who among you feel that Iraq was better off with Saddam running things? Please spare the phony indignation and outrage over his crimes: face it, you really don't care about anyone except for yourselves and your own surroundings. Once you realize this, then you can be honest. answer honestly please, after all, we all have our fake identities to hide behind, right?

Yes, Iraq is better off now. The don't have the fear of being kidnaped in the middleof the night and tortured to death.

Also, they now have a chance for self determination. They never had that before.

The best part for them is that they'll end up with all the benefits without having had to dothe bulk of the fighting for it.

I have to go with LU, Iraq is better off, but it's still a process.

What Lord Umbarger said basically.

What I find VERY funny, is the setup question for the "poll". Like, I have NO Idea what the pollsters take is. Nope. Not a biased question in the least...

Better off, many many reasons. But like Yelekiah sais it is a process.

that's wonderful and all, but can any of you brave "Hawks" out there give me a reasonable explanation on why "Smilin" Dick Cheney was able to get five draft deferments to avoid serving the military during the Vietnam "war"? I know Dick is a real badass and all, but geez, FIVE deferments?

In the American Civil War, it was commen for a wealthy draftee to hire someone to stand in for them. It was even legal at the time. People with money today can usually hire themselves a smart lawyer find them a way out of the fray.

I'm not saying that it's right or honourable but, it's always been the way of things. In the middle ages, the wealthy bought weapons and armour. The poor fought with bare feet and farm impliments. Who had a better chance of surviving? Of course, the richest people stayed in the castle!

Another twist is that people with money who join the service often have a college education. When they serve it's in a higher ranking (read : further from the shooting) position. That's not altogether fair either but, I'd rather serve under someone who's been educated in the art of war than someone who was just plucked off the streets.

Once again, the major factor here isn't rather Cheney was a coward but, more an issue of he had the money to "serve in other capacities".

from what I've read about Dick, he wasn't that great of a student while in college, and he pretty much lucked and weasled his way out of the draft. Forgive me if I'm wrong, but when Cheney was eligible for service, he got married. When married men (providing they had no offspring) were eligible, he got his wife pregnant. When this too failed, he luckily enough turned 26, the cut-off age for the draft at that time. Perhaps I have my facts wrong, or have misinterpreted my sources (which I'm sure the Bush folks will be more than happy to point out), but to say that Dick bought his way out seems a little disingenous to me:didn't I read that he worked for a power company as a lineman? I will hand it to him, though, he does seem to have a bit more adverse background than Bush, a little more in line with the common man. Too bad he's such a Dick!

rofl

was a legit question

is an insult to every member of UM, I don't see a qualifier...

what does this have to do with your original topic/point?


Feel the love?

Evil little man got his wife pregnant just to avoid the draft...
I remember that schtick when the Thunder Road Group and America Coming Together were chanting about that back in like March? of 04, was all over the Mainstream Media and liberal talking points sites. Thank you Mr. Soros. It was made an "issue" when they were running against the treasonous coward Kerry, who served in Vietnam if you haven't heard.

I'm just wondering how this ties in to you thinking Iraqis were being better off under Saddam, Uday and Qusay...

Lynne Cheney was on the Diane Rehm show today on NPR promoting her newest book. By coincidence, Bush spoke today, again trying to sell his "war". Cheney's appearance on Rehm's show was another exercise is selling the war, but fortunately, Diane Rehm is a smart host and asked some questions that had Cheney squirming. A few callers slipped in and one Vietnam vet questioned Lynne on Dick's five deferments. All she said was "I thank you for your service". Wow. I seem to have hit a sore spot on this site questioning the ADMINISTRATION, which is what I would expect from the sanctimonious Bush crowd. Feel the love, indeed.

I'm still wondering how Bush, Cheney, the ADMINISTRATION, or whatever the object of your baseless fanatical hatred is, ties in to your original post saying Iraqis were being better off under Saddam, Uday and Qusay.

I'm wondering the same thing.



I'm not happy at all with the war, or Bush-however, I can agree with the majority and say that the Iraqis are better off without Sadaam.

I think there was a lot more order under Hussein; I don't recall hearing about car bombs everyday. I believe they also had power and water. Bush got us involved in something just to finish the job his father didn't, and no matter what any of you armchair generals say, it's a mess with no end in sight. As far as anyone claiming it was our duty to rescue the people of Iraq from a brutal dictator, bollocks! How come the U.S. waited so long to get involved in WWII? The Holocaust was in full swing by the time Pearl Harbor was attacked, and up to that point, the Holocaust was a buried item in most newspapers. And one more thing; if you call me any more names (fanatical), I just might cry!

Yes, I think they are better off and no you didn't hear about ANYTHING coming from Iraq before....now did you?

Why didn't you try starting another thread titled "I just want to rant about the US government" and be honest.

Just rapes, people disappearing, being chopped up in industrial shredders... oh, and there Were bombs now and then. Military on civilian actions. Remember all the children we released from the jails? Saddam of course let all bad reports get out. There was no collusion from CNN either... NOT!


Thus, I don't care what the supposed justification we had to use to get the noodle spined charged enough to finish what we should have done to begin with.


Yes, I heard that from before we went into Afghanistan about Afghanistan. The Arab Street will Rise Up! It was a supposed "quagmire" before we ever started. Another Vietnam is what that side WANTS to create the impression of. Smoke and Mirrors don't work when everyone sees you setting them up.


So we're to never learn from our mistakes? Never to start, Somewhere? Wait for more attacks? Do you want to pull out immediately? Do you have a plan other than to whine? So are we allowed to relate this to WWII or not? I can do it both ways.

Here's what a Democratic Senator who went to Iraq has to say:

=====================================

Our Troops Must Stay
America can't abandon 27 million Iraqis to 10,000 terrorists.

BY JOE LIEBERMAN
Tuesday, November 29, 2005 12:01 a.m. EST

I have just returned from my fourth trip to Iraq in the past 17 months and can report real progress there. More work needs to be done, of course, but the Iraqi people are in reach of a watershed transformation from the primitive, killing tyranny of Saddam to modern, self-governing, self-securing nationhood--unless the great American military that has given them and us this unexpected opportunity is prematurely withdrawn.

Progress is visible and practical. In the Kurdish North, there is continuing security and growing prosperity. The primarily Shiite South remains largely free of terrorism, receives much more electric power and other public services than it did under Saddam, and is experiencing greater economic activity. The Sunni triangle, geographically defined by Baghdad to the east, Tikrit to the north and Ramadi to the west, is where most of the terrorist enemy attacks occur. And yet here, too, there is progress.

There are many more cars on the streets, satellite television dishes on the roofs, and literally millions more cell phones in Iraqi hands than before. All of that says the Iraqi economy is growing. And Sunni candidates are actively campaigning for seats in the National Assembly. People are working their way toward a functioning society and economy in the midst of a very brutal, inhumane, sustained terrorist war against the civilian population and the Iraqi and American military there to protect it.

It is a war between 27 million and 10,000; 27 million Iraqis who want to live lives of freedom, opportunity and prosperity and roughly 10,000 terrorists who are either Saddam revanchists, Iraqi Islamic extremists or al Qaeda foreign fighters who know their wretched causes will be set back if Iraq becomes free and modern. The terrorists are intent on stopping this by instigating a civil war to produce the chaos that will allow Iraq to replace Afghanistan as the base for their fanatical war-making. We are fighting on the side of the 27 million because the outcome of this war is critically important to the security and freedom of America. If the terrorists win, they will be emboldened to strike us directly again and to further undermine the growing stability and progress in the Middle East, which has long been a major American national and economic security priority.





Before going to Iraq last week, I visited Israel and the Palestinian Authority. Israel has been the only genuine democracy in the region, but it is now getting some welcome company from the Iraqis and Palestinians who are in the midst of robust national legislative election campaigns, the Lebanese who have risen up in proud self-determination after the Hariri assassination to eject their Syrian occupiers (the Syrian- and Iranian-backed Hezbollah militias should be next), and the Kuwaitis, Egyptians and Saudis who have taken steps to open up their governments more broadly to their people. In my meeting with the thoughtful prime minister of Iraq, Ibrahim al-Jaafari, he declared with justifiable pride that his country now has the most open, democratic political system in the Arab world. He is right.
In the face of terrorist threats and escalating violence, eight million Iraqis voted for their interim national government in January, almost 10 million participated in the referendum on their new constitution in October, and even more than that are expected to vote in the elections for a full-term government on Dec. 15. Every time the 27 million Iraqis have been given the chance since Saddam was overthrown, they have voted for self-government and hope over the violence and hatred the 10,000 terrorists offer them. Most encouraging has been the behavior of the Sunni community, which, when disappointed by the proposed constitution, registered to vote and went to the polls instead of taking up arms and going to the streets. Last week, I was thrilled to see a vigorous political campaign, and a large number of independent television stations and newspapers covering it.

None of these remarkable changes would have happened without the coalition forces led by the U.S. And, I am convinced, almost all of the progress in Iraq and throughout the Middle East will be lost if those forces are withdrawn faster than the Iraqi military is capable of securing the country.

The leaders of Iraq's duly elected government understand this, and they asked me for reassurance about America's commitment. The question is whether the American people and enough of their representatives in Congress from both parties understand this. I am disappointed by Democrats who are more focused on how President Bush took America into the war in Iraq almost three years ago, and by Republicans who are more worried about whether the war will bring them down in next November's elections, than they are concerned about how we continue the progress in Iraq in the months and years ahead.

Here is an ironic finding I brought back from Iraq. While U.S. public opinion polls show serious declines in support for the war and increasing pessimism about how it will end, polls conducted by Iraqis for Iraqi universities show increasing optimism. Two-thirds say they are better off than they were under Saddam, and a resounding 82% are confident their lives in Iraq will be better a year from now than they are today. What a colossal mistake it would be for America's bipartisan political leadership to choose this moment in history to lose its will and, in the famous phrase, to seize defeat from the jaws of the coming victory.

The leaders of America's military and diplomatic forces in Iraq, Gen. George Casey and Ambassador Zal Khalilzad, have a clear and compelling vision of our mission there. It is to create the environment in which Iraqi democracy, security and prosperity can take hold and the Iraqis themselves can defend their political progress against those 10,000 terrorists who would take it from them.





Does America have a good plan for doing this, a strategy for victory in Iraq? Yes we do. And it is important to make it clear to the American people that the plan has not remained stubbornly still but has changed over the years. Mistakes, some of them big, were made after Saddam was removed, and no one who supports the war should hesitate to admit that; but we have learned from those mistakes and, in characteristic American fashion, from what has worked and not worked on the ground. The administration's recent use of the banner "clear, hold and build" accurately describes the strategy as I saw it being implemented last week.
We are now embedding a core of coalition forces in every Iraqi fighting unit, which makes each unit more effective and acts as a multiplier of our forces. Progress in "clearing" and "holding" is being made. The Sixth Infantry Division of the Iraqi Security Forces now controls and polices more than one-third of Baghdad on its own. Coalition and Iraqi forces have together cleared the previously terrorist-controlled cities of Fallujah, Mosul and Tal Afar, and most of the border with Syria. Those areas are now being "held" secure by the Iraqi military themselves. Iraqi and coalition forces are jointly carrying out a mission to clear Ramadi, now the most dangerous city in Al-Anbar province at the west end of the Sunni Triangle.

Nationwide, American military leaders estimate that about one-third of the approximately 100,000 members of the Iraqi military are able to "lead the fight" themselves with logistical support from the U.S., and that that number should double by next year. If that happens, American military forces could begin a drawdown in numbers proportional to the increasing self-sufficiency of the Iraqi forces in 2006. If all goes well, I believe we can have a much smaller American military presence there by the end of 2006 or in 2007, but it is also likely that our presence will need to be significant in Iraq or nearby for years to come.

The economic reconstruction of Iraq has gone slower than it should have, and too much money has been wasted or stolen. Ambassador Khalilzad is now implementing reform that has worked in Afghanistan--Provincial Reconstruction Teams, composed of American economic and political experts, working in partnership in each of Iraq's 18 provinces with its elected leadership, civil service and the private sector. That is the "build" part of the "clear, hold and build" strategy, and so is the work American and international teams are doing to professionalize national and provincial governmental agencies in Iraq.

These are new ideas that are working and changing the reality on the ground, which is undoubtedly why the Iraqi people are optimistic about their future--and why the American people should be, too.





I cannot say enough about the U.S. Army and Marines who are carrying most of the fight for us in Iraq. They are courageous, smart, effective, innovative, very honorable and very proud. After a Thanksgiving meal with a great group of Marines at Camp Fallujah in western Iraq, I asked their commander whether the morale of his troops had been hurt by the growing public dissent in America over the war in Iraq. His answer was insightful, instructive and inspirational: "I would guess that if the opposition and division at home go on a lot longer and get a lot deeper it might have some effect, but, Senator, my Marines are motivated by their devotion to each other and the cause, not by political debates."
Thank you, General. That is a powerful, needed message for the rest of America and its political leadership at this critical moment in our nation's history. Semper Fi.

Mr. Lieberman is a Democratic senator from Connecticut.

===========================================


lol you think that was calling you a name? It's a property of your undeniable hatred as expressed in your words. If you want to claim the "fanatical" title for yourself as you've just done, that's not my doing.

Geez, you really put me in my place; I'm truly sorry for having the wrong opinion and offending the Bush supporters on this site. I'm sure the Iraq situation will work itself out and the troops will come home safe and sound. You are right and I am wrong. I wish you all good luck. Goodnight.

Has it ever crossed your mind that as long as they've been fighting us over there they have not been fighting us over here? I don't know everything that the leaders do and I certainly am not preivy to thier plans but, I am smart enough to know that Al Quida cannot let an arab nation become free. It would make them look like they have no more power than any other terrorist organisation. Then the radicals would stop backig them. One of the benefits of invading Iraq has been that Al Quiada has had to focus it's efforts in the arab region.

I don't know about all the liberal terror lovers but, I'd far rather have the war going on over three than in my front yard. But, if they were in my front yard, I'd be shooting at the little b*stards too!

BTW, the terrorists are offended by being called towel heads since what they wrap around thier heads more closely resembles a sheet. From now on, all freedom loving people are required to refer to thier friendly neighborhood terrorists as "Sheet Heads". Thank you.

Friend, I too am aware of the threat of al quida or al quiada invading our front yards. I'm frightened by the prospect of a sheet-head,or even worse, a pillow-case head spreading their evil into our homes...

Pillow case head, now that's a new one.

Using means such as mass graves and chemicals to maintain a sinister order is bound to have some success.