07-07-2008, 02:17 AM
We had a reason to go to Afghanistan, retalian was necessary - but the real reason we went in was to get a foot in the middle eastern door, obviously. Now look at the rest of the region. You have Iraq and Iran, Two nations with equally insane, nut job leaders - one of which has NO evidence of any successful start to a nuclear program, one has documented plans, contacts and materials to actually build the bomb. wouldn't it make sense to go for the latter? But wait, there's more! Look at the three countries mentioned, Afghanistan and Iraq are two countries with relatively no national army, where Iran would involve a full scale conflict. Now, Bush doesn't want to start a full scale war, too risky, too unpopular. So what do you do? You try to pressure Iran (the only actual threat in the region) into backing down. How, you ask? You have American support to enter and invade Afghanistan (see 9/11), and what country lies on the other side of Iran... oh my god, Iraq!
A country with a nut job, genocidal leader - largely unpopular with the American people. That enough doesn't warrant an invasion, so what happens! Our intelligence agencies, along with the White House create a reason for invasion (See WMD LIES, oh yea UN inspectors also told us they didn't have any means or methods to creating a nuclear weapon - i would supply a link but CNN, AD, Google, Yahoo, almost all websites i frequent aren't working on my current connection. You can verify that with Aero or Bojack). Anyways, so now we invade Iraq and have two footholds in the Middle East, coincidentally on either side of Iran - who in turn becomes momentarily hostile, only to then back down.
Coincidence? I think not. Lying to the public and embarking on unjust wars? I think so. Also, if we wanted to oust every fucking insane leader in the world, you think we'd go to Venezuala, Russia, China, North Korea and every fucking country in Africa too. But we didn't, so if your going to justify us going to Iraq SOLELY on the mission to remove a nut job, your ignorant. I tried to make a nuclear bomb in my basement, and failed miserably - fifteen years ago - should we launch an airstrike on Boston? He tried, and failed miserably fifteen years ago. HE DIDN'T EVEN COME CLOSE. and UN Inspectors this time around actually DID inspect Iraq's facilities, and guess what? nothing. And, in my opinion, Suddam should have been upset about inspectors coming - we had no just cause, no reason to think he was trying again. That's like bringing the FBI to your house on my word alone, and no evidence whatsoever. Maybe some fabricated evidence, at best.
Cleaning up the mess? Iraq economy, down. Murders and violence in iraq, up. living conditions, down (dead corpses and animals lying in the street half blown up are on the rise). Suddam's security force might have been oppressive, but it limited sectarian violence, it limited terrorism - it did the job. the Iraqi police are a complete joke. An Iraqi commander even SWITCHED TO THE OTHER SIDE WITH HIS TROOPS in Sadr City. Yes, Mission Success George W.
I'm not defending Suddam, he obviously should have been ousted - but the manner and methods we took, and how it's gone so far is, and has been, entirely illegal and a complete failure.
A country with a nut job, genocidal leader - largely unpopular with the American people. That enough doesn't warrant an invasion, so what happens! Our intelligence agencies, along with the White House create a reason for invasion (See WMD LIES, oh yea UN inspectors also told us they didn't have any means or methods to creating a nuclear weapon - i would supply a link but CNN, AD, Google, Yahoo, almost all websites i frequent aren't working on my current connection. You can verify that with Aero or Bojack). Anyways, so now we invade Iraq and have two footholds in the Middle East, coincidentally on either side of Iran - who in turn becomes momentarily hostile, only to then back down.
Coincidence? I think not. Lying to the public and embarking on unjust wars? I think so. Also, if we wanted to oust every fucking insane leader in the world, you think we'd go to Venezuala, Russia, China, North Korea and every fucking country in Africa too. But we didn't, so if your going to justify us going to Iraq SOLELY on the mission to remove a nut job, your ignorant. I tried to make a nuclear bomb in my basement, and failed miserably - fifteen years ago - should we launch an airstrike on Boston? He tried, and failed miserably fifteen years ago. HE DIDN'T EVEN COME CLOSE. and UN Inspectors this time around actually DID inspect Iraq's facilities, and guess what? nothing. And, in my opinion, Suddam should have been upset about inspectors coming - we had no just cause, no reason to think he was trying again. That's like bringing the FBI to your house on my word alone, and no evidence whatsoever. Maybe some fabricated evidence, at best.
Cleaning up the mess? Iraq economy, down. Murders and violence in iraq, up. living conditions, down (dead corpses and animals lying in the street half blown up are on the rise). Suddam's security force might have been oppressive, but it limited sectarian violence, it limited terrorism - it did the job. the Iraqi police are a complete joke. An Iraqi commander even SWITCHED TO THE OTHER SIDE WITH HIS TROOPS in Sadr City. Yes, Mission Success George W.
I'm not defending Suddam, he obviously should have been ousted - but the manner and methods we took, and how it's gone so far is, and has been, entirely illegal and a complete failure.
![[Image: Minoshiav2.png]](http://i137.photobucket.com/albums/q218/Aerogfx/sigs/Minoshiav2.png)
The Prince of Darkness