Close to Victory in Iraq!!

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
21

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
nsane-membrain wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
Schwarzfahrer wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
Schwarzfahrer wrote:
It’s barely the 4th post and the nazis are resurrected … again

RISE AND MARCH ONCE MORE!

You did resurrect them.

the Dolchstoss-legend didn’t originate with the nazis, they may used it, but they didn’t invent it.

I’m aware of that. You should realize that most Americans however would not. Hell, many of my students don’t know where Germany IS, much less any European History.

Who’s fault is that???

Well, based on your avatar, I’m sure you could figure out a way to blame Bush.

But seriously, the blame mostly goes to those who thought they could underpay teachers and expect a quality education. Take a walk through any public high school in Cleveland to see how that worked out.

Teachers should start at $50,000 per year, with a $2000 annual raise. Otherwise, expect a K-Mart quality education for your children.

Rant over.

[/quote]

And where would this money come from? (I agree, and am genuinely curious)

22

[quote]The Mage wrote:
Schwarzfahrer wrote:
Yeah right, let’s check the markets; oil barrel over 86 Dollars- seems you’re doing great!

Oh no, not high oil prices. There is the proof that we lost.

Wait, hold on, yep I knew it. Beer prices are rising too. Damn that war.

Seriously once the speculators leave, which they eventually will, prices will drop. Ridiculous things are buoying the market. Some in the business have complained that events that would not have made it into any newspaper before are suddenly big stories if it is related to oil.

Now as far as your NAZI statements, wonderful twisting game you are playing. What was the reason for bringing up the document anyway?

Don’t act all superior when you started down the road.[/quote]

Ahm , perhaps you might care to explain beforehand why MY comment was a nazi statement, when apparently you were doing the Adolf-maneuver ?

23

[quote]Schwarzfahrer wrote:
This is such a mess I cannot even laugh anymore.
It’s exactly why the Stab-in-the-back legend (german:Dolchstosslegende)was believed by so many germans to be true.
[/quote]

Exactly which Germans are you talking about here if not the ones in Europe circa 1932-1945?

Were there other Germans who felt they were “stabbed in the back,” and if so, who and when?

24

[quote]Beowolf wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
But seriously, the blame mostly goes to those who thought they could underpay teachers and expect a quality education. Take a walk through any public high school in Cleveland to see how that worked out.

Teachers should start at $50,000 per year, with a $2000 annual raise. Otherwise, expect a K-Mart quality education for your children.

Rant over.

And where would this money come from? (I agree, and am genuinely curious)
[/quote]

Where does the money come from to pay doctors $200,000 per year? Where does the money come from to pay a new B.S. in Computer Engineering $57,000 per year come from?

All of these things are determined by the mostly free market. The same is pretty much true for teachers. Everyone is willing to part with a huge chunk of change to a doctor to treat their sick kid’s body, but scream if a teacher wants to make more than a K-Mart clerk does in training their child’s mind. They’re happy to pay $600 for some new horseshit i-phone (or wtf it was called), but don’t you dare ask for money to raise teacher pay!!!

So, the free market pays teachers the minimum that it can get away with, pretends that education is taking place, and we get mostly pre-adult babysitting services.

K-Mart pay, K-Mart results…then bitch about the quality. How very logical of my fellow humans…

25

GKhan it seems futile to argue with you.

26

I, for one, am glad to know that the US Military has dealt these devastating blows to Al-Qaeda. Hopefully it will be just as devastating as the three (four?) times the military has killed the number two leader of Al-Qaeda in Iraq, because those devastating blows worked real well. Maybe it will even work as well as forcing Osama to run his terrorist empire out of our ally Pakistan, which must be a horrible place for a radical islamist to hide out.

Hopefully these successes in Iraq will meet with all the success the President has delivered in social security reform, education, immigration, and his plan to build a moon base that we can use to send people to mars. I sure am glad that we have such a great President, and that things are going so well under his leadership. I�??m sure that this whole Iraq thing will be solved in no time, and then our troops will finally be greeting as liberators and walk out of Bhagdad on a carpet of rose petals.

27

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Beowolf wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
But seriously, the blame mostly goes to those who thought they could underpay teachers and expect a quality education. Take a walk through any public high school in Cleveland to see how that worked out.

Teachers should start at $50,000 per year, with a $2000 annual raise. Otherwise, expect a K-Mart quality education for your children.

Rant over.

And where would this money come from? (I agree, and am genuinely curious)

Where does the money come from to pay doctors $200,000 per year? Where does the money come from to pay a new B.S. in Computer Engineering $57,000 per year come from?

All of these things are determined by the mostly free market. The same is pretty much true for teachers. Everyone is willing to part with a huge chunk of change to a doctor to treat their sick kid’s body, but scream if a teacher wants to make more than a K-Mart clerk does in training their child’s mind. They’re happy to pay $600 for some new horseshit i-phone (or wtf it was called), but don’t you dare ask for money to raise teacher pay!!!

So, the free market pays teachers the minimum that it can get away with, pretends that education is taking place, and we get mostly pre-adult babysitting services.

K-Mart pay, K-Mart results…then bitch about the quality. How very logical of my fellow humans…

[/quote]

So… are you implying we should intervene in the free market to give teachers better salaries?

How about paying high school teachers more than primary school teachers? Good start?

28

It wouldn’t really be intervening since we’re mostly talking about public schools here. Which means we already did intervene with the free market…and look at the results.

Hell I wouldn’t be able to name half the countries in Europe by looking at a map. But then again I’m not much motivated to.

[quote]Beowolf wrote:

So… are you implying we should intervene in the free market to give teachers better salaries?

How about paying high school teachers more than primary school teachers? Good start?

[/quote]

29

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Al Qaeda Dealt Devastating Blow in Iraq
Monday, October 15, 2007

The U.S. military says it has dealt devastating and potentially irreversible blows to Al Qaeda in Iraq in recent months, leading some generals to advocate a declaration of victory over the group, which the Bush administration has long described as the most lethal U.S. adversary in Iraq, the Washington Post reported Monday.

But as the White House and its military commanders plan the next phase of the war, other officials have cautioned against taking what they see as a premature step that could create strategic and political difficulties for the United States, the newspaper said. Such a declaration could fuel criticism that the Iraq conflict has become a civil war in which U.S. combat forces should not be involved. Simultaneously, the intelligence community, and some military members, worry about underestimating an enemy that has shown surprising resilience in the past.

“I think it would be premature at this point,” a senior intelligence official said to the Washington Post of a victory declaration over AQI, as the group is known. Despite recent U.S. gains, he said, AQI retains “the ability for surprise and for catastrophic attacks.” Earlier periods of optimism, such as immediately following the June 2006 death of AQI founder Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi in a U.S. air raid, not only proved unfounded but were followed by expanded operations by the militant organization, the Post reported."

You young guys are missing out!

Next Spring in Tehran!!! Fire up the Abrahms!!!

[/quote]

Let’s use our heads here: success in Iraq is not primarily about beating Al Qaeda, which was never more than a small proportion of the forces arrayed against us. It’s about building a stable, non-hostile state after the mess we created in 2003. How are we doing on that one?

Although not sure why I bother, anyone cheerleading for a future war is by definition a jingoistic idiot.

30

[quote]GDollars37 wrote:

Let’s use our heads here: success in Iraq is not primarily about beating Al Qaeda, which was never more than a small proportion of the forces arrayed against us. It’s about building a stable, non-hostile state after the mess we created in 2003. How are we doing on that one?[/quote]

Great actually. But you will never admit to that, regardless of any proof. If you cannot see success over Al-Qaeda as a positive thing, then you are blinded by your hate.

31

[quote]GDollars37 wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
Al Qaeda Dealt Devastating Blow in Iraq
Monday, October 15, 2007

The U.S. military says it has dealt devastating and potentially irreversible blows to Al Qaeda in Iraq in recent months, leading some generals to advocate a declaration of victory over the group, which the Bush administration has long described as the most lethal U.S. adversary in Iraq, the Washington Post reported Monday.

But as the White House and its military commanders plan the next phase of the war, other officials have cautioned against taking what they see as a premature step that could create strategic and political difficulties for the United States, the newspaper said. Such a declaration could fuel criticism that the Iraq conflict has become a civil war in which U.S. combat forces should not be involved. Simultaneously, the intelligence community, and some military members, worry about underestimating an enemy that has shown surprising resilience in the past.

“I think it would be premature at this point,” a senior intelligence official said to the Washington Post of a victory declaration over AQI, as the group is known. Despite recent U.S. gains, he said, AQI retains “the ability for surprise and for catastrophic attacks.” Earlier periods of optimism, such as immediately following the June 2006 death of AQI founder Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi in a U.S. air raid, not only proved unfounded but were followed by expanded operations by the militant organization, the Post reported."

You young guys are missing out!

Next Spring in Tehran!!! Fire up the Abrahms!!!

Let’s use our heads here: success in Iraq is not primarily about beating Al Qaeda, which was never more than a small proportion of the forces arrayed against us. It’s about building a stable, non-hostile state after the mess we created in 2003. How are we doing on that one?

Although not sure why I bother, anyone cheerleading for a future war is by definition a jingoistic idiot.[/quote]

It was AQ’s actions that really screwed up Iraq. There was Sunni violence before AQ provoked a civil war but not on the scale we have seen over the last 2 years.

32

[quote]Beowolf wrote:
SO we can bring em home now? Like, not in ten years but now?

And since when is beating Al Quaeda winning? I could have SWORN finding and disabling WMD’s was winning.[/quote]

Well, by definition of “winning a war” we did that a while ago. We came in and wiped out the entire govermental structure of a country and executed it’s leader. This phase is to make sure that the terrorists don’t take it over. And if what is reported is true, then I’d say it’s defniately a step in the right direction. Hell, I don’t like it anymore than you do, but I think the goal now is that when we leave, we don’t come back. I think that is the best that can be hoped for now.

33

Ummm…Al Qaeda in Iraq accounts for a fraction of the violence, roughly 8-15% of the attacks in the first half of 2007.

So in what fantasy world does stopping 15% of the violence suddenly become close to victory?

34

[quote]Ren wrote:
Ummm…Al Qaeda in Iraq accounts for a fraction of the violence, roughly 8-15% of the attacks in the first half of 2007.

So in what fantasy world does stopping 15% of the violence suddenly become close to victory?[/quote]

Well, we’ed be 15% closer then.

35

You won when you defeated their army.
You won when you killed sadams sons.
You won when you got Sadam.
You won when you strung him up.
You won when you killed that local Al Quada leader (can’t even remember his name).

Isn’t all this winning rather tiresome?

You’d have to be particularly stupid to believe this really is the last win, the fatal blow. Well, we know HH is that stupid, but I don’t think a significant part of the US population is.

36

[quote]Wreckless wrote:
You won when you defeated their army.
You won when you killed sadams sons.
You won when you got Sadam.
You won when you strung him up.
You won when you killed that local Al Quada leader (can’t even remember his name).

Isn’t all this winning rather tiresome?

You’d have to be particularly stupid to believe this really is the last win, the fatal blow. Well, we know HH is that stupid, but I don’t think a significant part of the US population is.[/quote]

Uhhh, I hate to be the one to break this to you wreckless, but wars are one by stringing together ALOT of victories; thereby allowing for the war to be won.

And yes, I assume all of these little victories are rather tiresome for an anti-American, leftist cheerleader such as yourself. Let me ask you this, if the US turned tail and retreated out of Iraq tomorrow, would you dance in the streets with the rest of the terrorists?

My guess is yes.

37

[quote]bigflamer wrote:
Wreckless wrote:
You won when you defeated their army.
You won when you killed sadams sons.
You won when you got Sadam.
You won when you strung him up.
You won when you killed that local Al Quada leader (can’t even remember his name).

Isn’t all this winning rather tiresome?

You’d have to be particularly stupid to believe this really is the last win, the fatal blow. Well, we know HH is that stupid, but I don’t think a significant part of the US population is.

Uhhh, I hate to be the one to break this to you wreckless, but wars are one by stringing together ALOT of victories; thereby allowing for the war to be won.

And yes, I assume all of these little victories are rather tiresome for an anti-American, leftist cheerleader such as yourself. Let me ask you this, if the US turned tail and retreated out of Iraq tomorrow, would you dance in the streets with the rest of the terrorists?

My guess is yes.

[/quote]

King and Hegemon Phyrrus.

Look him up.

Fascinating story.

Cost of war:
http://www.nationalpriorities.org/Cost-of-War/Cost-of-War-3.html

Dollar dropping:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/12/06/opinion/fenton/main659179.shtml

Record oil prices:

How many more “victories” you think you can afford?

38

[quote]The Mage wrote:
GDollars37 wrote:

Let’s use our heads here: success in Iraq is not primarily about beating Al Qaeda, which was never more than a small proportion of the forces arrayed against us. It’s about building a stable, non-hostile state after the mess we created in 2003. How are we doing on that one?

Great actually. But you will never admit to that, regardless of any proof. If you cannot see success over Al-Qaeda as a positive thing, then you are blinded by your hate.[/quote]

So the troops can come home soon? As in, we can set a date now?

39

Wreckless, the soviets didn’t “lose” a single battle in their 10 years in afghanistan, yet they withdrew with their tails between their legs to their crumbling, broke homeland.

Perhaps the americans just want to show that they can afford that kind of victory-addiction?

40

[quote]Schwarzfahrer wrote:
Wreckless, the soviets didn’t “lose” a single battle in their 10 years in afghanistan, yet they withdrew with their tails between their legs to their crumbling, broke homeland.

Perhaps the americans just want to show that they can afford that kind of victory-addiction?
[/quote]

The US nerver lost a najor battle in Vietnam either…