Placelowerplace Report This Comment Date: April 08, 2008 06:17PM
yup. among other things
Anonymous Report This Comment Date: April 08, 2008 06:28PM
Drop him . yaaaaah. thats what soldiers are for .dying.
Anonymous Report This Comment Date: April 09, 2008 03:36AM
Only a brainwashed Republican sheep would equate getting out of Iraq with
letting the troops down. You probably think Saddam had something to do with
9/11 too. (Sorry to educate you, but that was Osama Bin Laden in Afghanistan --
not Saddam Hussein in Iraq.)
I'm a retired Air Force chief master sergeant who served five tours in the
Middle East from 1991 through 2006, and I say WE NEED TO GET THE HELL OUT OF
THAT SHIT-HOLE.
Iraqis couldn't care less about Democracy. They don't WANT to participate in
their own government. They only want to worship Allah and care for their
families. And Shias, Sunnis and Kurds all insist that their religions serve as
the cornerstone of their government. The ONLY way to keep peace in that
ridiculous environment is to have a ruthless dictator in charge to keep the
masses under tight control.
We CAN'T stay there forever, and once we leave it's merely a matter of time
before the next Saddam rakes over. We're wasting thousands of American lives
and billions of taxpayer dollars on a useless war that isn't getting us anywhere
and has no long-term benefit for us.
fossil_digger Report This Comment Date: April 09, 2008 04:25AM
so you would rather fight it out on our soil?
abandon Israel?
turn control of the world's largest oil production to Iran?
most likely insure total chaos in the middle east?
i could go on all night
Anonymous Report This Comment Date: April 09, 2008 02:45PM
Hi anon (MS Iraq Vet),
So is there an alternative solution like nuking Iran or Syria ?
or maybe helping Israel beat Hezbolla to a pulp in Lebanon ? ...
Anonymous Report This Comment Date: April 11, 2008 01:11AM
My solution would be to get the Iraqis to defend their own country. The only
reason there is so much violence and unrest there is because of the insurgents
and Al Qaeda operatives who are there. They weren't in Iraq before we got
there, and once we're gone, they will leave.
We would be much better off if we told Iraq that they have six months to take
over ALL of their own internal security work. Then we could withdraw most of the
troops and launch a surge in Afghanistan on Al Qada's home turf. Who knows?
Maybe we would even find Osama Bin Laden -- the guy responsible for 911 and who
runs Al Qaeda from the shadows.
As for Israel -- they can take care of themselves pretty well, and hasn't anyone
ever told them that as Jews, it's a horrible idea to live smack dab in the
middle of a bunch of feuding Muslim arabs? I mean it's like being the whitest
guy in the world and moving into Harlem. Trouble is just bound to follow.
To take care of Iran, we need to do a better job of making freinds with the
Egyptians and Saudis. We could help with a little funding and a few trainers and
adviser, then we could just sit back and let them kick some Iranian ass.
fossil_digger Report This Comment Date: April 11, 2008 01:43AM
o.k. it's a plan anyway.
pie in the sky plan, but a plan.
you don't see the iraqi's being overrun from all sides then being divided
amongst the neighbors?
i damn sure do! it will not be pretty. and you can guarantee who's going to get
the shortest end of the stick.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/04/2008 01:47AM by fossil_digger.
brokntoad Report This Comment Date: April 11, 2008 04:43AM
ummm???
WOW.. some people actually think that supporting our troops means keeping them
in an illegal war.
This cartoon is stupid.
Making a play that Jimmy (dems) is worse than george jr (reps) because JC helped
him and his friends out by subsidizing peanuts while g jr is making himself and
his own wealthy off starting an illegal war for oil that is killing thousands
upon thousands of people.
4000+ US soldiers = how much oil? I wonder how much it would be if just one of
those was some one that you loved?
f_d said "so you would rather fight it out on our soil?"
fossil... keep being afraid... they are counting on it. I am sure some day that
they will find those WMDs.
jgoins Report This Comment Date: April 11, 2008 12:02PM
Not wanting to fight a war on our shores is not being afraid. It is simple
common sense. If a war is going to be fought, it is much better to take the
fight to others instead of doing it at home common sense not fear. When the war
actually comes to our shores you will see just how little fear there will be.
When push comes to shove the American people will step up and deliver.
Anonymous Report This Comment Date: April 11, 2008 02:55PM
What Illegal war ???
FYI the war has been over for some years now!....
fossil_digger Report This Comment Date: April 11, 2008 03:33PM
i see toad is still clueless, no surprise i guess.
fossil_digger Report This Comment Date: April 11, 2008 06:31PM
illegal?!?!
how!
cite the law.
Anonymous Report This Comment Date: April 11, 2008 10:29PM
THE WAR IN IRAQ IS OVER!
THE OCCUPATION OF IRAQ IS NOW!...
Anonymous Report This Comment Date: April 13, 2008 12:04AM
Fossil Digger,
I hate to break this to you -- but it is illegal to invade another country that
doesn't pose an imminent threat.
They call that type of action "waging a war of aggression" and it's
clearly prohibited in the Constitution of the United States as well as U.S.
Codes and international law.
We went into Iraq because we thought Saddam had WMDs. He didn't. But we stayed
anyway. Now Saddam is long dead, and we're still there. What is the goal?
If you think that fighting in Iraq will keep terrorists out of the U.S., you are
sorely mistaken. It's doing just the opposite. We're pissing off the entire
Middle East, and giving them even more incentive to recruit and train more
terrorists.
Now, every time a Muslim suicide bomber wipes out 20 Iraqi moms and dads, Al
Qaeda tells all the young impressionable kids that the Americans killed their
parents.
Where do you think they get their never-ending supply of suiicide bombers?
And just answer this one question: How does the president and General Petraeus
define "victory in Iraq"?
If it isn't defined, we can never achieve it -- or we will just arbitrarily
declare victory once we've spent ourselves into a Depression. We aren't
achieving any objectives because there aren't any objectives to achieve.
There's no way to wipe out terrorism because there's no way to know who the
terrorists are, or who will become a terrorist in the future.
The only possible way to achieve "victory" in the Middle East is to
kill every single Muslim there -- men, women and children alike. Are you ready
for that? Is that what you want to see?
fossil_digger Report This Comment Date: April 13, 2008 12:53AM
hey, i'm just a regular guy with no intel. whatsoever. needless to say my
opinion is irrelevant.
and i might add that someone being in the army does not validate their opinions
either.
deja vu huh?
fossil_digger Report This Comment Date: April 13, 2008 04:57AM
have you ever heard of an executive order? take a few minutes and read
this:
[
en.wikipedia.org]
zxz555 Report This Comment Date: April 13, 2008 09:56AM
today's winner will
be announced...
never, there are only losers, for the most part told what to think by TV
jgoins Report This Comment Date: April 13, 2008 12:18PM
zxz555 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> today's winner will be announced...
> never, there are only losers, for the most part
> told what to think by TV
Also applies to everyone here as well including yourself.
brokntoad Report This Comment Date: April 16, 2008 01:41AM
What executive order are you talking about? This one?
[
www.whitehouse.gov]
and on quoting wikipedia... ok
[
en.wikipedia.org]
fossil_digger Report This Comment Date: April 16, 2008 01:53AM
what is the name of your psychologist? i wan't to laugh at his dumbass.
fossil_digger Report This Comment Date: April 16, 2008 02:17AM
ooooooo peanuts!
