Iraq invading Kuwait WAS our business. Any instability in a region that hates us is bad; ever heard vacuum of power? Yugoslavia perhaps? Germany was unstable before Hitler.

All this monday-morning quarterbacking by you and people like you will get us nowhere. We might have been wrong about the WMDs. Then again, we were stalled by the UN for 8+ months between when we threatened invasion and when we actually went in. You can move a lot of bombs in 8 months.

What would you have made the decision on? Every day you make the best possible decision with the best possible information you have to make that decision. If we had been correct, and Iraq had WMDs, and we did nothing, and they sold a nuke to Al Qaeda and nuked a city, I guarantee you'd be raising a shitstorm about our lack of action.

Two schools of thought here. I prefer premptive strike to retaliation, as a retaliation strike means we've already been hit, and I would prefer us to not be hit.


On a lighter note;
Of course I think I am right. I wouldn't have an opinion I thought to be wrong. :D What is so wrong with that?

At the same time I realize I might be wrong, and that other people have other opinions, so that is a possibility; just, unlikely. ;)

When would I have attacked? How about never? It's funny that while we were rushing to war the U.N. was asking for more time then after we got in there and started looking, everyone who thought war was a good idea said "well it takes time". Fuck that. Nobody in our government will ever step up and say "you know what...I/we was/were wrong". Germany was unstable before Hitler because we had just bombed them into the stone age. Hitler fixed that...and then went crazy. Iraq was pretty much always in the stone age and Sadaam was pretty much always crazy. Big difference. If you want to police the world, join the service. Otherwise don't throw the idea around.

Honestly man...I welcome everyone's opinion and I'm certainly not opposed to you having your own. Just don't present it like that's the only way it can be.

Wren you really should stop putting words in peoples mouths cause I sure as hell don't remember EVER saying that...what was that word you used to label me? Jackass ?
looks like you pinned the tail on the the wrong "donkey"

Well think about what would have happened if we finished Korea.. we wouldn't have the current problems that we do with North Korea. Even China, who supported and even fought against us during the Korean war doesn't support Korea now, and wishes that they never had in the first place. N Korea is as much a thorn in their side as they are in ours.

Now let's compare that to Iraq. At some point in time they would have developed nuclear weapons, and we would have wished that we had dealt with them back in 2002 like we intended.

And saying that Iraq had no WMD is just retarded. From the end of the Gulf War Iraq never followed any of the agreements set by the U.N... but nothing was done about it. Iraq had 11 years to disseminate their WMD to countries like Syria.

And do you realize that 90% of these insurgents are not even Iraqis? And have you noticed that about 75% of the current casualties on our side are Iraqis to include iraqi police, iraqi politcians, and iraqi military? I wonder why that is... It's obviously not about us not belonging there.. because the insurgents seem to think that Iraqis don't belong in Iraq based on their recent attacks.

ok some where in here i read "would you wait till they had nuclear weapons to attak with before doing something?" or something along those lines.

heres my answer to that question: then why arent we in iran or NK? both are making them and both took forever disarming them. did they make them, sell them, and then said oh we dissarmed them.

lol, Afganistan. hell we still cant find thw hole/cave this guy is living in. till we find him that war will not be over. my guess is he living right next door to me. i think the war on iraq was to make people look there not over there. why? im not sure. it seems like everyone has forgot we are there.

I think it's more about the fact that insurgents think that the "new" Iraqi military and police forces are working for us and against them. Since we are apparently the infidel (who knew?), the fact that they are working with us must drive many of the insurgents to hate them, as well. Not to undercut the efforts or sacrifices made by the military, but why do we call them insurgents. We invaded them when they didn't want us there. They're fighting off a percieved threat (whether it be real or not) to their way of life. About 250 years ago we called those people "minutemen". Now all of a sudden that they're on the opposite side of the crosshairs we call them "insurgents". I'm not saying it's right or wrong...but it's a bit of a double standard.

Are you blind or just stupid?

wren is right. sorry darin. you did say that shit. twice to be exact.

SFKing I dunno if what you said is a fucking haiku or what.. because I don't know what the fuck you are talking about.. what are you talking about attacking Iraq to look here instead of there.. and to let people know we are there? here? Are you drunk?

Haha, he did use a lot of indefinite pronouns. :D

i may be slightly iunder the influnce.

but my point is. why are we not attacking iran or NK? they have nuclear weapons or were making them. the UN told them to disarm and dispose of them. but damn it took them forever to comply. so i guess they made them and sold them. we would never know. the UN never went to Iran did they?

did we go to war with iraq to get peoples attention off afganistan? we still havent found bin ladin, why arent we trying harder? how come people have forgot that we are there? becuase iraq is more important?

No we have not found bin laden.. we still need to, but the fact that we removed the taliban and AQ from Afghanistan has severely hindered their capabilities of performing a major terrorist attack. We still need to put the pressure on afghanistan, and we still do. You talk as if Afghanistan was unsuccessful, which shows how much you know.. like it was some form of embarrassment. Trying harder to find bin laden you ask? Please I am the U.S. military is open to suggestions.. what do YOU suggest?

As for Iran and NK.. they do not comply.. and you ask why don't we attack them? Watch the news lately? Didn't think so.. not to say that we are, because I don't know.. but there is tons of info out there and conjection about that topic.

lol, i never said attack. i merely asked why we dont deal with them making nuclear weapons. why dont we send in our own people and make sure they are not making them.

i never said afgan was an unsuccessful mission. it was. im saying why arent we trying to get bin ladin. last time i watched the NEWS and read the PAPER they were claimed bin ladin was still in afgan.

i never said i dont have to fight because i pay taxes. never once. I did however say i pay taxes which enables the military to be there

ohhh lol.. yea try not paying taxes.. let's see what happens. So basically I am here because you have no choice in the matter whatsoever.. ok I understand now..:rolleyes:

Oh yes you did....

I guess that is true tho, haha

Originally posted by SFKing
..... why are we not attacking iran or NK? .....


To quote Zoolander after "but why male models?";
"Are you kidding? I just told you."

Refer to previously in the thread.

From the all-knowing Maddox:

http://maddox.xmission.com/bomb_iran.html

what an awesome page you posted Steve, awsome to the very core

you missinterupted me.

we attacked Iraq becuase they have WMDS even after the UN said no dont. well the UN has said no, dont attack NK or Iran. why are listening to them this time? becuase we fucked up the first time?