Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
supercar

consequences of failure in Iraq

101 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Devendra
What we did in Vietnam is made it known that we will not stand by and watch the communist expansion on the Far East.

Should we then have just allow Cambodia, Malaysia, Thailand, Indonesia, The Philippines to fall to the communist and waited 30 years in hope of it will be properous? Should we then have left Kuwait alone and hope in 30 years it would be free again from Saddam? Should we wait 30 years before the world withdrew it's sanction, embargo, no fly zone and Resolutions on Iraq? Basically you are saying we do nothing and just hope for the best.

What kinda of dramatic bulls**t is that? :rolleyes:

Go get your facts straight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AROCES
What kinda of dramatic bulls**t is that? :rolleyes:

Go get your facts straight.

More of it makes sense and you don't like it since it does not fit your talking point about Vietnam. You folks are so proud thinking you are so right about Vietnam. Well, there is another side to that story, and you don't like hearing it.

Edited by AROCES

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
supercar
The brutal reality is that his son's life was wasted

His son died so that we never have to look at this again:

linked-image

No attacks on US soil since 9/11 proves his son's life was not wasted.

Here are the facts about the war in Iraq:

Success- invasion of Iraq

Success- destruction of Iraq's armed forces

Success- occupation of Iraq's capitol city

Success- occupation of all of Iraq

Success- removal of Iraq's government

Success- free elections

Success- capture of Saddam Hussein

Success- death of Uday and Qusay Hussein

Success- death of Al-Zarqawi

Success- capture of 50 out 55 on Iraq's 'Most Wanted' list

Success- introduction of new Iraqi currency

Success- formation of the new Iraqi Army

Success- Iraqi army operates independantly

Success- more free elections

Success- formation of new Iraqi government

Success- regime change

Success- more free elections

Success- practically no violence in the Kurdish region

Success- invasion of Iraq prompts Libya to give up it's WMD

Success- 85% of eligible voters cast votes in the most recent elections

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
supercar
you've killed approx 600,000 people

600,000? WRONG.

Try 67,364.

iraqbodycount.org

Only 37% of those 67,364 deaths were caused by US/Coalition forces:

'According to the survey by the Oxford Research Group and a website called Iraq Body Count, US-led coalition forces are responsible for about 37 per cent of these deaths, mostly during the initial invasion phase when about 7,000 civilians were killed'

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml...0/ixportal.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cinders

BFD Supercar! REGIME CHANGE my bozozo! BIG FREAKING DEAL!

Dude, you seriously have to look PAST 9/11 when you look AT IRAQ-- BECAUSE IRAQ didn't have a fricken' thing to do with 9/11!!! and HAD NO WMD's! This was admitted by Bone-head Bush!

6 months ago -- remember this on the news: NEWS BITS FROM OCT 20 2006

and NOTHING has changed - NOTHING!!

The only thing that has changed is the NUMBER of DEATHS, more lies, more spins, and more BS reasons to STAY in IRAQ!

But what it is all really about now is all for Bushs' EGO and DYING LEGACY!

Edited by Cinders

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bob26003
How long should we stay? Well the fight to defeat communism took us 45 years and included the Korean and Vietnam wars. I view the Vietnam war as a success. We commited troops to Vietnam to prevent the domino theory of southeast asian countries falling to communism. The Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, Indonesia stayed free of communism because of our commitment in Vietnam.

(Vietnam currently has one of the strongest growing CAPITOLISTIC economies :) )

Bob ... NEVER?? You are one of the most negative people. Have some faith.

And as for "as soon as we left" Vietnam 2 million more Cambodians were killed or starved to death.

If we leave ... Iran doubles it's realestate and oil revenues

Lord ... you are correct sir!

I know I fully understood what we were getting into after September 11th.

Finding Abu Abbas living just outside of Bagdad constitutes harboring a terrorist correct?

All of the above quotes are from President Bush's address to a joint session of Congress and the American People 9/20/2001

When President Bush made this speech we were United ... (90% I believe)

Right now we are the Un-United States. I can only imagine where we would be if there weren't so many Turncoats.

So 45 Years....? That is insane. Absolutely Bat Sh&% Crazy.............

Wake up, America doesn't want it, nor do the Iraqis. Ahminjinehdad has a higher approval rating than Bush.

Besides, it says no where in the Constitution about us Policing the World. We have our own problems at home to worry about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AROCES
Wake up, America doesn't want it, nor do the Iraqis. Ahminjinehdad has a higher approval rating than Bush.

Yeah, but who are approving of Mahmoud? And is that including the Anti Bush? :lol:

Besides, it says no where in the Constitution about us Policing the World. We have our own problems at home to worry about.

YUP, we have our own problem at home and then we got hit on 9/11.

Tell me, if we stay away from all the hot spots in the world, who do you want then to take over? China? The Arabs? Russia?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Caesar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
supercar
BFD Supercar! REGIME CHANGE my bozozo! BIG FREAKING DEAL!

Yes it is a pretty big deal to invade a country on the other side of the world,arrest it's leaders and completely change it's form of government.

Dude, you seriously have to look PAST 9/11 when you look AT IRAQ-- BECAUSE IRAQ didn't have a fricken' thing to do with 9/11

Iraq is the crossroads of the Middle East. If you can control Iraq,you can control the Middle East. The Middle East,as a region,except for Israel,has been waging a Terror War against the United States since 1970. Which gives the United States the right to wage war on the Middle East. Iraq was just the easiest Middle East country to invade because we had been destroying it's air defenses for years leading up to the war.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
supercar
Wake up, America doesn't want it, nor do the Iraqis. Ahminjinehdad has a higher approval rating than Bush.

Yeah he is real popular with those in Iran who stone people to death for having sex outside of marriage. Ahminjinehdad is real popular with those in Iran who cut people's hands of for stealing. Ahminjinehdad is real popular with those in Iran who hang people for being gay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
magnetar
Iraq is the crossroads of the Middle East. If you can control Iraq,you can control the Middle East. The Middle East,as a region,except for Israel,has been waging a Terror War against the United States since 1970. Which gives the United States the right to wage war on the Middle East. Iraq was just the easiest Middle East country to invade because we had been destroying it's air defenses for years leading up to the war.

I remember reading a report, early 2003, to a Federal scientific directorate spelling out possible future problems from oil producers in the Middle East. It tells me that the Administration would beg, borrow, or steal to take preventitive measures.

Unfortunately, there are many territorial issues. And possibly, an oil lust has ignited itself in the so-called religious leaders, who may secretly desire access to the revenues through state control- the very kind of organization the U.S. broke up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
magnetar

I do not mean to suggest that anything but political agenda and policy was used to go to war.

There are many interests in this war, from Turkey down to Iran. And, across to Israel. Perhaps if there was someway to make the main competing interests inside Iraq stakeholders in a positive outcome, things would shape up.

The aims of the war are somewhat reflected in the positions taken by Wolfowitz. Many might be very familiar with his role in various administrations, but nonetheless, here is a refresher interview.

Deputy Secretary Wolfowitz Interview with Vanity Fair. May, 2003

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nietze

A big problem is , americans, by their nature .. aren't the best suited to maintain peace and harmony in any country by their presence. It is bad enough for many just to have a coach load of american tourists around .. but when you think not a coach or two, but thousands upon thousands... and carrying guns and telling the population what they can or can't do . It must be hard on the iraqi's. Americans aren't suited to any kind of peace keeping endeavour by force of numbers, it just cannot work . The more of them there are , the more the resentment. For any nation, an occupying force cannot be pleasant but for an arab nation, with a generally unliked people even amongst european nations like the americans are, it must be terrible.

For example, can you imagine the likes of supercar running around in your area with a gun telling you you cant do this and that. It's enough to make anyone take up arms and be called an insurgent.

Edited by Nietze

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fluffybunny
For example, can you imagine the likes of supercar running around in your area with a gun telling you you cant do this and that. It's enough to make anyone take up arms and be called an insurgent.

That would never happen as Supercar does his patriotic work from behind his computer. Anyway the gungho war supporters fail to see the impact of having tried(and failed) to force a different government system and a way of life on people that did not want it, and after the initial glow of optimism have only seen people blowing each other up over the matter and seen American soldiers killing people that may or may not be a part of the "insurgency"...

As I said earlier, you are absolutely correct, if the roles were reversed and a military came rolling into your neighborhood telling you that your democracy failed and your government is corrupt and needs to be torn apart and several of your neighbors need to be killed and your town blown to heck, you might be the slightest bit upset and against the idea and willing to fight to keep it from happening...even if it was from behind your computer.

Too many people blindly believe what bushs' gang would have them believe and demonize anyone that says different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Devendra
For example, can you imagine the likes of supercar running around in your area with a gun telling you you cant do this and that.

That would be veeery scary. linked-image

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nietze

I'm not so sure they all blindly believe it themselves.. they know that this isnt about saddam or the spreading of democracy either , but it is in those certain parties interest that this belief isn't shaken in others .

Edited by Nietze

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Siara
His son died so that we never have to look at this again:

linked-image

No attacks on US soil since 9/11 proves his son's life was not wasted.

The war in Iraq has very little to do with "this". Al Qaeda was not working with Saddam Hussein. We should have focused on Afghanistan and the Taliban. By getting sidetracked into refereeing an irrelevent civil war we have given the Al Qaeda psychopaths extra time to branch out all over the world.

We've also destroyed our relationship with many of our allies, leaving the world a much less stable place.

As far as Al Qaeda is concerned, we couldn't have done more to increase their membership if we had mounted an ad campaign.

Iraq is never going to be a democracy. It is nothing but a set of artificial boundries concocted by Winston Churchill at the end of World War II. These boundries encircle three populations that hate eachother's guts. Democracy requires compromise. The chances that these populations are going to compromise with eachother in the interests of achieving a western-style democracy are zero. The moment we pull out, be it tomorrow, five years or fifty years they'll leap at eachother's throats and the strongest, most savage military faction will set up a new dictatorship.

Edited by Siara

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AROCES
The war in Iraq has very little to do with "this". Al Qaeda was not working with Saddam Hussein. We should have focused on Afghanistan and the Taliban. By getting sidetracked into refereeing an irrelevent civil war we have given the Al Qaeda psychopaths extra time to branch out all over the world.

We've also destroyed our relationship with many of our allies, leaving the world a much less stable place.

As far as Al Qaeda is concerned, we couldn't have done more to increase their membership if we had mounted an ad campaign.

Iraq is never going to be a democracy. It is nothing but a set of artificial boundries concocted by Winston Churchill at the end of World War II. These boundries encircle three populations that hate eachother's guts. Democracy requires compromise. The chances that these populations are going to compromise with eachother in the interests of achieving a western-style democracy are zero. The moment we pull out, be it tomorrow, five years or fifty years they'll leap at eachother's throats and the strongest, most savage military faction will set up a new dictatorship.

REally? Then why won't we hear your words from the very people who you think they can't live in a democratic way and that they rather butcher each other than live in peace together? Maybe because all you are hearing are the bombs from the few fanatics who actually thinks as you do?

Edited by AROCES

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
supercar
That would never happen as Supercar does his patriotic work from behind his computer

Once again you have violated the Rules of this message board:

Forum, Blog and Chat Room Rules

6. No flaming, flame baiting, mocking, verbal abuse or trolling

Members who derail topics with flaming, trolling, deliberate misquoting or the instigation of 'flame wars' will be removed from the forum. We ask that members stay open minded about opposing viewpoints. Don't ask for other people's opinions on something if the only opinion that matters to you is your own. Avoid being offensive towards other members that you disagree with; attack the viewpoint being presented, not the person who holds that view. Claiming that you 'know' you are right about something and that everyone who disagrees with you is 'ignorant' or 'blind' achieves nothing and is a close minded mentality that we strongly discourage in threads.

If you don't understand the rules of an internet message board which you moderate,how can you expect anyone to believe what you say about Iraq.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fluffybunny

I have broken no such rule Supercar; that is what you said you did...the member I quoted from mention you specifically, stating something to the effect that "how would someone like it to see Supercar walking down the street with a rifle..." I then stated that would not happen, as you have said in the past that you did patriotic work from your computer.

I have not said a thing about you that you have not said about yourself openly on this very forum.

Edited by Fluffybunny

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
supercar
I have broken no such rule Supercar

'Mocking' other posters is forbidden:

6. No flaming, flame baiting, mocking, verbal abuse or trolling

This is clearly mocking:

That would never happen as Supercar does his patriotic work from behind his computer

Each time you attack or mock me,it doesn't make me look bad. It makes you look bad. It makes the entire anti-war movement look bad. It proves that the anti-war movement is made up of individuals who mock and attack other people for their views.

Edited by supercar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fluffybunny

Hi Supercar,

Here is a quote from YOU Posted on: Jan 14 2007, 07:28 PM in reference to the fact that I volunteered to fight in Iraq (in which you did plenty of mocking yourself)

I'm fighting for what I believe right now by posting messages here. The War on Terrorism is a war of ideas. You have to fight an idea with an idea. The fight against radical Islam will be fought through public discourse,i.e. internet message boards,just as much as with bullets.

So, you have claimed such a thing, and that is what I posted. I am not mocking, I am repeating what you said about yourself. Read the bolded part of the quote above. It is very clear. Mocking would be more along the lines of:

Perhaps if you are so dead-set against the United States winning in Iraq,you'd like to head over to Iraq and join a militia or insurgent group. They might even teach you how to behead people.

Something you said to me...very ironic since I enlisted and became a medic eventually fighting in iraq and Kuwait. Rather well decorated for it too, so you can see why such a thing as what you said above is not only disgusting, but mocking as well...

From your own words that you have used many many times (in this case Posted on: Jan 15 2007, 11:34 PM):

Psychological projection:

* "Projection is the opposite defence mechanism to identification. We project our own unpleasant feelings onto someone else and blame them for having thoughts that we really have."

* "A defense mechanism in which the individual attributes to other people impulses and traits that he himself has but cannot accept. It is especially likely to occur when the person lacks insight into his own impulses and traits."

* "Attributing one's own undesirable traits to other people or agencies."

* "The individual perceives in others the motive he denies having himself. Thus the cheat is sure that everyone else is dishonest."

* "A man harboring attractions for a woman would perceive other men has having the same attractions for her."

* "People attribute their own undesirable traits onto others. An individual who unconsciously harbours his or her aggressive/sexual tendencies may then imagine other people acting in an excessively aggressive or sexual way."

* "An individual who possesses malicious characteristics, but who is unwilling to perceive himself as an antagonist, convinces himself that his opponent feels and would act the same way."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection

Edited by Fluffybunny

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bob26003

I was just thinking... How stupid were they to think that invading Iraq would work, especially given what happened in Ahfganistan with the Russians.

Also, Caesar...... That pharmacuetical factory that Clinton targeted that supposedly was making chemical gas with Iraq help..... Was making Ibuprofen and Pet medications.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
supercar
Hi Supercar,

So, you have claimed such a thing, and that is what I posted. I am not mocking, I am repeating what you said about yourself. Read the bolded part of the quote above. It is very clear. Mocking would be more along the lines of:

Perhaps if you are so dead-set against the United States winning in Iraq,you'd like to head over to Iraq and join a militia or insurgent group. They might even teach you how to behead people.

Something you said to me...very ironic since I enlisted and became a medic eventually fighting in iraq and Kuwait. Rather well decorated for it too, so you can see why such a thing as what you said above is not only disgusting, but mocking as well...

A saying about glass houses and throwing stones comes to mind...

I didn't suggest you should behead people. I was not implying that you would behead people. I was pointing out the barbaric nature of those we are fighting in Iraq. And they don't just behead the few Western hostages you see on videotape. They have beheaded hundreds of people:

February 27, 2007

Islamic State of Iraq: #1 In Beheading Murders For Allah

I see that the Islamic State of Iraq had claimed a number beheadings on their English language (Google owned blogspot, of course) website today. Most of the beheadings took place before the security crackdown. But it's worthy of note that they have started using the term "beheading" again when referring to their victims. They usually use the term "Implementing Allah's rule" as a general euphemism for any kind of murder (ie, when the physically capture a person and then kill them as opposed to an "operation" which generally means a straightforward attack).

It's also worth noting that since Zawahiri repremanded Zarqawi for turning the Ummah off due to his excessiveness in decapitating hostages, there have been very few beheading claims from Iraq. There have been many beheadings, but no one wanted to claim responsibility. Bad PR. Until now.

You'll have to excuse al Qaeda in Iraq's poor grammar and spellling. Apparently they don't run this copy by Orange County's finest, Azzaz al-Amreki:

1-Beheading two leaders in Ghadr "Badr" corps and 12 other activists in different regions of Baaqouba city, and taking as booties their personal arms, many of their cars and an important sum of money during a short period (less than one week) until Thursday 2/2/2007.

2- Beheading two spies working for the crusader forces in Baaqouba city on Thursday 2/2/2007....

4- Beheading the called "Mahdi Hussain al-Aazawee" in al-Mafraq , he was an officer lieutenant in what is called " Security Preservation forces in al-Kadhemeya region" and an inhabitant of al-Aazzat region, and taking as a booty his personal car on Thursday 2/2/2007

9- Beheading an apostate policeman in al-Mafraq region, he was from inhabitants of "Delli Aabbas" region, on Tuesday 16/1/2007.

On Wednesday 21/2/2007, the Mujahedeen beheaded the called "Deyaa Aabd al-Hussain" in Baghdad province "by the grace of Allah".....

1- Beheading two soldiers from what is called the Interior Maghaweer in al-Katoun/al-Rahma region, on Monday 22/1/2007....

5- Beheading four elements from Ghadr "Badr" corps in al-Mafraq region , on Tuesday 23/1/2007.

21- Beheading an element of the apostate police in al-Mafraq region, on Sunday 6/1/2007,

http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/186718.php

Here is a quote from YOU Posted on: Jan 14 2007, 07:28 PM in reference to the fact that I volunteered to fight in Iraq (in which you did plenty of mocking yourself)

Would you care to show me where in that thread I was mocking anyone. Guess what. I wasn't mocking anyone.

Interesting you should bring up that old thread. If you recall that thread was closed by one of the other moderators because you,Rahl,Reincarnated and Anubi were,in the moderators word's,'dogpiling' on me:

That's enough of that. There will be no dogpiling on other members with differing opinions. This topic is sensitive enough without barroom cheering.

http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum...showtopic=85981

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bob26003

So supercar, what's the moral difference between beheading someone or spraying them with White Phosphorus or dropping bombs on them?

Please supercar........ Your President doesn't even support the Geneva conventions or the UN, and you want to talk about barbarism?

Edited by Bob26003

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.