Mission Accomplished!! - Dallas-Mavs.com Forums

dude1394 · 07-11-2008, 12:56 AM

What a wonderful outcome. A democracy in the middle east, millions of souls liberated from tyranny. I'm humbled by the service of our men in uniform and emboldened by the leadership and intestinal fortitude that Dubya has shown. Nice job by our next prez McCain as well.

http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/20...q-down-90.html

Quote:

Sweet Victory!... Attacks In Iraq Down 90% From Last Year

It looks like it's a done deal...
This War is Won!

A woman holds up her child and the food she received from a humanitarian assistance distribution by Iraqi police in the Zuwarijat district of al Kut, Iraq, July 3. (DVIDS)

Thanks to the leadership of President George W. Bush, Iraq is a democracy and the Middle East is a safer place.
The Defense Department announced today that attack levels are down more than 90% from a year ago in Iraq.
The US Department of Defense reported:

Quote:

Since late March, when major operations began in northern, central and southern Iraq, violence and attack levels in the country have dipped to the lowest point in four years.

Attack levels are down more than 90 percent during the past year. And as Iraqi army and police units continue to mature, the coalition and Iraqi government have been able to shift more focus toward central services and other issues affecting Iraqis, according to military officials in Baghdad.

“Our efforts in conjunction with the efforts of the Iraqi security forces have been significant in reducing the number of attacks throughout the country,” Austin said. “[Iraqi security forces] have collected up a number of caches, and they’ve also conducted operations in Basra and Amarah. And as we watch that unfold, we see them take out a tremendous amount of lethal accelerants off the battlefield.”

Austin said he’s pleased with his force’s hard work, but continues to focus against finishing the fight with al-Qaida in the north and efforts against Iranian-backed “special groups criminals” in the south.

“We know that al-Qaida is a very resilient enemy, and I think we have to continue to keep the pressure on the remnants of its organization,” he said. “We also know that special groups criminal elements have left the country and have gone to Iran and other places with the intent to come back at some point. There is work to be done yet.”

Since Austin took the reins of Multinational Corps Iraq in February, the coalition’s “footprint has decreased over time,” he said. The last of the five surge brigades – the 3rd Infantry Division’s 2nd Brigade Combat Team – goes home at the end of this month, and more than 300 troops scheduled to deploy less than a month ago were turned around. Their deployment was canceled due to the recent improvements here, Austin said.

A girl clutches the milk she received from a humanitarian assistance drop performed by Iraqi police in the Zuwarijat district of al Kut, Iraq, July 3. (DVIDS)

More good news... MNF-Iraq is reporting that Iraq experienced the lowest number of acts of violence in more than four years last week.

Quote:

If you can keep your head when all about you
Are losing theirs and blaming it on you,
If you can trust yourself when all men doubt you,
But make allowance for their doubting too;

If you can wait and not be tired by waiting,
Or being lied about, don't deal in lies,
Or being hated, don't give way to hating,
And yet don't look too good, nor talk too wise:

If you can dream - and not make dreams your master;
If you can think - and not make thoughts your aim;
If you can meet with Triumph and Disaster
And treat those two impostors just the same;

If you can bear to hear the truth you've spoken
Twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools,
Or watch the things you gave your life to broken,
And stoop and build 'em up with wornout tools:

If you can make one heap of all your winnings
And risk it on one turn of pitch-and-toss,
And lose, and start again at your beginnings
And never breathe a word about your loss;

If you can force your heart and nerve and sinew
To serve your turn long after they are gone,
And so hold on when there is nothing in you
Except the Will which says to them: 'Hold on!'

If you can talk with crowds and keep your virtue,
Or walk with kings - nor lose the common touch,
If neither foes nor loving friends can hurt you,
If all men count with you, but none too much;

If you can fill the unforgiving minute
With sixty seconds' worth of distance run -
Yours is the Earth and everything that's in it,
And - which is more - you'll be a Man my son!

Words written by Dubya back to Condi after she passed him this note.

wmbwinn · 07-11-2008, 07:26 AM

US Media:
"Shhhhhhhhh!!!! Don't tell anyone that the US is seeing great success in Iraq!!! This is the last thing we need right now with the elections coming up!!!"

Even Obama has shifted his speaking to accomodate the success in Iraq. He has modified his position to support success in Iraq and has said that we will stay until the Iraqi military/police can take care of things without us.

But, come one, Dude. Don't spread this information around...

Underdog · 07-11-2008, 09:29 AM

VICTORY!!!

(wait - where's Osama bin Laden???)

Flacolaco · 07-11-2008, 09:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Underdog

VICTORY!!!

(wait - where's Osama bin Laden???)

What does that have to do with Iraq?

Underdog · 07-11-2008, 09:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flacolaco

What does that have to do with Iraq?

EXACTLY.

rabbitproof · 07-11-2008, 09:57 AM

I think he means WMDs were found.

alexamenos · 07-11-2008, 10:03 AM

after only four or five years of battle we've managed to turn a country that posed no plausible threat to the united states into a country which may not pose any plausible threat to the united states.

Mission Accomplished!

alexamenos · 07-11-2008, 10:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Underdog

EXACTLY.

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Underdog again.

purplefrog · 07-11-2008, 12:38 PM

Victory in Iraq, if it is at our fingertips, would be a true testament to our troops' perseverance and fortitude. Truly amazing!!! But imo it would be a solemn victory. The celebration should be tempered with the reality that many of our soldiers will suffer for many years and maybe indefinitely due to physical and psychological disabilities. Many of those families will have a difficult time celebrating the good that could come from victory in Iraq. I don't mean to dampen the feeling of accomplishment. Or maybe I do.... What I really want is for us not to forget the ongoing sacrifice of these individuals and families. The Mission may eventually be "accomplished" but the battle for a decent quality of life will endure, both here and in Iraq. I hesitated to even post something of this tone, because so many/most(?) try to make this a political issue that pits Republicans vs Democrats. I, personally, am tired of these battles of rhetoric and posturing in order to move the party's agenda forward and have little desire to get in the middle of that type of debate. I realize that just like the suffering of the many survivors of the Iraq war, the verbal battles among political pundits and party leaders will go on incessantly. Maybe its just good fun. Or maybe not.........

Flacolaco · 07-11-2008, 01:30 PM

Quote:

I think he means WMDs were found.

I assume you've all been following the story the AP put out last week about the 500 metric tons of yellow cake uranium that was removed from Iraq by the U.S. and shipped to Canada to be processed for civilian nuclear plants?

Why don't we have a thread about that?

http://www.bloggernews.net/116579
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/o...,6234364.story
http://uk.reuters.com/article/burnin...68496820080707
http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/...ellowcake.html

rabbitproof · 07-11-2008, 01:35 PM

Maybe becauseeeeeee.... from your links...

"As far as the (nuclear) proliferation threat goes, natural uranium is not of direct use in a nuclear weapon," U.S. embassy spokeswoman Leslie Phillips said.

The Bush administration's claim that Saddam was developing nuclear weapons was a primary justification it gave for the invasion to topple his regime, but no evidence has been found that Saddam continued a nuclear weapons programme after 1991.

---

So to make an analogy, the charge or 'reason' to invade Iraq was that Saddam was loading his gun and could/would shoot someone, not that he had the materials to build some bullets, right? Or did that change the first time the Mission was Accomplished?

Flacolaco · 07-11-2008, 01:40 PM

So just because it hadn't been enriched yet, it's not a concern?

Isn't that like telling a terrorist that you're not really worried about all those bomb parts out in his garage until he actually puts the bomb together?

rabbitproof · 07-11-2008, 01:52 PM

You'd arrest someone just because they have the means to kill someone?

Flacolaco · 07-11-2008, 01:54 PM

I'm sorry, I wasn't being clear. The question I'm asking is, why isn't this news worthy? I didn't see anything about it on any of the major networks.

Underdog · 07-11-2008, 01:58 PM

WMD's??? TERRORISTS???? DEMOCRACY?????????

Exxon's profits in Billions of Dollars:

1999 - 7.9

2000 - 10.9

2001 - 17.5

2002 - 11.5

2003 - 21.5 (year we invade Iraq)

2004 - 25.3

2005 - 36.1

2006 - 39.5

2007 - 40.6

AxdemxO · 07-11-2008, 02:11 PM

ummm yee OK...what mission is that??

Edit: I just had to ask ...do you ever think how you sound whn you start threads like this??

alexamenos · 07-11-2008, 02:14 PM

I think it wasn't newsworthy because it's widely known that Hussein had a nuke program working to some extent pre-1991. It's therefore no big surprise that he had some yellowcake laying around....distracting further from the drama are the facts that the yellowcake was lying next to a nuke complex that was dismantled nearly 2 decades ago and also that the only reason it attracted any news was that some canadian company saw a commercial use for it.

the wmd boy has cried wolf way too many times....

dude1394 · 07-11-2008, 02:15 PM

or

Quote:

Originally Posted by Underdog

Exxon's profits in Billions of Dollars:

1999 - 7.9

2000 - 10.9

2001 - 17.5

2002 - 11.5

2003 - 21.5 (year we invade Iraq)

2004 - 25.3

2005 - 36.1

2006 - 39.5 --- (democrats winning election)

2007 - 40.6

Underdog · 07-11-2008, 02:20 PM

I was waiting for the Dude Spin...

Yes, just like The Blacks/The Commies/The Jews - "The Democrats" are responsible for all of our problems...

(because pointing your finger at The Outlander is always a better solution than dealing with the problem...)

$18 billion increase under the Republicans, $4.5 billion increase under the Democrats - what math are you using to determine that Democrats are responsible?

rmacomic · 07-11-2008, 03:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Underdog

I was waiting for the Dude Spin...

Yes, just like The Blacks/The Commies/The Jews - "The Democrats" are responsible for all of our problems...

(because pointing your finger at The Outlander is always a better solution than dealing with the problem...)

$18 billion increase under the Republicans, $4.5 billion increase under the Democrats - what math are you using to determine that Democrats are responsible?

OUTLANDEEEEEERRRRRRR!!!!! WE HAVE YOUR WOMAN OUTLANDER!!!!!!!

DirkFTW · 07-11-2008, 03:31 PM

The Neocons and Big Oil are responsible for all of our problems...

(because pointing your finger at The Outlander is always a better solution than dealing with the problem...)

Just saying that it all sounds very similar...

MavsX · 07-11-2008, 03:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AxdemxO

ummm yee OK...what mission is that??

Edit: I just had to ask ...do you ever think how you sound whn you start threads like this??

Underdog · 07-11-2008, 03:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DirkFTW

The Neocons and Big Oil are responsible for all of our problems...

(because pointing your finger at The Outlander is always a better solution than dealing with the problem...)

Just saying that it all sounds very similar...

Who mentioned Neocons???

I'm pointing the finger at the individuals who are responsible for this debacle - I'm fully willing to admit that it took Democrat votes in Congress to get this war to happen, not just the Republicans (but I don't "root for a team" so I'm not looking through rose-colored glasses...)

It's not like NOBODY is responsible - the guys in D.C. and the private corporations who are profiting off this war might be a reasonable place to search for answers...

DirkFTW · 07-11-2008, 04:07 PM

Sorry, I was gonna put the quote under JanetReno's name for fun, but I didn't.

The way I look at it, we have oil speculators, China buying up long-term oil contracts and then reselling them for a profit, oil companies, the war, our lack of drilling, more demand for oil... all of those contributed individually to this problem.

I think it's time for alternative fuels, nuke plants, and drilling (especially where people are slant drilling our oil). Punishing people is only going to go so far.

Underdog · 07-11-2008, 04:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DirkFTW

The way I look at it, we have oil speculators, China buying up long-term oil contracts and then reselling them for a profit, oil companies, the war, our lack of drilling, more demand for oil... all of those contributed individually to this problem.

I think it's time for alternative fuels, nuke plants, and drilling (especially where people are slant drilling our oil). Punishing people is only going to go so far.

I agree with these words 100%...

We don't need to punish anyone - we just need to start looking for REAL solutions to our problems, rather than devoting all our energy to placing the blame on someone else (but fat chance of that happening in an election year!)

wmbwinn · 07-11-2008, 07:43 PM

Too much time spent talking about the negatives.
1)NO, we didn't catch Osama. But, Osama is a man with "end stage renal failure" who was on peritoneal dialysis the last time anything was known about him. Wherever he is, he is only a symbolic figure. He may already be dead. If he is alive, he is only a symbol.
2)NO, we found no WMD. We may never know if the US Intelligence really thought that was the primary reason to attack.

So....

If we move past those two points which seem to dominate this thread and move on to what has been done right, then we can celebrate the successes of removing Sadam, creating a new government, putting down the various resistance movements, and building up the native Iraqi capability to wipe their own arse.

Name another country in the last 100 years who ever accomplished the above.

Compare to the failures of Russian in Afghanistan and the Chechen Republic. Compare to the failures of France and Spain with Islamic militancy at home in their own countries.

What we have accomplished is incredible.

Name another country who COULD have taken the 3 enemies of World War II and turned them into thriving allies of that nation. Do you think it could have been done by any country not named USA? Do you think the rest of Europe could have done it without us? No, they would be an extension of Russia.

Quit whining all the time. You sound like a Democrat

dude1394 · 07-11-2008, 09:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Underdog

I was waiting for the Dude Spin...

Yes, just like The Blacks/The Commies/The Jews - "The Democrats" are responsible for all of our problems...

(because pointing your finger at The Outlander is always a better solution than dealing with the problem...)

$18 billion increase under the Republicans, $4.5 billion increase under the Democrats - what math are you using to determine that Democrats are responsible?

Pretty disgusting post imo.

What's disgusting about it is that you are stating that our government, our military and all of the people who have given so much here got into the iraq conflict as a favor to the oil companies, disgusting, ignorant and completely lacking any evidence. No matter what you think of how it was done, carried out etc., the reasoning for the conflict was debated, discussed and voted upon. IMO it was by a government that had just been attacked for the first time on our soil and lost 3,000 of our citizens (and could have easily been 30,000). A country that was afraid that every bridge, mall, letter was going to contain death from terrorism. Those people who put their lives on the line to keep this country and your family safe did it because they thought it the best option to secure this country. And guess what, history (last 8 years) says that they were right.

Unless you think that china (who is now the worlds biggest polluter) and India are running new cars on pixie dust.

The democrats aren't responsible for all of our problems but they damn sure are largely responsible for those gas prices you are quoting. Their problem is that they don't have enough guts to do anything that might cost them a vote, unlike dubya, the republicans and the conservative movement in the case of the Iraq conflict. Because they believed this was the right thing to do.

Nice to equate my political dislike of the leftist-democrats with racist, jew-haters as well, good old fashioned liberal tactic. I would say that the democrats in this case were the arabic-haters as they were willing to let that country go up in flames to get elected. Nice go there.

With respect to your quoting of oil profits, you don't cite your source to check so I'll extrapolate it for you, especially what's going on this year and what will probably only get worse with our friends now having Barack Hussein Obama in the house who doesn't believe we should drill anywhere, anytime.

1999 - 7.9 -
2000 - 10.9
2001 - 17.5
2002 - 11.5
2003 - 21.5 (year we invade Iraq)
2004 - 25.3
2005 - 36.1
2006 - 39.5 (Year the democrats ran on reducing gas prices)
2007 - 40.6
2008 - 53.1 (extrapolated).

So using your own strange math (4 years versus 2 ???)..
Republicans 18billion in 4 years
Democrats 13.5billion in 2 years (give 'em 4 years and it'll be 27billion).
Looks like the democrats just got elected so they could make the oil companies richer.

wmbwinn · 07-11-2008, 09:37 PM

oil companies have not spent more or lost more in the process of the change in the value of oil. They are simply getting paid more. So, their profits go up.

The profits of the oil companies have nothing to do with Republicans or Democrats.

The profits are due to the changing world value of what they sell.

If I raise pigs and sell them for ham and bacon and the world decides to pay me 4 times more for the pigs, did I just become a criminal?

Such a childish arguement.

Blame the party in power. Credit the party in power.

The party in power rarely has anything to do with anything regarding the world's economy of any great significance.

MavsWiLLHaVeRinGs · 07-12-2008, 01:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Underdog

WMD's??? TERRORISTS???? DEMOCRACY?????????

Exxon's profits in Billions of Dollars:

1999 - 7.9

2000 - 10.9

2001 - 17.5

2002 - 11.5

2003 - 21.5 (year we invade Iraq)

2004 - 25.3

2005 - 36.1

2006 - 39.5

2007 - 40.6

1000 times rep

Dirkadirkastan · 07-12-2008, 03:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dude1394

Pretty disgusting post imo.

What's disgusting about it is that you are stating that our government, our military and all of the people who have given so much here got into the iraq conflict as a favor to the oil companies, disgusting, ignorant and completely lacking any evidence. No matter what you think of how it was done, carried out etc., the reasoning for the conflict was debated, discussed and voted upon. IMO it was by a government that had just been attacked for the first time on our soil and lost 3,000 of our citizens (and could have easily been 30,000). A country that was afraid that every bridge, mall, letter was going to contain death from terrorism. Those people who put their lives on the line to keep this country and your family safe did it because they thought it the best option to secure this country. And guess what, history (last 8 years) says that they were right.

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

Yay, Patriot Act and all that other Gestapo crap! At least we theoretically have a little "freedom" halfway around the world, don't we?"

wmbwinn · 07-12-2008, 10:12 AM

'Yay, Patriot Act and all that other Gestapo crap! At least we theoretically have a little "freedom" halfway around the world, don't we?""

I see that you are an expert Liberal Democrat in the grand tradition of Bill Clinton and Obama. I see that you skillfully completely changed the topic and pretended like it applied to the question at hand and then ranted and raved with emotion rather than content.

The Patriot act and Guatanamo are not what we are talking about here.

I'm sorry that your sorry little mind cannot think of any pertinent arguement regarding our success in Iraq.

Dirkadirkastan · 07-12-2008, 11:25 AM

Call everyone that disagrees with you a liberal Democrat if you wish, but I can't think of anything Team Blue has done for me lately either.

Speaking of which, it's actually rather obvious this whole "mission accomplished" mantra is just another last ditch effort to get Team Red back in office. Wasn't "mission accomplished" back in 2004 as well?

And yes, I think what I have mentioned is very relevant. The UNITED STATES is not the "beacon of freedom" politicians would have us believe. Even if it was, spreading U.S. troops all over the globe does not equate to spreading freedom.

Who gives a crap how successful we are overseas anyway? WE CAN'T AFFORD IT

dude1394 · 07-12-2008, 03:39 PM

Mission Accomplished means Mission Accomplished, a great victory by the US.

Or we could have had another US defeat if the other party had prevailed.

Which do you prefer?

rabbitproof · 07-12-2008, 04:31 PM

The last time the Mission was Accomplished....

To the assembled audience and the world, Mr. Bush said, "Admiral Kelly, Captain Card, officers and sailors of the USS Abraham Lincoln, my fellow Americans: Major combat operations in Iraq have ended (...). In the Battle of Iraq, the United States and our allies have prevailed. And now our coalition is engaged in securing and reconstructing that country.

"In this battle, we have fought for the cause of liberty, and for the peace of the world. Our nation and our coalition are proud of this accomplishment - yet it is you, the members of the United States military, who achieved it. Your courage - your willingness to face danger for your country and for each other - made this day possible. Because of you, our nation is more secure. Because of you, the tyrant has fallen, and Iraq is free.

"Tonight, I have a special word for Secretary Rumsfeld, for General Franks, and for all the men and women who wear the uniform of the United States: America is grateful for a job well done."

Five years after that speech, after the meaning of the phrase "mission accomplished" and when is a job truly "done" has been endlessly parsed, and after responsibility for creating and hanging the sign was first denied and later accepted, the White House said Wednesday that President Bush has paid a price for the banner, with its affirmative message becoming a target of mockery and a symbol of U.S. misjudgments and mistakes in the long and costly war - a war in which major combat operations are still being waged.

The president himself didn't exactly say the words "mission accomplished," but that point often gets lost in the feelings over the continuing war, reports CBS News senior White House correspondent Bill Plante.

But while the White House distanced itself from the message soon after the event, Mr. Bush was not averse to repeating it. Speaking to troops in Camp As Sayliyah in Qatar the following month, Mr. Bush said, "America sent you on a mission to remove a grave threat and to liberate an oppressed people, and that mission has been accomplished."

Now in its sixth year, the war in Iraq has claimed the lives of at least 4,058 members of the U.S. military - 3,924 of whom have died since Mr. Bush landed on the deck of the USS Abraham Lincoln. Tens of thousands of Iraqis have been killed (the true number may never be known, since the Iraqi government does not record tallies of the dead), and millions have been displaced from their homes. And there are currently more U.S. troops in Iraq than there were when the U.S. invaded with a contingent of other coalition forces.

I would say nothing is accomplished until our troops are safe at home.

dude1394 · 07-12-2008, 04:52 PM

I guess we haven't won ww1, 2, korean, bosnian, grenada, etc either.

Edit: I guess we only won in Vietnam.

wmbwinn · 07-12-2008, 05:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dirkadirkastan

Call everyone that disagrees with you a liberal Democrat if you wish, but I can't think of anything Team Blue has done for me lately either.

Speaking of which, it's actually rather obvious this whole "mission accomplished" mantra is just another last ditch effort to get Team Red back in office. Wasn't "mission accomplished" back in 2004 as well?

And yes, I think what I have mentioned is very relevant. The Unites States is not the "beacon of freedom" politicians would have us believe. Even if it was, spreading U.S. troops all over the globe does not equate to spreading freedom.

Who gives a crap how successful we are overseas anyway? WE CAN'T AFFORD IT

There is no price tag on the value of freedom. I have no point of reference for deciding what price is too high for freedom. Therefore, I have summarily dismissed your last statements. I give a crap about how successful we are overseas. Failure "overseas" will become a failure at home. Success overseas means we maintain alliances and keep our enemies at bay.

Are you a Libertarian? Would you have us withdraw all interests outside of our borders? What sort of stupid one liner is it to say "who gives a crap how successful we are overseas?"

Is there a different beacon of freedom in the world? Is the European Union going to grow balls and develop a real military? I doubt it. The European Union was created for economic reasons. The "real military" of the European Union is the same military of Canada and Mexico. It is the US Marine supported by the rest of the US War Machine.

No War Machine, no peace, no freedom. No War Machine, Russia already owns Europe and who knows what/where else. No War Machine, dictators "who do give a crap how successful overseas" they are take what they want.

Now, I would like to turn the "channel" back to the program scheduled. We were discussing the shockingly effective success of the US Military Machine overseas.

Quit whining. You are protected to be able to whine by the US Marine Corp.

wmbwinn · 07-12-2008, 05:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rabbitproof

The last time the Mission was Accomplished....

To the assembled audience and the world, Mr. Bush said, "Admiral Kelly, Captain Card, officers and sailors of the USS Abraham Lincoln, my fellow Americans: Major combat operations in Iraq have ended (...). In the Battle of Iraq, the United States and our allies have prevailed. And now our coalition is engaged in securing and reconstructing that country.

"In this battle, we have fought for the cause of liberty, and for the peace of the world. Our nation and our coalition are proud of this accomplishment - yet it is you, the members of the United States military, who achieved it. Your courage - your willingness to face danger for your country and for each other - made this day possible. Because of you, our nation is more secure. Because of you, the tyrant has fallen, and Iraq is free.

"Tonight, I have a special word for Secretary Rumsfeld, for General Franks, and for all the men and women who wear the uniform of the United States: America is grateful for a job well done."

Five years after that speech, after the meaning of the phrase "mission accomplished" and when is a job truly "done" has been endlessly parsed, and after responsibility for creating and hanging the sign was first denied and later accepted, the White House said Wednesday that President Bush has paid a price for the banner, with its affirmative message becoming a target of mockery and a symbol of U.S. misjudgments and mistakes in the long and costly war - a war in which major combat operations are still being waged.

The president himself didn't exactly say the words "mission accomplished," but that point often gets lost in the feelings over the continuing war, reports CBS News senior White House correspondent Bill Plante.

But while the White House distanced itself from the message soon after the event, Mr. Bush was not averse to repeating it. Speaking to troops in Camp As Sayliyah in Qatar the following month, Mr. Bush said, "America sent you on a mission to remove a grave threat and to liberate an oppressed people, and that mission has been accomplished."

Now in its sixth year, the war in Iraq has claimed the lives of at least 4,058 members of the U.S. military - 3,924 of whom have died since Mr. Bush landed on the deck of the USS Abraham Lincoln. Tens of thousands of Iraqis have been killed (the true number may never be known, since the Iraqi government does not record tallies of the dead), and millions have been displaced from their homes. And there are currently more U.S. troops in Iraq than there were when the U.S. invaded with a contingent of other coalition forces.

I would say nothing is accomplished until our troops are safe at home.

"And now our coalition is engaged in securing and reconstructing that country."

Mr. Bush said nothing at all inaccurate. His speech was about the transition from invasion (successful) to securing and reconstructing.

Securing and reconstructing is always harder and longer.

You pukes make me sick.

rabbitproof · 07-12-2008, 05:09 PM

Yeah, I get more sick about 4000 American soldiers dying for poor reasons but ok.

wmbwinn · 07-12-2008, 05:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rabbitproof

Yeah, I get more sick about 4000 American soldiers dying for poor reasons but ok.

This goes right back to the same debates we had recently about gun control and what is or what is not appropriate for defending ones home and the home of his neighbor. Go read the thread about the Supreme Court ruling on gun control.

No man is an island unto himself.

And neither is a nation.

History repetitively shows that that a nation that ignores the problems of the world around them is doomed.

So, Rabbit. Should we give a damn about Israel, Kuwait, and our other allies? Should we just tell the world to take on Sadam, Osama, Russian supported white dudes killing Islamic persons in Serbia, Putin's growing aggressions, Iran, North Korea, etc. without us? Should we just shrug our shoulders and say, "not our problem."

We lost just over 3 thousand on 9/11/01. We have lost only 4-5 thousand in combat since then.

We have not captured/killed Osama that we know of but Osama hasn't done anything significant either in the world since we started hunting him.

We have sacked and successfully put a new regime elected by Afghannies in Afghanistan.
We have sacked and successfully put a new regime elected by Iraqiis in Iraq.

We are on the verge of turning over most combat duties in Iraq to Iraqiis. We did that quite some time ago in Afghanistan. We maintain a small support unit capability in Afghanistan to lead, guide, train, teach, and empower with air support. We will transition to that in Iraq as well.

Libya dropped their gun and crapped their pants. Dropped their nuclear plan without a quarrel. Didn't want anything to do with the War Machine of America.

North Korea postured, bragged, rattled sabers, and set off a weak ineffective embarrassing failure of a nuke. North Korea is retreating and disarming its nuclear activity. And, this time, the supervision and confirmation is thorough rather than the joke of Clinton's team.

Lebanon (with Syrian and Iranian technology and money and peoples) attacked Israel. Israel was able to defend itself because of the presence of the USA in the region. What would happen there if the US withdrew from the region like the good little Libertarian wants us to do? What if the enemies of the US and Israel had no reason to fear the US War Machine?

4000 dead is a small price to pay.

Do some history on the number dead in Viet Nam. The reasons to fight Viet Nam were a lot weaker than the reasons to fight Iraq and Afghanistan.

But, the reasons to fight Viet Nam were important. A line had to be drawn somewhere against Russian aggression.

Do some history on the number dead in Korea. Do you realize how many South Koreans would die on the first day of combat if N. Korea could attack S. Korea with no fear of US action?

You are a pansy.

Janett_Reno · 07-12-2008, 06:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dude1394

Pretty disgusting post imo.

What's disgusting about it is that you are stating that our government, our military and all of the people who have given so much here got into the iraq conflict as a favor to the oil companies, disgusting, ignorant and completely lacking any evidence.

Stop pretending to be a hero and not all military personal are John McSame or W Bush fans. The last poll showed the soldiers fighting for us was for Obama. Stop connecting W Bush to the Baptist Christian, the almighty one and our military had a job and they done it and done a good job. As far as your spin about W, Chains, Rove, Liberman and Rams being great fighting military men is again spin and fluff. It has been many shows and documentaries about HALIBURTON employees pissed at this adm and many military personal pissed at guarding HALIBURTON running around all over the place and the tax payers paying for our military to guard Haliburton as they got no bid contracts. You keep spinning that Sadam had weapons of mass destruction. You keep spinning that Sadam bombed us on 9/11. You keep spinning that the suicide bombers was from Iraq. You keep spinning Al Queda was in Iraq before we went in. Now you spin that Iraq is like a walk in the park and such a nice rosey country. Have you noticed lately, that Iraq gov is saying get out and give us a time table? Have you noticed they are buddied up with Iran and Iran is saying get out and give us a time table? Not good dude. The muslim countries are not going to let us sit and stay and run those oil fields. I am speaking of 95% of all muslim countries in the middle east. They want time tables and guess what happens when we leave dude? Guess what happens if we stay dude? The mission that was acomplished was Sadam is no longer there. He did not like and did not tolerate Al Queda or Iran. He was brutal. So now we helped put in power a man and gov that is buddied up to Iran. Are you so sure Liberman's, Israel and the oil men mission is acomplished because Iran is a thorn. You know you want to attack Iran just like this adm. Tell the truth dude where the suicide bombers was from(9/11) and stop spinning it. Tell who was responsible for 9/11 dude and stop spinning it. The same man you care less if we go after because you have convinced yourself that Sadam was one that attacked us on 9/11. You know the real reason we went in Iraq and so stop the spin and the fluff.

No matter what you think of how it was done, carried out etc., the reasoning for the conflict was debated, discussed and voted upon. IMO it was by a government that had just been attacked for the first time on our soil and lost 3,000 of our citizens (and could have easily been 30,000). A country that was afraid that every bridge, mall, letter was going to contain death from terrorism. Those people who put their lives on the line to keep this country and your family safe did it because they thought it the best option to secure this country. And guess what, history (last 8 years) says that they were right.

Again keep spinning as i see again you watch O'Reily and Fox News way to much. Again dude is spinning that Sadam and Iraq was the mastermind of 9/11 and he carried out the attack and the suicide bombers was from Iraq. This is all false dude. You can do better spin than this. Obama did not vote for the Iraq war, neither did Paul or Dennis K. Scott, the Republican told you and us that the adm told him to spin and make us believe and scare us, as they were preparing to attack Iraq a long time. It wasn't 9/11 why we attacked Iraq. Do you think you can make people believe all you are trying to spin? Again, stop with the military are republicans and W is a Baptist. You don't speak for the military or the Baptist and all you speak for and spin for are neocons. Bridges contain terrorism? Have you been partying with Josh today dude? What bridges did Sadam blow up in the usa? Also if you are a big terrorism guy and want to attack all of it and things you believe in, then when are you going into China, Russia, Saudi, Pakistan, Iran, Syria and Cuba? Even NK. All you are doing now is spinning and doing what you always do, we are the baptist, we are not gay, we are not of color, we won't take your fishing poles away, we never raise taxes on the rich and maybe sometimes on the poor but who cares for them, we will attack who we want to, and we are the faith and values and we mix in the morals. All this is fluff dude. Won't work anymore. Get real and what one has told you in this thread, get real and stop spinning. The people that put their life on the line for you and me, why not give them support when they get home and stop with making them live on the streets. Why not support them when they get home? They have done their job and a great job, so now support them.

Unless you think that china (who is now the worlds biggest polluter) and India are running new cars on pixie dust.

The democrats aren't responsible for all of our problems but they damn sure are largely responsible for those gas prices you are quoting. Their problem is that they don't have enough guts to do anything that might cost them a vote, unlike dubya, the republicans and the conservative movement in the case of the Iraq conflict. Because they believed this was the right thing to do.

Here you go again blaming JFK, Carter and Clinton for gas prices. Do you think people believe your spin? Grow some nads and stand for something like Newt says and find solutions and stop blaming things on others. W is FAR FROM THE CONSERVATIVE MOVEMENT. W is connected at the hip with Rove, Chains, Rams, AssCroft, Liberman and finally John McSame joined them. They are running off conservatives and again you told me W wasn't conservative and was closer to a democrat. Get real dude and stop spinning. On one hand you say blame the democrats for the iraq war because they voted for it and on the other hand you say the Iraq war was a wonderful thing because Sadam was connected to 9/11. The right thing to do? Scott the republican and W's messenger says he thinks it was wrong to lie to the American people. W knew but wasn't the man that ran the show. You jump off on gas prices and then the Iraq war. Oh i forgot, you are very happy with 5.00 a gallon gas prices and like Phil Grahm says, we are really in great times, no recession, no inflation and the public is just cry babies. Groceries are not high and gas prices are about where alot in this adm feel they should be or higher. Do you think you can sell that to that to the public? You tell me one day that W is closer to a democrat and now telling me he started the conservative movement? Josh needs some of what you have been smoking. You are smarter than this, come on.

Nice to equate my political dislike of the leftist-democrats with racist, jew-haters as well, good old fashioned liberal tactic. I would say that the democrats in this case were the arabic-haters as they were willing to let that country go up in flames to get elected. Nice go there.

Racist, when you call Obama Black. Racist, when you call his name over and over again, trying to make him sound like Sadam. Here again, you are running around in circles attacking yourself. Not even John McSame could hire you because atleast he can break out of a speech or a circle every now and then but you just keep running around like a dog chasing it's tail. Get some faith and values dude and mix in some morals.

With respect to your quoting of oil profits, you don't cite your source to check so I'll extrapolate it for you, especially what's going on this year and what will probably only get worse with our friends now having Barack Hussein Obama in the house who doesn't believe we should drill anywhere, anytime.

In all means dude, like McSame says, we need to give millions and billons of tax breaks to Exon/Mobile and oil companies. You know, the trickle down effect. Most republicans i have talked to, has not felt any of this trickling yet. I know some that have went bankrupt. W, Chains and most of this adm has wanted to drill since they was in college and when they was oil men. Wonder why dude? Most republicans was why they couldn't because people like Jeb, McSame, and others said no to drilling. Jeb had to, as he had to do what FL wanted to do and now McSame has flip flopped again. Wow what a great conservative movement, McSame, Liberman, W Bush, Chains, Rams, Asscroft, but dude what happened to all these other conservatives moving? Colin Powell backing Obama, Hagel said yep i'll be Obama's vice pres, Newt saying where is a conservative anymore, making Warner quit and many others. You are not going to make the public believe that the great McSame and Liberman are the next great conservatives. Have you reverted back to Billy Beer? It sounds like you have been partying with Billy Carter down at the wood shack.
1999 - 7.9 -
2000 - 10.9
2001 - 17.5
2002 - 11.5
2003 - 21.5 (year we invade Iraq)
2004 - 25.3
2005 - 36.1
2006 - 39.5 (Year the democrats ran on reducing gas prices)
2007 - 40.6
2008 - 53.1 (extrapolated).

So using your own strange math (4 years versus 2 ???)..
Republicans 18billion in 4 years
Democrats 13.5billion in 2 years (give 'em 4 years and it'll be 27billion).
Looks like the democrats just got elected so they could make the oil companies richer.

The oil companies don't back the democrats, wonder why?Figure your math up again and go have another Billy Beer.