Quake3World

I made no points regarding WMDs. I never stood up for any one persons decisions to invade or not to invade Iraq. I've haven't disagreed with anyone's concepts or beliefs as to why the US invaded Iraq. I submitted facts about what has actually happened in Iraq. Things that have been proven about Saddam. Then I asked some simple questions about what the nay sayers think should have been done. Everyone else thought it necessary to throw in various details about why we are where we are today in a effort to side step the questions. But the same thing happened to this discusson that happens to the majority of them. They get led of track, loose focus and people make unfounded assumptions about each other.

Do I think the U.S. should be in Iraq right now? No, not for the reasons that were given to us in the first place. I think the U.S. should have taken him out when he violated peace treaties, attacked a sovereign nation and shot at U.S. planes in international air space. He's a maniacal tyrant that doesn't need to be in power.

Do I think we should invade every country ruled by an insane dictator? No, we're not the world's police. But when that dictator attempts to envelop other countries and disregards the athority of the U.N., that leader's rule needs to be adjusted.

Do I think Saddam should have been removed from power? Yes, for every example I made in this thread.

I asked a few questions, played devils advocate and provoked a few thoughts. That's it..... If some of you think you've become remotely close to identifing the type of person I am from my questioning, you're a bigger idiot than I originally accused you of being.

Play on...

YourGrandpa wrote:I made no points regarding WMDs. I never stood up for any one persons decisions to invade or not to invade Iraq. I've haven't disagreed with anyone's concepts or beliefs as to why the US invaded Iraq. I submitted facts about what has actually happened in Iraq. Things that have been proven about Saddam. Then I asked some simple questions about what the nay sayers think should have been done.

The point you tried to make, was that if we didn't invade Iraq we would inevitably have another 9/11 on our hands. Or, if not inevitably, then the vague thought of a future 9/11 by the hands of Saddam, is worth all the people who have been maimed and killed and had their lives destroyed in the last couple of years. This is the reasoning you put forth for supporting our invasion. And this is what I was responding to when I said we have top military commanders saying this could not have been won militarily.

And for flourishing rhetoric about spreading democracy, let's look at two scenarios: 1) We go in, decapitate Saddam, and get the hell out before anybody even knows it was us; i.e. a hit. 2) We invade, kill Saddam, and stick around until the whole country is at peace with each other.

My point is that either way this happened, it was almost guaranteed to wind up with the same outcome we're looking at right now. Why? Because Iraq is 3 separate countries. A foreign occupier came in decades ago, decided it shouldn't be 3 countries, and told them they better all learn to share their shit with each other, because they are now all "brothers." For comparison, imagine someone invading Florida and telling you that you were now a part of Cuba, and had to respect them as your equals. Saddam's iron fist of disgusting brutality has been the only thing holding this mess together for years. So, regardless of how well we handled it, this mess was bound to happen as many have said since its inception. The fact that our government has bungled the whole operation has only made the whole situation worse by degrees of magnitude.

The only way we could remove Saddam without this happening, would have been to kill him and quickly replace him with someone equally as brutal, or worse. Otherwise the country is just going to fall apart, as is happening now.

So it's easy to say that he needed to be taken out because he was a bad man -- even I could agree with that statement. But when you try to consider the situation from all sides, you wind up asking yourself a slightly more challenging question. Such as -- if we have a brutal tyrant halfway around the world, who has a bad habit of hoarding his country's wealth and making his own people suffer

R00k wrote: The point you tried to make, was that if we didn't invade Iraq we would inevitably have another 9/11 on our hands. Or, if not inevitably, then the vague thought of a future 9/11 by the hands of Saddam, is worth all the people who have been maimed and killed and had their lives destroyed in the last couple of years. This is the reasoning you put forth for supporting our invasion. And this is what I was responding to when I said we have top military commanders saying this could not have been won militarily.

I tried to make no such point. I don't think Saddam had much to do with 911, if anything. I think letting a tyrant such as Saddam run amuck without reprisal sets the wrong precedence in todays world. It only encourages other maniacs to attempt world domination. I also think that putting an end to his rain will ultimately save millions of lives in the years to come.

You need to re-read this thread and start pointing your finger at the right people. You're obviously confused.

YourGrandpa wrote:I tried to make no such point. I don't think Saddam had much to do with 911, if anything. I think letting a tyrant such as Saddam run amuck without reprisal sets the wrong precedence in todays world. It only encourages other maniacs to attempt world domination. I also think that putting an end to his rain will ultimately save millions of lives in the years to come.

You need to re-read this thread and start pointing your finger at the right people. You're obviously confused.

in what way, serious enough to warrant invasion and distinct enough from every other dictator, was he running amok?

Hey, try reading more than one post.

I'm not recapping this shit for you.

YourGrandpa wrote:Hey, try reading more than one post.

I'm not recapping this shit for you.

you got the part about it being shit right

I'm usually right.

MidnightQ4 wrote:

werldhed wrote: First of all, "changing the mindset" of radicals is never going to be accomplished by brute force. It's called foreign relations.

The war itself is not what is supposed to change ppl's mindset. I mean duh. Obviously it is the long term effect that outsting Saddam and establishing a democratic culture that will change the way people live, think, and behave as part of a world culture, and not some hyper religious nation who's people have nothing going for them in life and turn to fanatical religious ideas to escape.

I mean of course most everyone else but us and Britain thinks we are being bullies. But you know what? FUCK THEM! Anyone who thinks that needs to have a car bomb blow them into tiny pieces, or inhale some anthrax.

Well, there's a blatant contradiction. You want to change other people's mindset, but then say "fuck them" to the rest of the world? You ARE changing people's mindsets -- the rest of the world. Why do you think we now have such shitty relations with other countries? Because our "liberation" of Iraq changed the way they look at us. But now you want to say, "Fuck them"? Well, why didn't we do that in in the first place? If we just said "fuck them" to the middle east, why, we wouldn't be in this mess.

MidnightQ4 wrote: All the naysayers just look at this war and it's effects right now. Why can't you people think ahead 20-40 years when your kids are grown up, and think about the kind of world you want them to live in? It is obvious to me that if things do not change in the middle east in a large way, things are going to get worse, much worse. Especially as these countries develop new weapon technologies. It is only a matter of time.

I am thinking ahead... I don't relish the thought of living in a world where the accepted action of the US is to crush those who don't follow our way of life. I don't look forward to living anywhere near warmongering assholes who think manifest destiny exists. And I don't look forward to living in a country where the quality of life decreases significantly because we can't maintain foreign relations. And I hope that in 20 years I'll be able to travel abroad without having to pretend I'm from Canada.

MidnightQ4 wrote: Hell just look at Iran. They are blatantly and openly defying the UN now. They are basically going to put themselves, and us, in the same position that we were in with Iraq. They have flat out told everyone that they are developing the capabilites to build nuclear reactors for energy, which means they can also build bombs. AND the leader of the country said that his mission is to remove the jews from the gaza strip. That sounds like a bad combination to me. Not to mention that any world leader who makes it his country's mission to commit genocide is capable of tossing nukes at us or anyone else who he doesn't like. And it should be obvious that all of this hate he and his countrymen have is founded on their whacked out religion!!! There is no other reason to remove the jews from gaza.

All technology that we already possess, and we too are openly defying the UN, and pose a danger to a number of other countries. The US, however, should obviously retain the right to invade whomever they please without reprisal.

werldhed wrote: And while we're on the topic, religion played a small role in 9/11. Thinking that the reason we were attacked was because a bunch of people believe in a god which you don't agree with is just plain wrong. The mindsets we need to change are those that hate us for our asshole foreign policy. Starting a war is the least practical way to do that.

MidnightQ4 wrote:Well you can say that, but I completely do not agree. It is well known that these idiots who flew the planes were convinced that they would get to fuck 69 virgins in heaven. WTF kind of religion teaches people that? That's why all these fags are so quick to kill themselves, cause they are brainwashed!

Religion imo was a huge part of the reason why people hate us, it is not just foreign policy. Hell didn't we keep the russians from going in and attacking these people? Then they turn around and blow up our buildings? And even if you claim it is foreign policy, the guys like bin laden use religion as the driving force to get these fools to go along with them. So whatever the agend of bin laden is, he uses fanatical religion as his tool.

These people think we are all the brood of the devil, so it is their religious mission to kill us. Killing us is a good thing according to their doctrines. Do you deny this?

Yes, I do deny that. 9/11 was not mainly about religion, no matter what you think. Yes, as an added bonus, they got to kill "infidels", but the main motive was retaliation for our policy in the Irsaeli conflict. Saying their motives are based on their (according to you) backward faith and not at all on the way the US acts, is like saying that the Iraq war is a Christian crusade, because many people in the military, and even Bush himself, are Christians. It's just not true.

YourGrandpa wrote: It only encourages other maniacs to attempt world domination.

lol, an instant classic

It's sarcasm, you dolt.

Fender wrote:We didn't have to do ANYTHING about Iraq. They were a non-threat. They had NO WMD. Al Queda linked terriorist activity was almost non-existent. That's certainly not the case now. Seriously, what goals have we accomplished by going over there? None. We removed Sadaam. Big fucking deal. He was an idiot and a non-threat to us.

Ok next time we (and most every other country who matters) have intelligence saying that country X has WMDs let's just sit around and hope it's not true. I just hope when and if said weapons are ever used on anyone, it will be only those people who took the pacifist attitude toward such matters.

LOL wow, these are some stupid ignorant posts. Allow me to dismantle everything you just said.

werldhed wrote:

MidnightQ4 wrote:I mean of course most everyone else but us and Britain thinks we are being bullies. But you know what? FUCK THEM! Anyone who thinks that needs to have a car bomb blow them into tiny pieces, or inhale some anthrax.

Well, there's a blatant contradiction. You want to change other people's mindset, but then say "fuck them" to the rest of the world? You ARE changing people's mindsets -- the rest of the world. Why do you think we now have such shitty relations with other countries? Because our "liberation" of Iraq changed the way they look at us. But now you want to say, "Fuck them"? Well, why didn't we do that in in the first place? If we just said "fuck them" to the middle east, why, we wouldn't be in this mess.

No, we'd be in a potentially much worse mess later on when they eventually will have WMDs. All the intelligence pointed to Iraq having WMDs, so what were we supposed to do about it, wait? We already did for a long ass time before we did anything. All the while Saddam was playing games with the UN As for these moronic people that hate us for liberating Iraq, they already hate us for just being the #1 country in the world. They just are idiots who think we are doing everything for money, becaues that's why they would do it. However we are not doing it for money, we are doing it because it is the right thing to do. The rest of the world just has zero morality if they do not agree with us going into Iraq. So ya, fuck them.

As for your statement about making them hate us more by doing our own thing, well that's unfortunate, but they'll get over it eventually, especially in many years when things turn out for the better in the mideast.

And that's not the mindset that I was saying needs to change anyway, but apparently you can't comprehend simple english. I was talking about the radical religious mindset of so many of the muslim people in the mideast. That's what we need to change. The "popular opinion" mindset of the other countries who think we are being greedy and trying to get oil is nothing nearly as important as making people who want to kill us not want to kill us.

MidnightQ4 wrote: All the naysayers just look at this war and it's effects right now. Why can't you people think ahead 20-40 years when your kids are grown up, and think about the kind of world you want them to live in? It is obvious to me that if things do not change in the middle east in a large way, things are going to get worse, much worse. Especially as these countries develop new weapon technologies. It is only a matter of time.

I am thinking ahead... I don't relish the thought of living in a world where the accepted action of the US is to crush those who don't follow our way of life.

ok sorry but we do have the right to protect ourselves by removing evil dictators who threaten the lives of Americans by noncompliance with UN sanctions against WMDs. Noncompliance is an act of war, because it basically means that they are hiding something, and are therefore are a threat. Of course we can't know 100% for sure, but if all signs point to WMDs, we are left with NO CHOICE. Why can't you people see that? Apparently you wouldn't think there is ever a threat to our country until it actually happens. 9-11 happened, did you think there was a threat on 9-10? No you did not! Yet we were attacked. And still you morons take the stance of waiting for it to happen again (be if from terrorists or a mad man like Saddam) instead of taking a proactive approach and trying to do something to prevent it.

I don't look forward to living anywhere near warmongering assholes who think manifest destiny exists.

we do not go around attacking countries to take them over and rape their resources. If that was the case we would have took over the middle east a long time ago, but instead we pay for oil like everyone else. They don't cut us any breaks, it is a world market, don't be nieve. Ok point obliterated.

And I don't look forward to living in a country where the quality of life decreases significantly because we can't maintain foreign relations. And I hope that in 20 years I'll be able to travel abroad without having to pretend I'm from Canada.

Um, guess what. You can't safely go to the middle east primarily because of their religious stance against Americans. Remember, you are the devil's tool to them. Other countries like France just don't like us, but that is because they are basically jealous little bitches who make unlawful secret deals with evil tyrants like Saddam for oil. Which is why they were against us going into Iraq. So ya, fuck em.

MidnightQ4 wrote: Hell just look at Iran. They are blatantly and openly defying the UN now. They are basically going to put themselves, and us, in the same position that we were in with Iraq. They have flat out told everyone that they are developing the capabilites to build nuclear reactors for energy, which means they can also build bombs. AND the leader of the country said that his mission is to remove the jews from the gaza strip. That sounds like a bad combination to me. Not to mention that any world leader who makes it his country's mission to commit genocide is capable of tossing nukes at us or anyone else who he doesn't like. And it should be obvious that all of this hate he and his countrymen have is founded on their whacked out religion!!! There is no other reason to remove the jews from gaza.

All technology that we already possess, and we too are openly defying the UN, and pose a danger to a number of other countries. The US, however, should obviously retain the right to invade whomever they please without reprisal.

You continue to ignore the main points that I'm making about the religious problem. Also we are not defying the UN, the rest of the UN is defying their own rules!!! Fucking hypocrites!!! The UN is useless becaues they only follow their own rules and sanctions when it is good for them, like France didn't do the right thing because of oil deals. They are defying us, and Britain, and their own mandates that they set a few years back. It's fucking ridiculous that they are not stepping up to the plate and doing what they promised when they joined the UN. Iraq declared war, and they failed to fight the good fight for the betterment of all countries in the UN. So fuck em.

werldhed wrote: And while we're on the topic, religion played a small role in 9/11. Thinking that the reason we were attacked was because a bunch of people believe in a god which you don't agree with is just plain wrong. The mindsets we need to change are those that hate us for our asshole foreign policy. Starting a war is the least practical way to do that.

You think it is our "foreign policy" that makes people hate us, primarily our stance on Israel. Well guess what, the reason they hate us for that is because of their religious views on the subject. So ya, it IS an issue of their religion, not foreign policy in the broader sense. They don't hate us because of other foreign policy issues, like defending Kuwait, or trade agreements, only when something impinges on their religion do they decide to hate us. Your point = incinerated.

MidnightQ4 wrote:Well you can say that, but I completely do not agree. It is well known that these idiots who flew the planes were convinced that they would get to fuck 69 virgins in heaven. WTF kind of religion teaches people that? That's why all these fags are so quick to kill themselves, cause they are brainwashed!

Religion imo was a huge part of the reason why people hate us, it is not just foreign policy. Hell didn't we keep the russians from going in and attacking these people? Then they turn around and blow up our buildings? And even if you claim it is foreign policy, the guys like bin laden use religion as the driving force to get these fools to go along with them. So whatever the agend of bin laden is, he uses fanatical religion as his tool.

These people think we are all the brood of the devil, so it is their religious mission to kill us. Killing us is a good thing according to their doctrines. Do you deny this?

Yes, I do deny that. 9/11 was not mainly about religion, no matter what you think. Yes, as an added bonus, they got to kill "infidels", but the main motive was retaliation for our policy in the Irsaeli conflict. Saying their motives are based on their (according to you) backward faith and not at all on the way the US acts, is like saying that the Iraq war is a Christian crusade, because many people in the military, and even Bush himself, are Christians. It's just not true.

Why else other than their religious beliefs do they have a problem with the Jews being in gaza? Their faith IS backwards cause they don't know how to get along with people of other faiths. We are not over in Iraq trying to get rid of muslims and instill Christianity, why would they try to do the same thing with the Jews? They are the ones who are messed up. See thier whole stance against us is based on religion, whereas ours is in no way based on religion. Indeed we do not have anything against those people, aside from Saddam threatening our lives with WMDs. Whether he had them or not, the threat was very real because he alludded to having them by not cooperating.

YourGrandpa wrote:I'm usually right.

Ya apparently you're the only one on here besides me that knows what is up. Makes me wonder how old these kids are. They seem to be pretty much not worried about anything except making the rest of the world like us.

Fender wrote: Let's not forget
3) There's an election to win and we need to make people forget that we haven't caught Osama in Afganistan. WE ARE FIGHTING TURRORISTS! GO USA!

If it's so easy, tell us where he is so we can capture him. Otherwise stfu and stop belittling the efforts GW and our countrymen are making to keep you from dying from anthrax son.

GONNAFISTYA wrote: Dude...you forget we've both been posting here for a long time and I pretty much know how thick headed you are when it comes to these types of discussions. I've tried to engage you but realized after your first reply it'd be a waste of time trying to batter down the walls of ignorance in your life.

I'd rather watch Jell-O set.

blah blah blah I can't think of any good points to make blah blah blah

Tormentius wrote:

MidnightQ4 wrote: Hell just look at Iran. They are blatantly and openly defying the UN now. They are basically going to put themselves, and us, in the same position that we were in with Iraq. They have flat out told everyone that they are developing the capabilites to build nuclear reactors for energy, which means they can also build bombs. AND the leader of the country said that his mission is to remove the jews from the gaza strip. That sounds like a bad combination to me. Not to mention that any world leader who makes it his country's mission to commit genocide is capable of tossing nukes at us or anyone else who he doesn't like. And it should be obvious that all of this hate he and his countrymen have is founded on their whacked out religion!!! There is no other reason to remove the jews from gaza.

Until the US decommissions the vast majority of it's nuclear and chemical weapon stockpiles it isn't in a position to decide who else possesses them. As for "whacked out religions" its the right-wing religious quacks in the US which have led you guys into one war after another and earned you a bad reputation in many parts of the world. Don't start commenting on other extremist's beliefs when your own leader is almost as much of a fanatic.

If you honestly think that invading Iran wouldn't make the losses in Iraq look miniscule in comparison then you're even more of a redneck moron than I thought. Iran has a much larger and more well-equipped military and they have close ties with the rest of the Middle East. Then consider the fact the rest of the planet is getting tired of the US propaganda and bullshit so the odds of there being much support for another invasion are pretty slim.

I agree with you that invading Iran would be costly. However you can only play defense for so long until a ball slips through into your goal. Sometimes the only way to prevent being attacked is to take away the other guys' ball if you will.

Maybe what we should do is just build a solid missle defense system, which protects only us. Then completely lock our borders aside from shipping lanes, and be done with it.

btw, GW does not go around trying to oust people from their land nor does he fly planes into skyscrapers, nor does he have any desire whatsoever to kill any muslim people. the same cannot be said for them.

MidnightQ4 wrote:
Indeed put it this way: What if we lived in a country like Iraq was, with said dictator? Wouldn't you want Britain or the UN to come in and get rid of him and help us to establish a democracy like we have now? If you say no, you can just leave the country please. I mean it should be obvious that democracy or something close to it is the best form of peaceful government. It is always the countries with power hungry dictators at the helm that cause most of the problems. People are greedy, so you have to balance the power out so no one person is in charge. It's fundamental, surely you can agree.

They don't want the US' way of life and, in fact, much of that way of life directly contradicts their culture and beliefs. Is comprehending that not everyone wants to emulate the US that fucking difficult?

We are not telling them how to live. Are you saying they don't want to have a voice in their government? That they enjoy the life under a dictator who steals their daughters away and rapes them, and puts people in torture chambers when they don't follow his rules? Or commits thousands of their countrymen to die in mass graves over religious differences? Are you saying they prefer that way of life?

seremtan wrote:i've already told you that i think you're misidentifying "the problem" through ignorance, and your pretence that history doesn't matter is just fox news-style idiocy. it's just not worth my time any more trying to penetrate that thick block on your shoulders

why do you guys keep going back to the US vs the Indians thing from 200 years ago? The world is a different place today compared to back then. Back then there was no UN, and there certainly was not nukes etc. in the hands of power hungry mad men. So ya that whole arguement is completely invalid so let's just never bring it up again.

Also about the idea that we put Saddam in power etc.: We may have done that, but we have always done our best to create peaceful and stable situations, just as we are doing now in Iraq with the new government. However we cannnot be 100% to blame if things go bad. Once we leave and these ppl turn evil why are we to blame? Hopefully that won't happen with this democracy thing this time, but we really are not responsible for all of the religious angst that those people have for each other. We can't make them get along and behave.

Btw, per your fox news reference, o'riley tonight has a comment about how pussified other countries over there are, and how they won't ever step up and do what is right. Just look at Hitler, they let him build to power over 8 years and never stepped in to do anything until it was too late. Then when they were getting fucked in the ass they come crying to us for help. Same thing with Iraq, only this time we stepped in preemptively, and they cry foul at us. Fucking morons. Seriously.

MidnightQ4 wrote:I agree with you that invading Iran would be costly. However you can only play defense for so long until a ball slips through into your goal. Sometimes the only way to prevent being attacked is to take away the other guys' ball if you will.

Yeah, sparking another war in the Middle East would be a great way to "take away their ball". Do you even realize how utterly stupid that sounds?

MidnightQ4 wrote: btw, GW does not go around trying to oust people from their land nor does he fly planes into skyscrapers, nor does he have any desire whatsoever to kill any muslim people. the same cannot be said for them.

Instead Bush just starts meaningless wars for oil and revenge, "accidentally" kills tens of thousands of civilians in the crossfire, and drops white phosphorous in cities instead of utilizing the other options which wouldn't have involved burning women and children to the bone.

MidnightQ4 wrote:
We are not telling them how to live. Are you saying they don't want to have a voice in their government? That they enjoy the life under a dictator who steals their daughters away and rapes them, and puts people in torture chambers when they don't follow his rules? Or commits thousands of their countrymen to die in mass graves over religious differences? Are you saying they prefer that way of life?

The US is telling them how to live by vetoing policies which their government is trying to set up while the CIA is being investigated for operating torture camps all over the world. Guatanamo Bay is holding people which the military has admitted are not terrorists without representation or trial for years. A couple thousand of your own guys have come home in boxes and up to 100,000 of Iraq's civilians are dead. I don't think they were better off with Saddam but this "crusade" has left their country a smoking ruin and left many of them with less than they had before.

Read something other than CNN and open your eyes man. Your government is not perfect and isn't doing this for entirely altruistic reasons. The bullshit reasons the administration has given (take your pick on which version of them) are simply designed to get the dumber members of the population to buy into the war. Evidently that tactic has worked.

I just saw tonight on tv that there is going to be a show about how Iraqies really feel about what we have done for them. From the excerpts I saw it paints a picture that they are really quite happy with us, despite all the bad press it has gotten. Go google it or something and get some perspective.

MidnightQ4 wrote:I just saw tonight on tv that there is going to be a show about how Iraqies really feel about what we have done for them. From the excerpts I saw it paints a picture that they are really quite happy with us, despite all the bad press it has gotten. Go google it or something and get some perspective.

Another propaganda hour by the US administration. Yeah, I'll be sure to watch that :icon27:

Well, some people can look for the bad in any situation, and yet never offer any other better ways of doing things, or ever admit that there is a problem until it slaps them in the face. I don't want to be one of those people. At least GW and crew are trying to do what they think is best to fix the problems. Seems that there are too many ppl telling them they are wrong, but then just leaving it at that. Never offering a better alternative. And really, sitting around waiting for the world to go to complete shit is not an alternative.

Like the latest thing that I think is retarded is all this pressure to pull our troops out immediately. What would the point of that be? So we can let things go to crap, have some crazy religious yahoos take power and break the democratic structure and be right back where we were again? With them pointing nukes at Israel and us in 10 years? Too many people just want to take the easy way out and not fix the problem because they don't think there is one. But there is. And we can't afford to be nieve to that anymore and get nuked or something before we stand up and take notice of the problems around us.

I predict that at some point in the future anther Iraq type situation will happen. And we will have some pussy for a president who will bow to the leftists and sit on his ass about it. Then we'll have a few million Americans get wiped off the planet and all of a sudden all those lefties will be like oh shit, we really were wrong the whole time, ok go get them and fix it now. But it will be too late.

MidnightQ4 wrote:At least GW and crew are trying to do what they think is best to fix the problems.

Yeah like I said, it appears that tactic worked quite well.

Tormentius wrote:

MidnightQ4 wrote:At least GW and crew are trying to do what they think is best to fix the problems.

Yeah like I said, it appears that tactic worked quite well.

Hey like I said, there is no perfect solution. But we have to do something, and yes it is working as well as anyone can expect. However it is premature to draw any real conclusion yet, that will have to be left to the next 10-30 years to see how it plays out.

If you have ANY ideas of how to do it better, let's hear them. All you do is sit back and point fingers saying how bad it is what we are doing. When in reality I think things are better over there for 99% of people and will continue to get better and better for them in the future.

R00k wrote:BTW, for the ones claiming Pearl Harbor was the only reason we got involved in WW2, or bombed Japan, or firebombed Dresden:

http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=103

This was news 4 years ago people.

Check this one out, it's a very interesting read:

http://www.antiwar.com/news/?articleid=4122

YourGrandpa wrote:Hey, try reading more than one post.

I'm not recapping this shit for you.

Don't evade the question. It's valid because it attacks one of your main arguments and no, you or this MidnightQ4 character haven't even come close to answering it.