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

So....Who's next?Belgium?

Iraqis should've not cheered and celebrated the deaths on 9/11.

Otherwise, I would have some sympathy for them, but I don't and never will ever again.

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

We still have people over there.

We always will. That war is not going anywhere, ever.

The face of the war will change, people will say its "done", but in the end, people will still be over there. Hell, we send FBI, DEA, all sorts of contractors there, and still are.

so what will we file the new civillian deaths under now that they can't be put under the war umbrella?

Starting a war then leaving early forcing the British & coalition troops to sort it out, excellent :/mikegtfc

so what will we file the new civillian deaths under now that they can't be put under the war umbrella?

Serraph105

Iraq's top army officer warned a couple of weeks ago that the Iraqi army may not be ready to control it's own country yet.

Link.

[QUOTE="Serraph105"]

so what will we file the new civillian deaths under now that they can't be put under the war umbrella?

sonicare

[QUOTE="Serraph105"]

so what will we file the new civillian deaths under now that they can't be put under the war umbrella?

sonicare

I just thought it might cause a problem for the administration when there are future civilian deaths despite not being at war.

The country was better off under Saddam for this one reason:

The various factions and groups feared him more than they hated each other.

cybrcatter

Yeah, minus the fact that he was a terrible tyrant who did terrible things to his people and only benefited his cronies. :|

[QUOTE="cybrcatter"]

The country was better off under Saddam for this one reason:

The various factions and groups feared him more than they hated each other.

leviathan91

Yeah, minus the fact that he was a terrible tyrant who did terrible things to his people and only benefited his cronies. :|

The only reason why there was a war is because of all the radical elements contained within Islam. Blood will continue to be spilled so long as this religion exists.

p2250

[QUOTE="leviathan91"]

[QUOTE="cybrcatter"]

The country was better off under Saddam for this one reason:

The various factions and groups feared him more than they hated each other.

Danm_999

Yeah, minus the fact that he was a terrible tyrant who did terrible things to his people and only benefited his cronies. :|

Many would of died under Saddam's regime anyway, and he would of gotten away with war crimes against humanity.

[QUOTE="cybrcatter"]

The country was better off under Saddam for this one reason:

The various factions and groups feared him more than they hated each other.

leviathan91

Yeah, minus the fact that he was a terrible tyrant who did terrible things to his people and only benefited his cronies. :|

We still have people over there.

We always will. That war is not going anywhere, ever.

The face of the war will change, people will say its "done", but in the end, people will still be over there. Hell, we send FBI, DEA, all sorts of contractors there, and still are.

-TheSecondSign-

[QUOTE="Danm_999"]

[QUOTE="leviathan91"]

Yeah, minus the fact that he was a terrible tyrant who did terrible things to his people and only benefited his cronies. :|

leviathan91

Many would of died under Saddam's regime anyway, and he would of gotten away with war crimes against humanity.

Starting a war then leaving early forcing the British & coalition troops to sort it out, excellent :/mikegtfc

[QUOTE="leviathan91"]

[QUOTE="Danm_999"] True, but more have died from collaterial damage and sectarian violence following the 2003 invasion than under his regime.

Danm_999

Many would of died under Saddam's regime anyway, and he would of gotten away with war crimes against humanity.

More like a step forward considering Iraq is now free from dictatorship. The cost of life was staggering but the cause was justified in order to create a better Iraq.

That's the case for any revolution. Sure, the American colonies shouldn't of rebeled so they would suffer loss of human life but did so anyway because they believed in a noble and just cause.

[QUOTE="Danm_999"][QUOTE="leviathan91"]

Many would of died under Saddam's regime anyway, and he would of gotten away with war crimes against humanity.

leviathan91

More like a step forward considering Iraq is now free from dictatorship. The cost of life was staggering but the cause was justified in order to create a better Iraq.

finally the troublemakers have left. too bad they already destroyed the country. iraq was so much better under saddam

It's about time, I sure hope Canadians will follow right behind them.

[QUOTE="sikanderahmed"]

finally the troublemakers have left. too bad they already destroyed the country. iraq was so much better under saddam

p2250

and you're retarded, imo.

[QUOTE="Serraph105"]

so what will we file the new civillian deaths under now that they can't be put under the war umbrella?

sonicare

No. Such a financial burden should fall upon those who enthuastically supported going into this quagmire, not those of us who opposed it. Your suggestion is kinda like a group of people setting fire to a neighboring town and then saying that the folks who were against burning the town should pay for the damage.

[QUOTE="p2250"]

The only reason why there was a war is because of all the radical elements contained within Islam. Blood will continue to be spilled so long as this religion exists.

Danm_999

Don't burden him with facts.

[QUOTE="Danm_999"][QUOTE="leviathan91"]

Many would of died under Saddam's regime anyway, and he would of gotten away with war crimes against humanity.

leviathan91

More like a step forward considering Iraq is now free from dictatorship. The cost of life was staggering but the cause was justified in order to create a better Iraq.

That's the case for any revolution. Sure, the American colonies shouldn't of rebeled so they would suffer loss of human life but did so anyway because they believed in a noble and just cause.

We're not talking about a populace who exercised self-determination to take their future into their own hands, we're talking about a country that was invaded, unproked and under false pretenses, and destabilized by a foreign invader.

Uhm..hooray i guess...let's throw a party...

[QUOTE="drufeous"]

Thank god. Get those soldiers home. Thank you all for your service and remember those who lost their lives over there. I lost a good friend to that war and what was accomplished?

Vader993

we got lots of oil

good old captailism

The war was never about oil in the first place. Sure it was corrupt, and there were ulterior motives, but we were importing more oil from Iraq before 9/11 than after, and those are the facts. We are more dependent on foreign oil than ever, though the main source by large for oil is still US based, and the decreasing imports from the Persian Gulf stress that dependency.

Once we got there, we defended the oil wells before anything else, because indeed we do value it more than anything else, even Iraqi life. But that doesn't mean we went to war over it, just that once the war began there, we wanted to defend our only real interest in that area.

Just thought I'd clear that up.

[QUOTE="Lto_thaG"]

So....Who's next?Belgium?

Serraph105

We are short a Queen.

[QUOTE="Serraph105"][QUOTE="Lto_thaG"]

So....Who's next?Belgium?

coolbeans90

We are short a Queen.

Another point. We spent drastically more fighting the war in iraq than we could have ever conceived making from stealing their oil. Just saying, the facts don't line up.

[QUOTE="-TheSecondSign-"]

We still have people over there.

We always will. That war is not going anywhere, ever.

The face of the war will change, people will say its "done", but in the end, people will still be over there. Hell, we send FBI, DEA, all sorts of contractors there, and still are.

Theokhoth

American troops still based there will still be playing some support roles for Iraqi combat troops. Furthermore, to say that they are completely non-combat is a bit inaccurate.

[QUOTE="coolbeans90"]

[QUOTE="Serraph105"] I'm thinking England. We haven't fought them for a while.GazaAli

We are short a Queen.

They have queens?

Another point. We spent drastically more fighting the war in iraq than we could have ever conceived making from stealing their oil. Just saying, the facts don't line up.

p00zer

Yay?

[QUOTE="p00zer"]

Another point. We spent drastically more fighting the war in iraq than we could have ever conceived making from stealing their oil. Just saying, the facts don't line up.

GazaAli

I disagree. It would have cost the U.S far less than $700+ billion to negotiate with Saddam over oil.

[QUOTE="GazaAli"][QUOTE="p00zer"]

Another point. We spent drastically more fighting the war in iraq than we could have ever conceived making from stealing their oil. Just saying, the facts don't line up.

coolbeans90

I disagree. It would have cost the U.Ss far less than $700+ billion to negotiate with Saddam over oil.

[QUOTE="GazaAli"][QUOTE="p00zer"]

Another point. We spent drastically more fighting the war in iraq than we could have ever conceived making from stealing their oil. Just saying, the facts don't line up.

coolbeans90

I disagree. It would have cost the U.Ss far less than $700+ billion to negotiate with Saddam over oil.

[QUOTE="coolbeans90"]

[QUOTE="GazaAli"] Its about the oil, but in another way. US has always used this model of controlling countries. Basically, they hit and run.GazaAli

I disagree. It would have cost the U.Ss far less than $700+ billion to negotiate with Saddam over oil.

I think that it was a clumsy handling of either fear (albeit somewhat baseless) of nuclear weapons, (or a violent Iraq in general) or the possibility of reelection, as wartime presidents do tend to be reelected. Or both.

Maybe its a part of the US plan to reform the middle east? its not secret that this is a project that has been going on for the past 30 years or so.GazaAli

A lot of the stuff in the Middle East was to fight the Soviets in the past. Modernly, well, it's a bit of a cluster****. Afghanistan was the country which housed an organization associated with 9/11. Iraq was a huge ****up that still doesn't make much sense. (nor do I realize why the majority of the U.S. and its legislature supported the invasion) And the support of Israel goes back some time. Pretty messed up when you look at the big picture. It makes slightly more sense when you look piece by piece, and it still sucks. I'd rather just not get involved in other countries' affairs.

Maybe its a part of the US plan to reform the middle east? its not secret that this is a project that has been going on for the past 30 years or so.GazaAli

Maybe I sound like a conspiracy theorist. Sorry if I do, I generally dislike those people ;). Just my theory.

That war was a disgrace.