Reply With Quote
So, mission accomplished.I believe we went after Osama in October of 2001.
I believe we went after Osama in October of 2001. The invasion of Iraq occurred in March 2003.
So, mission accomplished.I believe we went after Osama in October of 2001.
What is your solution to fighting the war on terrorism? Kill Osama and be done with it? Bush screwed up?
Not getting bogged down indefinitely in Iraq while Afghanistan is not completely pacified and Osama is still at large would've been a good start.What is your solution to fighting the war on terrorism?
Unless, of course, you saw terrorists streaming into an Iraq who was on the verge of getting sanctions lifted. An Iraq that had corrupted the OFF, in collusion with Kofi Annan, France, Germany, and Russia; and, was using his ill-gotten gains to re-militarize and re-cons ute his weapons programs. An Iraq that was host to terrorists training camps.
You obviously have the luxury of prophesy or the inability to multi-task, I'm not sure which.
complaining is not a real a strategy. Do you have any solutions of your own?
Maybe -- I was right after all.You obviously have the luxury of prophesyNo, our military now has the inability to mul ask, since they have to force Marines back into service in Iraq.or the inability to multi-task
Now? There isn't much to do now in Iraq except go through the motions until we find some face-saving way of leaving. Maybe then we'll have another chance to get our priorities straight.
Wow, some strategy you got there Chumpy.
Hey, we are where we are. That isn't my fault.
I was the one who said we were going to be in Iraq for a longer time than we'd really want. Right again.
No one is blaming you we just want to know what you would do to fix the problem and fight the war on terrorism. Be very specific if you can. Telling people to get their priorities straight doesn't sound like much of a strategy.
You don't seem to understand there isn't anything we can do militarily until we get out of Iraq. Until then, there is no military strategy save threatening use of nuclear weapons. This was the main problem with the invasion and the nation-building that Bush campaigned against before he got into office.
My military strategy? Try to find a way to be able to have a military strategy again.
Okay, so what's step 1.
You don't seem to understand there isn't anything we can do militarily until we get out of Iraq. Until then, there is no military strategy save threatening use of nuclear weapons. This was the main problem with the invasion and the nation-building that Bush campaigned against before he got into office.
My military strategy? Try to find a way to be able to have a military strategy again.
crickets
Sorry, I was driving to SA. I didn't realize you hang on my every post.
I already posted step one above.
France, Germany, Russia, Anan . . . yep, those ers not doing what the US says.
If the US pulls out of Iraq, we have zero credibility with anyone ever again and the only strategy we will ever have in the future will be threatening to use nuclear weapons. The first time we fail to nuke someone, the game is up.
You don't seem to understand there isn't anything we can do militarily until we get out of Iraq. Until then, there is no military strategy save threatening use of nuclear weapons. This was the main problem with the invasion and the nation-building that Bush campaigned against before he got into office.
My military strategy? Try to find a way to be able to have a military strategy again.
There are at least 25 million people in Iraq that are holding out and working to build their own country, people that are going to work and going to school and joining the police force and burying their dead for the idea of something better than being ruled by Saddam Hussein. For better or for worse, we are there, and we owe those people to man the up and stay there and help them.
Little ing smart-asses that have a grudge against the president because they get their news from Saturday Night Live and the Daily Show trying to dictate policy from their ing couch along with gutless politicians selling their rotten souls to keep their jobs are going to have to look at themselves pretty soon if we weaken Iraq and just abandon them to the scavengers as soon as it's not fun to watch on TV anymore.
So you see the problem.If the US pulls out of Iraq, we have zero credibility with anyone ever again and the only strategy we will ever have in the future will be threatening to use nuclear weapons. The first time we fail to nuke someone, the game is up.
Good.
Too bad you don't.
I see it perfectly. You stupidly assume I'm in the cut and run crowd. I simply saw the consequences of our involvement in Iraq from the beginning much more clearly than you. We had a choice before -- now, we have none.
maybe to expand commercial relations? i've yet to hear about a normal diplomatic meeting where this phrase doesn't pop up. Unless Slovenia's meetings in Russia, Serbia, Macedonia... are really a front and we're building WMDs.
Really Yoni, you should stick to quoting blogs, as soon as you try to form an original thought, you fail misserably.
Doesn't he in context refer to as, "why would Iraq expand commercial relations with Niger?".
But i guess you're arguing about little statements like that out of true curiosity of debate.
Excuse me Yoni, I am aware that my College Education came by way of Noon and Night Classes at various Universities from Vietnam to Germany over a
14 year period, however, in all your wisdom, could you explain to me and
interept the following:
... which the Prime Minister" interpreted" as meaning the delegation wanted to discuss yellowcake sales.
Is it possible the PM mis-interpreted
as far as resurrecting the beast- let it go, I will admit that SH had WMD
America sold them to him, America sold the Techno to deliver
them to China and I'm not so sure that China did not pass along this info to IRAQ/IRAN.
Why not?
Simply put and sometimes IMO it must be put simply in order for some folks to understand and I'll even spell it out
China, wants and needs O I L, Iran has it, Iraq had it and I'm real sure that they would give it away to get what they want. NUKES
We "MAY" have had a choice before, With GWB I don't think so, please remember that no matter how smart, cough, sputter, GWB or the People are that surround him in the Presidents mind is the FACT that
"SH tried to kill my DAD"
This is not business, it's personal.
GWB is no Gandi
Last edited by BIG IRISH; 08-26-2006 at 02:00 AM.
He says only explaination is Iraq wanted to buy uranium, which is a stupid reasoning. The most probable is that it was just a stupid phrase that always gets said. Or he wanted to buy something else or he wanted to sell stuff.
Yoni asked himself and then gave an anwser he felt was only possible, i didn't feel the need to quote his anwser and instead just anwser his original question to show that this was not it's only anwser. His reasoning is not false, his interpretation is certainly possible and i will not argue it (hence no quotation), but it's not the only possible interpretation. His stupidity was not in his interpretation, but in his assumption that this was only possible conclusion.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
