Not about the oil?

[Nick Grana]

It ain't about the oil.:eek:
Oil-For-Food-Scandle (http://www.alternet.org/module/printversion/27792)
Some make the best profits during war at the expense of anyone and everyone. Did our government know? How could they not?

Oh, year, the minister or prime ministor say U.S. forces will leave Iraq in '06 if Iraqi forces are trained properly and able to handle the situation.
Plan on the big 'IF' making your vacation there a lot longer.
I feel your pain. I say come home......now.

[zipulrich]

~[Edited the above post - hope you're OK with it, Nick!]~

[Nick Grana]

Sure, Zip. Sometimes my true feeling get the best. I need all the supervision I can get.:dizzy:
Your best wop, (Hey, I'm Scicilian. Don't hurt my feelings.);)
Nick:michaelan

[zipulrich]

;)

[oracle128]

Plan on the big 'IF' making your vacation there a lot longer.
I feel your pain. I say come home......now.Are you saying it would be better to pull the troops out now, leaving their job half done, so all those troops would have died for nothing? What do you think the families of those dead troops would say about that? Have you actually asked any troops what THEY want to do? (Start the flaming, I'm a big boy I can take it)

[Ned Seagoon]

Hi oracle128

As Vietnam veteran I'm sure that Nick can speak for the troops who are there. I don't think it is a case of leaving the job half done, more a case of cutting the losses. There is no place here for any cognitive dissonance, one dead is one too many.

[DELTREE]

Nick, the ARMY today is a lot different then when you and I were at war.
I would like to see them come home too,but they have to get the job done first.Not like VN,cut and run.;)

[Nick Grana]

Have you actually asked any troops what THEY want to do?
Yes. And the answers from most were just the same answers I had a long time ago. We have a duty, heart, and a gung-ho attitude that will last until the job is done. 'What's the spirit of the bayonet?. 'TO KILL'
Like Deltree said, we cut-n-run in Vietnam. But wait, these colors don't run.
Oh, but pardon me. When the outcome is bleak or not obtainable, why throw more money and body bags in the pot. What did 50,000 losses do in Vietnam.
The very same as it will happen in the Middle East. The holy wars will continue. The same countries will fight. The Russians were 10 years in Afghanistan before they cut-n-run.
They (whoever they are) started this with us. And we still can't find the man who bears the weight of his terrorist party. So we morphed into Iraq.
We have a target head now, but the right one? We were lied to, simple and plain. If anyone thinks otherwise, the moon is made of cheese.
Deltree, I don't think it's that much different now than then. Same training teaching the basics of fighting, shooting, jumping out of perfectly good airplanes. Getting their head filled with 'An Army of One' or 'The Best of the Best' brainwashing we had. "Let me in there. I want to due my duty to the best of my ability. Let me in coach, I'm ready to play."
This is just the opinion of an old poop who has seen a lot and the outcomes.
Bush, "We will rid the world of terrorism." Bull crap.
No this ain't a book. Just trying to justify some of my statements.
Just like the $5,000,000 winner of the World Poker Tour. Did it change your life? "Same guy, nicer watch." Right, and I won't quit my job flipping burgers if I won $5 mil in the lottery.
No flames in this matter. Just the slow flowing patience of a man with an outlook that differs from some others.
What do you think the families of those dead troops would say about that?
Same thing they said of all wars, especially the ones with no great reasons.
My heart goes out to these families.
And I support my brothers and sisters who are following orders to do the best.
God Bless the brave fighting men/women who lay down their lives everyday to do their duty. High cost? You bet, Will it be worth it? Time will tell.:disgust:

P.S.
To date 2,068 U.S. troops have been killed in Iraq, 1,928 of them after President Bush declared major combat operations successful on May 1, 2003. (Posted 6:33 a.m.)
I guess winning the peace is much more costly than the war itself.

[Idnew]

Remember, Americans won virtually all the battles in Vietnam, but lost the war. Why? The left and the left media combined to convince most Americans the war was morally wrong and unwinnable. Americans have short attention spans and don't like problematic, drawn-out conflicts. The outcome in Iraq will ultimately be determined by domestic politics in the USA.

For whatever reasons we are there, the men and women fighting do not need to hear all the negative comments from the press, and the anti-war protesters.

This is a soldiers view......... Aim to serve nation, help Iraqi citizens (http://www.dailytarheel.com/vnews/display.v/ART/2004/11/09/4190c44979575)

[Miz]

All political and national security issues aside, sometimes I think it all gets down to whether you (that's the generic "you") believe an American life is worth more than an Iraqi life.

If you believe an American life is worth more than an Iraqi life, then being in Iraq and staying in Iraq is not justifiable. If we hadn't gone into Iraq, Sadaam would have continued killing Iraqis by the thousands but they wouldn't be American lives. If we leave now, there will be a bloodbath but it won't be American blood.

On the other hand, if you believe that all lives are worthwhile, then going into Iraq starts to make sense. If you also believe "to whom much is given, much is expected," the argument can be made that it is incumbent upon the richest, most powerful nation to use those riches and that power to come to the aid of the helpless.

As far as the tired old "we were lied to" theory, the facts do not support that statement.

[Nick Grana]

As far as the tired old "we were lied to" theory, the facts do not support that statement.
I beg to differ on that. WMD's were the key word and none were found.
We are the only country to kill with WMD's.....twice. Did it help? That begs for debate also.
If you believe an American life is worth more than an Iraqi life,
You bet I do. We are not the police of the world. We shouldn't stick our nose in every little sore cavity to try and fill it. Believe me, or not, 20 years in VN accomplished nothing. It wound up as were never there to start with, the exception being the heroism and great losses from us and out allies.
Remember, Americans won virtually all the battles in Vietnam, but lost the war. Why?
I think I can remember.:dizzy: It wasn't the left or the right but a right down the middle public thinking this has just gone far enough. And it did go too far.
If the government would have left the fighting to the military, different outcome, maybe.
Same with this MidEast, when enough is enough, the public will turn because of being fed up with the lack of progress. I pray these soldiers will continue to have the welcome home hero greetings. Unlike the rocks, spit, and baby killer remarks I returned to. It wasn't pretty. Deltree and many others can attest to this warped sense of being.
Like politics (war included in this) and religion, it will always be split pretty much down the middle as to how one interrupts it.
When it comes to war and you haven't been in one, don't try guessing what walking in a soldier's shoes would be like. My dad and three other brothers all served honorably in RVN. We were proud to do our duty.:thumbsup:

[Miz]

Yes, WMDs were part of the "reasons to go to war" package. I guess it depends on the definition of "lying."

When information from sources which are considered reliable (British, Israeli, French and American intelligence communities, among others) is accepted as true and repeated but is later found to be erroneous, I don't consider lying.

If that is considered lying, then far more people than those within the Bush administration lied and they, too, should be held accountable.

[Nick Grana]

If that is considered lying, then far more people than those within the Bush administration lied and they, too, should be held accountable.
That is so true. But it's way too late now to do anything about it.
It may not have been a lie initially or intentionally, but as time passed and more info was reported correctly, and the administration still went along with the wrong intelligence anyway, that was lying. Then that (lie) intelligence was replaced by other reasons to go to war. If one answer failed, another took its place faster than a speeding bullet. Then and now it's hard to keep up with exactly why we are there. To create a democracy? Plenty of countries live just fine without a democracy. And plenty of countries will war no matter what the government in place trys to uphold.

I do love you, girl, and I see your points. But I just love to argue. In these last few occasions, iI sincerely believe in what I say. Doesn't make it so but get's it off my chest. Thanks to all for being a backboard to some of my most intimate thoughts.:wave:

[Miz]

As you've probably noticed, I have great difficulty passing up political, theological and philosophical debates. I don't have a problem with someone who disagrees with me so long as there's no name calling and insult throwing.

You debate well, Nick.

[Ned Seagoon]

To date 2,068 U.S. troops have been killed in Iraq

Nick is right to mention the number of troops killed, it is terrible that these, many mainly young men, were killed. How many famlies have been affected? How many have come back suffering the scars of war, both the physical scars and those other scars which have uninformed people saying things like "pull your self together" or "Get over it". Those who have their whole lived stuffed.

But what about the Iraq dead, injured, displaced etc. Many innocent famlies trying to go about their day to day business were drawn into this. I hear someone saying "they were atacking us". OK some so called insurgents were, (in the second world war these same sort of people in France were called the resistance). To say nothing of those who are called collateral damage, innocent people who happened to be in the wrong place.

The insurgents are trying to repel invaders.

Those who advocated attacking Iraq must have had their head in the sand if they thought they could invade, kill and destabilise, and then have the locals say thanks.

War is a terrible thing, and should be avoided by all. If all were to avoid it none of the above would have happened.

[DonBB]

I feel like we've debated this topic before so I won't rehash my opinion, but I do have to say, for the people that think that we should pull out now...when we up and leave the country, with the Iraqi's unable to defend themselves, who do you think will quickly take over control of the country?? Zarqawi...perhaps Bin Laden himself, either way, someone much worse than Saddam Hussein. This is unacceptable, and in my opinion would be catastrophic to not only the region, but the rest of the world as well.

[Nick Grana]

I feel like we've debated this topic before so I won't rehash my opinion, but I do have to say,
Your opinion?;) They are like butts. Everyone has one. Some stink and some others............stink worse. Human nature.:michaelan

You debate well, Nick.
You also. It's fun.
I was so good in school doing debates that I was named, "Master Debater".:eek:

[Ned Seagoon]

"Master Debater".

Oh, Nick, you're pulling my leg, well something, anyway! :D

[Nick Grana]

:rotflmao: :rotflmao: :rotflmao:
Not pulling your leg but biting it off:
http://myspace-909.vo.llnwd.net/00310/90/92/310112909_m.gifWhy are you swimming with the sharks?:eek:
:michaelan