Forums: Community: The Soap Box:
troop surge in iraq
RSS FeedRSS Feeds for The Soap Box

Premier Sponsor:

 
First page Previous page 1 2 3 Next page Last page  View All


coopershawk


Jan 6, 2007, 7:06 AM
Post #1 of 73 (1645 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 23, 2004
Posts: 210

troop surge in iraq
Report this Post
Can't Post

Is this guy for fucking real? Seems to me that he's treading water until the elections in 2008 so the Republicans don't have the stigma of a "cut-and-run" administration hanging over their heads during the election drive.
http://www.tomdispatch.com/index.mhtml?pid=153798
Read this if you want


stymingersfink


Jan 6, 2007, 8:12 PM
Post #2 of 73 (1634 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 12, 2003
Posts: 7250

Re: [coopershawk] troop surge in iraq [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

coopershawk wrote:
Is this guy for fucking real? Seems to me that he's treading water until the elections in 2008 so the Republicans don't have the stigma of a "cut-and-run" administration hanging over their heads during the election drive.
tomdispatch.com
Read this if you want
fixed your liinkWink


wanderlustmd


Jan 8, 2007, 9:00 AM
Post #3 of 73 (1615 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 24, 2006
Posts: 8149

Re: [coopershawk] troop surge in iraq [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

I'm waiting for either a draft and/or plans to invade Iran. Wouldn't that be precious.

Neither will happen since congress switched over, but it's scary. Of course, what really needs to happen is that the Iraqis need to start taking over and building things up on their own. Of course, they are pretty much starting from scratch, so setbacks are expected, but it seems like all we ever hear about are setbacks. And, when they happen, we always say "Oh, we really should have seen that coming." Like with the invasion at the start of the war. Why didn't we do things properly the first time around and send adequate troops for the long run, not just enought to "get by." Mad

Something tells me that three months after the last of the US troops pull out, there will be a coup and it will be a dictatorship all over again. Corruption tends to run deep.


ihategrigris


Jan 8, 2007, 10:19 AM
Post #4 of 73 (1596 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 6, 2005
Posts: 757

Re: [wanderlustmd] troop surge in iraq [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

wanderlustmd wrote:

Something tells me that three months after the last of the US troops pull out, there will be a coup and it will be a dictatorship all over again. Corruption tends to run deep.

Or worse, the Iraqies elect some fundamentalist religious pricks (a la Hezbolah or the Taiban) and proceed to turn Iraq into another fundamentalist Islamic republic.


someonetookdan


Jan 8, 2007, 9:34 PM
Post #5 of 73 (1574 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 9, 2006
Posts: 6

Re: [coopershawk] troop surge in iraq [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

A troop surge could potentially solve some problems in Iraq, on the other hand it might not make any difference at all in the long run, who can say for sure. I do believe that America needs to maintain a strong presence in the Middle East *ahem* Iran + nukes = WW3 *cough cough*, so maybe a troop surge would lend itself to more then just a quick fix in Iraq.

In the end I think its important that our enemies look at America and feel fear. If we abandon Iraq then terrorists know exactly what it takes to make America lose heart. Don't fool yourselves, we are at war, and on a scale bigger then just whats happening in Iraq.


wanderlustmd


Jan 9, 2007, 5:43 AM
Post #6 of 73 (1561 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 24, 2006
Posts: 8149

Re: [someonetookdan] troop surge in iraq [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

someonetookdan wrote:
A troop surge could potentially solve some problems in Iraq, on the other hand it might not make any difference at all in the long run, who can say for sure. I do believe that America needs to maintain a strong presence in the Middle East *ahem* Iran + nukes = WW3 *cough cough*, so maybe a troop surge would lend itself to more then just a quick fix in Iraq.

In the end I think its important that our enemies look at America and feel fear. If we abandon Iraq then terrorists know exactly what it takes to make America lose heart. Don't fool yourselves, we are at war, and on a scale bigger then just whats happening in Iraq.

I'm fully aware of the dangers. I supported the war at the outset. I think we are going good in Iraq. Good friends of mine have served and have told me what you don't see on the news due to political spin. Lots of people are happy we took Saddam down.
The way I see it, even though it ended up being BS, Saddam having WMDs was a risk we couldn't afford to take so soon after 9/11. Iran is also a huge concern, you're right...terrorism isn't just going to go away if you close your eyes to it. But we need to make sure that actions are well-thought out and, more importantly, implemented properly. Americans forget and we DO NOT LEARN. You'd think after 9/11 we would get our shit together in terms of first response and emergency teams being able to communicate. But Katrina showed us that we are just as screwed up as before. We invaded Iraq with what turned out to be minimal troops and now we are paying the price. And all people seem to say is "Yep, damn that was so obvious! We'll get it right next time!"

No, we won't. Not unless people actually start to do what they say they will.


gunkiemike


Jan 13, 2007, 5:28 PM
Post #7 of 73 (1528 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 1, 2002
Posts: 2263

Re: [someonetookdan] troop surge in iraq [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

someonetookdan wrote:
A troop surge could potentially solve some problems in Iraq, on the other hand it might not make any difference at all in the long run, who can say for sure.

The so-called "surge" just gets our troop strength back to where it was over there 18 months ago. Oh, Bush forgot to mention that?

And did it work 18 months ago??


curt


Jan 13, 2007, 6:46 PM
Post #8 of 73 (1521 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 26, 2002
Posts: 18226

Re: [coopershawk] troop surge in iraq [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

GWB was told years ago, by many people, that he would need far more troops on the ground in Iraq to succeed--and he refused to listen.

Now, most people are telling GWB that it's too late--and that success will no longer result from increasing the number of troops in Iraq--and he still won't listen.

No big surprise, really--the man is delusional.

Curt


kyote321


Jan 14, 2007, 5:57 AM
Post #9 of 73 (1510 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 24, 2005
Posts: 636

Re: [someonetookdan] troop surge in iraq [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

Iran + nukes = WW3

W - brain = WW3


kyote321


Jan 14, 2007, 6:00 AM
Post #10 of 73 (1509 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 24, 2005
Posts: 636

Re: [wanderlustmd] troop surge in iraq [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

'But Katrina showed us that we are just as screwed up as before. We invaded Iraq with what turned out to be minimal troops and now we are paying the price.'

the big difference is that there isn't any oil in lousianna. it is only worth the country's fear and terrorizing innnocent people if the top 1% will benefit. mission accomplished.


curt


Jan 14, 2007, 10:46 AM
Post #11 of 73 (1504 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 26, 2002
Posts: 18226

Re: [kyote321] troop surge in iraq [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

kyote321 wrote:
Iran + nukes = WW3

W - brain = WW3

Therefore: W - brain = Iran + nukes

Curt


chogori


Jan 14, 2007, 12:17 PM
Post #12 of 73 (1497 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 21, 2005
Posts: 72

Re: [gunkiemike] troop surge in iraq [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

gunkiemike wrote:
someonetookdan wrote:
A troop surge could potentially solve some problems in Iraq, on the other hand it might not make any difference at all in the long run, who can say for sure.

The so-called "surge" just gets our troop strength back to where it was over there 18 months ago. Oh, Bush forgot to mention that?

And did it work 18 months ago??
Seriously. And wasn't the plan to slowly wean out our troops and swap them with Iraqi troops? And wasn't that a plan to fix the earlier plan to completely reform the Iraqi government by sheer force, which was a plan to fix the plan that we needed to get rid of Saddam's WMDs? Maybe we should just all plan to be idiots like we're doing, because apparently that's the only plan we're good at.
I mean, there's a reason terrorists don't like us. They didn't just open a country directory and go "Hmm, I think I'll choose to blow myself and a bunch of folks up in, gee, hmm... America." No, they don't like us because we stage coups, supply dictators with weapons, cripple economies with trade embargos, and basically stick our noses in places where we shouldn't. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for ensuring adequate human rights everywhere, but we've taken the moral high ground and treated everyone around us like second class, which tends to upset folks. Perhaps we should spend more money on education and less on war.
That's my 2 cents anyway.


gunkiemike


Jan 14, 2007, 12:47 PM
Post #13 of 73 (1493 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 1, 2002
Posts: 2263

Re: [kyote321] troop surge in iraq [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

kyote321 wrote:
the big difference is that there isn't any oil in lousianna.

Check yer facts. LA is something like the 3rd oil producing state after Texas and California. And it's number 1 or 2 in natural gas. The reason gasoline prices spiked as much as they did when K hit was because all that oil/gas production was shut down. That doesn't happen when a hurricane hits Florida, because Florida is a state without oil.


Partner tattooed_climber


Jan 14, 2007, 12:59 PM
Post #14 of 73 (1493 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 13, 2003
Posts: 4838

Re: [curt] troop surge in iraq [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

curt wrote:
kyote321 wrote:
Iran + nukes = WW3

W - brain = WW3

Therefore: W - brain = Iran + nukes

Curt

Thus: W - Nukes = Iran + Brain

Brain = W - WW3

and if we take the fact that bush has no brain...

W - Nukes = Iran + W - WW3

Sooo...

- Nukes = Iran + 2W - WW3

WW3 = Iran + 2W + Nukes

ohoh......i think we're all fucked!!!!!!its mathematical proven!!!


(This post was edited by tattooed_climber on Jan 14, 2007, 1:01 PM)


kyote321


Jan 14, 2007, 2:55 PM
Post #15 of 73 (1486 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 24, 2005
Posts: 636

Re: [gunkiemike] troop surge in iraq [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

ok. i should have said 'oil to be taken by force' in louisianna.

and wait, we can't leav the democrates out:

American people/W's monacracy = democats do nada


ihategrigris


Jan 14, 2007, 5:45 PM
Post #16 of 73 (1473 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 6, 2005
Posts: 757

Re: [tattooed_climber] troop surge in iraq [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

tattooed_climber wrote:
curt wrote:
kyote321 wrote:
Iran + nukes = WW3

W - brain = WW3

Therefore: W - brain = Iran + nukes

Curt

Thus: W - Nukes = Iran + Brain

Brain = W - WW3

and if we take the fact that bush has no brain...

W - Nukes = Iran + W - WW3

Sooo...

- Nukes = Iran + 2W - WW3

WW3 = Iran + 2W + Nukes

ohoh......i think we're all fucked!!!!!!its mathematical proven!!!

Only if you can find a second W.... does Jeb, Hillary or Obama have a W in their name? Does Chaney have a W somewhere perhaps. This is very important, I mean we're either fucked or we aren't.


carabiner96


Jan 14, 2007, 6:12 PM
Post #17 of 73 (1471 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 10, 2006
Posts: 12510

Re: [tattooed_climber] troop surge in iraq [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

tattooed_climber wrote:
curt wrote:
kyote321 wrote:
Iran + nukes = WW3

W - brain = WW3

Therefore: W - brain = Iran + nukes

Curt

Thus: W - Nukes = Iran + Brain

Brain = W - WW3

and if we take the fact that bush has no brain...

W - Nukes = Iran + W - WW3

Sooo...

- Nukes = Iran + 2W - WW3

WW3 = Iran + 2W + Nukes

ohoh......i think we're all fucked!!!!!!its mathematical proven!!!


wow, taddy...I'm not gonna lie, i'm purty impressed!


snoopy138


Jan 14, 2007, 6:19 PM
Post #18 of 73 (1469 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 7, 2004
Posts: 28658

Re: [ihategrigris] troop surge in iraq [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

ihategrigris wrote:
tattooed_climber wrote:
curt wrote:
kyote321 wrote:
Iran + nukes = WW3

W - brain = WW3

Therefore: W - brain = Iran + nukes

Curt

Thus: W - Nukes = Iran + Brain

Brain = W - WW3

and if we take the fact that bush has no brain...

W - Nukes = Iran + W - WW3

Sooo...

- Nukes = Iran + 2W - WW3

WW3 = Iran + 2W + Nukes

ohoh......i think we're all fucked!!!!!!its mathematical proven!!!

Only if you can find a second W.... does Jeb, Hillary or Obama have a W in their name? Does Chaney have a W somewhere perhaps. This is very important, I mean we're either fucked or we aren't.

Don't know about those three, but guess what Laura Bush's middle initial is ...


Partner j_ung


Jan 15, 2007, 10:40 AM
Post #19 of 73 (1443 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18687

Re: [wanderlustmd] troop surge in iraq [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

wanderlustmd wrote:
The way I see it, even though it ended up being BS, Saddam having WMDs was a risk we couldn't afford to take so soon after 9/11.

The way I see it our current predicament is proof positive why self defense and defense of our allies are the only reasons good enough to go to war. Obviously, preemptive war is a mistake. I'm not really sure what else needs to happen before people understand that. Full scale Iraqi civil war? An Iraqi fundamentalist theocracy? Iran with nukes maybe? If that's what it would take, well, hang on sec. All three are on the way... and whether we stay or go pobably makes no difference.


coopershawk


Jan 15, 2007, 11:41 AM
Post #20 of 73 (1434 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 23, 2004
Posts: 210

Re: [j_ung] troop surge in iraq [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

I'm convinced more than ever that this a ploy by Bush to preserve his "legacy" as president, no matter what the cost, for the next two years. He'll leave it for the next group to clean up, regardless of consequences, regardless of the deaths over the next months to come. The man simply does not care what anyone has to say; generals, aides, people in his own party, soldiers, etc. He only knows he can't go down in history as the total fucking, warmongering failure that he is. He has no clue what people have to live through everyday over there, or if he does, then he DOES NOT CARE. He knows what comes out of his mouth is bullshit, you can almost see him smirking as the lies fall out. I just don't get it. Who let this jackoff run the show? Oh yeah..the religious right, the mega corporations, the gay bashers, the shitkickers, the war geeks and the perpetually terrified segments who think there's a "terrorist" around every corner.


curt


Jan 15, 2007, 12:18 PM
Post #21 of 73 (1428 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 26, 2002
Posts: 18226

Re: [coopershawk] troop surge in iraq [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

coopershawk wrote:
I'm convinced more than ever that this a ploy by Bush to preserve his "legacy" as president, no matter what the cost, for the next two years. He'll leave it for the next group to clean up, regardless of consequences, regardless of the deaths over the next months to come. The man simply does not care what anyone has to say; generals, aides, people in his own party, soldiers, etc. He only knows he can't go down in history as the total fucking, warmongering failure that he is.

I'm pretty sure he will, anyway. History will not be kind to GWB.

Curt


someonetookdan


Jan 16, 2007, 7:20 AM
Post #22 of 73 (1399 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 9, 2006
Posts: 6

Re: [curt] troop surge in iraq [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

curt wrote:
History will not be kind to GWB.

Curt

I disagree. I think history will show that ol' georgey acted to preserve the welfare of our nation, and he did so despite an incredible amount of very public disapproval from half the country (lets not forget, he was reelected, so someone must agree with him).

I for one am happy that we have a president that didn't let the war on terror stop in Afghanistan. Maybe people are beginning to forget the significance of Sept. 11th, but I think that day gave us very real validation to stomp all over the middle east, in the interests of self preservation. We didn't go to Iraq to free Iraqis or take Iraqi oil, we went there to protect ourselves from a potential WMD terrorist threat.

I am saddened to think that in 2008 democrats will likely win the presidential election and we will again be yoked with the burden of the U.N. (a complete failure of an organization) and world opinion. Maybe we could be like those advanced european democracies. The ones crippled with inaction and with their populations slowly being replaced by muslim immigrants and their progeny (a subject for a different forum, no doubt.)

Here are a few links to illistrate my last few sentences:
http://fjordman.blogspot.com/...-wave-in-sweden.html
and
http://www.limitstogrowth.org/...nce-immigration.html

I know I've changed the subject quite a bit, but I just like to stick up for the commander in chief, since I like him, atleast in terms of his staunch foreign policy.


dingus


Jan 16, 2007, 7:46 AM
Post #23 of 73 (1397 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17361

Re: [someonetookdan] troop surge in iraq [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

someonetookdan wrote:
I know I've changed the subject quite a bit, but I just like to stick up for the commander in chief, since I like him, atleast in terms of his staunch foreign policy.

I think history will teach that Bush was the beginning of the end for democracy in the US, the mark of the Rise of Facism. I think we are now committed to near-perpetual warfare. Escalation is inevitable. The neocons think the failure in Iraq was in not immediately turning on Syria and Iran.

Its that mentality (mostly from people who never served a day in the military of course) that will destroy this country.

DMT


(This post was edited by dingus on Jan 16, 2007, 7:47 AM)


curt


Jan 16, 2007, 7:56 AM
Post #24 of 73 (1391 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 26, 2002
Posts: 18226

Re: [someonetookdan] troop surge in iraq [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

someonetookdan wrote:
I for one am happy that we have a president that didn't let the war on terror stop in Afghanistan...

He sure didn't. In fact, he went somewhere where the "war on terror" didn't exist--and started one.

Curt


veganclimber


Jan 16, 2007, 9:09 AM
Post #25 of 73 (1375 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 17, 2005
Posts: 2775

Re: [someonetookdan] troop surge in iraq [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

someonetookdan wrote:

I for one am happy that we have a president that didn't let the war on terror stop in Afghanistan. Maybe people are beginning to forget the significance of Sept. 11th, but I think that day gave us very real validation to stomp all over the middle east, in the interests of self preservation.

So sept. 11 gives us justification to invade a country that had nothing to do with it?

In reply to:
We didn't go to Iraq to free Iraqis or take Iraqi oil, we went there to protect ourselves from a potential WMD terrorist threat.

Maybe if we had actual proof that Iraq had WMD's that they could actually use against us. We're pretty sure doesn't cut it.

In reply to:
Maybe we could be like those advanced european democracies. The ones crippled with inaction and with their populations slowly being replaced by muslim immigrants and their progeny (a subject for a different forum, no doubt.)

So if immigrants are a problem don't you think immigration control would be a good solution? What is a war going to do, other than piss them off more?

First page Previous page 1 2 3 Next page Last page  View All

Forums : Community : The Soap Box

 


Search for (options)

Log In:

Username:
Password: Remember me:

Go Register
Go Lost Password?
$2.66 (10% off)
$8.96 (10% off)
$175.73 (10% off)
$13.46 (10% off)



Follow us on Twiter Become a Fan on Facebook