Bush = Active/Negative

[Sandman]

Originally posted by lasersailor184
Yes.

But which do you rate higher?  A Stabile Country?  Or a country free from tyranny and murder?

I think that we should not have sent American boys ten thousand miles away from home to do what Iraqi boys should have done for themselves.

[Sandman]

Originally posted by majic
Yeah, Germany was pretty stable in the late 30's too.

Compared to Iraq, Germany never lost stability at all.

[lazs2]

got rid of the commie liberal majority on the supreme court.... check.

No new fedral gun bans.....check

tells what he is going to do and then does it....check

doesn't rule by poll....check

allowed federal gun bans put there by democrats to lapse.... check

knows what the defenition of "is" is.... check.

lazs

[Yeager]

Compared to Iraq, Germany never lost stability at all.
=====
For the sake of discussion all German and Iraqi casualties prior to the rule of Hitler and Saddam are excluded.

Whats the stability comparrison between Hitlers Germany and Saddams Iraq?

Four Million and Eight Hundred Thousand dead Germans.
versus One Million and Three Hundred Thirty Eight Thousand dead Iraqis.

To say that "compared to Iraq, Germany never lost stability at all" speaks immensely of your failure to adequately express your intelligence here, I know you are intelligent.  Might want to revise your expressed view in this instance....

If your comparing postwar Germany to the situation developing in Iraq today then I think your doing everyone in the discussion a disservice with your stability comparrison remark.....Iraq is still in a condition of warfare as the government tries to establish itself amid an insurgency led by several thousands of religious zealot gangsters and as many criminal remnants of Hussein baath party.  The war for a free and stable Iraq is far from lost despite what you would wish for, but the truth is people of your way of thinking can and will (if provided the opportunity) destroy any and all hope for success in Iraq in order to regain the seat of power in the United States.

Politics as usual in a crumbling empire

[T0J0]

Originally posted by Sandman
All things being relative, Iraq was more stable under Hussein than it is now.

The Rape rooms and Stump grinders have a way of creating stability that Freedom can not?

TJ

[lasersailor184]

I think that we should not have sent American boys ten thousand miles away from home to do what Iraqi boys should have done for themselves.

Should have done?  Or Could have done?

Which do you believe it was?

[Stringer]

Originally posted by lasersailor184
Yes.


But which do you rate higher?  A Stabile Country?  Or a country free from tyranny and murder?

Who cares, unless it's in the country I live in.

[Stringer]

Originally posted by lasersailor184
Should have done?  Or Could have done?

Which do you believe it was?

What difference does that make to me in the US?

[mars01]

Gas. As much as I dont like the high prices either I think if you check around you will find we dont pay any more here then they do in most other countries.

Apples to Porter House Steaks.  They aren't even both fruits.

Next thing you'll be saying ahh look what a good job he is doing gas prices went from 3 bucks a gallon to 2.75 LOLH.

Record profits, 500 million dollar retirement packages - no justification can ease that BS.  Other countries.  Do these other countries refine their own oil?  What are arab coutries paying per gallon?  Answer less than 2.00 bucks.

[straffo]

Originally posted by lasersailor184
Yes.


But which do you rate higher?  A Stabile Country?  Or a country free from tyranny and murder?

??? a typo ?

If Iraq is free of murder ...

[Toad]

Originally posted by Sandman
I think that we should not have sent American boys ten thousand miles away from home to do what Iraqi boys should have done for themselves.

The Iraqi boys tried it by themselves after Gulf War 1, didn't they?

Estimates of deaths during that time range from 40,000 to 100,000 for Kurds, and 60,000 to 130,000 for Shi'ites.


It's not like they didn't try. The way you frame it makes it look like they were to lazy to give it a go.

[Sandman]

Hmmm... that was something like eight years before the second invasion.

Not really relevant.


Seems there are plenty of Iraqis willing to fight today. Where the hell were they in 2002?

[Nash]

That was also the one based upon an expressed support by the US which never materialized, wasn't it?

"Rise up, and we've got your backs."

Turns out.... they left 'em hangin'.

So, the failed uprising aint that great of an example, really, is it?

I'm with those here who think that if Democracy was the reason for this fiasco-I-mean-the-war-on-terror, then the only way for it to happen would be through those citizens earning it for themselves.

Anything less than the citizen's full support? Well..... look out.

[Toad]

Yeah, it was after Bush 1 called off Gulf War 1 at 100 hours.

There were statements by Bush 1 saying he favored "regime change" IIRC, but I don't recall any published statements by the US that we would militarily support such an action. I also don't have any reliable data on any guarantees that were offered sub rosa. Do you?

Nonetheless, and no matter how long ago, the Iraqi boys and girls did rise up against their dictator. And, depending on which figures you choose, they paid the price of between 100,000 and 230,000 lives for doing so.

Maybe in 2002 these losses were an inhibiting factor?

After all, we're ready to fold up shop at ~10% of that.

Just pointing out that it's not like they didn't try at all. They did.

[x0847Marine]

Originally posted by Sandman
I think that we should not have sent American boys ten thousand miles away from home to do what Iraqi boys should have done for themselves.

I saw FMJ the other night too... lol