U.S. deaths in Iraq, war on terror surpass 9/11 toll

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(monkeypox @ Sep 8 2006, 08:35 PM) [snapback]316694[/snapback]</div>

Dragonfly is correct, name calling is prohibited on the boards, its all listed in the site rules on the registration page..

Theres no need to belittle anyone, I get your points without the name calling..

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(priusguy04 @ Sep 8 2006, 07:48 PM) [snapback]316708[/snapback]</div>

I don't feel belittled or anything, in fact I kind of take it as a win because people who can't make their case on the facts often result to lies and name-calling. I'm just looking out for him!

 

A typical case of revisionist history!

We did not attack a country unprovoked. The UN had how many sactions against Iraq and each one of those allows military action to enforce. We waited something like 17 sanctions till we took action - nothing illegal or wrong there.


You are not supporting the troops by calling the commander in chief a nitwit - you are being just what you are calling him. He knows much more than you or I about what is going on - you only know the sliver of the facts that are made public. The stupid war as you put it, has the terrorist streaming there to fight us there rather than try to fight us here!


And yes, Generals know how to fight to win, politians only know how to do well in opinion polls. Once you decide to do something, you hand it over to someone that can win it without interference.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(kirbinster @ Sep 8 2006, 08:02 PM) [snapback]316718[/snapback]</div>

Specifically, what did they do to provoke us?

Again, I need to know what the threat was.

Except that Bush ignored the advice of the Generals who told him he needed more troops. I'd have a lot more respect for him if he DID fight to win. But he didn't and that has lead to an unwinnable situation, not good for anybody.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Alric @ Sep 8 2006, 09:27 PM) [snapback]316740[/snapback]</div>

Oh no we cant take the link seriously its for the Clinton News Network or is it the Communist News Network They lean to the left & in some cases the extreme left...

We need independent links that are unbiased as proof.. B)

 

The fact that no wmd were found does not prove they were not there. How big is a wmd, and how hard is it to transport it to Syria, or a small hole somewhere in Iraq? Finding something definitely proves it exists, not finding it only proves that you did not find it. Iraq is a very large country.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(priusguy04 @ Sep 8 2006, 08:59 PM) [snapback]316756[/snapback]</div>

Yeah, everybody knows FOX is the only unbiased news source around.

"The Administration ignored the advice of Army Chief of Staff Eric Shinseki about the number of troops necessary to secure the country after the initial phase of combat, sending far too few to seal the borders to prevent foreign terrorists from entering Iraq and far too few to secure the main population centers.

We now know that the administration’s top civilian administrator in Iraq, L Paul Bremer, urged the Defense Department to send more troops to Iraq, including an additional 35,000 troops just to secure Baghdad, and that these requests were rejected. And, as a result, we are still having American soldiers killed in Baghdad today."

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,187002,00.html

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(kirbinster @ Sep 8 2006, 09:31 PM) [snapback]316768[/snapback]</div>

The point is that we should have had some evidence that they existed before attacking. Instead, intellegence was exaggerated and likely even fabricated in an attempt to justify going to war. We should not have attacked on a hunch.

 

There you go with the stupid rules of war again. The only reason for lots of troops is so we can treat the bad guys nicely and give them all the rights that they don't deserve. With very few troops we could have easily bombed the transmission lines leading out of every single power plant in the country. No electricity, no communication, no command and control. Less than half the troops that went there could have very easily contained the entire country then. But alas, the liberals would have scolded us for doing that, so instead our troops die. As I said once you decide to fight a war you do it 100% with no half measures. Forget about if we should have gone there or not, that point is totally moot and arguing it does nobody any good. The question that needs to be addressed is how do we solve the situation at hand, and pulling out is most definitely not the answer. So stop belly aching about who you want to blame and offer up some useful solutions. As they say if you are not part of the solution you are just part of the problem.

 

One provication for the current Iraq War was the escalation of violence in the "no-fly" zone by Iraq. The "no-fly" zone was put in place as part of the cease fire deal with Iraq after the first Gulf War to protect the religious minorities in Iraq, the Kurds (who had already been gassed via WMDs) and the Shiite Muslims (who had been rounded up and killed in large numbers). After 9/11, Iraq, enboldened by the success of the terrorist attack against the US, delcared the "no-fly" zone illegal and began daily attacks on the coalition aircraft enforcing the "no-fly" zone which meant per the deal they signed that the war was back on. The UN passed more resolutions about the attacks and the inspections that were not recognized by Iraq. I believe that in the fear frenzy post 9/11 it was thought that Iraq's weapons of all types would end up in the hands of terrorists and used to attack us. That made sense since Iraq had already attacked its neighbors (Kuwait, Iran) and its own people resulting in killing at least a million (1 million in the Iran War alone).

The parallel to WWII is perfect because there is issue of appeasement vs the need for war to force the issue before millions more are killed. As taught by law professors, without repercussions, agreements, laws and rules are merely advice. Of course, War is hell.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(kirbinster @ Sep 8 2006, 09:49 PM) [snapback]316784[/snapback]</div>

Since when has this administration done anything on the basis that it might offend the liberals? You're too funny!

I don't blame you for not wanting to talk about why we went into war; I respect that you simply don't want to go into it rather than bringing up a bunch of lies like a bunch of other people around here do...

Speaking of which, the spin on that post just above this one is making me dizzy! Where you been Karnac?

 

I don't blame you for not wanting to talk about why we went into war; I respect that you simply don't want to go into it rather than bringing up a bunch of lies like a bunch of other people around here do...

Ohhhh, a baited reply to bait the previous posters to reply..

Karnac's reply is right on the money, as one of the provocations.. WMDs were another & saddam killing all the Kurds & the Shiite Muslims .... :angry: