Report: Gulf States Prepared to Back U.S. Military Strike on Iran

[PatrickHenry]

How isn't the military conflict in Iraq in US's interests?
.

The debt and loss of American lives is not worth the oil! Whatever happened to the WMD's? Where are they? That was our rational for going, but we were lied to!

[Fengzi]

The debt and loss of American lives is not worth the oil! Whatever happened to the WMD's? Where are they? That was our rational for going, but we were lied to!

True, we never should have gone in the first place. But I do agree with thcbongman that we can't just pull out now. We fucked it up, now we need to fix it. The problem is I don't think the Bush admisnistration has any idea what that means and certainly not how to accomplish it. Like Vietnam, they feel that if kill enough of the enemy the problem is solved, and, also like Vietnam, that just isn't the case. At least in Vietnam we had a better understanding of what "win" meant to the enemy. Does anybody even know what the insurgents want? And please, don't give me the " to convert by the sword" bullshit.

[Psycho4Bud]

The debt and loss of American lives is not worth the oil! Whatever happened to the WMD's? Where are they? That was our rational for going, but we were lied to!

Try Syria.......there's only 2 sources about this info and as usual I'll go against independent thought and supply the links.

Saddams General confirmed the move:
Iraq's WMD Secreted in Syria, Sada Says - January 26, 2006 - The New York Sun

A Syrian journalist.......I'm sure he's not the caliber of Prisonplanet but will have to do:
Iraq's Weapons of Mass Destruction, WMD in Syria

Have a good one!:jointsmile:

[Psycho4Bud]

True, we never should have gone in the first place. But I do agree with thcbongman that we can't just pull out now. We fucked it up, now we need to fix it.

A voice of reason rises from the dust........THANK YOU!

The problem is I don't think the Bush admisnistration has any idea what that means and certainly not how to accomplish it. Like Vietnam, they feel that if kill enough of the enemy the problem is solved, and, also like Vietnam, that just isn't the case. At least in Vietnam we had a better understanding of what "win" meant to the enemy. Does anybody even know what the insurgents want? And please, don't give me the " to convert by the sword" bullshit.

Sadrs group wants a government set up like Iran.
The Bathists want the good ol' days of Sunni's first fuck the Kurds and Shiites.
Al-Quada just wants a place to call home.

Have a good one!:jointsmile:

[thcbongman]

Soldiers made the decision to join the military, and it's their duty to serve, no matter how bad the quagmire. In a perfect world, we would have no military conflict, and everyone would share resources. Now back to reality. Every country is vying for resources. Since you come across as the college-educated, every war you studied involved the posturing for strategic resources. Every war had a propagated reason to go in, ideology is used to garner support. Rarely is it the legitmate reason for conflict. It's to protect interests, which is land, resources, and capital. Is it wrong to use conflict to allocate resources for it's citizens? Morally, yes. If you look it from a macro-view, our economy is partly based on posturizing, and exploitating resources. The land you live in is prosperous thanks partly to the government protecting our interests.

As far as everyone is concerned, WMDs are unaccounted for. At one time Saddam's regime possessed them. What happened since then, whether the regime or another entity disposed of them, sold them on the black market, hidden in the ground is inconclusive. It's not an outright lie. We'll never know because Bush couldn't wait for inspections to finish.

America was sold on the concept that Iraq was an imminent threat because of the potential threat of WMDs. They used a lot of hyperbole in terms of their evidence, but was it all a lie? No.

The American public was still rattled by 9/11 and believed all the propaganda passed around. At the time, I didn't think it was worth it to even go into Afghanstan, let alone Iraq. Bush's steered the ship in a new direction, and would be irresponsible to not clean up the mess he created.

[Psycho4Bud]

As far as everyone is concerned, WMDs are unaccounted for. At one time Saddam's regime possessed them. What happened since then, whether the regime or another entity disposed of them, sold them on the black market, hidden in the ground is inconclusive. It's not an outright lie. We'll never know because Bush couldn't wait for inspections to finish.

How could the inspections finish when Saddam didn't allow inspectors into different areas.....isn't this how the 17 U.N. resolutions were broken leading to the war?

LOL....how many countries bury it's nuclear plans under a rose bush?
CNN.com - Nuke program parts unearthed in Baghdad back yard - Jun. 26, 2003

Have a good one!:jointsmile:

[PatrickHenry]

Soldiers made the decision to join the military, and it's their duty to serve, no matter how bad the quagmire. In a perfect world, we would have no military conflict, and everyone would share resources. Now back to reality. Every country is vying for resources. Since you come across as the college-educated, every war you studied involved the posturing for strategic resources. Every war had a propagated reason to go in, ideology is used to garner support. Rarely is it the legitmate reason for conflict. It's to protect interests, which is land, resources, and capital. Is it wrong to use conflict to allocate resources for it's citizens? Morally, yes. If you look it from a macro-view, our economy is partly based on posturizing, and exploitating resources. The land you live in is prosperous thanks partly to the government protecting our interests.

As far as everyone is concerned, WMDs are unaccounted for. At one time Saddam's regime possessed them. What happened since then, whether the regime or another entity disposed of them, sold them on the black market, hidden in the ground is inconclusive. It's not an outright lie. We'll never know because Bush couldn't wait for inspections to finish.

America was sold on the concept that Iraq was an imminent threat because of the potential threat of WMDs. They used a lot of hyperbole in terms of their evidence, but was it all a lie? No.

The American public was still rattled by 9/11 and believed all the propaganda passed around. At the time, I didn't think it was worth it to even go into Afghanstan, let alone Iraq. Bush's steered the ship in a new direction, and would be irresponsible to not clean up the mess he created.

Thank you for eloquently stating your opinion. I agree with you on multiple fronts. I don't propose the immediate pull-out as a solution, but a scaled back pull-out over the course of a few years. To escalate this any further is ridiculous, and as you mentioned, immoral.

[PatrickHenry]

Try Syria.......there's only 2 sources about this info and as usual I'll go against independent thought and supply the links.

Saddams General confirmed the move:
Iraq's WMD Secreted in Syria, Sada Says - January 26, 2006 - The New York Sun

A Syrian journalist.......I'm sure he's not the caliber of Prisonplanet but will have to do:
Iraq's Weapons of Mass Destruction, WMD in Syria

Have a good one!:jointsmile:

From your own article:

' And President Bush himself has conceded much of the point; in a televised prime-time address to Americans last month, he said, "It is true that many nations believed that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction. But much of the intelligence turned out to be wrong."'

If what you say is true it would be touted by the Bush administration non-stop.

[PatrickHenry]

True, we never should have gone in the first place. But I do agree with thcbongman that we can't just pull out now. We fucked it up, now we need to fix it. The problem is I don't think the Bush admisnistration has any idea what that means and certainly not how to accomplish it. Like Vietnam, they feel that if kill enough of the enemy the problem is solved, and, also like Vietnam, that just isn't the case. At least in Vietnam we had a better understanding of what "win" meant to the enemy. Does anybody even know what the insurgents want? And please, don't give me the " to convert by the sword" bullshit.

I agree with you. I have a funny feeling about Viet Nam because I've visited the country in the past year and have witnessed personally the great strides made there. We were so afraid of losing Viet Nam to communism but it's slowly changing into a capitalist/democratic country as state run functions are privatized. As cliche as it is, future battles are for "hearts and minds."

[Fengzi]

I agree with you. I have a funny feeling about Viet Nam because I've visited the country in the past year and have witnessed personally the great strides made there. We were so afraid of losing Viet Nam to communism but it's slowly changing into a capitalist/democratic country as state run functions are privatized. As cliche as it is, future battles are for "hearts and minds."

This is so true. The thing about Vietnam, and what pretty much guaranteed our defeat, is that a huge portion of "the enemy" wasn't fighting for communism, they were simply fighting against yet another foreign power trying to screw with them.

I can't help but wonder how much of the same thing is happening in Iraq. What does Bush expect? That the "enemy", whoever that is, will simply wave a white flag and give up? No likely. The longer we keep fucking the place up, the longer they'll keep fighting and the more people will go over to their side.

What we need now is not more troops but more dialogue. P4B says that "Sadrs group wants a government set up like Iran. The Bathists want the good ol' days of Sunni's first fuck the Kurds and Shiites. Al-Quada just wants a place to call home." Well, maybe so, but is that what it will take to have peace and stabilize the country? Has anyone in our government extended an olive branch and said "hey guys, what's it gonna take?" . No, our fucking cowboy of a leader is to obsessed with killing the bad guys? Bush doesn't have a clue and is just grasping at straws as the situation increasingly slips through his fingers. It's no wonder that the democrats, and an increasinly large amount of his own party, don't have any confidence in his "plan".