Worldwide Protests mark Iraq war's third anniversary

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

Where are you getting your figures from? How about a link.

Our event in Pittsburgh was maybe 5% smaller than last year, but it was also freezing cold, as opposed to a 50 degree day in 05.

And thus proof of the resolve of the left. Oh it's to cold now so I'm not going to stand up for what I believe in waan waan waaan. :baby2

 

[alphamale]

The U.S. protests were the usual collection of little old leftist ladies in gym shoes, gays, anti-globalist street hippies, uniformed brainwashed over-privileged students, and pasty-faced peace creep appeasers. :2razz:

 

[Stinger]

No agreement here. I think all the decisions made by this administration with regards to ME policies have been in nothing but for the benefit of thier bosses at big oil and haliburton.

You seriously believe Bush reopened hostilities with Iraq to benefit Haliburton and oil companies. That he put our military in harms way to benefit some other guys. What was he to gain from this and what is your evidence? Or did he just do it because he likes Haliburton and is just buddies with oil company executives.

What absurdity.

He was quite clear in the reasons we held Saddam accountable to the cease-fire agreement and the UN resolutions. And you do know it was the official policy of the United States the remove him and his regieme, by whatever means necessary, before he even announced he was running for the office. Do you also believe that the Congress and Clinton passed the Iraqi Liberation Act for the benefit of Haliburton and the oil companies?

 

[Stinger]

Have any source to back this juxtaposition up? That these "die hards" would be protesting WWII?

Yes, their history of protesting any use of force.

Time to get out of hic country south and into the real world, maybe some decent education would help too.

And insulting the South is suppose to make your arguement correct? Is that the sign of a decent education? And since you have no idea of my education where do you get off claiming my wasn't "decent" or do you also believe invectives so how make your arguements correct. What folly.

 

[KidRocks]

Actually, it is 'the relevance'. kid hyped up this 'day of demonstrations' as if the streets are being overrun with protestors, when that was apparently far from the reality.

Do I 'admit this adiminstration is doing things very wrong'? Nope, not with respect to Iraq and ME policies. I have problems with the Bush administration in some other areas, but not this one. At least, not so far. Have mistakes been made? Sure. No conflict of any magnitude has ever been fought without disagreements and mistakes. But are we doing the right thing, are we going in the right direction? Yes, I believe we are.

Massive is the key word here, do you or anyone see the word "massive" anywhere in the title of the thread?

Of course you don't because the title of this thread is...

Worldwide Protests mark Iraq war's third anniversary

It is not... "Massive Worldwide Protests mark Iraq war's third anniversary"

So tell me Mr. oldreliable67, where is this alleged "hype"?

Worldwide does not insinuate "massive"!

Class dismissed!

 

[oldreliable67]

kid,

Here is the hype:

I think the Bush administration is in it's in last throes.

Protests mark Iraq war's third anniversary
Demonstrators take to streets in cities around the world

By these comments and your juxtaposition of them, you clearly attempt to suggest a link between your "Bush administration is in it's in last throes" proposition and protesters "take to streets in cities around the world".

Class? You flunked out long ago.

 

[KidRocks]

kid,

Here is the hype:



By these comments and your juxtaposition of them, you clearly attempt to suggest a link between your "Bush administration is in it's in last throes" proposition and protesters "take to streets in cities around the world".

Class? You flunked out long ago.

Actually, it is 'the relevance'. kid hyped up this 'day of demonstrations' as if the streets are being overrun with protestors, when that was apparently far from the reality.

Your weak attempt at a rebuttal is pathetic sir, the alleged "hype" attack was tied to numbers as clearly stated by you in the above quote!

 

[KCConservative]

I think the Bush administration is in it's in last throes.

Agreed. Just two more years left. :roll:

 

[KCConservative]

They aren't? Bush has never erred? Can we say, bullshit?
There is no proof whatsoever. In fact it seems contrary to what you blindly believe. Seems that Saddam had a better idea of how to control the populice then the Bush regime does now.

Perhaps you could save your sophomoric language for the basement. Thanks.

 

[jfuh]

You seriously believe Bush reopened hostilities with Iraq to benefit Haliburton and oil companies. That he put our military in harms way to benefit some other guys. What was he to gain from this and what is your evidence? Or did he just do it because he likes Haliburton and is just buddies with oil company executives.

bingo. With only less then 1000 days remaining in office, it's time to look for a retirement plan.

What absurdity.

He was quite clear in the reasons we held Saddam accountable to the cease-fire agreement and the UN resolutions. And you do know it was the official policy of the United States the remove him and his regieme, by whatever means necessary, before he even announced he was running for the office. Do you also believe that the Congress and Clinton passed the Iraqi Liberation Act for the benefit of Haliburton and the oil companies?

If that is the case, and the security and peace of the free world is in harms way. Why are we not truly in a place that posses a direct threat? Why is the US not in N. Korea bombing those sob's to hell? Y not in Iran?
If on this high moral pedestal of protecting the innocent are we not in Sierra Liom or Durfar. Save you're bs documents that had nothing to do with the war and face the music. The invasion of Iraq had nothing to do with your falsehood claims but everything about military spending, buddies in haliburton and finally big oil interests. Open your eyes blind man, the US government is held captive by coorperate special interests.
That's why young boys of the military are dieing in Iraq.
Face it, you and your hawkish possee are exposed, no one believes a single word you say. You have 0 credibility.

 

[jfuh]

This one, however, smacks of conspiracy theorists and tin-foil hats.

I would've expected more from you but ok.

Certainly nothing about the ME is 'simple'.

I do not disagree.

The question about 'faulty intelligence' is vexing and disappointing - we would all have preferred to see George Tenet's 'slam dunk' prove at least somewhat more accurate. The performance of the intel community left a lot to be desired, IMO.

I agree.

The true legacy of Iraq won't be known for many years to come.

The invasion is not going to matter as much as how the remainder of this conflict is brought to terms. Hopefully with new leadership (doesn't matter from which side), responsibilty and acceptance of error will prevail.

Credibility? Disgrace? These are all yet to be seen in the proper context:

At the moment, anyone will agree that the current administration of the US has absolutely no credibility nor respect (except for it's military might) of the international community.

the success or failure of Iraq to emerge as a country able to stand on its own and govern itself.

Hopefully it won't be so low an expectation of merely governing itself. Mind you Saddam's Iraq was also very much self governing. Anything except for a free, secular, democratic Iraq will be a failure.

I totally agree (as I have pointed out several times on DP) that one of our larger mistakes was poor planning for 'winning the peace'. Our planning and execution was exceptional for the 'warfighting' phase, but has been shown to clearly inadequate for the post-warfighting period.

You make it difficult for me to point this out with your total agreement. However not doing so would be irresponsible. I do not feel that the planning was exceptional at all. The essence that there seemed to be absolutely no plan whatsoever for a postwar Iraq shows to me that there was an utter lack of a plan. The "major operations" phase was executed nearly flawlessly, however, the war continues, the enemy is a growing threat and we are not the least bit safer then we were prior to the invasion.

Again, Afganistan, different beast all together and from the troubling news I've been reading, seems to be on the verge of collapse.

 

[jfuh]

Perhaps you could save your sophomoric language for the basement. Thanks.

Going from highschool graduate to now a sophomore. Keep on trucking KC. Watching any beverly hillbillies lately?

 

[jfuh]

Yes, their history of protesting any use of force.

I didn't notice that there were any anti-war protests during WWII.

And insulting the South is suppose to make your arguement correct?

No, that's not what it's for. Just stating the fact of the bible belt. Mostly hic country with religious fanatics that reject fact, as you often do.

Is that the sign of a decent education?

It's sign of an education.

And since you have no idea of my education where do you get off claiming my wasn't "decent" or do you also believe invectives so how make your arguements correct. What folly.

I know you're education couldn't have been decent because you reject any fact presented to you contrary to your dogmatic political beliefs.

 

[oldreliable67]

Your weak attempt at a rebuttal is pathetic sir, the alleged "hype" attack was tied to numbers as clearly stated by you in the above quote!

Apparently one of the reasons you flunked out was reading comprehension.

 

[KCConservative]

Going from highschool graduate to now a sophomore. Keep on trucking KC. Watching any beverly hillbillies lately?

Not sure how that answers the question. I was just hoping you might see the benefit is refraining from profane language upstairs. This is why vague created the basement.

 

[Stinger]

No, that's not what it's for. Just stating the fact of the bible belt. Mostly hic country with religious fanatics that reject fact, as you often do.

As I said in another message in this subject, when you can post some reasonable intellectual debate let me know, I have no interest in childish invectives.

 

[oldreliable67]

Just stating the fact of the bible belt. Mostly hic country with religious fanatics that reject fact, as you often do.

Now thats disappointing. You are clearly intelligent and for you to make that kind of base generalization is well, disappointing. Thats the kind of comment those of us from the south expect to hear from 'eastern or hollywood psuedo intellectual, better-than-thou, elitist snobs'. But you even misspelled 'hic[k]'! :2wave:

 

[Stinger]

Now thats disappointing. You are clearly intelligent and for you to make that kind of base generalization is well, disappointing. Thats the kind of comment those of us from the south expect to hear from 'eastern or hollywood psuedo intellectual, better-than-thou, elitist snobs'. But you even misspelled 'hic[k]'! :2wave:

Yep we only build the Saturn V and nuclear subs down here. In fact we're so dumb we are becoming the acme of the automobile industry with the most modern factories in the world operating with just us ole hics [sic] running them.

 

[oldreliable67]

At the moment, anyone will agree that the current administration of the US has absolutely no credibility nor respect (except for it's military might) of the international community.

Not sure whether I agree with that assessment in total or not, but it is certainly true in leftist and/or socialist leaning quarters. That, however, does not represent a change from their historical perception of the US.

Mind you Saddam's Iraq was also very much self governing. Anything except for a free, secular, democratic Iraq will be a failure.

To characterize Saddam's Iraq as 'self-governing' is perhaps true in a sort of technical sense, but certainly quite a stretch in any other sense. I suppose that, in those terms, one could perhaps characterize Saddam's Iraq as being relatively 'free' - in the same sense that Henry Ford offered customers a choice of colors for A-Models - as long as the color they chose was black.

The invasion is not going to matter as much as how the remainder of this conflict is brought to terms.

That remains to be seen. In the future, the invasion and the success or failure of postwar Iraq may be seen as more dependent on one another than at present. In the newly released national security strategy, the administration reiterated its "premptive strike" policy. A successful Iraq may yet be held out as validation of that strategy, hence one becoming proof of the 'correctness' of the other -the absence of WMDs notwithstanding. The contrary is of course also true: a failed postwar Iraq may cast sufficient additional doubts on the validity of the strategy to doom it. A successful Iraq will largely overshadow the so-far unsuccessful hunt for WMDs, which in time, will be seen more and more as an intelligence failure, and therefore an activity to be strengthened in the future. Certainly, the preemption strategy and the success of post-war Iraq are not firmly or critically tied in the minds of most observers at the moment, but the story is far from concluded at present.

 

[jfuh]

Not sure how that answers the question. I was just hoping you might see the benefit is refraining from profane language upstairs. This is why vague created the basement.

Suggestion, how about you stop dissing everyone that is in disagreement with you. The whole "dipstick liberal left" routine serves no purpose except to make an *** of yourself. And as you say, better suited for the basement.

 

[jfuh]

Not sure whether I agree with that assessment in total or not, but it is certainly true in leftist and/or socialist leaning quarters. That, however, does not represent a change from their historical perception of the US.

With each swap of administration the world takes on a different assesment against "US". The hypocrisy, the unilateral actions, the you're either with us or with them rhetoric is quite a disgrace from the "leader of the freeworld".

To characterize Saddam's Iraq as 'self-governing' is perhaps true in a sort of technical sense, but certainly quite a stretch in any other sense. I suppose that, in those terms, one could perhaps characterize Saddam's Iraq as being relatively 'free' - in the same sense that Henry Ford offered customers a choice of colors for A-Models - as long as the color they chose was black.

As I noted, anything but a free, democratic and secular Iraq would be an utter failure. I do not want to see Iraq become the sectarian fanatical nation that Iran is.

That remains to be seen. In the future, the invasion and the success or failure of postwar Iraq may be seen as more dependent on one another than at present. In the newly released national security strategy, the administration reiterated its "premptive strike" policy. A successful Iraq may yet be held out as validation of that strategy, hence one becoming proof of the 'correctness' of the other -the absence of WMDs notwithstanding. The contrary is of course also true: a failed postwar Iraq may cast sufficient additional doubts on the validity of the strategy to doom it. A successful Iraq will largely overshadow the so-far unsuccessful hunt for WMDs, which in time, will be seen more and more as an intelligence failure, and therefore an activity to be strengthened in the future. Certainly, the preemption strategy and the success of post-war Iraq are not firmly or critically tied in the minds of most observers at the moment, but the story is far from concluded at present.

I have nothing against pre-emptive strikes. I will not sit around while OBL or some other a$$hole is planing a full on invasion on me. It's when good ppl stop to care that things will go horribly wrong. What I dispise of is not having the courage of transparency and needing to hide behind a veil of deception. Just say "Look, here's the evidence, this is why we're going to bomb the crap out of these guys. " Better for the soldiers that have to go in too, know what they're there for without a need to come home and explain what the hell is going on.

 

[jfuh]

Yep we only build the Saturn V and nuclear subs down here. In fact we're so dumb we are becoming the acme of the automobile industry with the most modern factories in the world operating with just us ole hics [sic] running them.

I have nothing against anyone being from the south. It's when you display that stereotypical arrogance for reasoning that I will respond as such.

 

[KCConservative]

Suggestion, how about you stop dissing everyone that is in disagreement with you. The whole "dipstick liberal left" routine serves no purpose except to make an *** of yourself. And as you say, better suited for the basement.

Funny, I thought I simply asked you to take the profanity to the basement. Maybe you could show us where I said the words "dipstick liberal left". Oh that's right, I didn't....ever. But if I had, would that be any different than you classifying people who read the bible as "hicks who reject fact", as you have done.

You need some other examples, jfuh? Here's a few. Tell us, how do the following comments "serve a purpose"?

"It'd be nice if his facist regime ......"

"Time to get out of hic country south and into the real world, maybe some decent education would help too....."

"Then there's setting the fanatical neo-cons dogs ....."

"I say they're nothing but a bunch of cowards...."

"Well this is exactly why inbreeding is bad...."

"Face it, you and your hawkish possee are exposed, no one believes a single word you say. You have 0 credibility...."


Your words, jfuh. Tell us how these comments are somehow okay but if anyone counters, you call it "dissing" the discussion or your favorite phrase "ad hominem attacks." Give us a break. Either learn to take your own medicine or shut your hole.

 

[jfuh]

Funny, I thought I simply asked you to take the profanity to the basement. Maybe you could show us where I said the words "dipstick liberal left". Oh that's right, I didn't....ever. But if I had, would that be any different than you classifying people who read the bible as "hicks who reject fact", as you have done.

You need some other examples, jfuh? Here's a few. Tell us, how do the following comments "serve a purpose"?

"It'd be nice if his facist regime ......"

"Time to get out of hic country south and into the real world, maybe some decent education would help too....."

"Then there's setting the fanatical neo-cons dogs ....."

"I say they're nothing but a bunch of cowards...."

"Well this is exactly why inbreeding is bad...."

"Face it, you and your hawkish possee are exposed, no one believes a single word you say. You have 0 credibility...."


Your words, jfuh. Tell us how these comments are somehow okay but if anyone counters, you call it "dissing" the discussion or your favorite phrase "ad hominem attacks." Give us a break. Either learn to take your own medicine or shut your hole.

You just don't know when to quit do you.

 

[KCConservative]

You just don't know when to quit do you.

Does that mean you won't be responding to my post? Come on, don't run away. I've shown seven examples of your flaming rhetoric. Be a man and step up to the debate. We can take one thing at a time, if you'd like. Let's start with showing where I said "dipstick liberal". Show us that.