- 1,082
- 11
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2006
We will have to regain the respect of countries due to eight years of ______________________.
3/20/08 The War on Iraq 5 years on .. your thoughts/feelings + facts/figures
- Thread in 'General' Thread starter Started by kinglouisxiv,
- Start date
- 9,996
- 200
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2004
it has always been the oil
- 17,690
- 7,972
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2005
This is what happens when you vote for Bush........not just once but twice, SMH.
- 93
- 10
- Joined
- Nov 30, 2007
Vote 4 Obama
- 5,712
- 1,019
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2005
Yah. Thats what upsets me the most. We as a Nation could have stopped this man back in 2004, yet voters wanted him to continue. So here we are in 2008about to elect a new President. 4 years from now will the headline on Niketalk be:
[h3]3/20/12 The War on Iraq 9 years on .. yourthoughts/feelings + facts/figure[/h3]
- 385
- 11
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2005
- 3,024
- 12
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2006
- 4,718
- 15
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2007
I dont think the war in Iraq was pointless, more good will be seen then anything... but only time will tell
martdizzle23
Banned
- 1,049
- 10
- Joined
- Apr 10, 2007
very interesting i was watching videos of how Saddam's interrogator said Saddam believed al qaeda was a threat to his own regime and that he kept the worldguessing at his WMD's (even though he destroyed them) so that he could keep Iran from invading Iraq
- 193
- 10
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2007
The war is a sham... I been there done that... Thats what it is a shas... we've been had, bamboozled , hoodwinked.... and no on e says nothing.. WHY?because its about the future of our econmy... you think these political jerks dont know that? I really dont care about that stupid war cuz I have people I knowpersonally go over there every few months ...
- 415
- 289
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2003
Why in the world would anyone want to remember the terrorists? That is a ridiculous statement. The only thing id like to remember is all the dead terrorists. Its insane to know how many people are oblivious to the people they preach for.
quick question can Iraq, Afganistan, Palestine or whoever invade our lands, oust our President and then do away with Democracy for Islam? theanswer is HELL FREAKIN NO!!!! who are the real terrorists? we call others "terrorists" for the things they do, yet we invade countries, oustdictators,rulers,prime ministers. then we IMPOSE our way of life on the locals. if that's not terrorism then i don't know what is. Imperialism ="Terrorism"
- 2,506
- 109
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2005
This war is a scam. And it's not even just because we are in Iraq for false reasons.
It's because War Contractors went ahead and messed all this up for us.
For those who don't know, War contractors are companies that we sell out positions to in Iraq. Some military men, some interrogators, others to supplyfood and take care of our troops, and they are all doing terrible jobs.
Many of the militia are ex-cons, looking forward to getting paid when and IF they get back home. So what do you think they will do? Risk their lives toprotect our country? No, they will shoot and kill anything in sight to protect themselves to they can get back home and spend their 6 figure salaries.
The Interrogators aren't properly trained, and because the militia is picking up anyone and throwing them in jail just so it looks like they are doingsomething, the interrogators are doing the exact same thing. They have done terrible things to innocent people. In one case, they stripped a bunch of men,tied a rope to their penises, pushed one man down and watched as the others followed.
Many of them were sent back to their homes without the ability to havechildren.
And here is the kicker. For all this injustice, you never hear about it on the news. Why? Because these war contractors are a loophole in the GenevaConvention. They are unaffected by law in war. Anyone who is caught doing anything wrong is sent back home. SENT back home, which is exactly what they want. What more motivation do you need to start killing innocent people?
Watch this documentary, Iraq For Sale. It's not a conspiracy theory, it's all facts, and it's scary.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6621486727392146155
It's because War Contractors went ahead and messed all this up for us.
For those who don't know, War contractors are companies that we sell out positions to in Iraq. Some military men, some interrogators, others to supplyfood and take care of our troops, and they are all doing terrible jobs.
Many of the militia are ex-cons, looking forward to getting paid when and IF they get back home. So what do you think they will do? Risk their lives toprotect our country? No, they will shoot and kill anything in sight to protect themselves to they can get back home and spend their 6 figure salaries.
The Interrogators aren't properly trained, and because the militia is picking up anyone and throwing them in jail just so it looks like they are doingsomething, the interrogators are doing the exact same thing. They have done terrible things to innocent people. In one case, they stripped a bunch of men,tied a rope to their penises, pushed one man down and watched as the others followed.
And here is the kicker. For all this injustice, you never hear about it on the news. Why? Because these war contractors are a loophole in the GenevaConvention. They are unaffected by law in war. Anyone who is caught doing anything wrong is sent back home. SENT back home, which is exactly what they want. What more motivation do you need to start killing innocent people?
Watch this documentary, Iraq For Sale. It's not a conspiracy theory, it's all facts, and it's scary.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6621486727392146155
- 748
- 10
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2007
i dont support people who kill people
- 12,911
- 843
- Joined
- May 4, 2005
we need to bring all of our families and friends back home..... if you want to protect the US... take all the military from iraq and wherever else and let themguard our every mile of our boarders.... they will be at home ( US ) im pretty sure we would save a hell of alot of money from gas, transfering food, weapons,or whatever.....
- 10,490
- 229
- Joined
- May 2, 2001
regardless of what you think about if we should have gone there in the first place..
most people I know think this:
we broke it.
we should fix it.
most people I know think this:
we broke it.
we should fix it.
- 1,831
- 11
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2004
Saddam should still be alive.
- 193
- 10
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2007
im sorry but we cant fix shiiit.... its a FACT... this war is not to be won , just sustained...
Mister Meaner
formerly super producer j
- 20,171
- 10,381
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2007
It is a damn shame.
- 748
- 10
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2007
^are you in the military can you tell us some things about whats on there?
- 2,506
- 109
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2005
- 548
- 10
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2008
Dont Worry he will come back, Im home on leave from Iraq. Im in a combat team and Im always out in the streets keep Iraq safe from the +%%* heads who choose to#%!* things up, for the rest of the good people. Im going back in 2days, sucks but hey someone has to do the Job rite.
lrrr
Banned
- 3,037
- 12
- Joined
- Nov 22, 2008
come on son
- 299
- 10
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2005
Damn, talk about grave-digging. Well, expect this post to be refreshed for the six year anniversary in March.
- 6,445
- 15,545
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2004
Invading and toppling Saddam Hussein may or may not have been a good idea. I say that because I do not know the thought process that went into this war.Some experts on the Middle East say that the fact that Saddam Hussein was only marginally involved with Islamic terrorism made it all the better, from a standpoint of dissuading terrorists. I am inclined to believe that because what I have read about societies like that is that one's honor is enhanced byretaliatin gdisproportionately and against someone who only had general or peripheral involvement. When I say honor, I do not mean our definition of honor, Imean honor as it was known before the 19th century in the West and as it is still known in the Middle East and that is one's public perception with regardto reciprocating violence (or even insults) with far more violence. An honorable man in the Middle East is one who lets no slights and certainly no attacks gounavenged. Rather then being something that makes use less safe, by enraging the Arab Street, we would be a force that would be seen as willing to strike backand to strike back on grander and more dramatic scale then what ever attack is inflicted upon us.
Also, most Islamic militants themselves tend to cite the abuses of prisoners and the holding of and mistreatment of prisoners as the the most offensive thingwe have done, in course of the wars. Of course, some consider our existence a threat because our freedoms threaten to cause their women to be more autonomousand perhaps even sexually promiscuous. Those types cannot be dissuaded but those who are slightly less extreme would not have taken up arms over an invasion ofIraq but seeing their fellow Muslims humiliated, while prisoners of war, was an offense that was far more grievous to the honor of a Muslim.
A year ago I would be more inclined that the war was undertaken more so for the purpose of making us safer and the prolonged occupation was the cause of ourtroubles (I knew that some people would be enriched through cronyism, that is just part of government, whether you fight a war, build a school or try to usehundred of billions of dollars to stimulus the economy, things always get done over budget, behind schedule and with friends of the powerful getting some ofour money).
After witnessing Bush's behavior during the bank bailouts though, where he clearly sued fear and stirred up panic in order to enrich his friends (also hedid what Ronald Reagan was accused of doing but never did and that was engaging in so called "trickle down economics." Unlike Ronald Reagan, who cuttax rates, which means that government simply let you keep your money if you earned it, George Bush truly did give vast sums of tax payer dollars to therichest people in the Country in the hope that somehow the money would trickle down to everyone else. In other words, the straw man argument that was meant todemonize Ronald Reagan's policies is what Bush actually did do) I am much more inclined to believe that the administration may very well have started thiswar for the sole purpose of enriching its friends. In fact almost every accusation made against this administration has been retroactively given much morecredibility in my eyes after Bush's last major act, giving us the TARP or more appropriately the CRAP, "Completely Rigged Against the People" or"Consistently ******ed Asset Purchasing."
It goes without question that the occupation was a major mistake, if we had the war, we should have gotten our almost immediately after Saddam's death,capture or even just his being knocked out of power. IFfwe did have an occupation, it should have been with many more troops, it should have been thorough handit should not have taken years and lives and billions of dollars for the surge to happen and todo what should have been done years ago, if an occupation wasnecessary.
Also, most Islamic militants themselves tend to cite the abuses of prisoners and the holding of and mistreatment of prisoners as the the most offensive thingwe have done, in course of the wars. Of course, some consider our existence a threat because our freedoms threaten to cause their women to be more autonomousand perhaps even sexually promiscuous. Those types cannot be dissuaded but those who are slightly less extreme would not have taken up arms over an invasion ofIraq but seeing their fellow Muslims humiliated, while prisoners of war, was an offense that was far more grievous to the honor of a Muslim.
A year ago I would be more inclined that the war was undertaken more so for the purpose of making us safer and the prolonged occupation was the cause of ourtroubles (I knew that some people would be enriched through cronyism, that is just part of government, whether you fight a war, build a school or try to usehundred of billions of dollars to stimulus the economy, things always get done over budget, behind schedule and with friends of the powerful getting some ofour money).
After witnessing Bush's behavior during the bank bailouts though, where he clearly sued fear and stirred up panic in order to enrich his friends (also hedid what Ronald Reagan was accused of doing but never did and that was engaging in so called "trickle down economics." Unlike Ronald Reagan, who cuttax rates, which means that government simply let you keep your money if you earned it, George Bush truly did give vast sums of tax payer dollars to therichest people in the Country in the hope that somehow the money would trickle down to everyone else. In other words, the straw man argument that was meant todemonize Ronald Reagan's policies is what Bush actually did do) I am much more inclined to believe that the administration may very well have started thiswar for the sole purpose of enriching its friends. In fact almost every accusation made against this administration has been retroactively given much morecredibility in my eyes after Bush's last major act, giving us the TARP or more appropriately the CRAP, "Completely Rigged Against the People" or"Consistently ******ed Asset Purchasing."
It goes without question that the occupation was a major mistake, if we had the war, we should have gotten our almost immediately after Saddam's death,capture or even just his being knocked out of power. IFfwe did have an occupation, it should have been with many more troops, it should have been thorough handit should not have taken years and lives and billions of dollars for the surge to happen and todo what should have been done years ago, if an occupation wasnecessary.
- 11,640
- 506
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2005
A rexaglorum sighting???!?!?!
