Jump to content

More Troops in Iraq


KaskadskyjKozak

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 127
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

For those old enough to remember Vietnam - this is history in rerun.

 

Iraqification = Vietnamization

 

"Stay the course", "We aren't losing", "We are winning in Vietnam (Iraq)", "We must win in Vietnam (Iraq)", blah, blah, blah.

 

From the honest information that I have seen: "The U.S. will leave Iraq with its tail between its legs" This can either happen now or years from now with 1000's of more U.S. troop injuries and deaths and billions of $'s wasted.

 

Look, I think most of the elites and the generals know this (although Bush has no clue). And staying in Iraq is about appearences. Appearences that the U.S. policy in the Middle East isn't totally flawed. But it is and that is obvious to most.

 

The dems don't have the backbone to do anything except get blamed for the failure of Iraq policy in 2008 (even though it is Bush and the repubican's fault). The dems have no spines.

 

So fellow climbers - climb on! There is little you can do except pay your taxes. This country isn't a "free western democracy" or anything vaguely like that, so go climb a mountain ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Islamic Extremists are the same as Fundamentalist Christians.

 

When the Federal building in Oklahoma was bombed, was there any profiling of extreme right wing fundamentalist Christians? Did our "War on Terror" begin there? Was that when our President begin tapping phones without warrents? Was a Homeland Security act passed to quitely impeade on our civil rights "for our owe safety"? No, because the attackers were white militant Christians, just like Waco. We wrote them off as some whacked extremists and didn't use them as a basis for wholesale condemnation of an entire group of people, as a portion of our citizens are doing now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

there was no oil in waco. no new stuff anyway.we gonna stay in iraq until the oil is gone. hell in 5 years we fucked them out of oil profits,plus the 20 billions ear marked for reconstruction and the gravy off of the 800 billions we morons approved for this invasion that should cost 20. in this case failure is more profitable than success.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

anybody who thinks this is about religion is misguided by bush.or once he is gone by the next puppet of the real leaders.us president is the most powerfull puppet in the world. like carter said when he first started to serve was that he gave a bunch of orders....and nothing happened. ok it was carter but clinton had same problem

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For those old enough to remember Vietnam - this is history in rerun.

 

Iraqification = Vietnamization

 

"Stay the course", "We aren't losing", "We are winning in Vietnam (Iraq)", "We must win in Vietnam (Iraq)", blah, blah, blah.

 

From the honest information that I have seen: "The U.S. will leave Iraq with its tail between its legs" This can either happen now or years from now with 1000's of more U.S. troop injuries and deaths and billions of $'s wasted.

 

Look, I think most of the elites and the generals know this (although Bush has no clue). And staying in Iraq is about appearences. Appearences that the U.S. policy in the Middle East isn't totally flawed. But it is and that is obvious to most.

 

The dems don't have the backbone to do anything except get blamed for the failure of Iraq policy in 2008 (even though it is Bush and the repubican's fault). The dems have no spines.

 

So fellow climbers - climb on! There is little you can do except pay your taxes. This country isn't a "free western democracy" or anything vaguely like that, so go climb a mountain ...

 

It's not like Vietnam. Sorry, try again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Islamic Extremists are the same as Fundamentalist Christians.

 

When the Federal building in Oklahoma was bombed, was there any profiling of extreme right wing fundamentalist Christians? Did our "War on Terror" begin there? Was that when our President begin tapping phones without warrents? Was a Homeland Security act passed to quitely impeade on our civil rights "for our owe safety"? No, because the attackers were white militant Christians, just like Waco. We wrote them off as some whacked extremists and didn't use them as a basis for wholesale condemnation of an entire group of people, as a portion of our citizens are doing now.

 

No they are not they same. Anyone who believes that is a stupid motherfucker.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Islamic Extremists are the same as Fundamentalist Christians.

 

When the Federal building in Oklahoma was bombed, was there any profiling of extreme right wing fundamentalist Christians? Did our "War on Terror" begin there? Was that when our President begin tapping phones without warrents? Was a Homeland Security act passed to quitely impeade on our civil rights "for our owe safety"? No, because the attackers were white militant Christians, just like Waco. We wrote them off as some whacked extremists and didn't use them as a basis for wholesale condemnation of an entire group of people, as a portion of our citizens are doing now.

 

No they are not they same. Anyone who believes that is a stupid motherfucker.

 

Wow, that is how you articulate your point, compelling.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For those old enough to remember Vietnam - this is history in rerun...

 

 

It's not like Vietnam. Sorry, try again.

 

I'm only refering to the retoric. Obviously the geo-political situation is different. (Or is it??!)

 

Are you old enough to remember the news during Vietnam? I'm too lazy to check your profile. I mean, it is haunting. Like Johnson and Nixon and his friends have all risen from the dead.

 

Praise the nation state! The bumbling Empire marches on!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure it's just the rhetoric, but let's take a look.

 

Got into a war under false pretenses: check.

 

Involved ourselves in a civil war where our 'ally's government is so weak as to be nonexistent: check

 

No clear goals for the conflict: check

 

Our involvment base on Big Idea (containment of communism, containment of radical Islam): check

 

"Can't afford anything but victory": check

 

Keep doing the same thing over and over long after we know we're in a shithole: check

 

Wildly innacurate body counts (Vietnam: systematic overestimation of enemy KIA, Iraq: No count of civilian or insurgent casualties): check

 

Our involvement destabilizes a region to the point where our enemies gain regional control and wreak havoc (Vietnam: Pol Pot, etc, Iraq: Iran, insurgents, Al Qaeda): check

 

War costs ballooned far, far out of control: check

 

Ineffectiveness of our superior firepower against guerilla warefare: check

 

Inability to understand the culture of allies and enemies alike: check

 

Began a war that the experts in the region strongly advised against: check

 

What's not to love?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the motivation of war is money. in this case war is a transfer of 800 billions from the us people to the planetary elite.the actual conflict is an excuse,,,, like the cold war.or the fake moon shit. or now the conquest of mars. they dont fix katrina cause thats an expenditure. iraq , now thats an investment

Link to comment
Share on other sites

as religion was the opium of the masses , it has been replaced by television.all tv and all papers are own by the same people who own the arms plants. if they dont make their trillion on this fake war,where are they supposed to go. sell ice tools,,,in 1990 after the usssr collapse, those boys made a plan to use terrorism as the next enemy for the next 50 years.since there was not enough of it to get taxpayers to fork over all our cash they created most of what you seen in last 10years,usscole/african embassies/ london/madrid/toronto etc etc including their crown achievement 911. all to terrorise you. and it has worked, read chomsky and others

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Got into a war under false pretenses: check.

 

wrong. the real reason for going to Iraq is clear to everyone:

 

it's part of a geopolitical strategy.

 

Of course the sheeple were given lots of sound bytes, but citing the sound bytes to say the war is fake and done under false pretenses is disingenuous at best, and Machiavellian at worst.

 

Is this geopolitical strategy sound? Is it being implemented correctly? Well, those are legitimate questions. And the answer is not a simple black-white yes-no.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...