Pages: 1 2

 

2007-02-26 02:49:27
I.M.I Militant
We Are Not Alone In Here
+297|7146|Melbourne, Australia
ok guys im 16 years old and i see all this heated debate over the war in iraq my opinion i think is this

we shouldent of gone after wmd's that im sure never existed (and i realy think the american goverment knew that) now that we are in there are people saying we should leave asap

why would we leave now.. so many of our men and wemon have been killed and leaving would only be a win for the terrorists which could lead to much more recruitment with there cause growing stronger

but once we train iraqy soldiers so that they can defend themselves against insurgant attacks (much like the u.n are doing now) then we should leave...


i think my opinion/suggestion   works perfectly and makes alot of sence anyone who thinks overwise can you please give me reasons as to why we dont see eye to eye i cant realy understand that
2007-02-26 02:52:04
Bubbalo
The Lizzard
+541|6988
Yes, because the continued chaos and disorder associated with US troops* doesn't help them at all.

*I don't blame US troops for the chaos and disorder, but so long as they're there the terrorists can.
2007-02-26 02:53:32
Cybargs
Moderated
+2,285|7143
Point is, the Iraqi's are not ready to stabilize themselves. I know what you mean by losing men and women over Iraq, but if the Allied forces leave Iraq, the Shiites will take over and start killing the Sunni's.
https://cache.www.gametracker.com/server_info/203.46.105.23:21300/b_350_20_692108_381007_FFFFFF_000000.png
2007-02-26 03:06:35
crimson_grunt
Shitty Disposition (apparently)
+214|7081|Teesside, UK

I.M.I Militant wrote:

but once we train iraqy soldiers so that they can defend themselves against insurgant attacks (much like the u.n are doing now) then we should leave...
I was reading a while back that insurgents infiltrate the iraq government and police etc.  Yes you can train the soldiers but what about when they start shooting the people their supposed to defend?
2007-02-26 03:25:04
Brasso
member
+1,549|7057

Have you not been around for the past 4 years? 
"people in ny have a general idea of how to drive. one of the pedals goes forward the other one prevents you from dying"
2007-02-26 08:24:33
ATG
Banned
+5,233|6956|Global Command

I.M.I Militant wrote:

OK guys im 16 years old and i see all this heated debate over the war in iraq my opinion i think is this.

we shouldent of gone after wmd's that im sure never existed (and i realy think the american goverment knew that) now that we are in there are people saying we should leave asap

why would we leave now.. so many of our men and wemon have been killed and leaving would only be a win for the terrorists which could lead to much more recruitment with there cause growing stronger.

but once we train iraqy soldiers so that they can defend themselves against insurgant attacks (much like the u.n are doing now) then we should leave...


i think my opinion/suggestion   works perfectly and makes alot of sence anyone who thinks overwise can you please give me reasons as to why we dont see eye to eye i cant realy understand that
When the U.S. and the Soviet Onion agreed to partially disarm there was mutual inspection and verification.
The U.S. showed the russians perfectly maintained and ready to fire Minutemen Missles. When it came time to view the russian arsenal they were scrapping they showed us silos with standing water in the and rusty rockets drained of fuel ( hardcore russian alcoholics drink it ).

Point is, there was verification. Saddam did have a WMD program and fought inspection and verification everystep of the way. That's why we invaded. There is evidence that metric tonnes of banned materials got sent out of the country.

Other than a slap of the forehead for atrocious spelling I agree.
+1 for the pup.
2007-02-26 08:30:51
SteikeTa
Member
+153|7175|Norway/Norwegen/ Norge/Noruega
You meant to write Soviet Onion, right?
2007-02-26 08:31:43
EVieira
Member
+105|6905|Lutenblaag, Molvania

ATG wrote:

Point is, there was verification. Saddam did have a WMD program and fought inspection and verification everystep of the way. That's why we invaded. There is evidence that metric tonnes of banned materials got sent out of the country.
Please post this conclusive evidence you seem to have. It better be more plausible than what the Bush administration used to "justify" the invasion of Iraq...
"All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered;  the point is to discover them."
Galileo Galilei  (1564-1642)
2007-02-26 08:31:52
Lost Hope
Lurker
+20|6754|Brussels, Belgium

I.M.I Militant wrote:

ok guys im 16 years old and i see all this heated debate over the war in iraq my opinion i think is this

we shouldent of gone after wmd's that im sure never existed (and i realy think the american goverment knew that) now that we are in there are people saying we should leave asap

why would we leave now.. so many of our men and wemon have been killed and leaving would only be a win for the terrorists which could lead to much more recruitment with there cause growing stronger

but once we train iraqy soldiers so that they can defend themselves against insurgant attacks (much like the u.n are doing now) then we should leave...


i think my opinion/suggestion   works perfectly and makes alot of sence anyone who thinks overwise can you please give me reasons as to why we dont see eye to eye i cant realy understand that
I know that you did an effort in your spelling because it's worse most of the time but you really need to do better, it took me 5 minutes to read and understand all of it.

Now back on topic, Iraq is totally fucked. Unless the country is nuked, there will be (or there is) a civil war no matter the training of the Iraqi army (because some of the training helps the insurgents/millicians that have infiltrated the army).

You shouldn't have gone when everybody told you to don't, now you're fucked (politically) and it is totally deserved.
https://bf3s.com/sigs/9c9f8f6ff3579a4c711aa54bbb9e928ec0786003.png
2007-02-26 08:32:35
Hurricane
Banned
+1,153|7057|Washington, DC

It's hard to defend against a guy driving a car into a crowded area and blowing it up, trillion dollar army or not.

edit: What I mean is that regardless of whether you're the grand US military or the scrappy Iraqi military, these insurgents are willing to blow themselves up for what they believe in. And the way they do it, there's almost no stopping it.

edit2: Saddam did have some materials for making WMD's. He also had a program. He didn't have any usable WMD's though.

Last edited by Hurricane (2007-02-26 08:34:44)

2007-02-26 08:33:37
EVieira
Member
+105|6905|Lutenblaag, Molvania

EVieira wrote:

ATG wrote:

Point is, there was verification. Saddam did have a WMD program and fought inspection and verification everystep of the way. That's why we invaded. There is evidence that metric tonnes of banned materials got sent out of the country.
Please post this conclusive evidence you seem to have. It better be more plausible than what the Bush administration used to "justify" the invasion of Iraq...

I.M.I Militant wrote:

but once we train iraqy soldiers so that they can defend themselves against insurgant attacks (much like the u.n are doing now) then we should leave...
Thats the exact same thing the US said it would do when they decided to get out of Vietnam. Didn't work out so well...
"All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered;  the point is to discover them."
Galileo Galilei  (1564-1642)
2007-02-26 08:56:44
SteikeTa
Member
+153|7175|Norway/Norwegen/ Norge/Noruega
EVieira... from where in Brazil are you from?
2007-02-26 09:01:36
LaidBackNinja
Pony Slaystation
+343|7136|Charlie One Alpha

EVieira wrote:

EVieira wrote:

ATG wrote:

Point is, there was verification. Saddam did have a WMD program and fought inspection and verification everystep of the way. That's why we invaded. There is evidence that metric tonnes of banned materials got sent out of the country.
Please post this conclusive evidence you seem to have. It better be more plausible than what the Bush administration used to "justify" the invasion of Iraq...

I.M.I Militant wrote:

but once we train iraqy soldiers so that they can defend themselves against insurgant attacks (much like the u.n are doing now) then we should leave...
Thats the exact same thing the US said it would do when they decided to get out of Vietnam. Didn't work out so well...
That's what I've been saying ever since this mess started... Iraq IS the new Vietnam.
"If you want a vision of the future, imagine SecuROM slapping your face with its dick -- forever." -George Orwell
2007-02-26 09:04:23
EVieira
Member
+105|6905|Lutenblaag, Molvania

SteikeTa wrote:

EVieira... from where in Brazil are you from?
Mid-western region, about 200 kilometers from the capital. Why, been to Brazil before?
"All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered;  the point is to discover them."
Galileo Galilei  (1564-1642)
2007-02-26 09:06:44
Mason4Assassin444
retired
+552|7089|USA

I.M.I Militant wrote:

ok guys im 16 years old and i see all this heated debate over the war in iraq my opinion i think is this

we shouldent of gone after wmd's that im sure never existed (and i realy think the american goverment knew that) now that we are in there are people saying we should leave asap

why would we leave now.. so many of our men and wemon have been killed and leaving would only be a win for the terrorists which could lead to much more recruitment with there cause growing stronger

but once we train iraqy soldiers so that they can defend themselves against insurgant attacks (much like the u.n are doing now) then we should leave...


i think my opinion/suggestion   works perfectly and makes alot of sence anyone who thinks overwise can you please give me reasons as to why we dont see eye to eye i cant realy understand that
We aren't there for terrorists.
2007-02-26 09:36:46
Flaming_Maniac
prince of insufficient light
+2,490|7134|67.222.138.85

Mason4Assassin444 wrote:

I.M.I Militant wrote:

ok guys im 16 years old and i see all this heated debate over the war in iraq my opinion i think is this

we shouldent of gone after wmd's that im sure never existed (and i realy think the american goverment knew that) now that we are in there are people saying we should leave asap

why would we leave now.. so many of our men and wemon have been killed and leaving would only be a win for the terrorists which could lead to much more recruitment with there cause growing stronger

but once we train iraqy soldiers so that they can defend themselves against insurgant attacks (much like the u.n are doing now) then we should leave...


i think my opinion/suggestion   works perfectly and makes alot of sence anyone who thinks overwise can you please give me reasons as to why we dont see eye to eye i cant realy understand that
We aren't there for terrorists.
Nope, we're there to maintain a strong front in the heart of the middle east in an attempt to forestall any future terrorist attacks. We aren't going after the terrorists themselves necessarily, but more a show of force to the entire Islamic nation.
2007-02-26 09:46:51
Mason4Assassin444
retired
+552|7089|USA

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

Mason4Assassin444 wrote:

I.M.I Militant wrote:

ok guys im 16 years old and i see all this heated debate over the war in iraq my opinion i think is this

we shouldent of gone after wmd's that im sure never existed (and i realy think the american goverment knew that) now that we are in there are people saying we should leave asap

why would we leave now.. so many of our men and wemon have been killed and leaving would only be a win for the terrorists which could lead to much more recruitment with there cause growing stronger

but once we train iraqy soldiers so that they can defend themselves against insurgant attacks (much like the u.n are doing now) then we should leave...


i think my opinion/suggestion   works perfectly and makes alot of sence anyone who thinks overwise can you please give me reasons as to why we dont see eye to eye i cant realy understand that
We aren't there for terrorists.
Nope, we're there to maintain a strong front in the heart of the middle east in an attempt to forestall any future terrorist attacks. We aren't going after the terrorists themselves necessarily, but more a show of force to the entire Islamic nation.
If that were the case we could have left Saddam in power and continued in Afghanistan.

No....we are there for profit. Just like Vietnam we are there for profit. The hard part is when your public starts to see through the smoke. WMD's, 9/11, terrorist regime, democracy....all reasons for going into Iraq.

The true reasoning is, the profiteering. Us little guys are following the bread crumbs around the forest while the big dogs rake in the cash.

Did you know the 1st 60 bombs dropped on Baghdad all missed thier targets? You know why? How much does each bomb cost? Who rakes in the cash on each bomb created?

You know why Congress approved the war in Iraq? Because each member of Congress has/had an interest in the Iron Triangle.

Little guy loses. Big guy wins.

Faulty Intelligence? Not at all.....just a hard war to sell.
2007-02-26 10:25:39
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6982
Short answer: No, it's not that cut and dry, not by a longshot.
2007-02-26 10:41:58
wah1188
You orrible caaaaaaan't
+321|6887|UK
You do have some very valid points Militant but some of the Iraqi's being trained are working undercover and stuff , really wish a fairy would come sprinkle magical dust over the country and magical peace and all that mumbo jumbo would appear in Iraq. O
2007-02-26 10:43:14
Mason4Assassin444
retired
+552|7089|USA

wah1188 wrote:

You do have some very valid points Militant but some of the Iraqi's being trained are working undercover and stuff , really wish a fairy would come sprinkle magical dust over the country and magical peace and all that mumbo jumbo would appear in Iraq. O
We won't pull out until the Carlyle Group says so. They have said magic dust under development.
2007-02-26 10:49:27
Ajax_the_Great1
Dropped on request
+206|7074

Mason4Assassin444 wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

Mason4Assassin444 wrote:


We aren't there for terrorists.
Nope, we're there to maintain a strong front in the heart of the middle east in an attempt to forestall any future terrorist attacks. We aren't going after the terrorists themselves necessarily, but more a show of force to the entire Islamic nation.
If that were the case we could have left Saddam in power and continued in Afghanistan.

No....we are there for profit. Just like Vietnam we are there for profit. The hard part is when your public starts to see through the smoke. WMD's, 9/11, terrorist regime, democracy....all reasons for going into Iraq.

The true reasoning is, the profiteering. Us little guys are following the bread crumbs around the forest while the big dogs rake in the cash.

Did you know the 1st 60 bombs dropped on Baghdad all missed thier targets? You know why? How much does each bomb cost? Who rakes in the cash on each bomb created?

You know why Congress approved the war in Iraq? Because each member of Congress has/had an interest in the Iron Triangle.

Little guy loses. Big guy wins.

Faulty Intelligence? Not at all.....just a hard war to sell.
How do you complain about the billions of dollars spent on the war and then call it a war of profit?
2007-02-26 10:53:29
Mason4Assassin444
retired
+552|7089|USA

Ajax_the_Great1 wrote:

Mason4Assassin444 wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:


Nope, we're there to maintain a strong front in the heart of the middle east in an attempt to forestall any future terrorist attacks. We aren't going after the terrorists themselves necessarily, but more a show of force to the entire Islamic nation.
If that were the case we could have left Saddam in power and continued in Afghanistan.

No....we are there for profit. Just like Vietnam we are there for profit. The hard part is when your public starts to see through the smoke. WMD's, 9/11, terrorist regime, democracy....all reasons for going into Iraq.

The true reasoning is, the profiteering. Us little guys are following the bread crumbs around the forest while the big dogs rake in the cash.

Did you know the 1st 60 bombs dropped on Baghdad all missed thier targets? You know why? How much does each bomb cost? Who rakes in the cash on each bomb created?

You know why Congress approved the war in Iraq? Because each member of Congress has/had an interest in the Iron Triangle.

Little guy loses. Big guy wins.

Faulty Intelligence? Not at all.....just a hard war to sell.
How do you complain about the billions of dollars spent on the war and then call it a war of profit?
The US doesn't make the profit. The US accrues the debt and certainn "others" make the profit.
2007-02-26 10:59:48
PluggedValve
Member
+17|6767

Mason4Assassin444 wrote:

Ajax_the_Great1 wrote:

Mason4Assassin444 wrote:


If that were the case we could have left Saddam in power and continued in Afghanistan.

No....we are there for profit. Just like Vietnam we are there for profit. The hard part is when your public starts to see through the smoke. WMD's, 9/11, terrorist regime, democracy....all reasons for going into Iraq.

The true reasoning is, the profiteering. Us little guys are following the bread crumbs around the forest while the big dogs rake in the cash.

Did you know the 1st 60 bombs dropped on Baghdad all missed thier targets? You know why? How much does each bomb cost? Who rakes in the cash on each bomb created?

You know why Congress approved the war in Iraq? Because each member of Congress has/had an interest in the Iron Triangle.

Little guy loses. Big guy wins.

Faulty Intelligence? Not at all.....just a hard war to sell.
How do you complain about the billions of dollars spent on the war and then call it a war of profit?
The US doesn't make the profit. The US accrues the debt and certainn "others" make the profit.
See Halliburton, Cheney.
2007-02-26 11:03:49
PluggedValve
Member
+17|6767

Mason4Assassin444 wrote:

Ajax_the_Great1 wrote:

Mason4Assassin444 wrote:


If that were the case we could have left Saddam in power and continued in Afghanistan.

No....we are there for profit. Just like Vietnam we are there for profit. The hard part is when your public starts to see through the smoke. WMD's, 9/11, terrorist regime, democracy....all reasons for going into Iraq.

The true reasoning is, the profiteering. Us little guys are following the bread crumbs around the forest while the big dogs rake in the cash.

Did you know the 1st 60 bombs dropped on Baghdad all missed thier targets? You know why? How much does each bomb cost? Who rakes in the cash on each bomb created?

You know why Congress approved the war in Iraq? Because each member of Congress has/had an interest in the Iron Triangle.

Little guy loses. Big guy wins.

Faulty Intelligence? Not at all.....just a hard war to sell.
How do you complain about the billions of dollars spent on the war and then call it a war of profit?
The US doesn't make the profit. The US accrues the debt and certainn "others" make the profit.
Its basically how the politicians get money for their private companies.  Cheney says we HAVE to go in(under false pretenses, cause there wern't any legit) and his company gets paid by the US to rebuild.  So American tax payers basically pay CHENEY to rebuild Iraq.  Taxpayers need to demand that their taxes get spend in the US on americans, not on private companies doing business overseas.
2007-02-26 11:04:20
Mason4Assassin444
retired
+552|7089|USA

PluggedValve wrote:

Mason4Assassin444 wrote:

Ajax_the_Great1 wrote:


How do you complain about the billions of dollars spent on the war and then call it a war of profit?
The US doesn't make the profit. The US accrues the debt and certainn "others" make the profit.
See Halliburton, Cheney.
Negative. See Carlyle Group. Iron Triangle. Military Industrial Complex. Haliburton is just cooking the food. THose are the real money mongers.

 

Pages: 1 2

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard