'Forget About Winning In Iraq'

Off Topic Politics and World Issues
21

[quote]gDollars37 wrote:

Which one? If it’s your lisping little authoritarian, I will vote third party. If it’s Fred Thompson, odds are I’d vote for him. I won’t vote for Rudy or Romney, and I won’t vote for any of the Democrats (due to their support of partial birth abortion above all else). If those are my choices, I will write somebody in. If it’s McCain or Thompson, I’d vote for either of them.[/quote]

Thanks for your response. You know I favor Rudy. However, I’m going to look very closely at F. Thompson.

If he’s the nominee, we may actually end up voting for the same person.

Now that would be momentus!!!

JeffR

22

[quote]JeffR wrote:
Further, your numbers are always suspect. How many due to terrorists?

Oh, wait you blame us for everything. Never mind. [/quote]

Would there be that many terrorists if you didn’t invade the country?

Oh wait, you don’t wanna take responsability for anything. Nevermind.

23

Jerff,

Conveniently, you ignore my post. Why is that?

Dustin

24

[quote]JeffR wrote:
gDollars37 wrote:

Which one? If it’s your lisping little authoritarian, I will vote third party. If it’s Fred Thompson, odds are I’d vote for him. I won’t vote for Rudy or Romney, and I won’t vote for any of the Democrats (due to their support of partial birth abortion above all else). If those are my choices, I will write somebody in. If it’s McCain or Thompson, I’d vote for either of them.

Thanks for your response. You know I favor Rudy. However, I’m going to look very closely at F. Thompson.

If he’s the nominee, we may actually end up voting for the same person.

Now that would be momentus!!!

JeffR

[/quote]

Not really. I voted for Bush twice, although I regret it.

25

[quote]lixy wrote:
JeffR wrote:
Further, your numbers are always suspect. How many due to terrorists?

Oh, wait you blame us for everything. Never mind.

Would there be that many terrorists if you didn’t invade the country?
.[/quote]
Yup, there is no evidence to the contrary. Most terrorists are active or laying in wait for opportunity. There will always be opportunity, it comes in many forms.

[quote]
Oh wait, you don’t wanna take responsability for anything. Nevermind.[/quote]

On the contrary, we always take responsibility for our actions. We don’t blame “the man” like the terrorists you support. They kill people and blame Israel and the U.S for their deaths.
All you do, like a little wanna be terrorist is lie in wait for the U.S. or a western counter part to make a mistake so you can cease it and expound upon it endlessly.

Perhaps your point would be better made if your were to blow up a shopping mall or perhaps just a synaggue. Then you can blame the U.S. while actually doing something rather than sit on your ass constantly for hours on end replying to forum posts blasting and blaming the U.S., on a U.S. site, run by Americans, patronized by Americans, most of which actually like our country, despite it’s problems.

Will the country that makes no errors, please stand up and be recognized. Get a job, quit try to prove how smart you are to everybody. It is just is foum after all. It’s not worth the time, effort and emotion you put into it.

26

[quote]lixy wrote:
John S. wrote:
and 3rd point is irrelevant. Just because you have a few people trying to fight against the Strongest army the worlds ever seen doesn’t mean we lost. You seem to keep pulling that fact up, so ill say it again, they are there and we are fucking them up.

How hard is it to understand that this particular breed of terrorists feeds on the very violence you throw at it? And no matter what your commanders tell you, they is virtually no limited supply of them.

The war on Iraq exacerbated the terrorist threat. You can’t refute that. Everyone acknowledged that fact.

Saying that it’s irrelevant when you have been lead to war on false pretense and while the whole world was shouting “Don’t do it, you bunch of morons!” is absolutely irresponsible. You are not open to even the slightest self-reflection, and as such, you increase the chances that history will repeat itself and you’ll get drawn into yet another unnecessary war.

John, I’m curious what do you think is the reason behind all those high ranking general (in the highest possible positions in Iraq) are saying that war cannot be won. Are they terrorist sympathizers? Are they unpatriotic? Are they on Al-Qaeda’s payroll?

It doesn’t take a genius to realize that the word of a general in this context is worth a LOT more than that of Bush or Cheney. Let us know what you think is behind their decision to speak up. Do they have money invested in the flowers business?

I can give you a multitude of reasons why Bush would lie. Let’s see you try that for the generals.[/quote]

Ahh lixy, you never fail to amaze me how far you can go to refuse to read what I have said.

The terrorists do have a limit, Iraq itself now is kicking there ass. oh and really, because unlike you I have talked to people who have been over there, and they say the vast majority Like us over there. So please stop with this America is bad.

Edit.

I forgot one of your points please forgive me.
So the generals that got fired and kicked out are saying mean things?

But allow me to ask you a question, Why is Iraq itself turning against Al-quida(spelling?) Looks like they are loosing there Recrutes right there. I hope you can at least see these facts.

27

[quote]dusty bottoms wrote:
JeffR wrote:

I can of course counter with guys who are there who say that they are furious at the “back stabbing liberals” who want to run “before the job is done.”

Those who say that are indoctrinated morons who can’t see the big picture…kind of like you Jerff.[/quote]

Hey dusty bottoms,

Usually I choose not to respond to your posts. I do read them. However, responding to you is like embracing the law of diminishing returns.

Why is that? Is it because I’m humbled by your rapier wit? It is because you “get me?”

No.

You know better.

Most of your posts are incredibly inane and ridiculous.

For instance, for you to say that everyone who thinks the invasion and formation of a Democratic Iraq was and is the right thing to do are “indoctrinated morons” isn’t really worthy of a response.

Are you really arrogant enough to believe that you have ALL the wisdom and moral authority on this issue?

Is your brain pathologically unable to concede that people of good faith and ability can draw different conclusions without being “indoctrinated morons?”

[quote]And what exactly constitutes winning? Gutting the country? If that is the criteria, then we’re doing a bang up job.

If it is “spreading democracy”, then we have a long ways to go.

If it is setting up permanent bases so that Iraq will become something similar to South Korea where we will always have troops there, then we are having reasonable success.

Last time I looked, staving off defeat equals winning.

Last time I looked, neither was happening no matter what terminology one uses.
dusty bottoms
[/quote]

Winning is Sunni’s joining the Shiites and the Iraqi armies in killing al qaeda.

Winning is a growing democracy in Iraq.

I do think the U.S. should stay in a limited manner. I have suggested maintaining regional bases in Iraq. This must and is conditional on the Iraqi Government asking for and supporting the U.S.'s continued presence.

Deterrence against the regional enemies.

Finally, I need to ask you politely if you could come up with some new nicknames. “Dumb” and “cheerleader” just isn’t getting it done.

I need something clever and witty. For example, “Jeffro the Clown.” That was one of my personal favorites.

Do you think you could do me a favor, reach down into that cesspool of a brain of yours and produce a decent nickname?

Thanks in advance,

JeffR

28

[quote]JeffR wrote:

Hey dusty bottoms,
[/quote]

I actually like that, thanks!

That’s kind of how it looks. I post and provide my opinion usually backed up with links that back up said statement. You typically come back with a one or two line response saying my brain is poop and then say, “We’re done”, or that I’m a democrat. I can easily do a search and provide numerous examples.

You rarely ever make an attempt to refute my claims no matter how “outrageous” you claim them to be. So yes, it looks like you’re taking your ball, and going home.

Classic coming from an individual who posts Sean Hannity/Rush Limbaugh talking points regularly. I’m not the only one who thinks this either.

If you’ll take the time to read what I said (something else you’re poor at), I replied to you’re foolish assertion that the libs are “stabbing the troops in the back”. I replied that anyone who thinks this is a an indoctrinated moron.

No, but I do know for certain that I know more about the issue than you do. My posts in the past have shown this, whereas you’re posts is simply the regurgitation of the rhetoric of the Bush administration.

You mean the “libs are evil, republicans good” mantra that you always champion? Yes, I’m unable to concede that.

That won’t happen.

The only “democracy” that Iraq will ever have is the Americanized version of democracy. In lay terms, a government that does the bidding of the U.S. government.

These “regional enemies” weren’t doing much sabre rattling until we invaded Iraq. Strange how that happens.

I’ll see what I can come with

Dustin

29

[quote]dusty bottoms wrote:
Winning is Sunni’s joining the Shiites and the Iraqi armies in killing al qaeda.

That won’t happen.[/quote]

Hey, d.b.,

This is a perfect example of you not keeping up. Again, I don’t like to participate diminishing returns.

However, I’ll take on this one example (for my enjoyment).

Here, it’s happening:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070601/wl_afp/iraq

I got both of those from Fox and Sean Hannity.

JeffR

30

[quote]pat36 wrote:
lixy wrote:
JeffR wrote:
Further, your numbers are always suspect. How many due to terrorists?

Oh, wait you blame us for everything. Never mind.

Would there be that many terrorists if you didn’t invade the country?
.
Yup, there is no evidence to the contrary. Most terrorists are active or laying in wait for opportunity. There will always be opportunity, it comes in many forms.[/quote]

You have your head so up your butt that you’d do just about anything to justify the invasion, wouldn’t you.

Listen here, smart-ass, every single intelligence agency in the world agrees that the war on Iraq unleashed terrorists on the innocent civilians. Compare the figures of suicide bombs in markets pre-2003 and after the invasion. The correlation is crystal clear. Most people in their right mind would consider it enough evidence.

Man, you’re seriously disturbed if you think that the number of terrorists in Iraq hasn’t increased exponentially since 2003.

31

[quote]John S. wrote:
The terrorists do have a limit [/quote]

That’s where we’ll have to disagree. You can’t fight someone who willingly sacrifices himself for a cause. The best you can do, is mitigate the damage they cause.

The limit you’re refering to is purely theoretical, and in practical terms, it would take many decades and litteraly millions of innocent lives to reach that limit.

First, America isn’t bad. The US is easily the greatest country in the world, and it is precisely because I believe in its potential to change that I even bother. The problem is with the foreign politcy deciders and strategic planners who are obviously pushing an agenda that’s in the interest of noone but a handful of wealthy bastards.

Secondly, I know many Iraqis, both currently living (if you would call that living) in Iraq and refugees who had to leave everything and flee when you invaded. Their answers are unanimous: They didn’t want you to fuck up their country!

No sir. The overwhelming majority of them resigned for moral reasons. Has nothing to do with being fired.

And since when is it mean to give your opinion?

Because nobody in their right mind would support Al-Qaeda.

Here’s what you fail to get. Al-Qaeda represents a negligible portion of the “insurgents” who are resisting the occupation.

Yes, Iraq has a good chance of diminishing the influence of Al-Qaeda. But keep in mind that you can’t claim that as a victory on the “war on terror” since you would merely be at square one. Pre-2003, there was no Al-Qaeda in Iraq!

32

[quote]lixy wrote:
pat36 wrote:
lixy wrote:
JeffR wrote:
Further, your numbers are always suspect. How many due to terrorists?

Oh, wait you blame us for everything. Never mind.

Would there be that many terrorists if you didn’t invade the country?
.
Yup, there is no evidence to the contrary. Most terrorists are active or laying in wait for opportunity. There will always be opportunity, it comes in many forms.

You have your head so up your butt that you’d do just about anything to justify the invasion, wouldn’t you.

Listen here, smart-ass, every single intelligence agency in the world agrees that the war on Iraq unleashed terrorists on the innocent civilians. Compare the figures of suicide bombs in markets pre-2003 and after the invasion. The correlation is crystal clear. Most people in their right mind would consider it enough evidence.

Man, you’re seriously disturbed if you think that the number of terrorists in Iraq hasn’t increased exponentially since 2003.[/quote]

I am against the war, dingle-berry. Most of the iraqi terrorists were imports. And they were already terrorists prior to the war. Besides, like I said the war provided opportunity. Besides, there were plenty of terrorists before 9/11, we were struck 5 times prior to 9/11 and we did nothing. The terrorists still struck us. The war is just an excuse, they would try to blow us up no matter what we did.

33

[quote]lixy wrote:
John S. wrote:
The terrorists do have a limit

That’s where we’ll have to disagree. You can’t fight someone who willingly sacrifices himself for a cause. The best you can do, is mitigate the damage they cause.

The limit you’re refering to is purely theoretical, and in practical terms, it would take many decades and litteraly millions of innocent lives to reach that limit.

oh and really, because unlike you I have talked to people who have been over there, and they say the vast majority Like us over there. So please stop with this America is bad.

First, America isn’t bad. The US is easily the greatest country in the world, and it is precisely because I believe in its potential to change that I even bother. The problem is with the foreign politcy deciders and strategic planners who are obviously pushing an agenda that’s in the interest of noone but a handful of wealthy bastards.

Secondly, I know many Iraqis, both currently living (if you would call that living) in Iraq and refugees who had to leave everything and flee when you invaded. Their answers are unanimous: They didn’t want you to fuck up their country!

I forgot one of your points please forgive me. So the generals that got fired and kicked out are saying mean things?

No sir. The overwhelming majority of them resigned for moral reasons. Has nothing to do with being fired.

And since when is it mean to give your opinion?

But allow me to ask you a question, Why is Iraq itself turning against Al-quida(spelling?) Looks like they are loosing there Recrutes right there. I hope you can at least see these facts.

Because nobody in their right mind would support Al-Qaeda.

Here’s what you fail to get. Al-Qaeda represents a negligible portion of the “insurgents” who are resisting the occupation.

Yes, Iraq has a good chance of diminishing the influence of Al-Qaeda. But keep in mind that you can’t claim that as a victory on the “war on terror” since you would merely be at square one. Pre-2003, there was no Al-Qaeda in Iraq![/quote]

Many points, the first point you brought up is just going to be us disagreeing.

I also know some People from Iraq and some soldiers that where there, They say the vast majority like us there, Remember the government there is asking for are help it would be down right sinfull for us THE GREATEST COUNTRY IN THE WORLD to not listen.

3rd. Who the fuck said anything about victory on war on terror, Are victory was throwing saddam out of power. Anothe victory was setting up the government, and the Final victory is about to happen because Iraq is now kicking the living shit out of al quida. Even you and your infanit support of us loosing can not argue with that.

34

[quote]John S. wrote:
A bunch of semi-literate stuff…
[/quote]

You sound so convincing when you can’t even puzzle out the spelling on simple words like “our”.

Yep, I take you for a mastermind genius who certainly couldn’t be mistaken in anything!

35

[quote]vroom wrote:
John S. wrote:
A bunch of semi-literate stuff…

You sound so convincing when you can’t even puzzle out the spelling on simple words like “our”.

Yep, I take you for a mastermind genius who certainly couldn’t be mistaken in anything![/quote]

Ahh vroom, where my points to much that now you have to attack my spelling? Sorry I will slow down some so the words will be spelled right.

36

[quote]pat36 wrote:
Most of the iraqi terrorists were imports. [/quote]

Well yeah. A great batch of them came from my hometown in Morocco.

Here I’ll have to disagree with you. I actually met someone who ultimately was drawn to the “dark side” and I could see him getting radicalized by the day as the invasion was carried.

You might argue that it was inevitable no matter what, but I’ll have to argue otherwise.

I saw that just fine. The part that bummed me, is where you replied with the affirmative to my “Would there be that many terrorists if you didn’t invade the country?”. That made me quite mad as you could see.

If you didn’t invade, Saddam would be still in power and any terrorist would be crushed by the Ba’athist oppresssive machine.

[quote]Besides, there were plenty of terrorists before 9/11, we were struck 5 times prior to 9/11 and we did nothing. The terrorists still struck us. The war is just an excuse, they would try to blow us up no matter what we did.
[/quote]

Totally agreed. The terrorist threat didn’t suddenly emerge on 9/11, nor will it end any time soon.

They use the war as an excuse to recruit, and what you don’t seem to get, is that Iraq gave them a cause that allowed them to get tons of new applicants. Would the kernel be present if you didn’t invade? Hell yeah! Would they have managed to get such overwhelming numbers of “Jihadists”? I think not.

37

[quote]vroom wrote:
You sound so convincing when you can’t even puzzle out the spelling on simple words like “our”.

Yep, I take you for a mastermind genius who certainly couldn’t be mistaken in anything![/quote]

Give the guy a break. You don’t need particularly good orthography or grammar to get into the military. He’s just defending what he thinks is a worthy cause, and I find his commitment touching. Utterly senseless, but touching nonetheless.

P.S: No offense meant.

38

[quote]lixy wrote:
vroom wrote:
You sound so convincing when you can’t even puzzle out the spelling on simple words like “our”.

Yep, I take you for a mastermind genius who certainly couldn’t be mistaken in anything!

Give the guy a break. You don’t need particularly good orthography or grammar to get into the military. He’s just defending what he thinks is a worthy cause, and I find his commitment touching. Utterly senseless, but touching nonetheless.

P.S: No offense meant.[/quote]

Utterly senseless, wow I never knew providing facts was senseless. Your stupidity never ceases to amaze me. By the way my entrance exam gave me a 118 gt score and a 78 asvab score thank you very much. That is if you where assuming I barely made it into the Army.

39

[quote]John S. wrote:
Utterly senseless, wow I never knew providing facts was senseless. Your stupidity never ceases to amaze me. By the way my entrance exam gave me a 118 gt score and a 78 asvab score thank you very much. That is if you where assuming I barely made it into the Army.[/quote]

LOL. Relax man.

It’s true though, if you want to be taken seriously you’ll have to put at least some effort into proofing your comments.

That’s just the way the world works.

40

[quote]vroom wrote:
John S. wrote:
Utterly senseless, wow I never knew providing facts was senseless. Your stupidity never ceases to amaze me. By the way my entrance exam gave me a 118 gt score and a 78 asvab score thank you very much. That is if you where assuming I barely made it into the Army.

LOL. Relax man.

It’s true though, if you want to be taken seriously you’ll have to put at least some effort into proofing your comments.

That’s just the way the world works.[/quote]

Relax, Everything I have stated was true. Just because you close your eyes and plug your ears does not make it any less true.