Wrecking Iraq: One Million Dead, 2 Million Wounded, 3 Million Displaced

Wow i guess we all forgot about the 5000 people he killed with gas. Or the many people he executed just for opposing his rule. Yeah im pretty sure it would have been better if we left him in power...you people really need to remember history. And woopty doo about everyone killed in iraq, what about all the drive bys and people killed by drunk drivers every day?

Well we do remember history because wasnt it the U.S that provided Saddams ability to gas his own people and as far as comparing the drive by shootings and drunk driving accidents youve got to be kidding.

There was a time that Saddam, like so many third world dictators, was useful to republicans. Back in those Glory Days of yesteryear during the presidency of Ronald Reagan. Like "Uncle Joe" from World War II, "Good Saddam" offered economic opporunity in the region. Just look who we would send to make nice: CNN.com - Regime change - Sep. 30, 2002

The execution of Saddam has come and passed, and still there is no sign of the WMD's. Regardless of what reasons exists now after the fact, that is the Great Fear that Shrub's administration offered as reason for war. Now our military is stuck in the midst of a civil war while being used for a purpose it was never intended. Perhaps if "intelligence" might have been better... but all signs point to another reason- Downing Street memo - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Rambler Bush new that Iraq wasnt a threat as you may already know and his neocon advisors thought that taking down Iraq would be easy and that they would all get rich doing it.They all thought it would cost next to nothing to invade Iraq and the rewards would be unimaginalble.These guys may have went to the best schools around had the best education money can buy but their not very wise.Now the U.S is stuck there in the middle of a civil war they cant leave and they cant stay so what do you do?The neocons want the oil and they aint leaving till they get it,but if they leave now then all of this would of been for nothing except for getting rid of a two bit dictator that cost 500 billion dollars and counting,shit a one dollar bullet could of done the job.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fishman3811

the U.S that provided Saddams ability to gas his own people

---

Kids just love to sit and spin.........stories that is. WHY did we provide the ability to gas again? Does Irans Basij army ring a bell? Come on now dude, your playing the same game here that you denounce the "neo-cons" of doing.

Have a good one!:s4:

The fact is, Iraq and the region would be better off with Sadam still in power. He held the crazies at bay with his "brutal" dictatorship. A lot more Iraqis have died and more of the country is in squalor than it ever has been, since our unilateral invasion. We are the country (Bushco) that is totally responsible for the horrible situation in Iraq. No matter how you spin it, it is the USA that screwed the pooch. Tell me how we and the world are better off since we invaded Iraq, please be elaborate with you explanations......

Of course there were reasons for providing weapons and training. At the time I'm sure it seemed logical, though clearly there was no thought to later repercussions. We trained Osama when he fought against the Soviets, when Afghani militants viewed as "freedom fighters" rather than "terrorists." We supported Saddam as a stopgate for Iran. But look how well those plans turned out.

The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq are over. Mission Accomplished. Now this is an occupation. The US Generals, both retired and active, warn of the state our Military is in. Small wonder why. This administration is using the military for something it is ill suited for: nation building. One problem, the governed countries democratically elected represenitives want us gone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RamblerGambler

One problem, the governed countries democratically elected represenitives want us gone.

---

Iraq president hopes troops can stay

President Jalal Talabani told students at Britain's Cambridge University that all Iraq was safer because of Saddam Hussein's ouster and that many people were living normal lives.

"I think within one or two years, we will be able to recruit our forces and prepare our armed forces and tell goodbye to our friends," he said.
Iraq president hopes troops can stay - The Boston Globe


More spin without a link...............sorry but I couldn't find anything pro or con from the Afghanistan President regarding troop pullout.

Of course these people would like to see us gone as soon as things are more stable but NOT until then.

Have a good one!:s4:

I'll be sure to limit my spin then, and include links more often. Perhaps I should have phrased my response as "rising popular anger." Like here- Afghanistan Afghan senate calls for direct talks with Taliban - Yahoo! News

Or Iraq- AHN | Iraqi Parliament Drafts Law Setting Timetable For U.S. Troops To Withdraw | May 13, 2007

There are more, but we'll go from there

So the president or Iraq wants one or two more years isnt that what they said two years ago?In two years time they will want another two years and so on.That country will never be stable until the U.S gets out.