Quake3World

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20050820/ts_ ... NlYwM3MTY-


lol...could it get any worse? neomorons will still claim victory...rofl...

past tense? no fun anymore?

Testoclesius wrote:the best thing about iraq is all the americans that died

lol, spot the contradiction here:

Washington, with 140,000 troops still in Iraq, has insisted Iraqis are free to govern themselves but made clear it will not approve the kind of clerical rule seen in Shi'ite Iran, a state President Bush describes as "evil."

yes, iraqis are free to govern themselves but every line of their constitution must be approved by the US and is subject to US veto

how the fuck does anyone support this any more?

Testoclesius wrote:the best thing about iraq is all the americans that died

And let's be honest, 10,000 less iraqis.

seremtan wrote:

how the fuck does anyone support this any more?

Blind ignorance, news stations with a right wing agenda and a whole lot of scared white middle class christians.

10k less iraqis? lol...more then that were killed in the first week of the war...try 10-20X more then ur gay figure...then another 200k in the first gulf war...

yeah and the insurgents are just turrirists. none of them might happen to be one of the thousands and thousands of angry innocent iraqis who lost sons,daughters, etc to american bombs.

seremtan wrote: how the fuck does anyone support this any more?

Yeah, let's just pull out and let the totalitarian state in Iraq reign supreme.

...

waitaminute, that don't sound so hot :icon27:

funny how there are morons who still think iraq will be a democracy...

KingManULTRA wrote:

seremtan wrote: how the fuck does anyone support this any more?

Yeah, let's just pull out and let the totalitarian state in Iraq reign supreme.

...

waitaminute, that don't sound so hot :icon27:

What the hell do you think is going to happen when we do finally leave?

Saigon '75 all over again.

The Ironic part is that, in waging war against Islamic terror, we have taken the only secular Arab nation in the middle east and not only turned it into a terrorist training ground, but also turned it into an Islamic state like Iran.

Democracy? Ha. The Kurds aren't Islamic Arabs, so this constitution doesn't even include their rights at all.

Mr.Magnetichead wrote:

Testoclesius wrote:the best thing about iraq is all the americans that died

And let's be honest, 10,000 less iraqis.

not sure how many were killed in gulf war 1 but the sanctions have claimed about 750k, 500k of which were kids, and thus far the war has claimed somewhere between 20k (iraqbodycount site estimate) and 100k (lancet estimate).

KingManULTRA wrote:

seremtan wrote: how the fuck does anyone support this any more?

Yeah, let's just pull out and let the totalitarian state in Iraq reign supreme.

...

waitaminute, that don't sound so hot

yeah, let's just pretend for one moment that iraq is a sovereign nation whose people are capable of making their own choices and would do so if it wasn't for america continuing to interfere

wait a minute, that doesn't sound so profitable

Can someone post the geoff pic where he's holding a vacuum?

Thnx.

Testoclesius wrote:the best thing about iraq is all the americans that died

LOL

Freakaloin wrote:funny how there are morons who still think iraq will be a democracy...

troo dat

I like to get my breaking news about iraq from a guy that had to ask what "ffs" means.

seremtan wrote: yeah, let's just pretend for one moment that iraq is a sovereign nation whose people are capable of making their own choices and would do so if it wasn't for america continuing to interfere

The hell are you talking about? You remove U.S. troops from Iraq and it's going to go down the shitter in a hand basket, with religious conflicts between different islamic groups wrecking complete havoc in the country and there being nothing to stop a totalitarian government from rising in light of the instability. Pulling out now would be disastrous.

Also, Bush has nothing to gain from staying in Iraq as opposed to pulling out. The enormous cost of the war, the steadily rising death toll, the strained national guard reserves and other things all negatively affect Bush's popularity. It would be in his interest, for the sake of the later years of his presidential legacy, to pull out of Iraq ASAP no matter what.

in other words...he fucked up...MORON ALERT

Freakaloin wrote:in other words...he fucked up...MORON ALERT

Yeah, and how does that fact resolve anything in the present?

KingManULTRA wrote:

seremtan wrote: yeah, let's just pretend for one moment that iraq is a sovereign nation whose people are capable of making their own choices and would do so if it wasn't for america continuing to interfere

The hell are you talking about? You remove U.S. troops from Iraq and it's going to go down the shitter in a hand basket, with religious conflicts between different islamic groups wrecking complete havoc in the country and there being nothing to stop a totalitarian government from rising in light of the instability. Pulling out now would be disastrous.

Also, Bush has nothing to gain from staying in Iraq as opposed to pulling out. The enormous cost of the war, the steadily rising death toll, the strained national guard reserves and other things all negatively affect Bush's popularity. It would be in his interest, for the sake of the later years of his presidential legacy, to pull out of Iraq ASAP no matter what.

so now that you've listed the many reasons why the US should pull out of iraq, i'm intrigued as to why you think bush went there in the first place.

i must admit i ask myself what there is in iraq that could possibly be worth all this mess, and the answer i come up with is that iraq is situated bang on top of a dwindling energy resource on which america's potential rivals such as europe or the far east/china depend rather more than the US, and that controlling these energy reserves gives the US an effective veto over any rival challenging it for global supremacy. that's what rumsfeld, cheney and wolfowitz were saying in their 'project for the new american century' pieces back in the 1990s. they also said it would take a 'pearl harbor style attack' on the US to provide a pretext for this energy grab that could be sold to the american people, and lo and behold, such an attack took place, and here they are doing exactly what they planned.

furthermore the lack of timetable for withdrawal has nothing to do with the insurgency or anything going in iraq. it has to do with the well-known fact that there was never any exit strategy - for the simple reason that there was never intended to be any exit. the US bases there are intended to be permanent, as a tool of control of the region and its energy reserves

i mean, this is all so transparently obvious it still amazes me that there are people like yourself who, if they're not actually believing the propaganda, are at the very least giving the benefit of the doubt where no benefit is deserved

What is this? The "American Conspiracy Weekly" newsletter?

seremtan wrote: i must admit i ask myself what there is in iraq that could possibly be worth all this mess, and the answer i come up with is that iraq is situated bang on top of a dwindling energy resource on which america's potential rivals such as europe or the far east/china depend rather more than the US, and that controlling these energy reserves gives the US an effective veto over any rival challenging it for global supremacy. that's what rumsfeld, cheney and wolfowitz were saying in their 'project for the new american century' pieces back in the 1990s. they also said it would take a 'pearl harbor style attack' on the US to provide a pretext for this energy grab that could be sold to the american people, and lo and behold, such an attack took place, and here they are doing exactly what they planned.

furthermore the lack of timetable for withdrawal has nothing to do with the insurgency or anything going in iraq. it has to do with the well-known fact that there was never any exit strategy - for the simple reason that there was never intended to be any exit. the US bases there are intended to be permanent, as a tool of control of the region and its energy reserves

The U.S. will not have a significant military presence in Iraq 5 years from now, and most certainly not one large enough in size to "take control of the region." Such an endeavor would be highly unpopular and very costly. Bush's party as a whole dislikes long, drawn out conflicts with permanent and large scale military installations in the region for various reasons, mostly because of the insane costs associated with doing that and how it contradicts conservative fiscal policy. The U.S. will pull out almost completely sooner or later (as soon as is feasible), period.

seremtan wrote: i mean, this is all so transparently obvious it still amazes me that there are people like yourself who, if they're not actually believing the propaganda, are at the very least giving the benefit of the doubt where no benefit is deserved

This is funny coming from someone (probably) living in Europe where the entire media is like Fox News with a leftist slant on all issues regarding U.S. foreign policy.

Also, I see the Iraq war in a negative light but that doesn't change the fact that mistakes made in the past need to be resolved in the present, and that means seeing the Iraq situation through to the best possible solution.

KingManULTRA wrote:What is this? The "American Conspiracy Weekly" newsletter?


The U.S. will not have a significant military presence in Iraq 5 years from now, and most certainly not one large enough in size to "take control of the region." Such an endeavor would be highly unpopular and very costly. Bush's party as a whole dislikes long, drawn out conflicts with permanent and large scale military installations in the region for various reasons, mostly because of the insane costs associated with doing that and how it contradicts conservative fiscal policy. The U.S. will pull out almost completely sooner or later (as soon as is feasible), period.

It already costs an insane amount but they don't care that much. And about it being unpopular, it was that before he started the war but he went through with it.