hey..... where's all the foreign help???????

LMAO :laugh: :laugh:

Uhm, no, thats not what happened at all. The US command at the time wanted to march through to Baghdad and finish the job but since it was a UN sanctioned conflict the war was ended once the Iraqis were pushed from Kuwait. You can thank the lefts shining temple of corruption, the UN for that debacle, and the 12 years of sanctions and BS that ultimately had to come to an end.

I am curious if you feel if any war is justified, or if its just bad if a Bush/ Republican sends our country to war? Were you anti war/ anti Bush guys going crazy when Clinton sent our troops to Bosnia for no friggin reason and without UN support? Or how about when he launched Operation Desert Fox in 1998? During that air attack that happened to coincide nicely with his impeachment hearings ou: the US and Britain pummeled Iraq for 2 days with a massive air strike campaign.

Our country has gone to war for far worse reasons then we did in Iraq, and I dont remember seeing or reading about anyone getting impeached, so you might want to get over it, since no matter how much you hate Bush, nothings going to ever happen to him. It's a Republican controlled congress, and the way things are looking, the democrats will loose even more seats in 2006.

If you want an example of a President who trully lied to drag the US into a useless war look up Democrat Linden B Johnson and the fabricated Gulf of Tonken Incident that ultimatly led to the deaths of 58,000 plus US soldiers.

Iraq isn't even in the same league.

 

[quote="Why We Didn't Remove Saddam" by George Bush Sr.]"While we hoped that popular revolt or coup would topple Saddam, neither the U.S. nor the countries of the region wished to see the breakup of the Iraqi state. We were concerned about the long-term balance of power at the head of the Gulf. Trying to eliminate Saddam, extending the ground war into an occupation of Iraq, would have violated our guideline about not changing objectives in midstream, engaging in "mission creep," and would have incurred incalculable human and political costs. Apprehending him was probably impossible. We had been unable to find Noriega in Panama, which we knew intimately. We would have been forced to occupy Baghdad and, in effect, rule Iraq. The coalition would instantly have collapsed, the Arabs deserting it in anger and other allies pulling out as well. Under those circumstances, furthermore, we had been self-consciously trying to set a pattern for handling aggression in the post-cold war world. Going in and occupying Iraq, thus unilaterally exceeding the U.N.'s mandate, would have destroyed the precedent of international response to aggression we hoped to establish. Had we gone the invasion route, the U.S. could conceivably still be an occupying power in a bitterly hostile land. It would have been a dramatically different--and perhaps barren--outcome.[/quote]

Really sounds like he wanted to dive right into iraq.

Did clinton declare war on bosnia? War is right when the reasons are right, starting a war that's killed 24k+ people to protect our oil interests isn't right. Every reason bush has given to justify the iraqi war has been nothing but a PR move. It's just a shame that every bushite has a nice big pair of rose colored glasses that they like to put on whenever they hear anything about bush or the iraq war and all they can do to refute is to slam the person who brings it to light.

 

Guys..

Read my post in this thread..

http://www.v8buick.com/showthread.php?t=82701

JW

 

The answer for all the wanna-be politicians in this thread:

To unsubscribe from this thread, please visit this page:
http://www.v8buick.com/subscription.php?do=usub&t=82365

If you really know what's going on or what you are talking about, you were elected to be the president of the United States a long, long time ago....

(Same goes for all the couch potatoes criticizing sport on tv: If you were any good, you were out there playing. )

 

Sorry, maybe I should have said "US military command" wanted to march through to Baghdad, since it should have been obvious in my comment that George Bush the 1st wasn't there leading the troops into battle. I didn't agree with GB1st for his not finishing the job in Iraq, and I used my vote in 91 to send that message. In your quote from wherever you got it, it validates the point I made. That he didn't want to break up the UN coalition. Thanks for helping me make my point. :TU:

On the topic of oil.
Since our entire economy and the worlds economy as well is based on the use of oil, whether it be in transportation, or manufacturing or plastics which is basically in everything now. I would say that going to war to protect our oil intrests is just. Unless you want to see the US become a 3rd world $@&$hole I would think that it's completely hypocritical of you to say that you are against the US fighting to protect it's economy. Lets see how much of a peace lover you are when you can't drive your car, have no electrical power, and no heat. You also might want to take a look at all the things in your house that are made of plastic. So until you start making everything that you use out of wood or rocks, and start pedaling a bicycle for your transportation needs your argument of no blood for oil is rediculous.

As far as that Iraq body count web site you post to show death tolls, it is a complete fabrication, no one knows how many people were killed in the fighting, especially not some anti war web geek. Anyone can pull any figure they want out of their butt, that doesn't make it true. See the British medical news letter "The Lancet". They etimated that 100,000 civilians were killed during the conflict. When it was asked how they came up with that number they basically said it was a wild guess. and the numbers were between 3000 and 200K so they split the middle. Very scientific... LOL :laugh: But for the sake of argument, if the death toll is at 24K, then we have saved 176K lives since we invaded because it was estimated that Saddam was murdering at least 100K of his own people a year.

 

Let's just say that you're a very slow typer, and missed the previous messages........ :laugh:

 

Yes I did. My appologies.

 

There's a 13 minute gap so either our friend mike here is in the dunce class of keyboarding or he just felt like getting in the last word. My guess is the latter. Anyways, I'll end my side in respect to Jim's wishes.

 

Personal attacks, isn't that against board rules as well?

 

Let there be peace again in this part of the milky way...... :laugh:

 

This one has lost its appeal its locked now.