Anyone else ever think we could do a better job?

Post Reply New Topic

Lots of p**** countries were too scared to help in Iraq, or maybe things would be different there by now.

gee you hurt my little feelings

most of the deaths are on the hands of the war protestors who have encouraged the resistors to fight on. Your type also is responsable for millions dying in southeast asia.

You go Johnnie!

Your feelings should be hurt. Your country just killed 750 people.

If you don't you are proving my point.

From what you say you obviously don't know anything about how the world works. Even simple things.
.
.

it's pointless, the wimps will never get it. but got to at least annoy them a little.

It's simple, when confronted with overwhelming forces who have 100% support of the people behind them, the majority of the resistance will say ok they give up and lets talk about the future.

the people in Iraq don't trust us so aren't willing to support us when we have a record like leaving Vietnam and leaving the Shah of Iran to fend for himself. the wimp carter started this whole mess in the middle east by not coming to the aid of the Shah of Iran to help them crush the revolt.

and somebody watching the news has it all figured out because some paid talking head told them what to think

It's not my country, I'm not the owner of it.

The only thing you confronted them with was overwhelming stupidity ! !!

If you say so, I'm sure after watching the news you know it all

I gave up watching the news a while back : I knew I would end up with views as stupid as yours if I continued.

Which is why I began my post with some facts, not opinion.

Sadam Killed.. : 250,000
US Killed ....... : 750,000
.
.
.

It's a fact the resistors are fighting on because of past history of the USA and other countries wimping out and packing their toys up and going home before the job is done because of sniveling protestors.

It's a fact the middle east is full of crazy people who want to wipe out everyone who ain't on their knee's to allah.

It's a fact almost all the blood sinse the former Iraq government and army was crushed is on the hands of the protestors.

So... you just want to ignore the fact that coalition forces have been inciting and/or carrying out violence in order to keep the war going so that the defense contractors can get nice fat profits. That's cool. Ignorance is strength.
You have now said repeatedly that the blood of the dead is on the hands of the protestors. General Omar Bradley might disagree with you- "Wars can be prevented just as surely as they can be provoked, and we who fail to prevent them, must share the guilt for the dead." So war protestors are actually trying to avoid contributing to unnecessary death through the implicit approval that is given with silence. Sorry buddy, you are completely and blatantly wrong here.
Notice that almost every great military leader in US history hates war. Think there might be a reason? And before you go off about war being some unpleasant necessity, remember Grant's words, “There never was a time when, in my opinion, some way could not be found to prevent the drawing of the sword.”
We have killed more Iraqis than Saddam did. Women and religious minorities were protected under Saddam, they are not now. Under Saddam, Iraq had modern infrastructure, a good education system, a strong middle class, and a stable system of government. Now all of that is gone as we "bomb them into the Stone Age." I am not praising Saddam, he was a terrible and brutal dictator, but our handling has only made the situation worse. And if we went after Iraq to get rid of a dictator, why aren't we invading China, Saudi Arabia, or Cuba? If we went in because of WMDs, why is it now a well-established fact that all or most of the "intelligence" used in the case for war was fabricated? If it was because of 9/11, why were there plans to invade Iraq before W even took office?
And your comment about not questioning the President... BULL-FREAKING-CRAP. We do not elect dicatators to four-year terms (strictly speaking, we don't elect anyone, but that's a side issue). We need to continue to carefully watch and question our leaders for their entire term of service, there is a reason for the inclusion in the Constitution of provisions for the removal of a President, and I doubt you were questioning those provisions ten years ago, when Clinton cheated on his wife.
I won't even touch the absurdity that is your view on Vietnam. The entire thing was a complete failure, it did nothing to contribute to the fall of the Soviet Union, a bunch of people got killed. I don't like it when people get killed, and I think most would agree with me there. I don't like what's going on with Chinese slave labor or any of the other ills you mentioned, but we also need to focus on what is causing the most unnecessary damage and what can be corrected most easily. Let's get out of Iraq, and then focus on addressing all of the other issues we see.

I'm talking about it from the position that all forms of government have advantages and disadvantages. The inherent disadvantage of democracy is it's instability, so if it's not going to allow for openness, then why don't we just officially turn it back over to an elite, so that one guy can run it for 50 years at a time and at least ensure that the system is stable for a while.



Rescuing the Iraqi people? Originally we were supposed to be looking for WOMD. Then when we didn't find any, they just stopped talking about it (which is the whole problem, the media won't criticize).

Furthermore, there are estimates that hundreds of thousands of Iraqis have died because of our war, and the entire nation is being engulfed in a civil war that will happen now regardless of what we do (the only good news is, big conflicts eventually stabilize regions, as in post-WWII Europe). We've made the situation worse.



The dominoes theory is highly questionable at best, we stopped nothing (Vietnam fell to Communism anyway), and the Soviet Union never had the infrastructure to maintain any sort of serious threat to us. We just needed an excuse to justify the size of our military so we could continue to dominate the world. Now that they're gone, we've found a new enemy that can't really hurt us, and wouldn't try if we'd leave it alone, in the Middle East.

[qupte]do you really believe the rice farmers in the pajama's bank rolled the NVA ? if so think again, we drained massive amounts of resources away from russia who went broke, we won, they lost.[/quote]

Communism never had a workable infrastructure anyway. If everyone's provided for, there's no motivation too work. It sort of worked in Eastern Germany, where they already had a strong work ethic, but even there it was far from perfect. It would have collapsed anyway.



Those jobs are actually neccessary, but potentionally hazardous. The war in Iraq was not neccessary.



I never said I don't care about those people. The difference between you and me is: I don't think going into that person's country and blowing things up helps him much.



Hmmmm....funny, I thought that whole part in the constitution about impeachment implied he could be second-guessed when he did anything this radically stupid (sadly, congress won't even consider it).



No, they voted to go look for WOMDs in Iraq, based on falsified information.



First off, you're assuming we're capable of stabilizing it: we're not. Secondly, war shows people that violence is unacceptable. That's why Europe is so less militant that us now. We haven't seen real war on our home soil since the 1800s. They had the World Wars.

And, BTW, the US government has supported numerous oppressive governments. They really just care about what's most convenient for our economic interests.



By this same twisted logic you could blame every death in the American Revolution on the Revolutionaries...oh, and every death in Vietnam on the South for resisting communism.



BTW, the Shah was a dictator. Please explain what made him better than Saddam?



Wrong again, idiot. They don't care about our religion, they just don't want foreign troops on their soil. You wouldn't either.

Didn't we ?

(when you say instability ... evidence ? instability = desirable, evidence ?)

How would you know why we went in or anything about intelligence, because the moron media told you ? You haven't a clue what goes on behind closed doors, yet with very limited amounts of information which is mostly wrong, want to play keyboard president

The Great President George Bush should have rounded up anyone who undermined the war effort and had them shipped to internment camps, if it was me I would have just had anyone who dared question the war shot for treason.

Leave fighting the bad guys to real men and stick to whatever useless activities you girls & girly men do, like worrying about your hair.

Who are we to judge what constitutes a "madman" for other nations and what they should do? They're foreign nations...in other words: not us. Leave them alone. We need to stop acting like the world's police force.



Oh no! Not Communism! What will we do?? Communism will come here and kill us! Personally though, I'd rather have that than global capitalism. But either way, most of the United States wouldn't put up with being Communist. It's not going to happen.

And why do I hear so many people pretty much telling American-born citizens that they have no right to dispute this country's way of government? What's "democracy" if you're not allowed to do that? I don't want Congress to decide whether we go to war or not, and I'll keep speaking out against it, regardless of any NeoCons such as yourself who want to tell me otherwise.

p****? More like they knew the war was a stupid waste of money they didn't want to get involved in. It's the United States' problem, so why should anyone else be obligated to help?