War on Iraq

Originally posted by Thegeneral [QUOTE= Oh, and I would just like to add one thing.  If you are saying the WMD was "hocus pocus" you may want to rethink this.  The Iraqi airforces second in command, General (forgot his name, I'm not good with Arab names) said that Saddam did and does have WMD.  He says that because of his position, he was able to see the WMD.  And then when the UN was looking around, he saw Saddam scramble to hide them.  He also claims days before America invaded, he was ordered to have his men fly the WMD to Syria, or atleast the major parts of them.  If you don't believe me, he was on the news for writting his book on it.  (also forgot the name)

 

      Our son was an army combat eng. attached to 2nd brigade, 3rd acr

and was in one of the point units. He said the first Iraqi installation they came to was stocked with thousands of MOP suits and gas masks, and tens of thousands of atropine injectors.  " The pucker factor went up by a factor of ten".  It was obvious to them that the I.A. thought they had wmds and that they would be used. 

  Don't misunderstand, I am not a proponent of this badly planned ill conceived mess the shrub has gotten us into.   however it is not as clear cut as some people would have you believe.   

Edited by red clay

Short of finding WMD in Syria, no one will trust a story opposite their beliefs.  George Sada either saw the WMD or he didn't, but he's claimed both.  First, he was told by two pilots that WMD was transported to Syria by plane, then he claims he actually saw the barrels, which were transported by truck.  For the record, I have not read his book, but I suppose it will get a boost from his promotional appearances, like Richard Clarke.

Also, I'm sure Muslims don't appreciate his statement that Iraq was and is a Christian nation. 

http://amboytimes.blogspot.com/2006/01/saddams-general-cla ims-wmds-in-syria.html

Looks like the whole policy for that country is left to hope. Unfortunately, that is a shame and a shambles. I still want to know what the US policy over there is today and tommorrow.

I would like to believe that we are going to foster a stable regime with our sturdy dollars. Our imperialism has gone from bases in foreign countries to nation taking. We like takeovers. It's in our mindset. We are numb to it. Had the Iraqis asked us to come and change the country's government and demographics then I would be for the invasion. Since that wasn't the case we are not stabilizing that country yet. We have the choice to remain obstinate and continue to push our own agenda (for strategic purposes) however. Remaining patient and sticking it out may bring dividends. How long though? What may eventually happen is that a civil war will brew. One side will show dominance. If that winning side doesn't want us then we will have a problem. And we will be asked to leave. If they do want us it will be a long time for the dust to settle in order to see that. In the mean time lives and dollars will be wasted.   

Originally posted by Thegeneral I don't think those soldiers over there would want to be thought of as "wasted" if they died.  That is rather demeaning to the troops.

But does that make it any less true?

Originally posted by The Canadian Guy Originally posted by Thegeneral Originally posted by The Canadian Guy Does anybody have current anything on this stupid unessary war? I'm curious. My friend is an Iraqi and his family is in the frontline trying to evade the American forces. His bro was killed by an American marine. Trying to flee the battle. "He was murderd by soldiers" my friend says, as his brother was trying to escape  Um, was he by chance part of the Ba'ath party?  Maybe there was a good reason for him trying to flee from Americans?  Only criminals run. Oh, and I would just like to add one thing.  If you are saying the WMD was "hocus pocus" you may want to rethink this.  The Iraqi airforces second in command, General (forgot his name, I'm not good with Arab names) said that Saddam did and does have WMD.  He says that because of his position, he was able to see the WMD.  And then when the UN was looking around, he saw Saddam scramble to hide them.  He also claims days before America invaded, he was ordered to have his men fly the WMD to Syria, or atleast the major parts of them.  If you don't believe me, he was on the news for writting his book on it.  (also forgot the name) No he isn't. He has nothing to do with the army, or in fact anything that involves killing. He is a regular person trying to live an impossible life. I'll bet you would try to flee too, if your country was occupied by armed forces. While doing that you will/might get shot.

Oh btw there was a firefight going on and he fled from the fight, in so doing that, I'll bet the Marines thought he was a combatnant. So they shot him. I guess the marines were trying to protect themselves.

Edited by The Canadian Guy

I think you would get the same results for attacking Iran and Syria in America mostly because they aren't a real threat at the moment and very few people know what those two countries are doing at the present.

However, I still find it shear stupidity and/or pure ignorance to believe
1.  We should pull out of Iraq immediatly
2.  We are in Iraq for oil.

If we pulled out of Iraq now, it would be worse than if we were in there.  And if the Iraqis thought it would be better without us, they should ask us to leave.  If we don't, we would be in violation and then be an occupying country.

And if we were in Iraq for oil, someone explain to me two things:  Why Iraq, and why are oil prices still high?  Iraq isn't even our top supplier of oil.  So why would we invade Iraq?  And if we really needed oil, we could always go to Alaska if we needed oil badly enough to invade Iraq.  And if we are in Iraq, why are prices still so high?  If we were really in it for oil, America's main objective would have been to secure the oil areas and not bother ridding the cities of the insugents.  The logic just doesn't fit.

And who is responsible for the so called "civil war"?  Lol, America?  And Israel is even on the poll?  HAHAHA!  Thats great.  Shows how well people actually listen to the news.  Its all Americas fault terrorists decide to blow themselves up and kill their fellow country.  I LOVE Turkish logic!

Originally posted by erci Who is responsible for civil war in Iraq? %5 Al Kaide and Shias http://sondakika.milliyet.com.tr/2006/03/24/son/sontur05.asp

i find that one really funny.

its the sunni's that are doing all of this crap, but i guess in a sunni country they dont want to admit it.

Originally posted by Thegeneral I think you would get the same results for attacking Iran and Syria in America mostly because they aren't a real threat at the moment and very few people know what those two countries are doing at the present.

Iraq was a threat? Ah.. WMD's you're rite and you are also there to change the regime and bring peace.Thank god you are there, those people definetely needed a civil war and a chaos for a change.

Originally posted by Thegeneral And if we were in Iraq for oil, someone explain to me two things:  Why Iraq, and why are oil prices still high?  Iraq isn't even our top supplier of oil.  So why would we invade Iraq?  And if we really needed oil, we could always go to Alaska if we needed oil badly enough to invade Iraq.  And if we are in Iraq, why are prices still so high?  If we were really in it for oil, America's main objective would have been to secure the oil areas and not bother ridding the cities of the insugents.  The logic just doesn't fit.

Breaking news for you! Oil is already been shared between US and Brits.Oil is sitting right next to me in Iraq but I'm paying double what you pay in States.Why? because I'm buying oil from the united states, not from Iraq.You sure have Alaska but you are the one who is selling the Iraqi oil to me and Europe, not Iraqis.

Originally posted by Thegeneral And who is responsible for the so called "civil war"?  Lol, America?  And Israel is even on the poll?  HAHAHA!  Thats great.  Shows how well people actually listen to the news.  Its all Americas fault terrorists decide to blow themselves up and kill their fellow country.  I LOVE Turkish logic!

Which news source would you recommend? CNN? Fox? BBC? No thanks

Turks pay $2.40- $2.50 a litter for oil, How much you par for a gallon in the US? more than this?