[quote]100meters wrote:
…
No, the best policy is the most effective one…and that was no-flyzones,sanctions, and strategic strikes. We eliminated WMD for little $$ and contained Saddam…and it worked liked gang-busters!
…[/quote]
It also let an evil tyrant in charge to continue to fund terrorist acts, plot to assinate ex-presidents, etc.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Skystud wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
You are grossly misinformed. Saddam got nearly all his weapons from the USSR and Europe.
Uh, no. You are misinformed.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/12/31/world/main534798.shtml
Those don’t contradict my statements. Saddam got the overwhelming majority of his weapons from the USSR and Europe.
Nice try.[/quote]
How bout this then.
[quote]Skystud wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Skystud wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
You are grossly misinformed. Saddam got nearly all his weapons from the USSR and Europe.
Uh, no. You are misinformed.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/12/31/world/main534798.shtml
Those don’t contradict my statements. Saddam got the overwhelming majority of his weapons from the USSR and Europe.
Nice try.
How bout this then.
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines02/0908-08.htm
http://www.uscrusade.com/forum/config.pl/noframes/read/896
[/quote]
You still don’t get it do you? MOST of his weapons came from the USSR and Europe.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
100meters wrote:
…
No, the best policy is the most effective one…and that was no-flyzones,sanctions, and strategic strikes. We eliminated WMD for little $$ and contained Saddam…and it worked liked gang-busters!
…
It also let an evil tyrant in charge to continue to fund terrorist acts, plot to assinate ex-presidents, etc.[/quote]
While posing ZERO threat to the United States…so yeah still a good deal. Obviously.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Skystud wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Skystud wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
You are grossly misinformed. Saddam got nearly all his weapons from the USSR and Europe.
Uh, no. You are misinformed.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/12/31/world/main534798.shtml
Those don’t contradict my statements. Saddam got the overwhelming majority of his weapons from the USSR and Europe.
Nice try.
How bout this then.
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines02/0908-08.htm
http://www.uscrusade.com/forum/config.pl/noframes/read/896
You still don’t get it do you? MOST of his weapons came from the USSR and Europe.
[/quote]
True, but we didn’t invade Iraq because he had tanks, we went in because he had weapons of mass destruction, duh.
And when we got there, there weren’t any, but we never left. Get it? Did you even read the post?
yeah whatever
Oh, I see. So we armed the monster, but it’s not our responsibilty to take him out.
Sanctions? You mean the sanctions that crippled Iraq’s economy? The sanctions that starved children while Saddam got paid through the oil for food scams? The sanctions that pissed off so many middle-easterners for the misery it caused on the Iraqi populace? Yeah, they worked out well.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Sanctions? You mean the sanctions that crippled Iraq’s economy? The sanctions that starved children while Saddam got paid through the oil for food scams? The sanctions that pissed off so many middle-easterners for the misery it caused on the Iraqi populace? Yeah, they worked out well.[/quote]
The sanctions were a terrible idea that dodged the real problem which was Saddam. We didn’t “de-fang” Saddam by imposing sanctions, but that was the easy way to avoid head-on confrontation while making the UN appear to be an enforcer in the wake of his invasion of Kuwait.
When we finally manned up and invaded, Saddam had managed to stockpile an impressive amount of ordnance which was looted by the insurgents and is still in circulation being used against our troops today. We are talking about what should have been 650,000 tons of ordnance total, and 250,000 tons of it came up missing. That’s a shitload of explosives and bullets, folks. And we wonder why the insurgents are still holding out?
Who and what do they target? It’s not just our troops on patrol. The infrastructure we are trying to rebuild such as power stations, lines, etc. are all ripe targets for sabotage, and many of the local Iraqis involved with the rebuilding effort live in fear of reprisals for daring to cooperate with coalition forces.
And this is the part that makes no sense to me. They hate us, right? So they go and blow up a power station somewhere, and knock out the electricity to their own villages. Yeah, that’ll show us! What retards.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Oh, I see. So we armed the monster, but it’s not our responsibilty to take him out.
Sanctions? You mean the sanctions that crippled Iraq’s economy? The sanctions that starved children while Saddam got paid through the oil for food scams? The sanctions that pissed off so many middle-easterners for the misery it caused on the Iraqi populace? Yeah, they worked out well.[/quote]
Yes, those sanctions. They worked out quited well for little $$$ and no loss of american life. Plus the added advantage of keeping the check on Iran/as opposed to ally. These are trade-offs any thinking man would take. And did!
[quote]lothario1132 wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Sanctions? You mean the sanctions that crippled Iraq’s economy? The sanctions that starved children while Saddam got paid through the oil for food scams? The sanctions that pissed off so many middle-easterners for the misery it caused on the Iraqi populace? Yeah, they worked out well.
The sanctions were a terrible idea that dodged the real problem which was Saddam. We didn’t “de-fang” Saddam by imposing sanctions, but that was the easy way to avoid head-on confrontation while making the UN appear to be an enforcer in the wake of his invasion of Kuwait.
When we finally manned up and invaded, Saddam had managed to stockpile an impressive amount of ordnance which was looted by the insurgents and is still in circulation being used against our troops today. We are talking about what should have been 650,000 tons of ordnance total, and 250,000 tons of it came up missing. That’s a shitload of explosives and bullets, folks. And we wonder why the insurgents are still holding out?
Who and what do they target? It’s not just our troops on patrol. The infrastructure we are trying to rebuild such as power stations, lines, etc. are all ripe targets for sabotage, and many of the local Iraqis involved with the rebuilding effort live in fear of reprisals for daring to cooperate with coalition forces.
And this is the part that makes no sense to me. They hate us, right? So they go and blow up a power station somewhere, and knock out the electricity to their own villages. Yeah, that’ll show us! What retards.[/quote]
Yes, those Iraqi’s are real retards.
They don’t even understand that we shoot and torture them for their own safety and freedom ! ! !
I mean, how stupid can you get?
Today’s tip comes from Dan John:
Goals vs. Behaviors
The One Minute Manager said it best: Look at your goals. Look at your behaviors. Does your behavior match your goals? It’s the million dollar question for those of us in the strength world: Does your behavior match your goals? You see, it’s one thing to have a goal. It’s quite another to line your behaviors up with your goals. Think about it.
Yeah, hmm. Maybe the same thing applies to th U.S.. If you want peace, You should be peaceful with your neighbors. If you want good government to help your citizens, elect smart people and enact helpful legislation.
[quote]100meters wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Oh, I see. So we armed the monster, but it’s not our responsibilty to take him out.
Sanctions? You mean the sanctions that crippled Iraq’s economy? The sanctions that starved children while Saddam got paid through the oil for food scams? The sanctions that pissed off so many middle-easterners for the misery it caused on the Iraqi populace? Yeah, they worked out well.
Yes, those sanctions. They worked out quited well for little $$$ and no loss of american life. Plus the added advantage of keeping the check on Iran/as opposed to ally. These are trade-offs any thinking man would take. And did!
[/quote]
Those sanctions did well for the starving Iraqi children didn’t they?
[quote]Skystud wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Skystud wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Skystud wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
You are grossly misinformed. Saddam got nearly all his weapons from the USSR and Europe.
Uh, no. You are misinformed.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/12/31/world/main534798.shtml
Those don’t contradict my statements. Saddam got the overwhelming majority of his weapons from the USSR and Europe.
Nice try.
How bout this then.
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines02/0908-08.htm
http://www.uscrusade.com/forum/config.pl/noframes/read/896
You still don’t get it do you? MOST of his weapons came from the USSR and Europe.
True, but we didn’t invade Iraq because he had tanks, we went in because he had weapons of mass destruction, duh.
And when we got there, there weren’t any, but we never left. Get it? Did you even read the post?
[/quote]
You have no reading comprehension whatsoever do you?
It like talking to a child.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
100meters wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Oh, I see. So we armed the monster, but it’s not our responsibilty to take him out.
Sanctions? You mean the sanctions that crippled Iraq’s economy? The sanctions that starved children while Saddam got paid through the oil for food scams? The sanctions that pissed off so many middle-easterners for the misery it caused on the Iraqi populace? Yeah, they worked out well.
Yes, those sanctions. They worked out quited well for little $$$ and no loss of american life. Plus the added advantage of keeping the check on Iran/as opposed to ally. These are trade-offs any thinking man would take. And did!
Those sanctions did well for the starving Iraqi children didn’t they?
[/quote]
So you worried about the starving children in Iraq then? But what about the people dying in Iraq now?
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
100meters wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Oh, I see. So we armed the monster, but it’s not our responsibilty to take him out.
Sanctions? You mean the sanctions that crippled Iraq’s economy? The sanctions that starved children while Saddam got paid through the oil for food scams? The sanctions that pissed off so many middle-easterners for the misery it caused on the Iraqi populace? Yeah, they worked out well.
Yes, those sanctions. They worked out quited well for little $$$ and no loss of american life. Plus the added advantage of keeping the check on Iran/as opposed to ally. These are trade-offs any thinking man would take. And did!
Those sanctions did well for the starving Iraqi children didn’t they?
[/quote]
No. They did well for us.
Which beats not working out well for us or them.
[quote]Wreckless wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
100meters wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Oh, I see. So we armed the monster, but it’s not our responsibilty to take him out.
Sanctions? You mean the sanctions that crippled Iraq’s economy? The sanctions that starved children while Saddam got paid through the oil for food scams? The sanctions that pissed off so many middle-easterners for the misery it caused on the Iraqi populace? Yeah, they worked out well.
Yes, those sanctions. They worked out quited well for little $$$ and no loss of american life. Plus the added advantage of keeping the check on Iran/as opposed to ally. These are trade-offs any thinking man would take. And did!
Those sanctions did well for the starving Iraqi children didn’t they?
So you worried about the starving children in Iraq then? But what about the people dying in Iraq now?[/quote]
Listen asshole, American soldiers are fighting and dying in Iraq to try to prevent terrorists from setting off bombs in crowded marketplaces and I fully support their mission.
You apparantly support the mission of the terrorists.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Wreckless wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
100meters wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Oh, I see. So we armed the monster, but it’s not our responsibilty to take him out.
Sanctions? You mean the sanctions that crippled Iraq’s economy? The sanctions that starved children while Saddam got paid through the oil for food scams? The sanctions that pissed off so many middle-easterners for the misery it caused on the Iraqi populace? Yeah, they worked out well.
Yes, those sanctions. They worked out quited well for little $$$ and no loss of american life. Plus the added advantage of keeping the check on Iran/as opposed to ally. These are trade-offs any thinking man would take. And did!
Those sanctions did well for the starving Iraqi children didn’t they?
So you worried about the starving children in Iraq then? But what about the people dying in Iraq now?
Listen asshole, American soldiers are fighting and dying in Iraq to try to prevent terrorists from setting off bombs in crowded marketplaces and I fully support their mission.
You apparantly support the mission of the terrorists.[/quote]
No, American soldiers are fighting and dying because your guys never bothered to come up with phase IV. Fully supporting them would mean throwing out the real assholes who put them in this terrible position. In other words your support of stay the course factually supports the terrorists. (see title of thread)
Of course the NIE also said that we must win in Iraq. So let’s all support winning in Iraq!
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Listen asshole, American soldiers are fighting and dying in Iraq to try to prevent terrorists from setting off bombs in crowded marketplaces and I fully support their mission.
You apparantly support the mission of the terrorists.[/quote]
Last of the goose stepping, fox watching morons wrote this. If you support their mission, why don’t you go over there and help?
Last I heard of this war. The talking heads were calling it a fiasco. Do you read books? There are quite a few out there talking about what a joke this war and our administration are.
[quote]Skystud wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Listen asshole, American soldiers are fighting and dying in Iraq to try to prevent terrorists from setting off bombs in crowded marketplaces and I fully support their mission.
You apparantly support the mission of the terrorists.
Last of the goose stepping, fox watching morons wrote this. If you support their mission, why don’t you go over there and help?
Last I heard of this war. The talking heads were calling it a fiasco. Do you read books? There are quite a few out there talking about what a joke this war and our administration are.
[/quote]
Fuck off. They don’t want my old broken down body over there so I do what I can. I send gifts to my friends and acquantainces that are over there.
I refuse to repeat the enemies propaganda.
I have read dozens of books about the war in Iraq and Afghanistan. Unlike you I have a critical eye and can separate reality from politically motivated hatchet jobs.
Let me clue you in a bit. Every administration displays incompetence.
If you think this war is run badly do a little reading on WWI, WWII, Vietnam, Korea…