USA loses in Iraq
This topic is locked from further discussion.
[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Ninja-Hippo"] What babble is this? You have to be engaged in a conflict with a GOVERNMENT for it to be a war? Ninja-HippoCongress has to DECLARE war. And hence....they declared war against the Iraq government/military under Hussein....which was routed. We are not fighting the current government. That war ended the same year it began. However, the US stayed to help out the fledgling country and unfortunately insurgents continued to attack the Iraqis/US military. It would have been premature....and may still prove to be the case...had the US left after the invasion and destruction of the Hussein government. However, technically the war had ended. At least from a technical definition of the process. ....NONSENSE! I mean dude, come on, this is bad even for you. 'At least from a technical definition.' Exactly, so you basically concede that you're talking nonsense. Pointless semantics; 'pulling an LJ.' Soldiers were in Iraq fighting and dying for ten years. So your original comment 'you know the war ended a long long time ago' is a crock, isn't it? The *invasion* ended a long time ago, but then we stayed and occupied, didn't we? And that involved fighting. Every day. With guns. And bombs. You know what the general definition of that is, buddy? A war. The Iraq memorial doesn't call it 'a decade of *WAR*' for nothing. If we go by your ridiculous mental gymnastics World War 2 lasted three weeks. It's called a war because that is what people understand. It really is that simple. Guess what? Both Korea and Viet Nam are called wars...they had guns and bombs and yet neither was actually a war. Congress HAS to declare war. Period.
Maybe I should pull a hippo and start spamming inboxes with childish insults because someone doesn't agree with me. There is a reason you are one of only 2 people I've put on ignore.;)
[QUOTE="Ninja-Hippo"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]What the f*ck are you talking about? Do you even know? The war itself ended when the Iraq government fell. The US was NO LONGER attacking the Iraq military. Talk about nonsense. Staying to help out the new government does not mean one is engaging in war.I'm sorry, you're telling me that USA forces are engaged with militia on a daily basis but that's NOT A WAR? Are you serious? "We're not at war, we're just armed soldier who go out on patrol every day and engage in firefights with a hostile enemy. Occasionally we call in air strikes. Totally not a war, though." Please... The war was with the Hussein government. That means armed conflict to achieve objectives. They toppled the government. A new government is in place...the US is not engaged in war with this new government. Some insurgents hitting areas and needing to be dealt with is not the same as the war. Period. The US Congress declares war. Show me where war was declared on the insurgents.LJS9502_basic
Oh, well since you want to get hung up on technicalities then the US hasn't been at war since World War II.
....NONSENSE! I mean dude, come on, this is bad even for you. 'At least from a technical definition.' Exactly, so you basically concede that you're talking nonsense. Pointless semantics; 'pulling an LJ.' Soldiers were in Iraq fighting and dying for ten years. So your original comment 'you know the war ended a long long time ago' is a crock, isn't it? The *invasion* ended a long time ago, but then we stayed and occupied, didn't we? And that involved fighting. Every day. With guns. And bombs. You know what the general definition of that is, buddy? A war. The Iraq memorial doesn't call it 'a decade of *WAR*' for nothing. If we go by your ridiculous mental gymnastics World War 2 lasted three weeks. It's called a war because that is what people understand. It really is that simple. Guess what? Both Korea and Viet Nam are called wars...they had guns and bombs and yet neither was actually a war. Congress HAS to declare war. Period.[QUOTE="Ninja-Hippo"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] Congress has to DECLARE war. And hence....they declared war against the Iraq government/military under Hussein....which was routed. We are not fighting the current government. That war ended the same year it began. However, the US stayed to help out the fledgling country and unfortunately insurgents continued to attack the Iraqis/US military. It would have been premature....and may still prove to be the case...had the US left after the invasion and destruction of the Hussein government. However, technically the war had ended. At least from a technical definition of the process.LJS9502_basic
Go tell a combat veteran who's been in Iraq for much of the past decade that when he was shooting and being shot at that he wasn't actually at war, technically speaking, period.
....NONSENSE! I mean dude, come on, this is bad even for you. 'At least from a technical definition.' Exactly, so you basically concede that you're talking nonsense. Pointless semantics; 'pulling an LJ.' Soldiers were in Iraq fighting and dying for ten years. So your original comment 'you know the war ended a long long time ago' is a crock, isn't it? The *invasion* ended a long time ago, but then we stayed and occupied, didn't we? And that involved fighting. Every day. With guns. And bombs. You know what the general definition of that is, buddy? A war. The Iraq memorial doesn't call it 'a decade of *WAR*' for nothing. If we go by your ridiculous mental gymnastics World War 2 lasted three weeks. It's called a war because that is what people understand. It really is that simple. Guess what? Both Korea and Viet Nam are called wars...they had guns and bombs and yet neither was actually a war. Congress HAS to declare war. Period.[QUOTE="Ninja-Hippo"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] Congress has to DECLARE war. And hence....they declared war against the Iraq government/military under Hussein....which was routed. We are not fighting the current government. That war ended the same year it began. However, the US stayed to help out the fledgling country and unfortunately insurgents continued to attack the Iraqis/US military. It would have been premature....and may still prove to be the case...had the US left after the invasion and destruction of the Hussein government. However, technically the war had ended. At least from a technical definition of the process.LJS9502_basic
Maybe I should pull a hippo and start spamming inboxes with childish insults because someone doesn't agree with me. There is a reason you are one of only 2 people I've put on ignore.;)
No they don't. Dont be so ridiculous. It's almost as if you're reveling in your own reputation for pointless, counter-reality nitpickery. Vietnam was a f*cking war. That's what it's called when human beings fight each other with f*cking guns and explosives. Congress didn't declare war in 1066 at the battle of hastings, but it involved human being stabbing the sh*t out of each other so guess what that's called? A WAR. Jesus. Why did you ignore me? Because i made fun of you for quoting a report that you had next to your computer, which didn't exist on the internet and that you couldn't tell me the name of? You're REALLY bringing that up? :lol:It's called a war because that is what people understand. It really is that simple. Guess what? Both Korea and Viet Nam are called wars...they had guns and bombs and yet neither was actually a war. Congress HAS to declare war. Period.[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]
[QUOTE="Ninja-Hippo"] ....NONSENSE! I mean dude, come on, this is bad even for you. 'At least from a technical definition.' Exactly, so you basically concede that you're talking nonsense. Pointless semantics; 'pulling an LJ.' Soldiers were in Iraq fighting and dying for ten years. So your original comment 'you know the war ended a long long time ago' is a crock, isn't it? The *invasion* ended a long time ago, but then we stayed and occupied, didn't we? And that involved fighting. Every day. With guns. And bombs. You know what the general definition of that is, buddy? A war. The Iraq memorial doesn't call it 'a decade of *WAR*' for nothing. If we go by your ridiculous mental gymnastics World War 2 lasted three weeks. worlock77
Go tell a combat veteran who's been in Iraq for much of the past decade that when he was shooting and being shot at that he wasn't actually at war, technically speaking, period.
I wouldn't tell a Viet Nam or Korean War vet that either but that doesn't mean the US didn't win the war initially and then had a lot of work to do in stabilization and rebuilding.
[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]
....NONSENSE! I mean dude, come on, this is bad even for you. 'At least from a technical definition.' Exactly, so you basically concede that you're talking nonsense. Pointless semantics; 'pulling an LJ.' Soldiers were in Iraq fighting and dying for ten years. So your original comment 'you know the war ended a long long time ago' is a crock, isn't it? The *invasion* ended a long time ago, but then we stayed and occupied, didn't we? And that involved fighting. Every day. With guns. And bombs. You know what the general definition of that is, buddy? A war. The Iraq memorial doesn't call it 'a decade of *WAR*' for nothing. If we go by your ridiculous mental gymnastics World War 2 lasted three weeks. Ninja-HippoIt's called a war because that is what people understand. It really is that simple. Guess what? Both Korea and Viet Nam are called wars...they had guns and bombs and yet neither was actually a war. Congress HAS to declare war. Period.
Go tell a combat veteran who's been in Iraq for much of the past decade that when he was shooting and being shot at that he wasn't actually at war, technically speaking, period.
Definitely buy health insurance before making that move! :DThe war was with the Hussein government. That means armed conflict to achieve objectives. They toppled the government. A new government is in place...the US is not engaged in war with this new government. Some insurgents hitting areas and needing to be dealt with is not the same as the war. Period. The US Congress declares war. Show me where war was declared on the insurgents.[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Ninja-Hippo"] I'm sorry, you're telling me that USA forces are engaged with militia on a daily basis but that's NOT A WAR? Are you serious? "We're not at war, we're just armed soldier who go out on patrol every day and engage in firefights with a hostile enemy. Occasionally we call in air strikes. Totally not a war, though." Please...worlock77
Oh, well since you want to get hung up on technicalities then the US hasn't been at war since World War II.
Y'see you said that to make fun of his ridiculous logic but he's ACTUALLY CLAIMING THAT TO BE TRUE.[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]It's called a war because that is what people understand. It really is that simple. Guess what? Both Korea and Viet Nam are called wars...they had guns and bombs and yet neither was actually a war. Congress HAS to declare war. Period.[QUOTE="Ninja-Hippo"] ....NONSENSE! I mean dude, come on, this is bad even for you. 'At least from a technical definition.' Exactly, so you basically concede that you're talking nonsense. Pointless semantics; 'pulling an LJ.' Soldiers were in Iraq fighting and dying for ten years. So your original comment 'you know the war ended a long long time ago' is a crock, isn't it? The *invasion* ended a long time ago, but then we stayed and occupied, didn't we? And that involved fighting. Every day. With guns. And bombs. You know what the general definition of that is, buddy? A war. The Iraq memorial doesn't call it 'a decade of *WAR*' for nothing. If we go by your ridiculous mental gymnastics World War 2 lasted three weeks. Ninja-Hippo
Maybe I should pull a hippo and start spamming inboxes with childish insults because someone doesn't agree with me. There is a reason you are one of only 2 people I've put on ignore.;)
No they don't. Dont be so ridiculous. It's almost as if you're reveling in your own reputation for pointless, counter-reality nitpickery. Vietnam was a f*cking war. That's what it's called when human beings fight each other with f*cking guns and explosives. Congress didn't declare war in 1066 at the battle of hastings, but it involved human being stabbing the sh*t out of each other so guess what that's called? A WAR. Jesus. Why did you ignore me? Because i made fun of you for quoting a report that you had next to your computer, which didn't exist on the internet and that you couldn't tell me the name of? You're REALLY bringing that up? :lol:And thus you show you don't know the difference between understanding the legal definition of war and conflicts. I ignored you because you sound like a ten year old when you aren't agreed with. Guess what...some people DO IN FACT READ OTHER THAN the internet. I see you are not one of them. So sad...too bad.[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]The war was with the Hussein government. That means armed conflict to achieve objectives. They toppled the government. A new government is in place...the US is not engaged in war with this new government. Some insurgents hitting areas and needing to be dealt with is not the same as the war. Period. The US Congress declares war. Show me where war was declared on the insurgents.[QUOTE="Ninja-Hippo"] I'm sorry, you're telling me that USA forces are engaged with militia on a daily basis but that's NOT A WAR? Are you serious? "We're not at war, we're just armed soldier who go out on patrol every day and engage in firefights with a hostile enemy. Occasionally we call in air strikes. Totally not a war, though." Please...Ninja-Hippo
Oh, well since you want to get hung up on technicalities then the US hasn't been at war since World War II.
That is false. The Iraq War was a war. It just happens to have been won rather quick but insurgents made the stability an issue and the US stayed far too long. So technically...you were wrong. Congress did, in fact, declare war since WW2.And thus you show you don't know the difference between understanding the legal definition of war and conflicts. I ignored you because you sound like a ten year old when you aren't agreed with. Guess what...some people DO IN FACT READ OTHER THAN the internet. I see you are not one of them. So sad...too bad.LJS9502_basicNOBODY IS TALKING ABOUT THE LEGAL DEFINITION OF WAR. THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT THE COMMON F*CKING SENSE DEFINITION OF WAR. Do you know why the Iraq war memorial says 'a hard decade of war'? Because it was a decade of war. Do you know why every god damned newspaper and news station for the last week has been talking about the end of the WAR in Iraq? Because it was a god damned WAR. And yeah buddy, i'm sure some people do indeed read sources other than the internet. But most people aren't sad enough to invent reports which dont exist and then refuse to give the name of their mythical reports or the names of the authors. Get a grip. You sink to new lows in every thread.
[QUOTE="worlock77"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]It's called a war because that is what people understand. It really is that simple. Guess what? Both Korea and Viet Nam are called wars...they had guns and bombs and yet neither was actually a war. Congress HAS to declare war. Period.LJS9502_basic
Go tell a combat veteran who's been in Iraq for much of the past decade that when he was shooting and being shot at that he wasn't actually at war, technically speaking, period.
I wouldn't tell a Viet Nam or Korean War vet that either but that doesn't mean the US didn't win the war initially and then had a lot of work to do in stabilization and rebuilding.Right, you wouldn't tell those vets that because you know goddamn well that they were in a war regardless of your pathetic semantic nit-picking.
[QUOTE="worlock77"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] The war was with the Hussein government. That means armed conflict to achieve objectives. They toppled the government. A new government is in place...the US is not engaged in war with this new government. Some insurgents hitting areas and needing to be dealt with is not the same as the war. Period. The US Congress declares war. Show me where war was declared on the insurgents. Ninja-Hippo
Oh, well since you want to get hung up on technicalities then the US hasn't been at war since World War II.
Y'see you said that to make fun of his ridiculous logic but he's ACTUALLY CLAIMING THAT TO BE TRUE.Yeah, I noticed that after posting it.
I wouldn't tell a Viet Nam or Korean War vet that either but that doesn't mean the US didn't win the war initially and then had a lot of work to do in stabilization and rebuilding.[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="worlock77"]
Go tell a combat veteran who's been in Iraq for much of the past decade that when he was shooting and being shot at that he wasn't actually at war, technically speaking, period.
worlock77
Right, you wouldn't tell those vets that because you know goddamn well that they were in a war regardless of your pathetic semantic nit-picking.
*shrugs* Making an ass out of yourself with assumptions. Nonetheless....Congress declares war. Sleep through Civics class?
[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]And thus you show you don't know the difference between understanding the legal definition of war and conflicts. I ignored you because you sound like a ten year old when you aren't agreed with. Guess what...some people DO IN FACT READ OTHER THAN the internet. I see you are not one of them. So sad...too bad.Ninja-HippoNOBODY IS TALKING ABOUT THE LEGAL DEFINITION OF WAR. THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT THE COMMON F*CKING SENSE DEFINITION OF WAR. Do you know why the Iraq war memorial says 'a hard decade of war'? Because it was a decade of war. Do you know why every god damned newspaper and news station for the last week has been talking about the end of the WAR in Iraq? Because it was a god damned WAR. And yeah buddy, i'm sure some people do indeed read sources other than the internet. But most people aren't sad enough to invent reports which dont exist and then refuse to give the name of their mythical reports or the names of the authors. Get a grip. You sink to new lows in every thread. Apparently I was f*cking using the legal definition of war...which you jumped on. I didn't quote you...you quoted me. Period dumbass.
[QUOTE="kuraimen"][QUOTE="Ninja-Hippo"] I mean dude, come on, this is bad even for you. alexside1I disagree, that's basically his standard. Like yours? Heh... a match made in OT.
[QUOTE="worlock77"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] I wouldn't tell a Viet Nam or Korean War vet that either but that doesn't mean the US didn't win the war initially and then had a lot of work to do in stabilization and rebuilding. LJS9502_basic
Right, you wouldn't tell those vets that because you know goddamn well that they were in a war regardless of your pathetic semantic nit-picking.
*shrugs* Making an ass out of yourself with assumptions. Nonetheless....Congress declares war. Sleep through Civics class?Yes, we know that legally speaking in the United States the Congress issues declarations of war. Thank you Captian Goddamn Obvious. Now, regardless of your nit-picking or the loopholes used by scumbag politicans Korea, Vietnam, Iraq were all wars.
*shrugs* Making an ass out of yourself with assumptions. Nonetheless....Congress declares war. Sleep through Civics class?[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="worlock77"]
Right, you wouldn't tell those vets that because you know goddamn well that they were in a war regardless of your pathetic semantic nit-picking.
worlock77
Yes, we know that legally speaking in the United States the Congress issues declarations of war. Thank you Captian Goddamn Obvious. Now, regardless of your nit-picking or the loopholes used by scumbag politicans Korea, Vietnam, Iraq were all wars.
In one thread you go about posting the US definition of how things work...yet ignore it in another. So you pick and choose when to apply how the US government legally works. Got to love the double standards in OT.I presume we all know what is meant by the word 'war', so do the nitpicky semantics of it really fuucking matter?RavensmashHave you not met LJ_basic?
Dear mods, please reinstate old rules. This thread is more evidence of why.chessmaster1989Like he wasn't just as absurd before. At least now i can call him a jackass.
[QUOTE="worlock77"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] *shrugs* Making an ass out of yourself with assumptions. Nonetheless....Congress declares war. Sleep through Civics class?LJS9502_basic
Yes, we know that legally speaking in the United States the Congress issues declarations of war. Thank you Captian Goddamn Obvious. Now, regardless of your nit-picking or the loopholes used by scumbag politicans Korea, Vietnam, Iraq were all wars.
In one thread you go about posting the US definition of how things work...yet ignore it in another. So you pick and choose when to apply how the US government legally works. Got to love the double standards in OT.lolwut?
Honestly, I can't tell if you're just a really effective troll or if you really are this full of it.
[QUOTE="Ravensmash"]I presume we all know what is meant by the word 'war', so do the nitpicky semantics of it really fuucking matter?Ninja-HippoHave you not met LJ_basic? Considering I was talking about war in the US legal sense....and you're not....and the post was mine...and not yours....it's your fault for not understanding. Maybe you should ask for clarification before going off on a tangent. Do you even know what it entails for the US to declare war?
[QUOTE="Ninja-Hippo"][QUOTE="Ravensmash"]I presume we all know what is meant by the word 'war', so do the nitpicky semantics of it really fuucking matter?LJS9502_basicHave you not met LJ_basic? Considering I was talking about war in the US legal sense....and you're not....and the post was mine...and not yours....it's your fault for not understanding. Maybe you should ask for clarification before going off on a tangent. Do you even know what it entails for the US to declare war? Again, I'll ask the same question. I haven't even read through this thread, but clearly the conversation has yet again turned into nit-picking. Iraq, who?
In one thread you go about posting the US definition of how things work...yet ignore it in another. So you pick and choose when to apply how the US government legally works. Got to love the double standards in OT.[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="worlock77"]
Yes, we know that legally speaking in the United States the Congress issues declarations of war. Thank you Captian Goddamn Obvious. Now, regardless of your nit-picking or the loopholes used by scumbag politicans Korea, Vietnam, Iraq were all wars.
worlock77
lolwut?
Honestly, I can't tell if you're just a really effective troll or if you really are this full of it.
Or you just use double standards to suit your agenda depending on the thread. Frankly since I was correct about the Congressional declaration of war...and ninja just wants to argue anything.....his stance is not correct. OR are you denying that Congress declares war?[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Ninja-Hippo"] Have you not met LJ_basic?RavensmashConsidering I was talking about war in the US legal sense....and you're not....and the post was mine...and not yours....it's your fault for not understanding. Maybe you should ask for clarification before going off on a tangent. Do you even know what it entails for the US to declare war? Again, I'll ask the same question. I haven't even read through this thread, but clearly the conversation has yet again turned into nit-picking. Iraq, who?Eh what I said was the war ended with the US achieving it's objective. Ninja came in some time later and took to arguing for the sake of argument. The war did end with the US achieving it's objectives. Even now.....nothing changes that. Whether Iraq succeeds or fails now doesn't change anything. Hussein's regime is gone.
Man talks about the war in Iraq. You reply with "ACTUALLY there was no war in iraq, it ended years ago!' Half a dozen people explain to you how that is a stupid statement, congress does not dictate the common f*cking sense understanding of when human beings are engaged in an armed conflict; ie a FREAKING WAR. After many pages of this, you persist with your nonsense. I will indulge it no further. Pretty soon you'll have scraped through the bottom of that barrel though and you'll have to start burrowing into the ground. Ninja-HippoYou can't even get your trolling right. If there was no war then it couldn't have ended.:lol:
[QUOTE="worlock77"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]In one thread you go about posting the US definition of how things work...yet ignore it in another. So you pick and choose when to apply how the US government legally works. Got to love the double standards in OT.LJS9502_basic
lolwut?
Honestly, I can't tell if you're just a really effective troll or if you really are this full of it.
Or you just use double standards to suit your agenda depending on the thread. Frankly since I was correct about the Congressional declaration of war...and ninja just wants to argue anything.....his stance is not correct. OR are you denying that Congress declares war?In what **** thread am I using this supposed double standard? No, I'm not denying that technicallythe Congress declares war for the US. For Christ's sake, I've already stated that. What I'm saying is that war is goddamn war regardless of what you choose to call it. Regardless of if it's officially declared or not.
Again, I'll ask the same question. I haven't even read through this thread, but clearly the conversation has yet again turned into nit-picking. Iraq, who?Eh what I said was the war ended with the US achieving it's objective. Ninja came in some time later and took to arguing for the sake of argument. The war did end with the US achieving it's objectives. Even now.....nothing changes that. Whether Iraq succeeds or fails now doesn't change anything. Hussein's regime is gone. Oh come on, it's pretty clear that the word 'war' was used in the context of common understanding. I'm sure you honestly don't feel that strongly about the 'misuse' of a term which everyone understands.[QUOTE="Ravensmash"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] Considering I was talking about war in the US legal sense....and you're not....and the post was mine...and not yours....it's your fault for not understanding. Maybe you should ask for clarification before going off on a tangent. Do you even know what it entails for the US to declare war?LJS9502_basic
You can't even get your trolling right. If there was no war then it couldn't have ended.:lol: Common sense (look it up) would naturally dictate that the 'there was no war' pertains to the latter years which you claim were in fact, not a war. :| LOL U SO FUNNY![QUOTE="Ninja-Hippo"]Man talks about the war in Iraq. You reply with "ACTUALLY there was no war in iraq, it ended years ago!' Half a dozen people explain to you how that is a stupid statement, congress does not dictate the common f*cking sense understanding of when human beings are engaged in an armed conflict; ie a FREAKING WAR. After many pages of this, you persist with your nonsense. I will indulge it no further. Pretty soon you'll have scraped through the bottom of that barrel though and you'll have to start burrowing into the ground. LJS9502_basic
[QUOTE="Frame_Dragger"][QUOTE="alexside1"] Like yours?alexside1Heh... a match made in OT. Are you suggesting that we're lovers? Not you and I, I was noting that the similar standards of two others users match exceedingly well.
Or you just use double standards to suit your agenda depending on the thread. Frankly since I was correct about the Congressional declaration of war...and ninja just wants to argue anything.....his stance is not correct. OR are you denying that Congress declares war?[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="worlock77"]
lolwut?
Honestly, I can't tell if you're just a really effective troll or if you really are this full of it.
worlock77
In what **** thread am I using this supposed double standard? No, I'm not denying that technicallythe Congress declares war for the US. For Christ's sake, I've already stated that. What I'm saying is that war is goddamn war regardless of what you choose to call it. Regardless of if it's officially declared or not.
Ah well but for purposes of my post I was making the distinction between the declared war and objectives and the muck and mire the US got stuck in while trying to give the fledgling government a chance to succeed and train a military to handle the insurgency problem and leave a stable or somewhat stable country. There is a difference between the two......[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Eh what I said was the war ended with the US achieving it's objective. Ninja came in some time later and took to arguing for the sake of argument. The war did end with the US achieving it's objectives. Even now.....nothing changes that. Whether Iraq succeeds or fails now doesn't change anything. Hussein's regime is gone. Oh come on, it's pretty clear that the word 'war' was used in the context of common understanding. I'm sure you honestly don't feel that strongly about the 'misuse' of a term which everyone understands.Read my clarification to worlock on what my post was actually about first....then we can discuss.[QUOTE="Ravensmash"] Again, I'll ask the same question. I haven't even read through this thread, but clearly the conversation has yet again turned into nit-picking. Iraq, who?Ravensmash
This thread went places.Well, this thread will go places.
789shadow
[QUOTE="worlock77"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] Or you just use double standards to suit your agenda depending on the thread. Frankly since I was correct about the Congressional declaration of war...and ninja just wants to argue anything.....his stance is not correct. OR are you denying that Congress declares war?LJS9502_basic
In what **** thread am I using this supposed double standard? No, I'm not denying that technicallythe Congress declares war for the US. For Christ's sake, I've already stated that. What I'm saying is that war is goddamn war regardless of what you choose to call it. Regardless of if it's officially declared or not.
Ah well but for purposes of my post I was making the distinction between the declared war and objectives and the muck and mire the US got stuck in while trying to give the fledgling government a chance to succeed and train a military to handle the insurgency problem and leave a stable or somewhat stable country. There is a difference between the two...... Ah fair enough, at least you realise your mistake then.Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment