41% Americans are below what IQ?

[NCclimber 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

What could the US have done differently that would have resulted in more success?

Simple ... not invade Iraq.

Do you know the meaning of context?

Spin it anyway you want.

No spin here. My question to Bill was in relation to a UN supported invasion of Iraq. You're the one who tried to make it about something different.

Quote

The bottom line is that the USA has made the world a more dangerous place thanks to your greed for oil and your constant need to feed your industrial military complex for your own selfish economic gains.

Point that finger!hiss, hiss, grrr

You talk about greed and need... does Canada really consume less oil than the US on a per capita basis?

[NCclimber 0]

Good points, Bill.

[marks2065 0]

war is move counter move - you can never see all the posible outcome and could never plan for them - mistakes were made and will continue to be made - i think we need to engage the enemy not call for aprooval, i think all the protesters and dem party need to sit down and help bring this to a good ending not use it for political/personal gain - a united country would end this alot sooner with positive results - time to stop protesting and bashing bush and time to start adding good ideas and support to the president - show him the respect he deserves and show american pride again - if you don't like gwb fine vote for someone else next time until then don't make america look weak to the world by showing disrespect to the president and making the job harder than needed - the terrorists feed on this shit

[jakee 1,500]

Quote

Quote

>Would you support the war if the UN had authorized it?

Nope. But the whole world would now be trying to clean up Iraq, instead of one country. I suspect the world would have had more success.

Why? What could the US have done differently that would have resulted in more success?

Having a realistic plan (hell, any sort of plan) for dealing with a post-invasion resistance movement would have been a good start.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[billvon 3,006]

>you can never see all the posible outcome and could never plan for them -

I agree. But I think you will also agree that poor planning leads to piss-poor performance; I think that's even a saying in some parts. Good planning can increase the odds of success and reduce casualties.

>i think we need to engage the enemy not call for aprooval, i think all the
>protesters and dem party need to sit down and help bring this to a good
>ending not use it for political/personal gain -

I agree, and would add Bush and the GOP to that list. Sometimes it's better to swallow your pride and do what's best for the country instead of continuing to send bullet sponges to a civil war, in hopes you can "prove you were right all along."

>the terrorists feed on this shit

I agree. We should stop giving them so much shit to feed on.

[NCclimber 0]

Quote

war is move counter move - you can never see all the posible outcome and could never plan for them - mistakes were made and will continue to be made - i think we need to engage the enemy not call for aprooval, i think all the protesters and dem party need to sit down and help bring this to a good ending not use it for political/personal gain - a united country would end this alot sooner with positive results - time to stop protesting and bashing bush and time to start adding good ideas and support to the president - show him the respect he deserves and show american pride again - if you don't like gwb fine vote for someone else next time until then don't make america look weak to the world by showing disrespect to the president and making the job harder than needed - the terrorists feed on this shit

What are you saying?

That since we attacked a country that basically had done nothing against us and posed little eminent threat... that the supposed threat of WMDs was based on some selective intel, ignoring all the contrary intel... that this justification for invasion turned out to be utterly wrong... that four years later, this whole effort looks like an historic mistake (as in it will be in the history books for 100s of years)... that here we are four years later, with 100s of billions spent, not the mention the deaths and damage... that we have done massive damage to our world standing... that in light of all these factors we should steadfastly stand, in unity, in support of President Bush?

Is that what your saying?

[NCclimber 0]

Quote

Having a realistic plan (hell, any sort of plan) for dealing with a post-invasion resistance movement would have been a good start.

I agree.

[SpeedRacer 1]

Quote

but now that it has happened we need to see it through and give our people over there the tools to finish the job

"Finishing the job" means handing Iraq back over to the Iraqis.

So yes, I'm in favor of that.

Speed Racer
--------------------------------------------------

[jakee 1,500]

Quote

Quote

Having a realistic plan (hell, any sort of plan) for dealing with a post-invasion resistance movement would have been a good start.

I agree.

I may have to change my position!

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[CanuckInUSA 0]

Quote

You talk about greed and need... does Canada

Don't ever assume you know how I think about my own country. I guess you haven't seen some of the other threads where myself and some fellow Canucks have been slamming what is going on here. But this thread isn't about the 41% of below IQ Canadians. If you want to start a thread about how naive Canadians are, about how greedy some are while how socialistic others are, then go ahead. We might actually be arguing the same point for a change. No this thread is not about stupid Canadians.

PS: In my 8 years living and working in the USA, I met many intelligent Americans and I met many arrogant and ignorant Americans. It's just too bad your leadership falls into the arrogant ignorant side of things because you do have some very smart people down there.

Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

[NCclimber 0]

Just seems a bit hypocritical for a Canadian to rag on Americans for our consumption habits, when Canadians are no better.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

but now that it has happened we need to see it through and give our people over there the tools to finish the job

"Finishing the job" means handing Iraq back over to the Iraqis.

So yes, I'm in favor of that.

From MNF-Iraq:

Quote

At this point, four provinces have acquired full responsibility for their own security. Al-Muthanna province was first, followed by Dhi Qar province on Sept. 21, 2006, and An-Najaf in December 2006. Maysan province began handling its own security responsibilities on April 18, 2007. On May 30, 2007, Dahuk, Erbil and Sulaymaniyah provinces came under Provincial Iraqi Control as part of the Kurdish Regional Government's area of responsibility.

Quote

BAGHDAD — The U.S. military could begin drawing down the number of troops in Iraq next spring if Iraqi security forces continue to improve and succeed, the commander of Multinational Corps Iraq said today on a television news show.

Army Lt. Gen. Raymond T. Odierno reiterated during an appearance on CNN’s Late Edition that no decision has been made yet on drawing down the number of coalition forces in Iraq, but by September he should be prepared to make an informed recommendation to military planners.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[marks2065 0]

what lowers our standing in the world community is our costant bickering among ourselves and that we continue to help ungratefull countries - if bush was that bad he wouldn't have been reelected or if the other candidate was that good he would have been elected either way we got what we got and lets deal with it in a mature unified way and show these other countries what a unified group can do and with that our respect from other countries will increase - also all the counties that plot against us should have the financial support pulled until they support us - then if you want another president vote for another on election day - also with the dem party candidates they keep putting on the ballot even a really bad republican can get elected

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

?? The UN was quite close to agreeing to the use of force; both Germany and France were OK with a time limit, after which they would support invasion if Saddam had not complied. We didn't want to wait; we wanted that war.

The US timeline was driven by the weather. Wait till the peak of summer and the war effort would have been harder, with more casualties. Or would have to be delayed until the fall. Considerable expense.

On the other side, France loved the status quo and was doing its best to preserve it. Stalling as long as possible was the game. Their motivation wasn't peace, it was money, same as with the US.

Same with Hussein. For 12 years he had tapdanced on the edge and generally knew when to pull back. But he fucked up here - once the US war machine assembled in the Middle East, it was going to remove him from power. Too bad we didn't make that the mission rather than this bullshit nation building exercise you insisted we were obligated to accomplish.

[billvon 3,006]

>Wait till the peak of summer and the war effort would have been
>harder, with more casualties. Or would have to be delayed until the fall.
>Considerable expense.

Delaying the start of the war would have saved money.

>For 12 years he had tapdanced on the edge and generally knew when to
> pull back. But he fucked up here - once the US war machine assembled in
>the Middle East, it was going to remove him from power.

Yep, and he knew it, which is why he "blinked." He has always known which side his bread was buttered on.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

>Wait till the peak of summer and the war effort would have been
>harder, with more casualties. Or would have to be delayed until the fall.
>Considerable expense.

Delaying the start of the war would have saved money.

Not a chance. Housing a war making force next to hostile lines for 6 months isn't free. You're suggesting that we would have used to the time to realize it wasn't necessary, or a way to do it more intelligently. Come on - this administration?

[billvon 3,006]

>Housing a war making force next to hostile lines for 6 months isn't free.

You are correct. It is, however, a lot cheaper than supporting them in a battlefield during that time.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

>Housing a war making force next to hostile lines for 6 months isn't free.

You are correct. It is, however, a lot cheaper than supporting them in a battlefield during that time.

Now you're presuming the war would end 6 months sooner.

[kallend 2,027]

Quote

Quote

>Housing a war making force next to hostile lines for 6 months isn't free.

You are correct. It is, however, a lot cheaper than supporting them in a battlefield during that time.

Now you're presuming the war would end 6 months sooner.

You're ignoring the possibility that it wouldn't start at all if we didn't jump the gun.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[billvon 3,006]

>Now you're presuming the war would end 6 months sooner.

I'm assuming that it hasn't ended. Case 1 is the war started when it did and is still going on now. Case 2 is that the war started six months later and is still going on now. Case 2 is cheaper.

[joedirt 0]

Quote

For 12 years he had tapdanced on the edge and generally knew when to pull back.

Exactly, he signed a cease fire with conditions, so we wouldn't finish off his army (remember the highway of death retreating out of Kuwait city), just like we signed a cease fire in WW1 and Korea, that shit never works. Obvoiusly we had to deal with Germany eventually, who knows with Korea. It always comes back to bite us in the ass. He was taking shots at us for 12 years in clear violation of the cease fire and yet even some Americans still call this war "illegal". I can't decide wether George Bush. Sr had incredible foresight or no hindsight.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

>Now you're presuming the war would end 6 months sooner.

I'm assuming that it hasn't ended. Case 1 is the war started when it did and is still going on now. Case 2 is that the war started six months later and is still going on now. Case 2 is cheaper.

Only if you do your accounting today. 4 years of war fighting is 4 years of warfighting. (and with inflation, maybe it costs slightly more if delayed 6 months) Come on - that sort of accounting is as dumb as saying tax receipts have never been higher.

It only becomes a truth if the bad war results in a region change who immediately ends the war. Since many Democrats (yourself included) believe we're committed to seeing this through, that's not a given truth.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

You're ignoring the possibility that it wouldn't start at all if we didn't jump the gun.

As I clearly suggested, Bush isn't changing his mind 6 months later. Nor is the public.

[kallend 2,027]

Quote

Quote

You're ignoring the possibility that it wouldn't start at all if we didn't jump the gun.

As I clearly suggested, Bush isn't changing his mind 6 months later. Nor is the public.

In that 6 months UNSCOM and IAEA would have submitted final reports, making it very difficult for Bush to sell his WMD fairy stories to Congress and the US public.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[NCclimber 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

You're ignoring the possibility that it wouldn't start at all if we didn't jump the gun.

As I clearly suggested, Bush isn't changing his mind 6 months later. Nor is the public.

In that 6 months UNSCOM and IAEA would have submitted final reports, making it very difficult for Bush to sell his WMD fairy stories to Congress and the US public.

Speaking of fairy tales.