lol @ akipt

http://rapidrecon.threatswatch.org/2006/03/iraq-us-iraqi-troops-storm-alm/

Yes he does, much more so than anyone else around here... And as I've stated previously, I'd put a bullet in his head myself if I could.

Which begs the question, why isn't he dead yet?

Since you persist in broadcasting your ignorance....

lol @ L2

Well, Anyone can claim that someone did something somewhere, and blame US troops for it.
Our Troops are the convenient punching bag, ever since the Abu-Grahb Incident.
Since those are the only pictures most people over there have ever seen of US Soldiers, they all must be that way.

Which begs the question, why isn't he dead yet?
Because we made peace with him, and he joined the political process.

Because we made peace with him, and he joined the political process. Bravo! Everyone give Thormir a round of applause.

and he joined the political process.
in order to subvert it from within with Iranian money and influence.

Pro Iranian candidates that he supports from within the majority party are infiltrating the entirety of the government.

He doesnt "get" shit, he is puppet of Tehran, bought and paid for.
Why havent we put a bullet in his head? Because he feigns compliance with the government while at same time working to subvert it.

Its a fucking joke over there. In the end, this guy will do more harm to our aims and goals in Iraq than 10000 insurgents, and there isnt a fucking thing we can do about it.

There is some deep irony in the Iranians doing to Iraq what we did to Iran in the 50s.

There is some deep irony in the Iranians doing to Iraq what we did to Iran in the 50s.


SHHHHHH.
That sounds Vaguely Pro-American.

Its a fucking joke over there. In the end, this guy will do more harm to our aims and goals in Iraq than 10000 insurgents, and there isnt a fucking thing we can do about it.You're such a hyper-defeatist, worse than Walter Cronkite even.

Yes, because it was Cronkites fault we lost Vietnam.
It couldnt have been failed policy and lack of vision. Yes, lets blame Cronkite for exposing the truth, because if there is one thing America cant tolerate in a time of war, its reality.
Because the simpilest way to resolve any foreign policy matter is to have enough public support to be able to throw an unlimited number of bodies at it, no matter how piss poor the reasoning is.

It is the same passivity that you demonstrate and absence of accountability that you advocate that leads to such disasters.

Yes, because it was Cronkites fault we lost Vietnam.
It couldnt have been failed policy and lack of vision. Yes, lets blame Cronkite for exposing the truth, because if there is one thing America cant tolerate in a time of war, its reality.
Because the simpilest way to resolve any foreign policy matter is to have enough public support to be able to throw an unlimited number of bodies at it, no matter how piss poor the reasoning is.

It is the same passivity that you demonstrate and absence of accountability that you advocate that leads to such disasters.

Poor L2, creating strawmen for his own solitary playground.

Yes, because it was Cronkites fault we lost Vietnam.
It couldnt have been failed policy and lack of vision. Yes, lets blame Cronkite for exposing the truth, because if there is one thing America cant tolerate in a time of war, its reality.
Because the simpilest way to resolve any foreign policy matter is to have enough public support to be able to throw an unlimited number of bodies at it, no matter how piss poor the reasoning is.

It is the same passivity that you demonstrate and absence of accountability that you advocate that leads to such disasters.

Ok, so how would you have done things differently?
Rather than pointing out what did and is going wrong and offering no constructive solution, tell us how you would have done things differently?
I really am eager to find out.

Ok, so how would you have done things differently?
Rather than pointing out what did and is going wrong and offering no constructive solution, tell us how you would have done things differently?
I really am eager to find out.

I don't know what L2 would have done but I would have hung the bastard from the same bridge that the US contractors were hung from in Fallujah.

If we do something like that to a few of the mullahs they will start to come around pretty quickly to our way of thinking!

Hows that for liberal thinking?

I don't know what L2 would have done but I would have hung the bastard from the same bridge that the US contractors were hung from in Fallujah.

If we do something like that to a few of the mullahs they will start to come around pretty quickly to our way of thinking!

Hows that for liberal thinking?

You must be a neoliberal.
:devil

How L2 would have dont things differently:

1. As I advocated before the invasion happened. WHOA.. slow down a bit. Why the rush? The hurriedness of this process was due to the desire for political expedience rather than prudence. Let the process play itself out.

2. I would have had a better knowledge of my terrain. There seemed to have been no knowledge of the Iraqi culture. Neo Cons assumed that Iraq would be a better fit for success because it was a more secular Arab nation. To an extent that was true. Sunni muslims, especially in Iraq ARE more secular. They are better educated for the most part and more western and moderate in their religious beliefs. They tended to be the one's who ran Iraq. The Shia tend to be more lower class and as a whole much more fundamental in their beliefs.. heavily influenced by Iranian flavored beliefs from their Imans who command large followings and have been allied with Iran for years.
Saddam being a Sunni gave this class prefered status in Iraq. As a result, almost all were Baathists (part of his political party, an offshoot of the Pan Arabian ideals of Syria and Egypts Nassir)
So whats the first thing we do? We remove all Baathists from power.
durrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
Chaos, confusion, looting... The Sunnis see themselves heading down the same path as the Tutsi's after the Belgians left Rwanda. Marginalized and disinfranchised, the best and brightest in Iraq have no channel to contribute in a positive way and energies turn to such extremes as the Insurgency.

3. I wouldnt have tried to pull off Nation building on the Cheap. Bush allowed himself to be convinced that Iraq could be done for almost no expendature of treasure. 6 Billion was the final total, everything said and done, that they convinced him the whole thing could be done from. Iraqi oil sales would be up and running and would pay for the rest.
You get what you pay for.
Nation building is not done on bargin basement prices. I would have had ready after the Tanks rolled into Baghdad a Marshall Plan sized reconstruction of that nation. Exactly what we did for Japan and Germany. Rebuild the entire country. Not just rebuild, but improve the infrastructure. Instead of Iraqi's looting or rioting or joining an insurgency, they would have been working, earning money.
Yes, a massive investment of capital.. but it what would have been needed to do the job right, and if we confronted that reality then, we wouldnt been paying the same amount of cash now, and a higher amount in American lives.

Very well thought out.
Of course, there's just as much of a chance that your plan would have fell on its face. It has been pointed out that Middle Eastern values are far different than Western values.
There's every chance that the lure of Jihad would still have quagmired the Shermanesque rebuild plan you have in mind as well.
Getting rid of all of the Baathists in 1 fell swoop, was probably a bad idea as well. As you said, they were the 1s with knowledge to make things happen. There might have been chances there would have been some subversion by some of them, but the good would have outweighed the bad, potentially.
The only reasoning I can give for the speed of the invasion, was based on the "We won't let it happen again" attitude of the Administration.
It seemed for all intents and purposes, that Saddam had WMDs still, and was breaking the terms of the cease fire agreement he signed to end the 1st Gulf War.
Here's an analogy: remember when there was a rash of children getting shot by police officers because they were pointing thier very realistic looking toy guns at the officers? Think of what happened to Saddam the same way. Was it right to rush in? Probably not, but I don't think it was done because GW is an "Evil Man". I think he was trying to do what he thought was best. As always, hindsight is 20/20.

I think he was trying to do what he thought was best

Best for whom? Him and his cronnies, the Iraqi people, or the American people. I think it had nothing to do with the later two choices.

Best for whom? Him and his cronnies, the Iraqi people, or the American people. I think it had nothing to do with the later two choices.

I'm going with the cronies!

I meant for the country. I just find it hard to believe the man is truly as bad as the Left is making him out to be.
Next you'll tell me he was ejected from Heaven for the Sin of Pride, and that all his cronies were Fallen Angels (read daemons) as well.

Next you'll tell me he was ejected from Heaven for the Sin of Pride, and that all his cronies were Fallen Angels (read daemons) as well.

You have some inside info on that?...damn!! Always suspected but until you said that, I wasn't sure. :p

You have some inside info on that?...damn!! Always suspected but until you said that, I wasn't sure. :p

LOL, you made me smile, REP points for Joo.

Edit: Hmm won't let me give you any more. :mad: