The U.S. is now "officially" done with the Iraq War.

[QUOTE="GD-1369211121"][QUOTE="Dark_Knight6"]And only five years later than the troops should have left. Now that's how you handle a pointless war.Dark_Knight6

[QUOTE="Dark_Knight6"]

And only five years later than the troops should have left. Now that's how you handle a pointless war.

GD-1369211121

what war?

Well he's linked to Alcheida(sp?), That's all I need to know.GD-1369211121

No he's not. No link was ever established between Hussein and Al Qaeda. Aside from the vague "There is strong evidence" bull **** that the Bush administration pushed.

[QUOTE="GD-1369211121"][QUOTE="Dark_Knight6"]

There is no known evidence that links Hussein to 9/11.

the_new_guy_92

He tortured people and killed many, wasn't reason enough for him to be hung?GD-1369211121

Which is entirely irrelevant to your initial point.

[QUOTE="the_new_guy_92"]

[QUOTE="GD-1369211121"] Well he's linked to Alcheida(sp?), That's all I need to know.GD-1369211121

[QUOTE="the_new_guy_92"]

[QUOTE="GD-1369211121"] Well he's linked to Alcheida(sp?), That's all I need to know.GD-1369211121

The remaining troops that are there may not all be combat troops, but I don't how they could have a roster of that many troops and the majority of them aren't combat troops. Sounds like some BS.

Who the **** cares where they are stationed? You station troops where they are or might be needed. When military affairs aren't in the news nor the general public's awareness what do you think those troops are doing? They're not sitting in the Barracks drinking beer and eatingpretzels until another occupation or deploymentis publicised. The Enlisted men and Commissioned Officers still soldier all year round somewhere. Reservists want to be reservists and get the benefits yet never actually go anywhere or do anything. That's the problem with reservists, most of them are just bodies, not professionals. So they complain regarding where and why they are deployed.

[QUOTE="GD-1369211121"]He tortured people and killed many, wasn't reason enough for him to be hung?Dark_Knight6

Which is entirely irrelevant to your initial point.

Have the 'small minority of Muslim radicals that misuse Islam'stopped blowing people up or something??

[QUOTE="GD-1369211121"][QUOTE="the_new_guy_92"] Al-Qaeda? And no, Saddam Hussein was NOT linked to Al-Qaeda. Iraq and Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with 9/11, just letting you know.

carrot-cake

[QUOTE="carrot-cake"]

[QUOTE="GD-1369211121"] He tortured people and killed many, wasn't reason enough for him to be hung?GD-1369211121

[QUOTE="carrot-cake"]

[QUOTE="GD-1369211121"] He tortured people and killed many, wasn't reason enough for him to be hung?GD-1369211121

[QUOTE="GD-1369211121"]

[QUOTE="carrot-cake"]
So does that mean the US should invade every country that has done so? Is that enough justification for a full scale invasion which left the country very unstable and arguably less secure? Is that enough justification for the number of foreign solders which have lost their lives?

the_new_guy_92

[QUOTE="the_new_guy_92"]

[QUOTE="GD-1369211121"] If we don't invade then who will? They weren't able to handle it themselves that's for sure. And they were greatfull.

GD-1369211121

[QUOTE="GD-1369211121"]

[QUOTE="carrot-cake"]
So does that mean the US should invade every country that has done so? Is that enough justification for a full scale invasion which left the country very unstable and arguably less secure? Is that enough justification for the number of foreign solders which have lost their lives?

carrot-cake

[QUOTE="Apocalypse33"][QUOTE="GD-1369211121"] Did I say they were all greatful? No. There are still terrorists there obviously. Hussaine wasn't the only one. That is why the war has gone on for so long. If they couldn't blow us up there, then they'd be here blowing us up in America. Do want that instead?

GD-1369211121

Quite the opposite. :)

Did I say they were all greatful? No. There are still terrorists there obviously. Hussaine wasn't the only one. That is why the war has gone on for so long. If they couldn't blow us up there, then they'd be here blowing us up in America. Do want that instead? GD-1369211121

The real answer to the Iraq question would have been to allow Sadam to kick out the weapons inspectors and then form an actual coalition with the UN (or EU or NATO or some organization) and cooperate to take out the tyrant, because if there is anything we have learned from WW2/Vietnam it is that wars in distant lands never end well for the invader. There was nothing we could have done, because the times of successful invasions are over.

You seem to be misinformed, I hope you can't vote/become aware of current events before you do vote.

And only five years later than the troops should have left. Now that's how you handle a pointless war.

Dark_Knight6

Because invading countries, obliterating their infrastructural capacities, and leaving them in a state of anarchy and civil war is real badass. :roll:

I seriusly doubt that. I don't care what you call it, but people are still dying by the hundreds.

[QUOTE="Dark_Knight6"]

And only five years later than the troops should have left. Now that's how you handle a pointless war.

coolbeans90

Because invading countries, obliterating their infrastructural capacities, and leaving them in a state of anarchy and civil war is real badass. :roll:

[QUOTE="GD-1369211121"]

[QUOTE="carrot-cake"]
So does that mean the US should invade every country that has done so? Is that enough justification for a full scale invasion which left the country very unstable and arguably less secure? Is that enough justification for the number of foreign solders which have lost their lives?

the_new_guy_92

Generalization.

Good, we had no reason to ever be there in the first place. Let the Iraq government take care of themselves. and if they deteriorate, i could care less, it was NOT our job to take care of them. thousands of lives have been lost for what?? for what dammit? im just thankfull our troops can return home to thier families

[QUOTE="carrot-cake"]

[QUOTE="GD-1369211121"] If we don't invade then who will? They weren't able to handle it themselves that's for sure. And they were greatfull.

GD-1369211121

I do hope you realise that congress has not formally declared war since 1942. Anyway, so you justify the invasion of Iraq by claiming that Saddam would have killed everyone. Well what about eastern Africa? What about the Somalian and Sudanese which are being oppressed because they are a certain ethnicity or religion? Just because America has acted like the world police (for the most part it hasn't, the Korean war was completely justified, I wouldn't say the same about Vietnam, Kosovo was worse AND backed by a UN resolution, etc.) doesnt mean that it is appreciated.

[QUOTE="GD-1369211121"]

[QUOTE="carrot-cake"]
What? Why is there a need to invade? Why is there a need to police the world directly with military force? Is the US the world police? What right does the US have to invade a soverign nation which hasn't directly attacked an ally of the US? If this was truly for the people, then Eastern Africa wouldn't be like what it currently does.

carrot-cake

I do hope you realise that congress has not formally declared war since 1942. Anyway, so you justify the invasion of Iraq by claiming that Saddam would have killed everyone. Well what about eastern Africa? What about the Somalian and Sudanese which are being oppressed because they are a certain ethnicity or religion? Just because America has acted like the world police (for the most part it hasn't, the Korean war was completely justified, I wouldn't say the same about Vietnam, Kosovo was worse AND backed by a UN resolution, etc.) doesnt mean that it is appreciated.

Africa doesn't have oil, duh!!! At least as readily accessible.

And now the debate will turn to "Did we win or did we loose?"Treflis

We won a while ago in Iraq..

[QUOTE="Dark_Knight6"]

And only five years later than the troops should have left. Now that's how you handle a pointless war.

coolbeans90

Because invading countries, obliterating their infrastructural capacities, and leaving them in a state of anarchy and civil war is real badass. :roll:

Hey, someone's gotta get those weapons of mass destruction that we still haven't found, for some reason.

[QUOTE="Treflis"]And now the debate will turn to "Did we win or did we loose?"taj7575

We won a while ago in Iraq..

You guys have yet to realize something. Caring about something is OK but you can't care about everyone and everything. I care somewhat about the war but not enough to do something. I can't do anything. All of you need to try and relax and care about more things closer to you.

I would like to pose the question: Why were we in Iraq when worse things were happening in the Congo every day?Mousetaches

Well, it's not like Iraq was invaded for humanitarian reasons. Leaving after invasion, leaving the place in civil war in between the Sunni and Shiite would have compared. There is also something to be said for restoring order to a place that you completely obliterate any sort of resemblance to a body that formerly did so.

[QUOTE="coolbeans90"]

[QUOTE="Dark_Knight6"]

And only five years later than the troops should have left. Now that's how you handle a pointless war.

Dark_Knight6

Because invading countries, obliterating their infrastructural capacities, and leaving them in a state of anarchy and civil war is real badass. :roll:

Hey, someone's gotta get those weapons of mass destruction that we still haven't found, for some reason.

I never claimed there were, and invasion was a mistake. But once there, you can't just pack your bags and leave in a situation to post invasion Iraq.

Believe it or not, a lot of people supported Saddam Hussein and that's why they opposed the war.

Many liberals in the US support him.

I never claimed there were, and invasion was a mistake. But once there, you can't just pack your bags and leave in a situation to post invasion Iraq.

coolbeans90

Oh, I took your comment as sarcasm, being that mine was ridiculously blatant that it was sarcasm. We should have never been there. Period.

Believe it or not, a lot of people supported Saddam Hussein and that's why they opposed the war.

Many liberals in the US support him.

p2250

Believe it or not, a lot of people supported Saddam Hussein and that's why they opposed the war.

Many liberals in the US support him.

p2250

Believe it or not, a lot of people supported Saddam Hussein and that's why they opposed the war.

Many liberals in the US support him.

p2250

If someone wants the U.S. to stop this "World Police" bull****, it does not mean they support Hussein.

I heard on the radio that there are still 50,000 people in iraq. The USA may be done with the "war", but it is not done with Iraq.

Believe it or not, a lot of people supported Saddam Hussein and that's why they opposed the war.

Many liberals in the US support him.

p2250

Nobody "supported" him at the time. There was just a lot of people who didn't want to go to war.

And at a time, the US did support Iraq and Hussein, especially during the Reagan administration.

I heard on the radio that there are still 50,000 people in iraq. The USA may be done with the "war", but it is not done with Iraq.

hoola

[QUOTE="coolbeans90"]

I never claimed there were, and invasion was a mistake. But once there, you can't just pack your bags and leave in a situation to post invasion Iraq.

Dark_Knight6

Oh, I took your comment as sarcasm, being that mine was ridiculously blatant that it was sarcasm. We should have never been there. Period.

*Facepalms at self and puts new AAs in sarcasm detector* Agreed.

Never mind the invasion. The previous U.S. administration was "hell-bent" on making sure it happened. I'm only wondering how much less deadly and shorter the insurgency might have been if the Coalition Provisional Authority did not do something as stupid as dissolve the Iraqi military and police. That left a security gap and power vacuum that will take years still to completely fill.

That doesn't mean much. I think that we've done pretty good over there. Even if there weren't weapons, we got rid of a crazy dictator, and the country is probably better off in the long run.

About freaking time. I say we pull out of Afghanistan, pull all the US bases in the Middle East out, and leave Israel to it's own devices which it created thanks to Zionism. Yeah the AIPAC and Jewish Zionism can go **** itself hardcore.

Let's go back to political isolationism! Communist containment was a disastrous policy with Vietnam, and the hatred we created by keeping dictator's in power in some countries only made us look worse. We must give the world it's freedom in order to full enjoy ours. We have to kill various members of the military industrial complex though...........We can have a great military, a great war machine when it needs to exist, but we don't need war mongers who have money on their mind keeping the wars going and the hatred compounding against us. It's just not right.