• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Insurgent attacks down

T

The Real McCoy

Che said:
Oh Great Here we go again.

Ready.

Set.

Go!


Che said:
We have as many soldiers there as there are cops in manahattan

We're not there to patrol the country. It's not like the Afghanis don't have there own security forces.


Che said:
How Dare you compare WWII to Iraq! In WWII and Korea we put OUR men on the line for a cause. Here we're putting them on the line based on a lie and propaganda and oil.

I'm surprised you admit that we had a cause in Korea. Props to you, Che.

Most of the propoganda is of the left-wing variety, that this is a war for oil. You know, the kind that you buy in to.



Che said:
Yes let's seek the easy route then shall we? Since GOP is so big on National Security and China is really going to save our asses

The easy route? Save our asses? What are you talking about? China has the diplomatic power to keep North Korea relatively in check. They exert much more influence on Pyongyang than we do.


Che said:
Castro done and then another Castro party leader comes like his brother or cousin.

Either way, Cuba is not a high priority.


Che said:
AND anyway I thought we were going after dictators since those famed WMDs in Iraq haven't showed up.

We did. Found the one we were looking for on Dec. 15, 2003 in a hole in the ground.


Che said:
We're not a Democrazy. We're a Representative Republic.

Yes, a form of indirect democracy.


Che said:
And So what? All those countries I stated are ideal to plant your seeds.

No they're not. The Middle East is the only area in the world that's regressed in the last 50 years. Every other region has made progress but they continue to decline and become more and more of a problem. All the countries you listed were either too remote or had absolutely nothing to do with the ME.


Che said:
Besides what business ,besides catching Osama and putting a McDonalds in Every Oil Rich country, do we really have in the Middle East.

What business do we have? Curbing the conditions that produce guys like bin Laden.


Che said:
We're not team America. We have enough problems on the homefront ,in case you forgot, like SS and Healthcare crisises.

I haven't forgot. I also haven't forgot about the problems manifesting in other parts of the world that pose a threat to our security.
 

Navy Pride

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
39,883
Reaction score
3,070
Location
Pacific NW
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Che said:
Sure but why start in oil rich Iraq? Why not Sudan? Why not Niger where little kids are dying? Why not Cuba a mile away from us. Why not N. Korea with Nuclear weapons. There are far worse killings in other countries. Oil is the reason we chose Iraq. It's the only difference in between Iraq and those other countries where people are starving. For me, oil is not a good reason to put 2000+ American soldiers lives on the line.




Afghanistan we were actually fighting for something. We were trying to find he terrorist who killed 1000's of Americans. Then we decided to be like a kid with ADD and run after someone else letting him plot in peace.




Nope. Pulling out troops isn't going to solve anything because more marines are dying.

Hey che, here is a question for you......How much oil have we received from Iraq since we overthrew Saddam?

I will answer that for you............zero
 

mixedmedia

iniquitably employed
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 10, 2004
Messages
6,822
Reaction score
373
Location
Naples, FL
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
Stinger said:
No, we didn't engage in his removal did we. And last I checked it's not the official policy of this country as it was with Saddam nor has the UN issued resolutions authorizing it. Now if he does invade his neighbors, use WMD against his neighbors and his own citizens, and the UN and our government issues resolutions authorizing his removal and I don't support them, then yes I would be pro-Chavez.

None of those are supposedly the reason we invaded Iraq. But it really doesn't matter, why we invaded is irrelevant to my question.

I hardly see how failing to see sense in this war, much like most people around the world - we are just a small percentage, ya know - makes one pro-Saddam. I mean, take our own president. There are many folks who would like to see him impeached. I am not one of them. But it hardly makes me pro-Bush.
 

scottyz

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
1,575
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Moderate
mixedmedia said:
I hardly see how failing to see sense in this war, much like most people around the world - we are just a small percentage, ya know - makes one pro-Saddam. I mean, take our own president. There are many folks who would like to see him impeached. I am not one of them. But it hardly makes me pro-Bush.
I suppose it's an easy way to avoid the real topic. If you don't support this guys war, you must be pro-enemy! I remember many Republicans didn't support Clinton's war so that must have made them pro-Milosevic and ethnic cleansing? :confused:
 

mixedmedia

iniquitably employed
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 10, 2004
Messages
6,822
Reaction score
373
Location
Naples, FL
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
scottyz said:
I suppose it's an easy way to avoid the real topic. If you don't support this guys war, you must be pro-enemy! I remember many Republicans didn't support Clinton's war so that must have made them pro-Milosevic and ethnic cleansing? :confused:
I think its just another cheap and easy jab at the people who don't agree lock stock and barrel with the Bush administration. And I'm tired of seeing it.....from BOTH sides.
 

Bergslagstroll

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 26, 2005
Messages
6,304
Reaction score
1,299
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
oldreliable67 said:
No doubt some will survive and return to their home countries. No matter. We would rather fight them in their home countries rather than our home countries, but we do have to fight them somewhere.

How do you now that all those foreign fighters would still be fighting if there had not been an Iraq war. Maybee there would become radicalized? Maybee Iraq gave them a reason to fight, organisaze and get skilled?

Stinger said:
You guys just can't stand it can you. You are so invested in failure that your whole political agenda depends on it. You can't even bring yourself to say, wow that's really good, but must prostitute reason to come up with anything, ANYTHING, to miminalize the good news. It's very clear news and your post is filled with "maybes" and "ifs" so you can denigrate the good news. Amazing.

Well I just wanted to prove that you data doen't prove anything. Beacuse yes lower amount of atacks against the military can be a indication that the violence is droping. But it can also be the case that the terrorist is just regrouping, becoming more efficient or targeting more civilians. So if you want to prove anything you have to add more data. Like for example numbers of killed americans, iraqie security and civilians and show there are a drop there.

But if you can show data that actually prove anything like that the number of killed is droping, I would say that it's a good trend that hopefully will countinue. I would still think that the cost for Iraq war already are to high.
 

Stinger

DP Veteran
Joined
May 3, 2005
Messages
15,169
Reaction score
565
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Well I just wanted to prove that you data doen't prove anything. [/quote]

Those are from the official numbers from our military, they prove EXACTLY what they say, you just can't stand the fact that it's getting better over there and we just might be successful.

Beacuse yes lower amount of atacks against the military can be a indication that the violence is droping.

A drop of over 40% and it just "can be.."


BUT MONKEY WARNING BUT MONKEY WARNING
 

Navy Pride

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
39,883
Reaction score
3,070
Location
Pacific NW
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
I think it is great news that the insurgent attacks are down in Iraq......Why doesn't the press report this? Why does it not make our friends on the far left happy? Could it be partisan politics? :roll:
 

Navy Pride

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
39,883
Reaction score
3,070
Location
Pacific NW
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
mixedmedia said:
None of those are supposedly the reason we invaded Iraq. But it really doesn't matter, why we invaded is irrelevant to my question.

I hardly see how failing to see sense in this war, much like most people around the world - we are just a small percentage, ya know - makes one pro-Saddam. I mean, take our own president. There are many folks who would like to see him impeached. I am not one of them. But it hardly makes me pro-Bush.

I would not say there are many people that want this president impeached.......I would say it is just a small very vocal minority in the far left whackos that want that and have wanted it since the elections of 2000..........
 

mixedmedia

iniquitably employed
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 10, 2004
Messages
6,822
Reaction score
373
Location
Naples, FL
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
Navy Pride said:
I would not say there are many people that want this president impeached.......I would say it is just a small very vocal minority in the far left whackos that want that and have wanted it since the elections of 2000..........

A small minority could still be considered many....and it is irrelevant anywho.
 

Navy Pride

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
39,883
Reaction score
3,070
Location
Pacific NW
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
mixedmedia said:
A small minority could still be considered many....and it is irrelevant anywho.

Not on the grand scheme but if its irrelevant why bring it up?:confused:
 

mixedmedia

iniquitably employed
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 10, 2004
Messages
6,822
Reaction score
373
Location
Naples, FL
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
Navy Pride said:
Not on the grand scheme but if its irrelevant why bring it up?:confused:

Have you followed the conversation, NP? It is irrelevant in light of the discussion I have been having with Stinger. If you're not gonna read up, then just stick with your own conversations.
 

Navy Pride

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
39,883
Reaction score
3,070
Location
Pacific NW
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
mixedmedia said:
Have you followed the conversation, NP? It is irrelevant in light of the discussion I have been having with Stinger. If you're not gonna read up, then just stick with your own conversations.

You got the shot in on impeachment that many people were for impeachment........I was just pointing out that was and erroneous statement.......

Carry on.............;)
 

mixedmedia

iniquitably employed
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 10, 2004
Messages
6,822
Reaction score
373
Location
Naples, FL
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
Navy Pride said:
You got the shot in on impeachment that many people were for impeachment........I was just pointing out that was and erroneous statement.......

Carry on.............;)

I wasn't "getting a shot in." I made a relevant example....and even managed to insert that I am not one of those "many."

No, you carry on......;)
 

Navy Pride

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
39,883
Reaction score
3,070
Location
Pacific NW
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
mixedmedia said:
I wasn't "getting a shot in." I made a relevant example....and even managed to insert that I am not one of those "many."

No, you carry on......;)

Yeah I read that.It was very subtle but it was still a shot.....
 

mixedmedia

iniquitably employed
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 10, 2004
Messages
6,822
Reaction score
373
Location
Naples, FL
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
Navy Pride said:
Yeah I read that.It was very subtle but it was still a shot.....

Oh, please, NP. Don't tell me what I meant. Please. That's very annoying.
 

Navy Pride

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
39,883
Reaction score
3,070
Location
Pacific NW
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
mixedmedia said:
Oh, please, NP. Don't tell me what I meant. Please. That's very annoying.

Only you know what you meant.........I am just trying to tell you how it sounded to me..........

This thread is about insurgent attacks are down.....Why even bring up impeachment?:confused:
 

mixedmedia

iniquitably employed
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 10, 2004
Messages
6,822
Reaction score
373
Location
Naples, FL
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
Navy Pride said:
Only you know what you meant.........I am just trying to tell you how it sounded to me..........

This thread is about insurgent attacks are down.....Why even bring up impeachment?:confused:

Oy vey. I had a small conversation with Stinger about his suggestion that there were "pro-Saddamists" here and it was relevant to that discussion.
 

Stinger

DP Veteran
Joined
May 3, 2005
Messages
15,169
Reaction score
565
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Quote:
Originally Posted by mixedmedia
Hmmmmm.....so following that logic you are pro-Hugo Chavez? I mean, unless of course you support invading Venezuela.


No, we didn't engage in his removal did we. And last I checked it's not the official policy of this country as it was with Saddam nor has the UN issued resolutions authorizing it. Now if he does invade his neighbors, use WMD against his neighbors and his own citizens, and the UN and our government issues resolutions authorizing his removal and I don't support them, then yes I would be pro-Chavez.

mixedmedia said:
None of those are supposedly the reason we invaded Iraq. But it really doesn't matter, why we invaded is irrelevant to my question.

Each one of those was specifically a reason we removed Saddam, go read the Iraqi Liberation Act and the Senate resolution to use force to remove him. And it is specifically relivent as to why we removed him and not Chavez. If Chavez engages in the same behavior then I would certainly support his removal and those who supported his remaining in power would thus be pro-Chavez.

And as far as trying to compare Chavez and Bush to Saddam, they are different circumstances. If Bush turns into a Saddam then I will be anti-Bush and support his removal, same with any other leader out there.
 

mixedmedia

iniquitably employed
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 10, 2004
Messages
6,822
Reaction score
373
Location
Naples, FL
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
Stinger said:
Quote:
Originally Posted by mixedmedia
Hmmmmm.....so following that logic you are pro-Hugo Chavez? I mean, unless of course you support invading Venezuela.


No, we didn't engage in his removal did we. And last I checked it's not the official policy of this country as it was with Saddam nor has the UN issued resolutions authorizing it. Now if he does invade his neighbors, use WMD against his neighbors and his own citizens, and the UN and our government issues resolutions authorizing his removal and I don't support them, then yes I would be pro-Chavez.



Each one of those was specifically a reason we removed Saddam, go read the Iraqi Liberation Act and the Senate resolution to use force to remove him. And it is specifically relivent as to why we removed him and not Chavez. If Chavez engages in the same behavior then I would certainly support his removal and those who supported his remaining in power would thus be pro-Chavez.

And as far as trying to compare Chavez and Bush to Saddam, they are different circumstances. If Bush turns into a Saddam then I will be anti-Bush and support his removal, same with any other leader out there.

My point is that it is unnecessarily provocative to call a person who doesn't support the war a pro-Saddamist and I think, from being aware of your contributions here, that you are savvy enough to understand what I'm getting at without talking around it.

But whatever, it's not worth the time I spend getting the runaround to get that admission from you.
 

Stinger

DP Veteran
Joined
May 3, 2005
Messages
15,169
Reaction score
565
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
mixedmedia said:
My point is that it is unnecessarily provocative to call a person who doesn't support the war a pro-Saddamist and I think, from being aware of your contributions here, that you are savvy enough to understand what I'm getting at without talking around it.

But whatever, it's not worth the time I spend getting the runaround to get that admission from you.

Did you support his remaining in power?
 

mixedmedia

iniquitably employed
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 10, 2004
Messages
6,822
Reaction score
373
Location
Naples, FL
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
Stinger said:
Did you support his remaining in power?

No. But at the time, I did not support this war at that time. That does not mean I was or ever have been "pro-Saddam."

You're playing the same word game as the "pro-lifers" do here. And I ain't falling for it.

And for good measure, now that we are in Iraq, I support our staying there until the job is done. Just because I don't agree with the war, doesn't mean I am against any US intervention in the interest of a healthier ME society.
 

LeftyHenry

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 21, 2005
Messages
1,896
Reaction score
12
Location
New York City
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Stinger said:
Did you support his remaining in power?

Nobody really thinks he should remain in power. We who are against the war don't like the fact that we were lied to in front of our faces for the sake of oil. We think there are better ways to spend tax payers money then on bullshit wars.
 
Joined
Nov 9, 2005
Messages
2,669
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Che said:
We who are against the war don't like the fact that we were lied to in front of our faces for the sake of oil.

Everyone's got an opinion, I guess. :roll:
 

Navy Pride

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
39,883
Reaction score
3,070
Location
Pacific NW
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
mixedmedia said:
My point is that it is unnecessarily provocative to call a person who doesn't support the war a pro-Saddamist and I think, from being aware of your contributions here, that you are savvy enough to understand what I'm getting at without talking around it.

But whatever, it's not worth the time I spend getting the runaround to get that admission from you.


I don't call anyone that does not support the war a pro Saddamist..........I just think by their actions the bolster the resolve of the terrorists in Iraq....They know what happened in Viet Nam when the left mounted their attack on that war and casued this country to cut and run there........They think if they just hold out that the same thing will happen in Iraq.....

The left in this country has made one bad calculation though..........They have badly underestimated this presidents resolve in finishing the job there........
 
Top Bottom