airdvr 210 #51 August 12, 2014 kallend***QuoteFACT: the justification was simply a lie. Show me the proof you have. You really are out of touch. I see you have nothing. Thanks.Please don't dent the planet. Destinations by Roxanne Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #52 August 12, 2014 Quotestop providing aid, and stop trading with any country that harbors or funds terrorists. LOL There is no way the US is willing to turn their back on Saudie Arabia. You guys created this mess with a father/son dick swinging contest. You could at least have the common decency to clean up the mess you have created. Maybe one day you guys will learn that not everybody wants to be like the USA. And maybe at the same time your soldiers will one day figure out they aren't always fighting to defend the freedom of Americans. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mirage62 0 #53 August 12, 2014 Quote Maybe one day you guys will learn that not everybody wants to be like the USA. Yep, one day maybe Canada will grow a set..... Naaaaa never happen. Quote And maybe at the same time your soldiers will one day figure out they aren't always fighting to defend the freedom of Americans. Hell MAYBE one day Canada will decide there is something WORTH fighting for................ Naaaaa never happen.Kevin Keenan is my hero, a double FUP, he does so much with so little Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mirage62 0 #54 August 12, 2014 Quote If by "much else" you mean "restart our war" then yes, I am in that camp. It would be a mistake to start the Second Iraq War. However, there is a lot more you can do than restart our war. Bill that's my point, had we left troop in the area with a moderate amount of equipment I do not believe we would be looking at the same problem - depending on what Obama did after ISIS started moving. Handle at the beginning I do not think we would be looking at restarting the war, as we may be doing right now.Kevin Keenan is my hero, a double FUP, he does so much with so little Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #55 August 12, 2014 mirage62Hell MAYBE one day Canada will decide there is something WORTH fighting for. And what, precisely, was "WORTH fighting for" in Iraq? Oh, that's right, the PNAC thought it could get its hands on the oil and otherwise profit from dealing death while "only" sacrificing >4000 of our own soldiers. I simply do not understand why every veteran and family member of a fallen soldier in the country hasn't gathered all the members of the PNAC up and tried them for treason and war crimes.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cgriff 0 #56 August 12, 2014 mirage62Hell MAYBE one day Canada will decide there is something WORTH fighting for................ Naaaaa never happen. Seriously? I'll grant you, I'm no fan of Canada, but this is just silly... It took Canada a week to declare war on Germany in '39. How long did it take us? I think we have differing ideas of what is WORTH fighting for. Maybe, just maybe, making up wars to increase political power isn't quite the worthy justification our "leaders" pretend it is... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bolas 5 #57 August 12, 2014 SkyDekker Quote stop providing aid, and stop trading with any country that harbors or funds terrorists. LOL There is no way the US is willing to turn their back on Saudie Arabia. Especially them. Quote You guys created this mess with a father/son dick swinging contest. You could at least have the common decency to clean up the mess you have created. And how do you propose we do that? Short of putting in another regime like Sadam's, if we get back involved we can chase ISIS out of the country but the minute we leave they or someone like them will come back and the Iraqi army will just surrender the weapons we gave them to them again. If they aren't willing to fight, why should we do it for them? Quote Maybe one day you guys will learn that not everybody wants to be like the USA. And maybe at the same time your soldiers will one day figure out they aren't always fighting to defend the freedom of Americans. Maybe the best way to learn that lesson is by completely exiting the area to realize the futility and foolishness of thinking wars that have gone on for over a thousand years can be resolved by outside forces by anything less then genocide. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,119 #58 August 12, 2014 >Bill that's my point, had we left troop in the area with a moderate amount of >equipment I do not believe we would be looking at the same problem . . . I think it would now be worse, not better. More US soldiers would be dead and the government would be even more of a hollow shell. We toppled Saddam Hussein, and in the process freed a lot of the people he was controlling with an iron fist. Turns out a lot of them were terrorists and extremists who have rejoiced in the freedom to kill that we gave them. Now we have several choices: 1) Become the next Saddam Hussein and restore that iron fist. Sure, we could do that, but the cost in both money and human lives (many of them American) would be enormous. And do you really want to become the next Saddam Hussein? 2) Keep enough troops in-country to prop up a puppet government. Cost - more dead Americans and guaranteed collapse when we do leave. Remember the Shah? 3) Get the hell out of there and let them decide their own destiny. I prefer 3) - fewer dead Americans and more freedom for the people in the region to decide what _they_ want to do. Israel has been trying to solve this problem (setting up a Western-style government in the Middle East) for 50 years, and they are no closer to a solution. We should not repeat their mistakes. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,150 #59 August 12, 2014 airdvr******QuoteFACT: the justification was simply a lie. Show me the proof you have. You really are out of touch. I see you have nothing. Thanks. There was nothing. No WMDs. Bush and Powell both finally admitted it. The justification for the invasion was a bare faced lie.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,150 #60 August 12, 2014 mirage62Quote Maybe one day you guys will learn that not everybody wants to be like the USA. Yep, one day maybe Canada will grow a set..... Naaaaa never happen. *** And maybe at the same time your soldiers will one day figure out they aren't always fighting to defend the freedom of Americans. Hell MAYBE one day Canada will decide there is something WORTH fighting for................ Naaaaa never happen. Suggest you read a little history. For starters, try Googling "Vimy Ridge" and "Juno Beach".... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airdvr 210 #61 August 12, 2014 kallend*********QuoteFACT: the justification was simply a lie. Show me the proof you have. You really are out of touch. I see you have nothing. Thanks. There was nothing. No WMDs. Bush and Powell both finally admitted it. The justification for the invasion was a bare faced lie. They admitted none were found John. We know he had them.Please don't dent the planet. Destinations by Roxanne Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,119 #62 August 12, 2014 > We know he had them. At one point he certainly did - because we sold him the ingredients. But by the time the war started, they were nowhere to be found - as the U.S. Iraq Survey Group Final Report determined. "ISG has not found evidence that Saddam Hussein possessed WMD stocks in 2003." Indeed the UN investigation teams were within weeks of proving this when we invaded. That would have been a political disaster for the US, so we invaded before they were able to finish their search. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,150 #63 August 12, 2014 airdvr ************ Quote FACT: the justification was simply a lie. Show me the proof you have. You really are out of touch. I see you have nothing. Thanks. There was nothing. No WMDs. Bush and Powell both finally admitted it. The justification for the invasion was a bare faced lie. They admitted none were found John. We know he had them. Like the yellow cake from Niger and "Saddam Hussein's armoury of chemical weapons is on standby for use within 45 minutes".... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airdvr 210 #64 August 12, 2014 Let me spoon feed it to you...your memory only goes back to right around 2002. Lots was happening prior to that which you and your ilk conveniently ignore... June 23-28, 1991 - Iraqis fire warning shots at inspectors to prevent them from intercepting vehicles suspected of carrying nuclear equipment. August 2, 1991 - Iraq admits to biological weapons research for "defensive purposes" only. March 19, 1992 - Iraq declares that it once possessed 89 missiles and chemical weapons, but destroyed them in the summer of 1991. This unilateral destruction of weapons is a violation of SCR 687. July 1992 - UNSCOM destroys some Iraqi chemical weapons and production facilities. July 5, 1993 - UNSCOM leaves Iraq. July 1, 1995 - Iraq admits the existence of its biological weapons program. December 16, 1995 - UNSCOM has the Tigris River near Baghdad searched. They uncover over 200 missile parts, believed to have originated in Russia. It goes on and on. We played cat and mouse games with these fucks for more than a decade when your beloved Mr. Clinton was in charge. In 2002 you might have been willing to bet that Iraq had no WMDs. Me and most of the members of congress weren't. You want to revise history go ahead.Please don't dent the planet. Destinations by Roxanne Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,119 #65 August 12, 2014 "you and your ilk" Safe to ignore anything that comes after such a statement, since it is pretty much a guarantee that the following statement will be based on a strawman. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,150 #66 August 12, 2014 Let me refresh YOUR memory: Here you see both truck and rail car-mounted mobile factories. The description our sources gave us of the technical features required by such facilities are highly detailed and extremely accurate. As these drawings based on their description show, we know what the fermenters look like, we know what the tanks, pumps, compressors and other parts look like. We know how they fit together. We know how they work. And we know a great deal about the platforms on which they are mounted. As shown in this diagram, these factories can be concealed easily, either by moving ordinary-looking trucks and rail cars along Iraq's thousands of miles of highway or track, or by parking them in a garage or warehouse or somewhere in Iraq's extensive system of underground tunnels and bunkers. We know that Iraq has at lest seven of these mobile biological agent factories. The truck-mounted ones have at least two or three trucks each. That means that the mobile production facilities are very few, perhaps 18 trucks that we know of-there may be more-but perhaps 18 that we know of. Just imagine trying to find 18 trucks among the thousands and thousands of trucks that travel the roads of Iraq every single day. Colin Powell to UN, Feb 5, 2003. We found the weapons of mass destruction. We found biological laboratories. You remember when Colin Powell stood up in front of the world, and he said, Iraq has got laboratories, mobile labs to build biological weapons. They're illegal. They're against the United Nations resolutions, and we've so far discovered two. And we'll find more weapons as time goes on. But for those who say we haven't found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they're wrong, we found them. G.W. Bush, May 29, 2003 "My personal view is we're going to find them, just as we found these two mobile laboratories” Donald Rumsfeld, May 29, 2003 "But let's remember what we've already found. Secretary Powell on February 5th talked about a mobile, biological weapons capability. That has now been found and this is a weapons laboratory trailers capable of making a lot of agent that -- dry agent, dry biological agent that can kill a lot of people. So we are finding these pieces that were described.” Condoleezza Rice, June 3, 2003 "We know that these trailers look exactly like what was described to us by multiple sources as the capabilities for building or for making biological agents. We know that we have from multiple sources who told us that then and sources who have confirmed it now. Now the Iraqis were not stupid about this. They were able to conceal a lot. They've been able to scrub things down. But I think when the whole picture comes out, we will see that this was an active program.” Condoleezza Rice, "We recently found two mobile biological weapons facilities which were capable of producing biological agents” President G W Bush, June 5, 2003 LIES, ALL LIES. These "WMD labs" turned out to be making hydrogen for artillery balloons. "Saddam Hussein's armoury of chemical weapons is on standby for use within 45 minutes", another LIE. Yellow cake from Niger (SOTU, January 2003), another LIE.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airdvr 210 #67 August 12, 2014 QuoteLIES, ALL LIES. These "WMD labs" turned out to be making hydrogen for artillery balloons. I understand that's how you'd like it to be John. So the administration that couldn't tie its shoelaces is all of a sudden capable of a massive conspiracy? Right.Please don't dent the planet. Destinations by Roxanne Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,119 #68 August 12, 2014 > So the administration that couldn't tie its shoelaces is all of a sudden capable of a >massive conspiracy? Hanlon's Razor applies. Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by simple incompetence. There was no conspiracy, just ignorance and magical thinking. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 897 #69 August 12, 2014 Anywho.... We're sending in approximately 100 additional "advisers" in northern Iraq. Apparently they aren't wearing boots though. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,150 #70 August 12, 2014 airdvrQuoteLIES, ALL LIES. These "WMD labs" turned out to be making hydrogen for artillery balloons. I understand that's how you'd like it to be John. So the administration that couldn't tie its shoelaces is all of a sudden capable of a massive conspiracy? Right. Both the CIA and State Dept. had stated that the "yellow cake" story was false, yet GWB still included it in his SOTU address. LIE ... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Stumpy 284 #71 August 12, 2014 normissAnywho.... We're sending in approximately 100 additional "advisers" in northern Iraq. Apparently they aren't wearing boots though. maybe they should wear crocs and the whole thing will peter out due to ISIS laughing too hard to fight.Never try to eat more than you can lift Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
aphid 0 #72 August 12, 2014 I recommend he also follow up with some study of Korea and Afghanistan. Sigh... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mirage62 0 #73 August 12, 2014 OK, let me be clear....I was just fucking around about Canada. It's a great country with great people. I was responding in a childish manner to comments from a previous poster. Canada is full of kung-fu killers and will descend upon its southern neighbor at any moment of their choosing and correct our out of control government (should another Republican EVER get elected) Now will someone call off the mad moose's? Kevin Keenan is my hero, a double FUP, he does so much with so little Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,119 #74 August 12, 2014 >Apparently they aren't wearing boots though. Well that's OK then. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 897 #75 August 12, 2014 So long as you fully understand what "military advisers" are, I suppose so. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites