemy troops.
 
#27
#27
oklavol said:
So we went to war for WMD"s. Then where are they?

Funny Saddam has all these stockpiles of WMD's and doesn't even use them on troops invading his country who are trying to hunt him down and kill him? It does sound odd.

I guess he would rather hide them to make Bush look back then to actually use them on enemy troops.
Click to expand...
Not at all. On a greater strategic level, funneling all incriminating evidence outside the country is actually a better bet than unleashing WMDs on American forces (at most, maybe causing 20% casualties) and having world opinion in favor of the U.S.

Also, if you actually read for context, you will understand that it was less about them actually having WMDs and more about them thwarting the efforts of the inspectors and therefore not being in compliance with the Resolutions that led to a ceasefire at the end of the Gulf War.

However, I would assume just by the few dealings I've had with you on this board that treaties, honor, and integrity mean little to nothing to you. So, in that case, I can see from your point why you think our move against Iraq was wrong.
 
#28
#28
therealUT said:
Not at all. On a greater strategic level, funneling all incriminating evidence outside the country is actually a better bet than unleashing WMDs on American forces (at most, maybe causing 20% casualties) and having world opinion in favor of the U.S.

Also, if you actually read for context, you will understand that it was less about them actually having WMDs and more about them thwarting the efforts of the inspectors and therefore not being in compliance with the Resolutions that led to a ceasefire at the end of the Gulf War.

However, I would assume just by the few dealings I've had with you on this board that treaties, honor, and integrity mean little to nothing to you. So, in that case, I can see from your point why you think our move against Iraq was wrong.
Click to expand...

What good is world opinion when your hanging from a gallows?

So basicly the U.N. is doing weapon inspections for years out of fear he might use WMD's and then he doesn't even use them (assuming he had them) on troops invading his own country and trying to hunt him down and kill him. Obviously that was a huge threat.

Iraq was a much bigger threat for WMD's then Iran? Odd under Bush's foreigh policy it's ok for Iran to have a Nuclear bomb, but not ok for Iraq to have a cannister of anthrax buried in a hole where no one knows where that he apparently planned to never use.
 
#29
#29
oklavol said:
What good is world opinion when your hanging from a gallows?

So basicly the U.N. is doing weapon inspections for years out of fear he might use WMD's and then he doesn't even use them (assuming he had them) on troops invading his own country and trying to hunt him down and kill him. Obviously that was a huge threat.

Iraq was a much bigger threat for WMD's then Iran? Odd under Bush's foreigh policy it's ok for Iran to have a Nuclear bomb, but not ok for Iraq to have a cannister of anthrax buried in a hole where no one knows where that he apparently planned to never use.
Click to expand...
Was Iran in violation of a previous treaty that led to a cease fire and the end of hostilities by the US? No.

For first two paragraphs, look into it yourself.
 
#30
#30
If you look at the resolution it clearly indicates this was ALL about the WMD's and little actually about the UN matters. It all revolved around the security threat to the Middle East because of the WMD programs. Read each 'whereas' and see it focuses on WMD's and the threats posed by them along with terrorism. Both of which Iraq was little involved in. We even knew leading right up to the actual crossing of the border this was not true. We had a top Iraqi official defecting and telling us this was not the case.
 
#32
#32
oklavol said:
if you looking for a rationale explanation for it there isn't one.

It was first to find WMD"s, then it was to remove a brutal dictator, then it was to fight terrorism, then it was to nation build, etc. You pick.

But trying to find one that is in the national interest and worth the financial cost is the hard part.
Click to expand...

Problem is, Bush has used all of these rationales to serve his agenda. He is so stupid, he thinks the American public will buy whatever he says. In other words, we aren't supposed to question him because he knows best, which is a joke. This guy, Petraeous(sp?), has misled the public before. Back in '04, he is the one who stated very firmly that the Iraqis were almost ready to take over militarily. And he is the first four star general I know of who hasn't seen combat. And Bush, to continuously speak as though our presence in Iraq is due to the fact we are fighting a war on terror against the US. Iraq has never been a threat to the US...never will be either and had NOTHING to do with 9/11

AT this time next year, we will have same number of troops as we had before surge and unfortunately, the sectarian violence will still be an issue.
 
#35
#35
He never saw combat till the Iraq war. He led the 101st Airborne during the V Corps push toward Baghdad.

Just some more non sense from the lefts talking points.
 
#36
#36
OrangeEmpire said:
He never saw combat till the Iraq war. He led the 101st Airborne during the V Corps push toward Baghdad.

Just some more non sense from the lefts talking points.[/QUOTE]


Ridiculous. I am a moderate from a military family. Everyone from my grandfather in WWI, my father in WWII, Korea and Vietnam, my brother in Vietnam to myself have all served our country.

For you to make a post like" we are kicking azz" is totally ridiculous. Proof enough your opinion isn't very qualified in the matter. No one is questioning we are kicking azz. I would hope so, but it is much more complicated than just kicking azz militarily. You sound like a supporter of our incompetent commander-in-chief. Enough said
Click to expand...
 
#37
#37
truefan said:
OrangeEmpire said:
He never saw combat till the Iraq war. He led the 101st Airborne during the V Corps push toward Baghdad.

Just some more non sense from the lefts talking points.[/QUOTE]


Ridiculous. I am a moderate from a military family. Everyone from my grandfather in WWI, my father in WWII, Korea and Vietnam, my brother in Vietnam to myself have all served our country.

For you to make a post like" we are kicking azz" is totally ridiculous. Proof enough your opinion isn't very qualified in the matter. No one is questioning we are kicking azz. I would hope so, but it is much more complicated than just kicking azz militarily. You sound like a supporter of our incompetent commander-in-chief. Enough said
Click to expand...

Yeah, I was quoting Bush.............:whistling::whistling::whistling::whistling:

You know, sarcasm...........:eek:k:

I am very proud of you and your family for serving our country, but next time, do some research. :hi:
Click to expand...
 
#39
#39
Have fun!

That is what this board is all about!

Post often and if you need your post count up, post one word at a time.

You are a little green, you will learn!

:good!:
 
#40
#40
truefan said:
OrangeEmpire said:
He never saw combat till the Iraq war. He led the 101st Airborne during the V Corps push toward Baghdad.

Just some more non sense from the lefts talking points.[/QUOTE]


Ridiculous. I am a moderate from a military family. Everyone from my grandfather in WWI, my father in WWII, Korea and Vietnam, my brother in Vietnam to myself have all served our country.

For you to make a post like" we are kicking azz" is totally ridiculous. Proof enough your opinion isn't very qualified in the matter. No one is questioning we are kicking azz. I would hope so, but it is much more complicated than just kicking azz militarily. You sound like a supporter of our incompetent commander-in-chief. Enough said
Click to expand...

I agree. Unfortunately a few posters think no one with any integrity would dare criticize Bush:

therealUT said:
However, I would assume just by the few dealings I've had with you on this board that treaties, honor, and integrity mean little to nothing to you. So, in that case, I can see from your point why you think our move against Iraq was wrong.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
#41
#41
truefan said:
Ridiculous. I am a moderate from a military family. Everyone from my grandfather in WWI, my father in WWII, Korea and Vietnam, my brother in Vietnam to myself have all served our country.
Click to expand...

I agree. Unfortunately a couple of posters seem to think no one with any integrity would criticize Bush:

therealUT said:
However, I would assume just by the few dealings I've had with you on this board that treaties, honor, and integrity mean little to nothing to you. So, in that case, I can see from your point why you think our move against Iraq was wrong.
Click to expand...
 
#45
#45
oklavol said:
allvol123 & therealUT
Click to expand...

Get a clue. I am not a die hard Bush fan. I have stated repeatedly that I dislike his handling of many things. I just dislike the idiocy spewed by people that blame every problem in the world on him, even more. Clearer for you?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top