U.S. and Iraq are officially winning:

[IntruderLS1]

Well seeing as how the violence fluctuates this means nothing really.

You mean like temperature in global warming? I guess that makes sense when you put it that way.

 

[Tim]

Yeah. and yet it took so long to find Saddam. And yet we can't even find Bin Laden. All that technology. Isn't it Ironic? Whatcha think?

If we were serious about finding Bin Laden, he would be found. Just look at the battle ofTora Bora to see how we had him and let him get away.

 

[COOL_BREEZE2]

If we were serious about finding Bin Laden, he would be found. Just look at the battle ofTora Bora to see how we had him and let him get away.

So why do you think they don't want to find him?

 

[All Else Failed]

You mean like temperature in global warming? I guess that makes sense when you put it that way.

Maybe if you put it through your FOX news logic, I suppose.

So why do you think they don't want to find him?

Bin Laden is a nice face to what we are "fighting".

 

[Alien Allen]

If we were serious about finding Bin Laden, he would be found. Just look at the battle ofTora Bora to see how we had him and let him get away.

And what about the time Clinton had OBL in the cross hairs. And the chicken shit refused to let us take him out

The whole fucking mess could have been avoided if the dickhead in the Oval office had been more concerned about taking out a known enemy. but no he wanted to test the wind of opinion. he was afraid of what would be thought if we took action . sorry but there is always gonna be a ton of blood on Billy Bobs hands for his inaction.

 

[COOL_BREEZE2]

Bin Laden is a nice face to what we are "fighting".

Oh I see. A nice face. he he.

 

[Tim]

And what about the time Clinton had OBL in the cross hairs. And the chicken shit refused to let us take him out

The whole fucking mess could have been avoided if the dickhead in the Oval office had been more concerned about taking out a known enemy. but no he wanted to test the wind of opinion. he was afraid of what would be thought if we took action . sorry but there is always gonna be a ton of blood on Billy Bobs hands for his inaction.

Absolutely. He fucked up royally when it came to that among other things... but what the hell does that have to do with this topic? Hell, we could say that it's his mothers fault for not getting an abortion. The fact is once he ordered the attack on 9/11, he became public enemy #1. We had opportunities to take him out after and failed to capitalize on it. I don't care how you slice it up, our military is not that inept. This is a top down problem.

Oh I see. A nice face. he he.

Yeah, pretty funny... so let me ask you something, do you think at some point you will actually contribute something constructive to this conversation? Instead of all the one line comments to other peoples posts... :dunno

Just curious

 

[Alien Allen]

Too bad I am half in the bag.

I would respond a bit more in detail.

But I like this CB guy :thumbup

Succinct and to the point.

Some people just can't stand that. :24:

 

[dt3]

Well seeing as how the violence fluctuates this means nothing really. Oh and how we don't even control most of the country.

Of course it fluctuates day-to-day and month-to-month. But the article is talking about a decline since February 2007. It's looking at a big picture, which tends to even out the fluctuation. The article even points that out, if you had read it before you replied you would have seen that.

 

[COOL_BREEZE2]

Originally Posted by COOL_BREEZE2
Oh I see. A nice face. he he.

Yeah, pretty funny... so let me ask you something, do you think at some point you will actually contribute something constructive to this conversation? Instead of all the one line comments to other peoples posts...

Just curious

Ouuuch!!!! A tard sensitive now are we? And yes it is funny.

To answer your question, I will continue to follow treads as I always do including debates which I quite enjoy and find interesting. My intention is to continue contributing from time to time according to the comments as I see them. And yes at times I do encourage. Nevertheless I do have opinions and questions:

Some examples:

Originally Posted by RecklessTim
So if the cops bust through my door and trash my house looking for drugs that aren't there, shoot my kids and dog, turn off my heat, water and empty my refrigerator... I should be happy if they have the place 40 to 80 percent cleaned up after 6 years?

Sure, less violence is GREAT news for our troops over there and I am very glad to hear about it, but it doesn't address the millions of lives that were destroyed over a lie.

In response to your comment:

Originally Posted by COOL_BREEZE2
Well if the cops came to your door to search for drugs and you gave them the run around for 12 years playing games and trying to frustrate them....yes you should be happy they have the place 40-80% cleaned up after 6 years.

Originally Posted by RecklessTim
Yet another piece of misinformation... You are aware that the US ordered the weapons inspectors out of Iraq before the invasion, right? They were there, they were doing their job, they were not kicked out by Saddam.

Originally Posted by COOL_BREEZE2
We went into this before Tim. It was to the end that they were pulled out. After years and years of run around by Saddam.

True Dat. The man thumbed his nose at the UN and the US for years. At some point, the rest of the world sees this and figures they can get away with it too. Well, that sent a message--you don't comply--you suffer the consequences. Now liberals generally believe in talking people to death and so they don't quite understand the concept of consequences.

Originally Posted by RecklessTim
OMG you are so right... he thumbed his nose at us so we needed to kill him, destroy the country and kill hundreds of thousands of Iraqis... We sure showed him.

Very cheeky now are you?

Originally Posted by FreeWorkVest
He NEVER once threatened another country, except when Kuwait was stealing oil. Iraq was not a place for terrorists, as a matter of fact Al Queda considered Saddam Hussein to be more evil that anyone.

Food for thought (cause that's how I rolls ):

Soooooo.....what you're saying is....Bin Laden felt Saddam was more evil than the Bush infidel?

Originally Posted by Fox Mulder
Hussein allowed UN Inspectors back into Iraq--that's true, but that's a far cry from:

It was a half-hearted, non-complying effort done solely because the UN had passed a resolution calling for it. He knew if he didn't allow them back, his ass would be invaded and he'd be disposed. He never believed the world would allow the US to invade. He had been calling the world's bluff for 12 years--had violated dozens of UN resolutions on a regular basis and he was continuing to "push the envelope as far as he believed he could." I frankly find it shocking that anyone would take the position that the US and the UK were not justified in using military force. I cannot conceive of a situation that would warrant it if Hussein's thumbing his nose at the world would not.

Acknowlegement (yes, one liner he he. Short and sweet):

Exactly. And well put.

Originally Posted by Josef
You tell me in what way Hussein's regime was a threat to stability in the Middle East. I can tell you now that before the war Iran was not in control of Southern Iraq. Iraq was the balance to Iranian ambitions. That is gone now and Iran couldn't be happier.

Also before 9/11 Iran was on the brink of armed conflict with Afghanistan, and had large numbers of forces near the border.

Now Iran has major influence in both countries.

Food for thought (abeit one liner. No need for paragraphs):

Originally Posted by COOL_BREEZE2
Hitler wasn't a threat at one time either was he?

Originally Posted by Josef
You actually have me interested now. In what way were Hussein and Hitler similar?

Well they were both bad men obviously, both had inexplicable comedy moustaches...

I'm struggling for more...

Both their last names begin with 'H'?

Plenty words here:

Yes, for comparison purposes.



ahhhhh yes, same last name initial too huh? Good spotting.

Well besides that, the comparison was that basically when he was systematically going about his tyrant business to build his army and plans for wiping out the jews he was allowed to do that for a good while because nobody wanted to do anything about it...or afraid...or didn't want to get involved until it was almost too late. By which time a magnitude of jews, too many I can't recall now, had already been evaporated. Notwithstanding his ambitions to conquer more countries.

On a sidenote, that madman, had he have access to WMDs he may have very well be inclined to use it too. Don't doubt that.

 

[COOL_BREEZE2]

(continued)........

Originally Posted by RecklessTim
Saddam and Hitler were two different types of madmen. Hitler truly believed in world domination while Saddam had no such aspirations. Saddam knew that if he were to step to far over the line it would mean the end of his world in the form of a mushroom cloud. Hitler had no such threat to keep him in line.

Saddam knew how far he could go, there was no way the world would allow him to take over the middle east, he was confined to his own little patch of sand.

No matter how far he pushed the rest of the world, Saddam was no real threat to us or any other major country

There are no comparing the two....

Oh boy, there ya go. Forcing me to say more words:

Originally Posted by COOL_BREEZE2

There is everything comparing the two. Two madmen peas in a pod. Oh, I love to hear ya'll with "no, Saddam wouldn't do this, Saddam wouldn't do that". That's freaking hilarious. Ya'll are inside the madman's head knowing what he's thinking. he he. Hitler wouldn't have done this, Hitler wouldn't have done that. he he. Tell that to the millions of Jews and others he and his cohorts evaporated and died on the way to his ambitions.

So yeah, Saddam was not and would never have done anything because you knew what he was thinking. he he.

Hooray for Saddam the humanitarian.

And we come back to:

Originally Posted by RecklessTim
Do you even know what you are talking about? Do you not see that the world is a completely different place today than it was when Hitler began his march? Hitler was able to amass one of the worlds greatest armies and was at the lead in many military weapon systems. There was nothing to keep him in check. We didn't have satellites watching his every move. And we sure as hell didn't have any weapons at our disposal that could stop him in his tracks.
Yet today, we knew all of Saddam's movements by satellite, we have the most technologically advanced military in the world, we have aircraft carriers off his coast (which alone could wipe him off the face of the earth) we have dozens of nuclear subs (each one is capable of removing Iraq from the globe) and we have the world to back us up if Saddam would have made a move on the world. Saddam was a monster who killed thousands, but he wasn't stupid enough to think he could take over the world, or even the middle east.
Hitler was a true threat to the world for many reasons, he was very close to pulling it off. Saddam was a threat to no country. He couldn't even take care of Iran after 10 years of fighting...

Not as lenghty as yours but:

Yeah. and yet it took so long to find Saddam. And yet we can't even find Bin Laden. All that technology. Isn't it Ironic? Whatcha think?

Short and sweet:

If we were serious about finding Bin Laden, he would be found. Just look at the battle ofTora Bora to see how we had him and let him get away.

Short and sweet too:

So why do you think they don't want to find him?

Here comes the AEF with Bin Laden nice face:

Originally Posted by All Else Failed

Bin Laden is a nice face to what we are "fighting".

Yeah right:

Originally Posted by COOL_BREEZE2
Oh I see. A nice face. he he.

Which bring us back to Ouuuch!:

Yeah, pretty funny... so let me ask you something, do you think at some point you will actually contribute something constructive to this conversation? Instead of all the one line comments to other peoples posts... :dunno

Just curious

 

[COOL_BREEZE2]

Too bad I am half in the bag.

I would respond a bit more in detail.

But I like this CB guy :thumbup

Succinct and to the point.

Some people just can't stand that. :24:

Thank you kindly sir.

 

[All Else Failed]

Of course it fluctuates day-to-day and month-to-month. But the article is talking about a decline since February 2007. It's looking at a big picture, which tends to even out the fluctuation. The article even points that out, if you had read it before you replied you would have seen that.

I did read it.


Its simply macro-fluctuation.

 

[IntruderLS1]

Maybe if you put it through your FOX news logic, I suppose.

It's from CNN!! :lol :lol

I love how you have no problem posting articles by Al Sader's press guy, or Tim using Air America, but you do find fault with Fox News. Do you honestly think Fox is more right than those two are left?

Beyond that though... You've gotta admit, it was a good point.

 

[dt3]

I did read it.


Its simply macro-fluctuation.

So you'll write off 16 months of continuous, substantiated progress as "macro-fluctuation"? That settles it for me, you're absolutely the most close-minded person on this site. I'm simply amazed by that statement.

 

[Josef]

More likely (much more likely) had he developed any sort of advanced weaponry, it would have been used covertly, not directly. There would have been a chemical or nuclear weapon used and it would not have been able to be tracked back to Hussein.

I'm interested to know how you come to this conclusion because it sounds like unsubstantiatable nonsense to me.

 

[Josef]

Plenty words here:

Just a shame they are all total drivel.

 

[COOL_BREEZE2]

You overestimate (greatly) intelligence gathering.

And no one expected Saddam to make a move on the world. More likely (much more likely) had he developed any sort of advanced weaponry, it would have been used covertly, not directly. There would have been a chemical or nuclear weapon used and it would not have been able to be tracked back to Hussein.

Exactly. Thank you.



Apologies:
(BTW, sorry for the one liner. Sometimes less is more).

 

[DaveM]

well that's good news indeed, not like a government has falsified anything like that before is it?

 

[IntruderLS1]

well that's good news indeed, not like a government has falsified anything like that before is it?

You kinda lost me with the second part. Are you saying the government is covering up the violence?