your opinion about iraq withdrawl.

[Motherland]

Really?

Check into nuclear artillery shells. We had them, the Soviets had them. Cod knows how many are still floating around out there. Surely none of those could ever fall into the wrong hands or be duplicated right? I mean it's totally impossible, right? Just can't happen.

So... how would stopping Iran's nuclear program stop them from getting their hands on one of those?

[Masherbrum]

you either have a misquote fetish......or your reading comprehension skills are horrid.

or is it a case of a long time board reg looking tough for his pals while he's being slung around like a wet towel?

give it a rest, pumpkin.  I've seen it before and the act is old.... put me on your ignore list.

No, but I guarantee you 9/11 affected me more than yourself and you don't see me in here whining about it.   I don't "misquote" unless "you stated yourself incorrectly".   

What's next Parcheesi?

[VooWho]

If America could make its own cars, own computers, or anything that didn't say Made in China, Japan, Mexico, Germany, Mongolia, etc.... and be able to run itself without the help of other countries then hell yes, lets just stay out of everyones problems and solve are owns, but really we can't. America needs other countries so that we can have things we use or need everyday like, food, sugar, salts, cars, computers, ipods, cellphones, fruits, oil, natural gas, wood, fish, rubber, metals, etc.ect... Without these countries we couldn't survive as a state. The reason why we need to be in everyones buisness is because if one of these countries destroyes itself cuz of a tyrannt government or economic disaster then it affects us. There is just no way America can just sit and watch the world destroy and rebuild and destroy itself over and over for us not to get effected.

I really hate it when people say we went to Iraq for oil. If we went to Iraq for oil then why isn't my gas a $1.34 a gallon. Please tell me then why I'm paying over $4.00 a gallon for gas?? Then people ask, 'is there a way we can lower gas prices'?? Will how about we invade a oil rich nation and take their oil? Then our prices will be lower wouldn't it? But wait no it wouldn't cuz why? We are in an oil rich country and my gas is still over $4.00 a gallon. 

Then again if we fix things in Iraq and trade with them and our gas prices go down and a once dictatorship nation turns to a democracy that can handle itself, then damn I think this war was for a good cause cuz now I'm paying $2.00 a gallon. 

[Shuckins]

Four thousand of our finest have given their lives serving their country in Iraq.  They toppled a genocidal dictator, held the line against blood thirsty fanatics, patroled the streets of troubled cities, acted as ambassadors of good will, dispensed food and medicine, rebuilt the country's infrastructure, provided security during Iraq's first democratic elections, are equipping and training native Iraqi security forces, and endured long tours of duty away from their families with surprisingly few complaints.

They have performed magnificently.  It is ludicrous for some to state that they support the troops but are against the war.  The war gives every sign of winding down and achieving its goals.  Nation building isn't easy, and the time and effort necessary for that to happen is apparently beyond the capacity of some to comprehend. 

Our sons and daughters have shed their blood in a foreign land.  We should stay the course, and finish the job, so that their blood will not have been shed in vain.

[VooWho]

Four thousand of our finest have given their lives serving their country in Iraq.  They toppled a genocidal dictator, held the line against blood thirsty fanatics, patroled the streets of troubled cities, acted as ambassadors of good will, dispensed food and medicine, rebuilt the country's infrastructure, provided security during Iraq's first democratic elections, are equipping and training native Iraqi security forces, and endured long tours of duty away from their families with surprisingly few complaints.

They have performed magnificently.  It is ludicrous for some to state that they support the troops but are against the war.  The war gives every sign of winding down and achieving its goals.  Nation building isn't easy, and the time and effort necessary for that to happen is apparently beyond the capacity of some to comprehend. 

Our sons and daughters have shed their blood in a foreign land.  We should stay the course, and finish the job, so that their blood will not have been shed in vain.

100% agreed 

[NavyOne1978]

Shukins, you said it best of all here...   

[68Hawk]

Charon and Shuckins make some good points, but I gotta say that I think its past an issue of us winning hearts and minds.  The Iraqi government may still have that chance, but enough people hate us here that I think we blew it.

Will the Iraqi government be able to accomplish this?  Well sometimes they run from fire.  Sometimes they decide to beat the hell out of some guy, then just release him as he apparently didn't do anything (almost got video of that one).  Not sure how the local population will view the legitimacy of the government, but we really won't know that till theyr'e on their own, and then its completetly up to them anyway.

Yes we have begun to see real progress at last, and now is not the time to simply cut out, but we need to begin to lay weight on the Iraqi soldiers, as we've carried the burden soley for long enough.  If they don't take it themselves then we can never be victorious.

As for Iran......

Now would be a horrible time to invade Iran.  Our troops are tired and overextended.  Our vehicles are wearing out.  Our gear is ok, but not as plentifully supplied as would be appreciated.  If we run in there now we're in for a serious world of hurt.  Sure we could take their military, no sweat.  But what happens after that?  Failing to answer that question before the conflict got us into the situation we're in now.  What about the rest of the Arab world if we invade?  We dodged the bullet on that one this last time.  Probably won't happen again.  Iran with a couple nukes isn't a serious threat, because if they use them the entire world will hate them and they know it.  Our country has lots of nukes.  I don't want to see a nuclear Iran, but there's only so much they can do with it.  They're not fools after all.  Starting a war because we think they might have one is only going to give them a reason to use it.  Lets not be rash.

I'm more concerned with their support for the insurgency here, which our government has said is on the wane.  Lots of the EFPs and material to make them has come from Iran, and those are really nasty.  If we engage the Iranians diplomatically we have a chance of stabalizing Iraq and achieving our objectives in the wider Middle East.  If we attack Iran we lose it all.

If Israel attacks Iran I say let them stand alone and bear the consequences.  Last thing we need is to be drawn into a theater conflict by a cranky teenager throwing a panicy tantrum. 

[Eagler]

Iran "not a threat" ...???

Iran is already attacking the US and Israel by proxy

How many of us have they killed through their training, weapons and ppl sent over the borders? They ARE hezbollah as most Israelis already know

As for their nuke dev, they dont need a delivery system nor do they need some super powerful nuke .. just a few allah crazed virgin hunrgry fools willing to carry a suitcase or two (dirty bombs) into the downtown areas say of our top 6 cities and watch the country implode on itself in the months following the attack. By the time we figure out and can blame Iran for it, our country would be toast

Iran IS the reason we invaded Iraq IMO

No worries.. Obama will talk them out of their zealous lunatic hatred of the west LOL

[Excel1]

excel..  I think that you are correct.

That being said...  is it just the hate for America that is causing the civilized nations of the world to shoot themselves in the foot on this issue?

Is it just that they are so weak or greedy?  Why aren't they all banding together to help us finish this thing off once and for all and to get some stability for once in the region?   Don't they realize that this is probly the last best chance of it ever happening again?

Is is because they are all over run with muslim populations?   What?

lazs

i think you pretty much know the reasons lazs

as you say, weakness and greed, plus sanctimonious socialist hypercritical ivory tower politics with some historical envy and historical ignorance thrown in to the mix, about sums it up i think.

my guese is that this apparent post cold war view that is held by some western nations that a weaker u.s with less influence and therefore counterbalanced and held in "check" by a host of tyrannical nations of assorted sizes is somehow better for the world is in for a realignment sooner or later when those western nations own comfy zones are iminintly threatened when history repeats 


in the mean time, it's not practical and i don't think it would do it, but i wouldn't blame the u.s if it did slam the shutters up

[ZetaNine]

No, but I guarantee you 9/11 affected me more than yourself and you don't see me in here whining about it.   I don't "misquote" unless "you stated yourself incorrectly".   

What's next Parcheesi?

:weak:

[SirLoin]

Four thousand of our finest have given their lives serving their country in Iraq.  They toppled a genocidal dictator, held the line against blood thirsty fanatics, patroled the streets of troubled cities, acted as ambassadors of good will, dispensed food and medicine, rebuilt the country's infrastructure, provided security during Iraq's first democratic elections, are equipping and training native Iraqi security forces, and endured long tours of duty away from their families with surprisingly few complaints.

They have performed magnificently.  It is ludicrous for some to state that they support the troops but are against the war.  The war gives every sign of winding down and achieving its goals.  Nation building isn't easy, and the time and effort necessary for that to happen is apparently beyond the capacity of some to comprehend. 

Our sons and daughters have shed their blood in a foreign land.  We should stay the course, and finish the job, so that their blood will not have been shed in vain.

[Toad]

So... how would stopping Iran's nuclear program stop them from getting their hands on one of those?

Might stop them from making one of those or something similar.

Your idea that they won't be able to make a small nuke seems to disregard the fact that the technology to make one as small as an 8" artillery shell has been around a long time and is no secret.

[CAP1]

Four thousand of our finest have given their lives serving their country in Iraq.  They toppled a genocidal dictator, held the line against blood thirsty fanatics, patroled the streets of troubled cities, acted as ambassadors of good will, dispensed food and medicine, rebuilt the country's infrastructure, provided security during Iraq's first democratic elections, are equipping and training native Iraqi security forces, and endured long tours of duty away from their families with surprisingly few complaints.

They have performed magnificently.  It is ludicrous for some to state that they support the troops but are against the war.  The war gives every sign of winding down and achieving its goals.  Nation building isn't easy, and the time and effort necessary for that to happen is apparently beyond the capacity of some to comprehend. 

Our sons and daughters have shed their blood in a foreign land.  We should stay the course, and finish the job, so that their blood will not have been shed in vain.

if i'm not mistaken, didn't we put said genocidal dictator in power? and didn't we support him for years, untill it became inconvienent? i'm not sure, so don't flame me, i'm only asking.

 it actually is NOT ludicrous to support the troops but not the war. what that means to me is someone who admires what our brave men and women are doing, but doesn't think that they should still have to be over there trying to fight a one handed fight, with a bunch of insane muslims trying to kill them in any way they can possibly imagine.

 i agree, we SHOULD finish the job. again though, i'm not sure, but it appers to me that our brave soldiers have to fight with rules of engagement? whereas the enemy doesn't? it's really...in my opinion anyway.....very difficult to win a war fighting this way. we need to let our soldiers do the jobs they've trained to do. then, and only then will a quick descisive victory be achieved, and we can get out of there.

just my opinions

<<S>>

[SirLoin]

Iran IS the reason we invaded Iraq IMO

I have to agree that it was one of the reasons,if not THE reason.Any nation's "President" that threatens to "Wipe Isreal off the Earth",holds "Holocaust Denail" summits & terrorist training camps..in my opinion has lost not only it's right to aquire nuclear power,but has lost it's soverign nation status.They haven't quite met all four UN mandates for that(unless they vilolate The Non Proliferation Treaty)..Iraq was a serial violator of all four and had lost it's soverign status.(though the UN did nothing)

I'm all for Nation building if it involves removing Islamic facist governments.These mullahs and their monotheistic governments are hell bent on bringing on the Apocolypse,and one day one of them will set one off in Isreal.It is a huge deterrent having a large millitary force in Iraq.

Say what you want about Cheney and GWB..I think it is to their credit that they went ahead with this even though they had to lie,mislead the general public as to their true intentions as to ensure the safety of the greater good.

The biggest crime imho was letting Iraq rot for 12 years(mostly under Clinton's watch) before finishing off this murderous regime.

[lazs2]

holmes... in light of excels reply to me (he seemed to be able to decipher my questions) I will break it down into simple questions for you.

I said... "holmes.. so it is your opinion that excel is in the minority with his opinion?  That most of the civilized nations feel that the best way to fight muslim extremeism is to simply leave the muslim countries alone and fight the terrorists on their own ground?   or.. is it t hat your socialist programs have made you so weak that really... that is all you can do?

you do not believe that the US turning Iraq into a democratic modern country free of despots and terrorists is the way to go?  that eventually you will have to fight the 9th century muslims on their own ground?"

now...

(1)  "holmes.. so it is your opinion that excel is in the minority with his opinion?"

(2)  "That most of the civilized nations feel that the best way to fight muslim extremeism is to simply leave the muslim countries alone and fight the terrorists on their own ground?

(3)  "or.. is it t hat your socialist programs have made you so weak that really... that is all you can do?

(4)  "you do not believe that the US turning Iraq into a democratic modern country free of despots and terrorists is the way to go?  that eventually you will have to fight the 9th century muslims on their own ground?"

you can answer some or all of the above simple questions.   excel seemed to figure out how to answer.

lazs