What Bush has planned for after the election...

[Dolman]

Commends guys on keeping a very civil debate.

Here's my .02 for what its worth.

Here is a pretty interesting site, that has polled many iraqis, to find out the scoop over there.

Of course these numbers are set in stone, but what is? I think these should be a good estimate.

We are forcing democracy on the iraqis

United Nations stepping in

The war was a mistake, because no WMD

Here is the actual site. It has some great stuff on it
http://www.thetruthaboutiraq.org/


But I think sanchez has pretty much hit the nail on the head. I still believe Al Qaeda was at one time or still does have some connection with saddam.
BUT, even if we found out for a FACT, without any doubt, there was no conection, AND there was NEVER any threat of WMD, the war still served a purpose.
Doesn't anybody know how brutal saddam was? I'm proud to say my country stepped in to liberate that country.

It is so fucking stupid how america gets so much shit, yet we are THE good guys. We are standing up and helping other countries, many times, and offer a land of great opportunity, yet even people in america, coughmichaelmoorecough, complain about this country and talk shit. So not only do we have our own people talking trash about our country, we have people hell-bent on taking out the religion that this country was founded upon. Yes freedom of religion is good, but this is getting out of hand. Christians/jews are getting treated far worse than other denominations, greatly due to the far amount of extreme leftists we have... and it is just going to keep getting worse. Yeah sounds like a good time to get rid of bush and bring kerry in to me

Despite the civil war going on between the religious and the secular, this is still a great place to live. At least, imo

 

[Supahfonic]

A draft would probably silence the chickenhawks. At least the ones of draft age or with family members of draft age.

 

[harold]

however unlikly a draft is it does seem scary. on one hand it seems that a draft would be impossible. on the other it seems that it is totally vital.

i don't think there will be a draft but if it scarys people away from voting for bush then i am all for the rumers

 

[love_tha_sweet]

That's true. It was a cheap political trick to scare people.






We never had enough troops on the ground for the occupation phase, because our Army is too small. We downsized too much in the 80's and 90's.

I could be wrong but I bet most of the downsizing occured when Clinton was in office

 

[ÆGEAN]

TERROR TERROR TERROR


oh yeah i forgot about domestic issues :laugh: - BUSH





i am sick and tired of him blabbering on about terrorists

 

[Supahfonic]

Defense spending did initially decline under Clinton, who carried out plans for cuts in the Pentagon's budget originally drawn up by then-SecDef Dick Cheney and President G. H. W. Bush. The first Bush administration called for reduced military spending in reaction to the end of the Cold War.

Clinton, however, put into effect a $124 billion increase in defense spending over the course of seven years, starting in 1999.

Here's an article produced by the conservative Cato Institute:
"Does U.S. Intervention Overseas Breed Terrorism?"

According to the Pentagon's Defense Science Board, a strong correlation exists between U.S. involvement in international situations and an increase in terrorist attacks against the United States. President Clinton has also acknowledged that link. The board, however, has provided no empirical data to support its conclusion. This paper fills that gap by citing many examples of terrorist attacks on the United States in retaliation for U.S. intervention overseas. The numerous incidents cataloged suggest that the United States could reduce the chances of such devastating--and potentially catastrophic--terrorist attacks by adopting a policy of military restraint overseas.

 

[Anime Pornstar]

I could be wrong but I bet most of the downsizing occured when Clinton was in office

Maybe, I'm not 100% sure. However, the Republicans controlled the Congress at the time and could have easily stopped it had they wanted to.

Nobody envisioned having to fight a medium-sized war with the exception of Korea, but that was under control ('was' being the key word).

The attack on Iraq last year went according to plan, even better than the plan. But no one counted on a large guerilla war that requires many, many ground troops to fight. It was never planned for and now our soldiers are paying the price in blood.

I was in a similar situation once, when my infantry battalion was caught in a guerilla war against half the city of Mogadishu. We won a pitched battle, but couldn't control the area on a day to day basis without alot more reinforcements.

 

[Brino]

The 9/11 Commission said so. There was no credible link between the two for the Sept. 11 events, but the two did have a connection before. Terrorists, are terrorists. Deal with them, or let them kill the innocent.

There are many reasons why (we) have not attacked other Countries with WMD's. Iraq was an easier target, and that may have been why they were picked. I'm fine with that. It had to start somewhere, and for me Iraq was a good choice.

Big deal. The UN is useless for the most part. Plus, its been said that publicly the UN may denoce actions, but privately support it. Not every action in history, has been approved by the UN.

Could be next on the list. One step at a time. There are many parts of the World that need help, and attention. Plus, if the Sudanese are in such a great need of help, where was Clinton in his 8 years in power?

There was no conclusive evidence that Al Qaeda would hijack American airliners, and crash them directly into buildings, but it happened. Again, he was a huge problem in the mid East, and I am very happy he has been dealt with before he could bring his fight to this side of the ocean.

When the insurgents are gone, and the reality of freedom sets in, then you will see how happy the people of Iraq are that the soilders are there. Be positive.

When they finally did, then would you support their removal?

I question why Clinton didn't do something about this.

Soldiers know that when they sign up, they run the risk of being put into combat. And when they are in combat, they run a risk of being killed. Of course no one signs up to be killed, but they know the risk. The people killed that morning did not know the risk, and yet they were murdered. I'm not trying to take away the importance or bravery of the American Solder, but their lives have not been lost for nothing. They are accomplishing a very important mission, and should be proud they have a CiC who is willing to do what it takes to keep his country safe.

I've never said that, or meant to imply that. I've said that that part of the World has a supreme hatred for America, and to this point we've let that hatred boil on it's own. Now the fight has been brought to our front door, and its time to take a pro-active approach.

You talk like the US is the only Country in Iraq. Many allies are helping in Iraq.

Dude you really need to give this whole justification of the Iraq war thing a rest. Saddam had no collaborative relationship with Al Qaida. I stress the words "collaborative relationship" because yes there were meetings but never did Saddam help Al Qaida in any terrorist activities.

And sure it's a good thing that Saddam is gone and maybe it does make us a little bit safer but it would be a good thing if a lot of dictators in the world were gone but nobodys proposing that we should invade those countries so why Iraq?

 

[georges]

Dude you really need to give this whole justification of the Iraq war thing a rest. Saddam had no collaborative relationship with Al Qaida. I stress the words "collaborative relationship" because yes there were meetings but never did Saddam help Al Qaida in any terrorist activities.

And sure it's a good thing that Saddam is gone and maybe it does make us a little bit safer but it would be a good thing if a lot of dictators in the world were gone but nobodys proposing that we should invade those countries so why Iraq?

Yes saddam had a relation ship with al quaeda he supported them financially and by selling them assault rifles.Saying that saddam never helped al quaeda in terrorist activities is being blind.Look in Iraq, there is al zarquaoui or what ever his name is, is a terrorist and saddam supported islamic extremists terrorists.If you don't fight dictatorships and terrorists with force and determination you will never solve the problem.

 

[Dirty Sanchez]

Dude you really need to give this whole justification of the Iraq war thing a rest. Saddam had no collaborative relationship with Al Qaida. I stress the words "collaborative relationship" because yes there were meetings but never did Saddam help Al Qaida in any terrorist activities.

And sure it's a good thing that Saddam is gone and maybe it does make us a little bit safer but it would be a good thing if a lot of dictators in the world were gone but nobodys proposing that we should invade those countries so why Iraq?

Easily, the dumbest thing you have said yet. Why else would the two parties meet, to discuss the weather? Come on Brino, get harld to help you pull your head out of your ass.

All dicatators need to go, and should be dealt with. But not all can be taken down at once. Maybe if you and the tree hugging babies at the UN grew some nuts, and realized they have to make the World safe for everybody, then we'll get these things dealt with. But instead, you continue to live in the past, and have yet to add anything positive to controlling the future.

So, tell me son, if not Iraq's dictator, then who?

 

[Anime Pornstar]

Well, North Korea now has nuclear weapons to go with their ballistic missles...

Russia is on the verge of becoming a dictatorship...

China has oppressed and killed millions of people...

Pick one.

 

[Dirty Sanchez]

Well, North Korea now has nuclear weapons to go with their ballistic missles...

And where are those nukes pointed at? War won't solve problems there. It have to be dealt with by other means.

Russia is on the verge of becoming a dictatorship...

Interesting situation that is only recently developed. I suspect more is going on behind the scenes then what some news outlets are willing to report.

China has oppressed and killed millions of people...

Pick one.

Keep the lid on Russia first. Then make sure we are keeping the middle east in line. After that it's a toss up. Simple numbers dictate a War won't work in either of these cases. Economic restrictions and sancations will make more sense over there. It will happen, just give it time.

 

[member5726]

Yes saddam had a relation ship with al quaeda he supported them financially and by selling them assault rifles.Saying that saddam never helped al quaeda in terrorist activities is being blind.Look in Iraq, there is al zarquaoui or what ever his name is, is a terrorist and saddam supported islamic extremists terrorists.If you don't fight dictatorships and terrorists with force and determination you will never solve the problem.

I would like to remind you that the US have sold weapons to Iraq also when Iran and Iraq were going at it...

 

[Dirty Sanchez]

I would like to remind you that the US have sold weapons to Iraq also when Iran and Iraq were going at it...

I keep looking for you to blame Bush for that one.

They also supplied weapons to bin laden when he was fighting the Russians. Basically, these are the same people who begged for the US's help when they needed it, then turned on them. Do know see what kind of fucked up people that are over there?

 

[Brino]

Yes saddam had a relation ship with al quaeda he supported them financially and by selling them assault rifles.Saying that saddam never helped al quaeda in terrorist activities is being blind.Look in Iraq, there is al zarquaoui or what ever his name is, is a terrorist and saddam supported islamic extremists terrorists.If you don't fight dictatorships and terrorists with force and determination you will never solve the problem.

No he didnt! End of Subject! I'm not going to discuss this with you anymore georges because your easily the least informed member of this debate!

 

[Brino]

Easily, the dumbest thing you have said yet. Why else would the two parties meet, to discuss the weather? Come on Brino, get harld to help you pull your head out of your ass.

All dicatators need to go, and should be dealt with. But not all can be taken down at once. Maybe if you and the tree hugging babies at the UN grew some nuts, and realized they have to make the World safe for everybody, then we'll get these things dealt with. But instead, you continue to live in the past, and have yet to add anything positive to controlling the future.

So, tell me son, if not Iraq's dictator, then who?

You know, I try to have a civil conversation and you pull shit like this.

Sure all dictators need to go but war isnt necessarily the answer and it definately wasnt the answer with Iraq. For fucks sakes even top republicans are saying WE FUCKED UP! Answer me this, How Blind are You!?

 

[member5726]

I keep looking for you to blame Bush for that one.

They also supplied weapons to bin laden when he was fighting the Russians. Basically, these are the same people who begged for the US's help when they needed it, then turned on them. Do know see what kind of fucked up people that are over there?

Yeah, but its by playing their game on their playing field that we're gonna win, we got to be a lot more smarter than that, and the to do that we got the elected a new president because Bush does'nt know what the heck he's doing there !!

 

[Supahfonic]

Retired General: U.S. Staying 10 Years in Iraq

DELRAY BEACH, Fla. - Iraq (news - web sites) will need at least a decade to become stable enough for the U.S. military to withdraw, said a retired general who commanded the air campaign in the 1991 Gulf War (news - web sites).



Retired Air Force Gen. Chuck Horner said Thursday the 10-year estimate was based on how long it took to rid Germany of Nazis after World War II.

"Every time we train 10 Iraqis, we can pull out one GI," he told the World Affairs Council of the Florida Palm Beaches. "We should have never disarmed the Iraqi army," he said before his speech.

President Bush (news - web sites) has refused to offer a timetable for bringing home some 140,000 U.S. troops in Iraq. He has said setting a deadline would let insurgents wait out the U.S.-led coalition. Democratic challenger Sen. John Kerry (news - web sites) has said some troops could begin coming home within six months of his being in office.

Horner did not criticize the Bush administration directly, but said the results of the war in Iraq have been a "mixed bag."

"I've learned not to be for or against war," he said. "War is a terrible thing that should always be a last resort."

 

[Dirty Sanchez]

Umm, interesting Supahfonic, although, not that surprising.

Thank God we won't ever know, but I have wondered if Kerry would stick to his word (it changes alot) with regards to when the troops would be coming home. By placing a timetable on it, it just ultimately shows how out of the loop he really is. Would he been more concerned about sticking by his timeline, and causing the Country to collapse, and in turn, making the World far more dangerous.?

No he didnt! End of Subject! I'm not going to discuss this with you anymore georges because your easily the least informed member of this debate!

Yes he did!!!! For God sake Brino, get a clue. How you can say this is utterly mind blowing. Are you really that ignorant to believe your own crap?

Sure all dictators need to go but war isnt necessarily the answer and it definately wasnt the answer with Iraq.

What is the answer then? To talk over some coffee. Please, war was the answer. He needed to go, and now he is gone. Get on board with getting Iraq back on track and quit your girlie whining.

For fucks sakes even top republicans are saying WE FUCKED UP! Answer me this, How Blind are You!?

Who said it, what did they say, and when did they say it? I have watched, and read everything I can, and I have yet to hear any "top" Republicans say anything close to this. Yet, we have Democrats who supported the War. Before you post again, prove your statement. If you can't, shut the hell up. Of course, you are the guy who thinks there was no connection between saddam and al qaeda, so I guess it's fair to say you are in your own little world. Bubble gum and candy drops, Brino.

Yeah, but its by playing their game on their playing field that we're gonna win, we got to be a lot more smarter than that, and the to do that we got the elected a new president because Bush does'nt know what the heck he's doing there !!

Again, your backwards thinking. You don't fire a guy if you don't have a suitable replacement. There is no suitable replacemnet for GWB, and so you can't get rid of him. Look at how over the place Kerry has been on everything. How do you honestly expect him to do a better job, when he doesn't even know what he is doing.

And I say once more, who is the genius who keeps allowing Howard Dean on camera? 6 months ago he was telling everyone John Kerry wasn't capable of running the Country, and now he is saying vote for him. On top of that, the guy looks like an absolute jackass, doesn't answer direct questions, and just gives me the creeps.All by him self he is driving people away from the Democratic party.

 

[Supahfonic]

Rumsfeld: No 'hard evidence' of Iraq-Qaeda link

http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/NewsStory.aspx?section=World&OID=60937

http://edition.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/10/04/rumsfeld.iraq/

"To my knowledge, I have not seen any strong, hard evidence that links the two," Rumsfeld added.

"I just read an intelligence report recently about one person who's connected to al Qaeda who was in and out of Iraq. And it is the most tortured description of why he might have had a relationship and why he might not have had a relationship. It may have been something that was not representative of a hard linkage."

-------------------

General Anthony Zinni:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/05/21/60minutes/main618896.shtml

Retired General Anthony Zinni is one of the most respected and outspoken military leaders of the past two decades.

From 1997 to 2000, he was commander-in-chief of the United States Central Command, in charge of all American troops in the Middle East. That was the same job held by Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf before him, and Gen. Tommy Franks after.

Zinni says Iraq was the wrong war at the wrong time - with the wrong strategy. And he was saying it before the U.S. invasion. In the months leading up to the war, while still Middle East envoy, Zinni carried the message to Congress: “This is, in my view, the worst time to take this on. And I don’t feel it needs to be done now.”

But he wasn’t the only former military leader with doubts about the invasion of Iraq. Former General and National Security Advisor Brent Scowcroft, former Centcom Commander Norman Schwarzkopf, former NATO Commander Wesley Clark, and former Army Chief of Staff Eric Shinseki all voiced their reservations.
-----------------

Richard Clarke, was a counterterrorism advisor for four US presidents:

Clarke Calls Iraq War 'Enormous Mistake'
By The Associated Press

Saturday 26 June 2004

Orlando, Fla. - The invasion of Iraq was an "enormous mistake" that is costing untold lives, strengthening al-Qaida and breeding a new generation of terrorists, former White House counterterrorism czar Richard Clarke said.

"We did exactly what al-Qaida said we would do - invade and occupy an oil-rich Arab country that wasn't threatening us in any way," Clarke said Saturday before giving the keynote address at the American Library Association's annual convention in Orlando. "The hatred that has been engendered by this invasion will last for generations."

Clarke, a counterterrorism adviser to the past three presidents, wrote the book "Against All Enemies," which strongly criticizes the Bush administration for making Iraq a top priority and for underestimating warnings about al-Qaida before the Sept. 11 attacks.

Clarke said the United States will lose the war on terrorism if it loses the battle of ideas against extremists in the Middle East.

"We won the Cold War by, yes, having good strong military forces but also by competing in the battle of ideas against the Communists," Clarke later told the librarians. "We have to do that with the jihadists."

The United States' ideological credibility has been undermined by revelations of the mistreatment of Iraqi prisoners at the Abu Ghraib prison and the release of documents that showed U.S. government attorneys conducted a legal analysis of what constituted torture, Clarke said.

Clarke took issue with some elements of filmmaker Michael Moore's new documentary, "Fahrenheit 9/11," which depicts how the Bush administration allowed Saudi nationals and members of Osama bin Laden's family to leave the United States days after the Sept. 11 attacks.

Clarke said he thought the Saudi government was "perfectly justified" in wanting its citizens to leave the United States out of fears of "vigilantism" by Americans.

The Saudis were not allowed to leave until the FBI cleared them of posing any danger and having knowledge of Osama bin Laden's whereabouts, Clarke said.

Making the incident a big part of the movie was a mistake, said Clarke, who added that he agrees with many things Moore stands for.

-------

"Admit WMD mistake," survey chief tells Bush

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1160842,00.html

----------

A New C.I.A. Report Casts Doubt on a Key Terrorist's Tie to Iraq

WASHINGTON, Oct. 5 - A reassessment by the Central Intelligence Agency has cast doubt on a central piece of evidence used by the Bush administration before the invasion of Iraq to draw links between Saddam Hussein's government and Al Qaeda's terrorist network, government officials said Tuesday.

http://nytimes.com/2004/10/06/politics/06intel.html