Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Face it Bush et al made up the scare in order to get us in a war we didn't belong in, so his friends could make billions on weapons and oil.... that is all it was about. We lost 4400 brave souls so some coward a$$holes could get richer. Iraq lost hundreds of thousands and we don't even acknowledge that as significant, and we wonder why the middle east doesn't like us.
It is absurd some are still trying to validate an obscene war. We broke a country and the world will pay. It would be very wise that we get independent of oil, and no the Keystone pipeline won't help. Renewables is the best option. and yes they do work.
Bush didn't make up the scare as it was around well before he was president but Bush is the one that acted on it.
i read the article---- meaningless. the weapons were used on iranians not meant or designed for use on NYC. that bit of jihadist action came from the royal household of saudi arabia our allies and was done with box cutters courtesy our non existent internal security system. only bek of some gutsy american patriot civilians on the planes did the white house and pentagon survive. you know--- the same civilian patriot americans trying to stop bus loads of illegals from being dropped in our streets by our wonderful BP officers.
WMD is a problematic term. You can buy a brick of 5000 rounds of .22 lr for less than a thousand dollars, which would seem to qualify as WMD, but can you shoot 5000 souls with it? No, you will probably be shot yourself after the first.
But we are stuck with this terminology from our friends at the NYT, Washington Post, ABC, NBC, etc. They are so much more sophisticated than us, and they write the rules.
You could hold them off with this 22 for a second.
dual Ruger 10-22's, 2 100 round drums.
This and a pack of hogs!!
We were to occupy Iraq for eternity? Why? While Isis may not have over run the country as fast they would have been targeting our soldiers daily. Why is it that we should have continued to put our kids in harms way day after day in Iraq? For what?
In order to serve the military industrial complex, that's why. Hey, it's not like these chicken hawk neo-cons will have to send their own kids. BTW, a lot of these "WMDs" were supplied by the US.
Sure it was. I have some bottom land I would like to sell you, all you have to do is drain the swamp and get rid of the cottonmouths and alligators, deal?
They had elections a congress amd a working government . Seems much better than half their country now over run by a terrorists state. Of course. It's only my opinion that elections and a functioning government is better than being over run by terrorists.
No we do not, we have no reason to occupy any country for forever, not our place to do so and we cannot afford it in money or blood. I have a better idea let them work out their own problems, our interference will not solve their long term issues, those must be resolved by the People that live there.
No we do not, we have no reason to occupy any country for forever, not our place to do so and we cannot afford it in money or blood. I have a better idea let them work out their own problems, our interference will not solve their long term issues, those must be resolved by the People that live there.
When you say occupy what does an occupation entail , imho an occupation occurs when the conquering country controls the government . Having troops on ground does not mean it's an occupation . Now in your opinion do we occupy Japan? We have a military presence . My opinion is when iraq elected and formed its own government we were no longer occupiers .
They had elections a congress amd a working government . Seems much better than half their country now over run by a terrorists state. Of course. It's only my opinion that elections and a functioning government is better than being over run by terrorists.
The reason they are in trouble is because the government was not working the Shia's running the government had made the Sunnis into a second class group and in doing so lost the support of most of the People of Iraq and that is how terrorists can take such large areas of the country where the Army should have been able to easily destroy them when it first started. It is better is the government actually represents the People of Iraq instead of a small select group, because without the support of the People the government cannot stop what has happened. It is slowing turning around and hopefully they will win out in the end, but for the most part that should be up to them to determine.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
