Liberals Say Iraq Is Just Like Vietnam!

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='catholicinsd' post='1223165' date='Mar 30 2007, 03:04 PM']Thirteen very small colonies can gain indepence than the people of Iraq can form a stable government by themselves.[/quote]

Yeah but we didnt do it by ourselves France use too help a brother out, use too...

[catholicinsd]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' post='1223168' date='Mar 30 2007, 03:10 PM']Yeah but we didnt do it by ourselves France use too help a brother out, use too...[/quote]

And in the Revolution, the USA was the main force, with France as back up. In this endless sturggle, America is the main, and Iraq isn't even really providing aid.

[Anomaly]

[quote name='catholicinsd' post='1223165' date='Mar 30 2007, 05:04 PM']Thirteen very small colonies can gain indepence than the people of Iraq can form a stable government by themselves.[/quote]Wow. I just can't believe someone could so hate the Iraqi people that they won't even use reason.
The 13 colonies did not have to deal with other countries and religious extremists setting off car bombs, chlorine bombs, and smuggling in weapons and conducting a terror campaign against the populace.

You know, not all the Iraqi people are Muslim extremists. Even some of the Muslim people are regular people like you and me and really don't want much more than a job to pay rent, buy food, and put their kids through school. The people who will be the first to get rounded up when the US abandons them will be the ones who volunteered to serve in the new military or police (despite the car bombs in recruitment lines, suicide bombers at check points, infiltration by assassins). They and the families, including their wives, daughters, and sons, will be tortured, raped, and killed to teach the lesson against standing up against tyranny. Those who will witness these atrocities will really hate the rascist Americans who think Iraqis are worthless barbarians who are too backwards, ignorant, or cowardly to sacrifice to establish a representative governement.

But the people in Darfur are more worthy? Do you even know anything about Darfur and how long they've been without a government and how much international aid and help they've gotten? Darfur is a prime example of feeble politically motivated help without the messiness of people risking their lives to help them establish a solid government. Read a bit more about the hell that Darfur is here: [url="http://hellonearth.wordpress.com/what-is-the-crisis-in-darfur/"]http://hellonearth.wordpress.com/what-is-t...isis-in-darfur/[/url] Read how lack of military force to protect the innocent have allowed small groups with guns wage war on each other while the populace are caught in the middle. Racist abandonment of Bahgdad will just create a Darfur in the middle east.

Edited March 30, 2007 by Anomaly

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='catholicinsd' post='1223172' date='Mar 30 2007, 03:18 PM']And in the Revolution, the USA was the main force, with France as back up. In this endless sturggle, America is the main, and Iraq isn't even really providing aid.[/quote]


Your to use to your microwave dinners, wars take time, we were in Europe for years after the war, which the war took years to win, and in many cases we were the main force. If this was Clinton's war the press would be much more positive spin on it but since its Bush and hes all evil, its evil. If the press would show the good that has been done, and there has been alot alot of good, and not always feeding on the deaths of our brothers and sisters over there, you and alot of people would have a different opinion.

And listen kid, calling your elders "boys and girls" when they are older, wiser, braver, and more honorable than you is not very respectful. But I'm sure you've been told that before, and it doesn't matter...

[Guest T-Bone]

[quote name='catholicinsd' post='1222995' date='Mar 30 2007, 08:55 AM']Were they the ones to called for this war?[/quote]

Yes

[quote]
Were they the ones to send the boys and girls over?
[/quote]Yes

[quote]
Were they the ones to didn't equip those kids properly?[/quote]

Yes

[quote]
Are they vetoing a bill giving our troops more money?
[/quote]They're the ones that loaded such a bill full of pork and an idiotic timeline for withdrawal.

[quote]
Are they refusing to do anything to bring them home?[/quote]

Yes

[RezaMikhaeil]

1.) Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was against Veitnam, you know why? Because prior to the US Invasion of Vietnam, the united states had the opportunity to promote piece in that region but didnt because the man bringing piece was pro-communist [thou morally not a bad man], therefore the United States had the man murdered. Dr. King said that just because it wasn't a democracy or a government replica of our own, doesn't nessessarily mean that it's all bad and having the man murdered just because of his views wasn't best for veitnam or our nation

2.) Neo-republicans [not conservatives because this isn't a conservative war] had declared "mission accomplished" at their party on the aircraft carrier, therefore to say "wars take time, be patient" and saying that "liberals wanted to withdraw before giving it a chance to be victorious" and idiot statements like that, have no weight. If the mission was accomplished, the troops shouldn't be dying at such an alarming rate.

3.) What is this war about?

[i]A.) WMD, never found
B.) Iraq had no links to Al-Quida
C.) Saddam was put on trial for war crimes carried out during the Imposed War, in which the United States funded, gave him the weapons for, and supported every step of the way. Even after Saddam had killed the Kurds, the following year the United States restated that they were in support of Saddam and kept trading with him.[/i]

4.) What else was the war about? Oh that's right, Oil [[b]O[/b]peration, [b]I[/b]raqi, [b]L[/b]iberation], which was what the war was originally named but was changed for public appeal. I know that everyone gets sick of hearing that Mr. Bush and his "buddies" went to war for oil but it's the facts. If it wasn't the facts:

[i]A.) The Oil in Iraq would be more then able to pay for the reconstruction of Iraq [which Bush Promised before going into war but is a promise that hasn't been kept to the American People].
B.) The Oil that Haliburton and others are pumping from Iraq and the Caspian Sea would be metered [currently the oil being pumped isn't metered and so the Iraqi and American people have no idea the amount of oil being pumped out of Iraq and the Caspian Sea].
C.) American Oil products, with english rather then arabic, wouldn't be found in Iraq[/i]

5.) Walter Reed, a common misconception is that "democrats" [labeled as liberals] don't support the troops in Iraq, don't care about them and the safety of the American people and that the "Republicans" [that like to label themselves as conservative but definately are not conservative with the american people's resources] are patriotic, love the american people and the troops that protect this nation. Let me assess this situation, because it's far from the truth. Those that are against the war, most likely do support the troops. They support the troops in the greatest sense of getting them out of harms way, in which they're risking their lives in Iraq for Oil. It's the "democrates" or "Liberals" that propose giving the troops a pay increase, it was Bush that proposed a decrease and couldn't even give them the proper medical care at Walter Reed. It's those same "liberals" that proposed not using our valuable resources in Iraq, a country that posed no threat to our nation but rather save them for a more immediate crisis [like that possibly developing in Iran].

Now let me get this straight: If Iraq doesn't have weapons of mass destruction, repeatedly asserts that they don't, and most everyone else agrees that they don't [including the bush administration before 9-11] and we invade them and waste our military resources, and then Iran does have nuclear weapons, has repeatedly said "we got em, check us out", and we don't invade them because we don't have the resources, how is that conservative? That's everything but conservative, being a conservative means that you "conserve" your resources unless its absolutely nessessary [IE: I like to conserve or save my money in order to better protect my family].

Reza

[Lounge Daddy]

[quote name='Budge' post='1222932' date='Mar 30 2007, 08:57 AM']I want you to tell me the POSITIVE things the Iraq war has achieved.[/quote]

Halliburton is doing really well, isn't it? That's a plus.
And those investing in Halliburton (including your buddy, Michael Moore) should be doing well. That's a plus.

[RezaMikhaeil]

[quote name='Lounge Daddy' post='1223369' date='Mar 30 2007, 07:09 PM']Halliburton is doing really well, isn't it? That's a plus.
And those investing in Halliburton (including your buddy, Michael Moore) should be doing well. That's a plus.[/quote]

Halliburton has actually taken their headquarters overseas officially and will probably take the rest of their business overseas soon too, so just the stock holders are benefiting, not the country as a whole.

Reza

[Budge]

So this PRIVATE company is making BILLIONS off USA taxpayer money?

Think about that.

I knew a wife of a Iraqi "contractor", via a Bible study I was in, he was making so much money hand over fist, his wife saw it as no problem that he had been away from home for THREE ENTIRE years, with maybe 2 weeks back a year. I remember saying to friends, Im sorry but marriage and time with someone counts more then money. They had kids too who were living withOUT their Dad.

She knew I was agianst the Iraq war. I was too polite to point out of course she was for it, because it was so personally profitable for her.

This war had more to do with profit then any defense.

Look North Korea has the bomb and has been threatening us and who did we got to war with?

And why does ANYONE support the present admin even JUSt considering the MESS theyve made of the BORDER by DESIGN?

[Budge]

[quote]And those investing in Halliburton (including your buddy, Michael Moore) should be doing well.[/quote]

Michael Moore is a NWO shill not to be trusted.

Just another LEFT "gatekeeper".

he'll stump for HIllary Im sure.

His movie Bowling for Columbine made me want to puke.

The movie on Farenheit 911, most people who read and studied the news already knew that stuff about Saudia Arabia and how they are in the backpocket of you know who.

Did you know that one of Bush's cousins helped Michael Moore get his start?

[Lounge Daddy]

[quote name='Budge' post='1223394' date='Mar 30 2007, 09:45 PM']Michael Moore is a NWO shill not to be trusted.

Just another LEFT "gatekeeper".

he'll stump for HIllary Im sure.

His movie Bowling for Columbine made me want to puke.

The movie on Farenheit 911, most people who read and studied the news already knew that stuff about Saudia Arabia and how they are in the backpocket of you know who.

Did you know that one of Bush's cousins helped Michael Moore get his start?[/quote]

so this isn't a "vast right wing conspiracy"?
this is more of a plot on the part of the Illuminate cabal?

[Socrates]

[quote name='Budge' post='1223394' date='Mar 30 2007, 08:45 PM']Michael Moore is a NWO shill not to be trusted.

Just another LEFT "gatekeeper".

he'll stump for HIllary Im sure.

His movie Bowling for Columbine made me want to puke.

The movie on Farenheit 911, most people who read and studied the news already knew that stuff about Saudia Arabia and how they are in the backpocket of you know who.

Did you know that one of Bush's cousins helped Michael Moore get his start?[/quote]
So Bush is not only behind 9-11, but Michael Moore as well?

[catholicinsd]

[quote name='T-Bone' post='1223237' date='Mar 30 2007, 04:29 PM']Yes[/quote]

No. They Dems just passed a bill to bring them home, but your happy president is refusing to allow that to happen.

Edited March 31, 2007 by catholicinsd

[Guest T-Bone]

The passed a bill so ridiculously idiotic that it would get vetoed, and they knew it. They knew the bill wouldn't do anything, ergo, they did nothing.

[RezaMikhaeil]

[quote name='T-Bone' post='1223440' date='Mar 30 2007, 09:14 PM']The passed a bill so ridiculously idiotic that it would get vetoed, and they knew it. They knew the bill wouldn't do anything, ergo, they did nothing.[/quote]

Its not like they did nothing, they put their foot down for once and they should have voted against the war from the beginning, rather then to just try and look like the good guy and play this political game.