Today...

[Pink Underoo]

While i agree that in the future, towards the end of our lives or probably even when we're al dead and gone, Bush will be remembered in a more positive light (he has to, he can't go anywhere but up for christ's sake.) but i don't think his situation will mirror Lincoln's. Bush won't be thought of as one of the greatest presidents, i think he'll reach 'okay' at best. Lincoln also won the war he started, remember. Bush's war cannot be won.

Um, I don't know if you've noticed but Iraq has been turning around for a wihle now and is a success. Besides that, the nature of the two conflicts are totally different: Lincoln let Grant cut a path of destruction through the south in an all-out effort to put an end to things, while Petraeus has to contain and reform an insurgency while training natives to do the police work themselves in a region that's been divided into sectarian sides for centuries. If anything, the difference here would favor Bush.

I'd also say that Bush has made a great accomplishment in assigning Roberts and Alito to the Supreme Court. They won the decision over 5-4 in the recent ruling on handguns and the Second Amendment - if not for them then another part of our constitutional rights to protect ourselves would have been chipped away. I know people like to say that Bush disregards the constitution, but presidents have always had exception when taking action for purposes of national security and it's the Court that actually rules on what is constitutional. Seriously, the dissenting opinion over the 2nd Amendment case was lead by Justice Breyer who wrote, "In my view, there simply is no untouchable constitutional right guaranteed by the Second Amendment to keep loaded handguns in the house in crime-ridden urban areas." If you're not permitted to have the weakest type of firearm loaded in your house even in "crime-ridden urban areas" according to 4 of the 9, then all I have to say is thank God that Bush won a second term and I really hope McCain wins this election because another two Justices are going to need replacing in the coming term.

[Tobias]

I agree with the supreme court decision but one good ruling a good judge does not make. Constitutionally the right to privacy has been being bent over and fucked far more than gun ownership, so I'd like justices that would actually handle that not executive mouthpieces. Its all about balance.

[Bra]

As far as I'm concerned, Amadeus, and I've checked the facts over the years...

If not for the nuclear strikes on Japan, many more lives would have been lost than those in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. A conventional war in Japan would have been horrible to all sides.

You simply cannot convince me otherwise. It seems we're definitely opposed on this topic, so there's not really much sense trying to convince one another otherwise. lol

I do, however, respect your line of reasoning, I simply disagree with it.

EDIT: And... Iraq is a gong show. XD

It's only 'turning around' 'cause you couldn't have screwed up much more than they already had to begin with.

[Minoshia]

Did you just refer to Iraq as a success? You have got to be out of your fuckin' mind. What have we accomplished? Al Quaeda wasn't present in Iraq, not actively atleast, before we came. Sectarian violence didn't exist, atleast not in the massive amounts in which it exists now, before we invaded. They don't have WMD's now, just as they didn't before we went in. We accomplished a handful, Killing Suddam (and although he was a nut job genocidal mothafucka, sectarian violence and terrorism were two things that didnt exist under his regime), We opened the door for sectarian violence and large scale terrorism build-up, set into place another USELESS puppet government - just as reagan liked to do in the eighties- and wasted thousands of American lives.

True violence is down in Iraq recently, and the fact that we consider that a success is pitiful. we're five years into this war, violence should be nonexistent. The only reason why some people see this as a success if because the bar is so fucking low for success that it's touching the floor.

[Bra]

Don't forget! The US armed Osama himself with assloads of money and weapons, and placed Saddam in power. Amusing how the government outright ignores any questions concerning those little events.

EDIT: Thousands, Mino? I doubt that. Your losses can't be that bad. ...Can they?

I know in Afghanistan, at least the Canadians, we've only lost a few hundred. Tops. (Which still sucks but it's war. What did you fucking expect?)

[Minoshia]

I believe American deaths is over four thousand. with thousands more injured.

[Uno]

Every Country > North Korea

[Pink Underoo]

Did you just refer to Iraq as a success? You have got to be out of your fuckin' mind. What have we accomplished? Al Quaeda wasn't present in Iraq, not actively atleast, before we came. Sectarian violence didn't exist, atleast not in the massive amounts in which it exists now, before we invaded. They don't have WMD's now, just as they didn't before we went in. We accomplished a handful, Killing Suddam (and although he was a nut job genocidal mothafucka, sectarian violence and terrorism were two things that didnt exist under his regime), We opened the door for sectarian violence and large scale terrorism build-up, set into place another USELESS puppet government - just as reagan liked to do in the eighties- and wasted thousands of American lives.

True violence is down in Iraq recently, and the fact that we consider that a success is pitiful. we're five years into this war, violence should be nonexistent. The only reason why some people see this as a success if because the bar is so fucking low for success that it's touching the floor.

We've removed Saddam - that in itself is a great accomplishment which is something that very few people who are aware of his history will naysay. The only reason there wasn't open sectarian violence during Saddam's rule was because he had the nation in an iron grip: really,Saddam "won" 100% of the vote in 2002 and then was sentenced to death by hanging four years later. Although we found no WMD's in 2003, Saddam's regime has attempted to create nuclear weapons and cover it up when inspectors have gone in before. When UN inspectors were sent to Iraq to see what he was doing before the invasion, Saddam was doing the same old song and dance of stalling the inspectors and running them around in circles, so we gave him an ultimatum: be inspected or be invaded. When he refused that, it was his call and not ours. It's not in our interests to play games with minor dictators that have delusions of grandeur. Now after only a few years we've made marked accomplishments in cleaning up the mess that Saddam was making over the past few decades which was preceded by centuries of conflict. Maybe you should read up on it.

AQ itself is a fractured group; while there may not have been significant AQ activity in Iraq before the invasion, there were and are splinter groups all over the middle east, which includes Iraq, and beyond. By fighting them there we're going to accomplish several major objectives: changing Iraq from a destabilizing force in the region into a functional democracy, showing the rest of them over there that we are going to finish what we start which will turn into a major negotiating tool in the years to come, and by defeating the terrorist movement AQ we'll demoralize them and take a giant step towards wiping them away altogether.

Don't forget! The US armed Osama himself with assloads of money and weapons, and placed Saddam in power. Amusing how the government outright ignores any questions concerning those little events.

EDIT: Thousands, Mino? I doubt that. Your losses can't be that bad. ...Can they?

I know in Afghanistan, at least the Canadians, we've only lost a few hundred. Tops. (Which still sucks but it's war. What did you fucking expect?)

Which is why it's so important that we finish what we started, because if we don't then we know exactly where Iraq is going to end up. D:

[Violet]

I believe American deaths is over four thousand. with thousands more injured.

Its true.

[Zangya]

As of this thread, I no longer expect one line replies from Pink, Amadeus, Yamu, HF, and Bra.

That is all.

[Yamu]

I can give a one line response if I want to.

[Minoshia]

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.

[Raditzu]

Which is why it's so important that we finish what we started, because if we don't then we know exactly where Iraq is going to end up. D:

There is no finishing what's going on in the Middle East. It is an amazing example of a cluster fuck.

*shakes head*

[Krillin]

I completely agree.

This isn't a war that can be won. Even if we did to every Middle East country what we did to Iraq, the terrorist resistance would only double in strength. Just like there are fresh bad guys every time you restart a level of Rainbow Six, we'll always have tangoes to pwn.

[Milk Bubble]

My highlight of the 4th was Raditzu almost having a fatal accident making smores.

[Pink Underoo]

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.

Iran couldn't do much more than Iraq: it's airforce, artillery, ground forces and weapons technology are vastly inferior to everything that the US has. If we moved into Iran it would happen pretty much the same way as Iraq: we use bombs and missiles to blow the crap out of them, then our forces move in to sweep up what's left. And while some UN inspectors did get to inspect some facilities in Iraq, they were only allowed to do it when and where Saddam gave permission: is it any wonder that they found nothing? It's because Saddam was refusing to permit inspections in other locations that we threatened to invade Iraq. Or do you seriously think that we invaded Iraq for no reason other than what you've posted here?

This conflict isn't just about revenge for 9/11. The militaristic madmen that rule in the middle east and use the oil revenue to fund their oppressive regimes is what generates the desperate wackos that will fly planes full of civilians into buildings full of more civilians. Like Bra already said, we actually helped put Saddam into power so his regime was partly our fault: to an extent, we're simply taking responsibility for what we've done there. In a larger sense, we're doing it because it simply needs to be done and nobody else is going to do it. Total success isn't going to happen tomorrow: reform takes time. You might be crying that some things are bad in Iraq now, but at least now they can fight for their own freedom, and for their children, and they're not forever subject to one bloodthirsty man's mad ambition. Progress is being made, just a few months ago the "USELESS" Iraqi government and Sadr's Mahdi Army were making progress in unifying the nation. If we leave, that kind of progress would stop and things would regress into the type of situation that would produce another Saddam-style dictator.

We should have toppled Saddam's regime when he invaded Kuwait, because after we kicked his balls in the Iraqi people tried to overthrow him while expecting that the US would help, but we did nothing while Saddam slaughtered many people that otherwise would be helping us right now: and they have not forgotten it. It's the primary reason why so many in Iraq have been so slow to join any US-lead reformation, because if we suddenly leave then they're going to have to fend for themselves against enemies on all sides that all hate the USA. The other nations in the region are also intently watching what we're doing there, and our future relationships with them will depend on how we resolve our involvement in Iraq.

Besides all that, you're harping on the invasion which is over and has been for years. Wars are more than just an invasion: we've been in the reconstruction phase for years now.

[Raditzu]

My highlight of the 4th was Raditzu almost having a fatal accident making smores.

I have no idea what you're talking about.

*ahem*

>.>

[Minoshia]

Iran couldn't do much more than Iraq: it's airforce, artillery, ground forces and weapons technology are vastly inferior to everything that the US has. If we moved into Iran it would happen pretty much the same way as Iraq: we use bombs and missiles to blow the crap out of them, then our forces move in to sweep up what's left. And while some UN inspectors did get to inspect some facilities in Iraq, they were only allowed to do it when and where Saddam gave permission: is it any wonder that they found nothing? It's because Saddam was refusing to permit inspections in other locations that we threatened to invade Iraq. Or do you seriously think that we invaded Iraq for no reason other than what you've posted here?

This conflict isn't just about revenge for 9/11. The militaristic madmen that rule in the middle east and use the oil revenue to fund their oppressive regimes is what generates the desperate wackos that will fly planes full of civilians into buildings full of more civilians. Like Bra already said, we actually helped put Saddam into power so his regime was partly our fault: to an extent, we're simply taking responsibility for what we've done there. In a larger sense, we're doing it because it simply needs to be done and nobody else is going to do it. Total success isn't going to happen tomorrow: reform takes time. You might be crying that some things are bad in Iraq now, but at least now they can fight for their own freedom, and for their children, and they're not forever subject to one bloodthirsty man's mad ambition. Progress is being made, just a few months ago the "USELESS" Iraqi government and Sadr's Mahdi Army were making progress in unifying the nation. If we leave, that kind of progress would stop and things would regress into the type of situation that would produce another Saddam-style dictator.

We should have toppled Saddam's regime when he invaded Kuwait, because after we kicked his balls in the Iraqi people tried to overthrow him while expecting that the US would help, but we did nothing while Saddam slaughtered many people that otherwise would be helping us right now: and they have not forgotten it. It's the primary reason why so many in Iraq have been so slow to join any US-lead reformation, because if we suddenly leave then they're going to have to fend for themselves against enemies on all sides that all hate the USA. The other nations in the region are also intently watching what we're doing there, and our future relationships with them will depend on how we resolve our involvement in Iraq.

Besides all that, you're harping on the invasion which is over and has been for years. Wars are more than just an invasion: we've been in the reconstruction phase for years now.

First of all i am not harping on the invasion. because obviously, we invaded. i'm saying the war that we are fighting right now in Iraq, the attempt to reconstruct that country through training the Iraqi security forces and suppressing the insurgency is a complete and utter failure. The main point of my last post was that every single person alive knew they didn't have WMD's, and our government used it as an excuse to invade Iraq to pressure Iran. If you were paying attention, Iran's military might being more impressive and organized than Iraq (which is simply a fact) was only a fraction to my reasoning on why we went into Iraq to pressure Iran rather than just invading Iran. (btw, funding for special operations in Iran has increased heftily recently- im dissapointed my ISP is acting up, i assure you when i leave my step fathers house i will provide the links, - which is also known as "laying the battlefield" which only further justifies my point that Iraq was only a stepping stone towards Iran.) My main reason was that the american public were more likely to accept a war with Iraq than Iran, due to the public image of Suddam being a dominant force in the last two decades of American history.

The Iraqi security force is a joke, and while it is developing it is going way to slow and taking way to long. That is a failure in it of itself. The situation in Iraq wouldn't of had to be resolved if we hadn't of fucked it to shit in the first place. You can not deny that how we handled this has been a complete and utter failure, and the only reason why people are saying we are making progress is that we've gone from like a 0 rating to like a 1.2 rating. Yay for progress, it's still a fucking failure, it still isn't enough. Going from a complete failure a failure that is getting slightly less of a failure may be slight progress, but its still a failure and a clusterfuck and the chances of saving it are getting slimmer and slimmer by the day. You cannot, CANNOT, continue a foreign operation without public support, without international support, without support across party lines (even a little). This war is draining the life out of America, it's people, it's politics, and ultimately it's economy.

My grade in Math went from a 7% to a 9% and has been hovering around 9% for three years with slight increases and decreases. Hooray for progress, i'm still a failure!!

[Bra]

You can pretend the States went to Iraq to play the 'good guy' all you want.

They went there to save the people from Saddam.

Right.

Then explain to me why the United States has an amicable relationship with Jordan? Look up that country. Saddam is a fucking saint in comparison.

Don't think that's the only example. The United States habitually befriends murdererous bastards in order to further their own ends. There are no 'good' guys anymore. Every country is guilty. Trying to pretend you're saving the world hurts credibility.

[Minoshia]

Governments are not in the business of helping people, that's really what it comes down to. Charitable acts and helping those in need cost money, where war, death and destruction are very profitable. Bra i believe we actually touched on this in our brief AIM conversation earlier.

Using the illusion of a threat to create a rivalry and instill fear in citizens, much like the Cold War, which fuels our military industrial complex which typically spurs our economy. Even that got fucked up in Iraq.