Any person does their job better and more effectively when they are supported. The more important a position within an organization is, and the more essential a person’s role is, the more likely that person is to perform their duties without distraction. In the military, a soldier’s job is life or death. He or she works every day in situations where it is essential to have a clear mind and conscience. The military should operate like a well-oiled machine, each person functioning smoothly and without a hitch.
When the military enters a conflict which is unsupported by the American population, there is a huge problem. Members of the armed services are distracted by thoughts like, “What am I fighting for anyway?” They aren’t going to do their jobs as well, and those moments of distraction and lack of devotion could mean death.
Don’t fool yourself; our brave men and women in the armed service know about the American people who don’t support their actions. They are aware that many people don’t want them in Iraq. You can’t say that you support the troops, but you don’t support the war; logic defies this statement on many levels. Choose one, or stop trying to be politically correct and just keep your mouth shut.
America, you need to make a decision. There are two choices.
Not supporting the war and yet allowing our troops to remain in Iraq is condemning them to failure and death. We can pull our troops out, quick like a band-aid, without warning to reduce the potential damages. In my opinion, this would be the only safe way to remove our armed services from Iraq without actually resolving the conflict. This will leave us with the knowledge of the unfinished business of Iraq in shambles forever in our hearts, and the possibility of terrorist retaliation against the innocent civilians of Iraq. Whether you supported the use of armed forces against Iraq in the first place or not, consider that Americans should finish what we started.
The other choice is to put the vast heart of America into this war, and give our brave men and women of the armed forces an honest opportunity to succeed in destroying the despicable organization of al Qaeda and helping the Iraqi population recover from the rule of the dictator Saddam. In my opinion, the only reason why we have failed in Iraq thus far is because our troops have lacked support from the American public.
The United States has always been known for our backbone and strength of character. What happened to the country that always stood up for its citizens against the wrongs in the world? When did we get afraid to spill the blood of our enemies to save innocent lives? Better that our trained armed forces fight on foreign soil then civilians continue to die on foreign soil, or here at home, because we haven’t stood up for ourselves and said, “Enough is enough.” I am disappointed in all the administrations that stood by and watched when the United States was under terrorist attack in the last 35 years, finally cumulating in the attack on the World Track Center.
I am not a war-monger, but I am a woman with a big heart who wants to help Americans and Iraqis alike so we can all live better lives.
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
You want to know in what way I support the troops? By not wantng them to get killed. We shouldn't have gone in and we shouldn't have stayed. If we stay, we can't win. You can't force democracy onto people who have never expirienced it. Things don't work like that. We are all ready trillions of dollars in debt. We can't afford to stay until we change the mindset of an entire nation.
Further more, our leaving the region won't create animosity. Most people just want us to get out. They don't like us because we are there. If we leave, they wil have acomplished our goal.
"Isn't it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of it too?"
Douglas Adams
"That is not dead which can eternal lie / And with strange aeons even death may die."
H. P. Lovecraft
The armed forces exist for one reason: to protect civilians. Part of being a member of those forces, and the benefits that come with it, is being willing and able to put yourself in danger when the time comes. You really need to come to terms with this.
I don't support forcing democracy on Iraq. Don't put words in my blog. I never wrote that; I supported removing Saddam from power. It's a different thing.
We're already there; let's finish what we started. Crying and whining about it, and letting the terrorist factions win will only make more civilians suffer. They will feel more confident in attacking innocent people in the future.
Why can't we win? The answer: because people like you keep saying we can't. We have the most powerful military in the world; we can do anything if Americans really support it, and start caring about what is going on around us.
"The armed forces exist for one reason: to protect civilians. Part of being a member of those forces, and the benefits that come with it, is being willing and able to put yourself in danger when the time comes. You really need to come to terms with this." Agreed. However, our actions in Iraq do not serve to protect us. All they do is create animosity against us.
"I don't support forcing democracy on Iraq. Don't put words in my blog. I never wrote that; I supported removing Saddam from power. It's a different thing." Well, that is the justification as to why we are there. And, we already kicked Saddam out, so why do you still support our presence there?
"We're already there; let's finish what we started. Crying and whining about it, and letting the terrorist factions win will only make more civilians suffer. They will feel more confident in attacking innocent people in the future." The whole stay the course thing is utter shit. If a person does something stupid, that isn't rectified by them continuing to do something stupid. It is rectified by the correction of that action. The same is true on a national scale. As for the terrorists, or whatever you want to call them, let them win over there. Stop getting them angry at us. Don't provoke them into attacking us at home. Isn't that the goal?
"Why can't we win? The answer: because people like you keep saying we can't. We have the most powerful military in the world; we can do anything if Americans really support it, and start caring about what is going on around us." What is victory? If you consider at this point, victory to be the installation of a succesful Democracy there, which is what the government says, then no, we can't win regardless. History has shown us that you can't just start being a democracy. Look at China. Look at Nazi Germany. Look at pre-Soviet Russia. Look at modern day Russia. It just doesn't work like that. If that isn't what you consider victoy, then what do you?
"Isn't it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of it too?"
Douglas Adams
"That is not dead which can eternal lie / And with strange aeons even death may die."
H. P. Lovecraft
Our actions in Iraq provide us with a way to eliminate organizations like al Qaeda that feed terrorism, and eliminated a government which financially supported the deaths of thousands of innocent civilians whom were both American and of other nationalities. The people of Iraq were nothing but happy about the fall of Saddam. If you don't believe me, see the video of the fall of his stature. Or you can read about how he oppressed women in one of the most enlightened nations in the middle east.
I still support our presence there because I think we need to finish the job we started. There are three individual groups of people in Iraq; it is my opinion we should help Iraq split into three separate nations that all work under their individual beliefs rather than forcing these different cultures with a history of hate to merge and work together. Keep posted for a future blog about this.
How are we provoking the terrorists into attacking us at home? I haven't heard of any major (or minor) terrorist attack here in the U.S. since the Iraq war started, yet there have been more than one against nations who refused to support our war against terrorism. Sounds as if they are afraid of us, but aren't afraid to attack nations whom haven't defended themselves. Explain that.
Our victory in Iraq would be establishing a government which would not financially fund terrorist organizations, would support it's citizens in a productive manner, and wouldn't cause civil war. These goals have nothing to do with democracy.
Our operations in Iraq are part of the Manifest Destiny mentality that our leaders hold. Where we must instill peace and democracy across the world. That is a bad outlook and it makes people hate us. We're installing a failed government system because our chief and his handlers seem to have no grasp that a democratic government will fail where a republic can succeed. They're talking of cutting the country into thirds for crying out loud. Our victory in Iraq, puts us in good with the oil giants. Civil War is already boiling in Iraq.
You call for 3 seperate countries. Ethinic cleansing is alot of fun when one country decides that they're the more powerful than the other countries who have the same beliefs but they're of a differenct sect.
This war has everything to do with politics and Washington, it has nothing to do with Al Qaeda, only the war in Afghanistan did. We need to get off our, we are the leaders of the world mentality and realize that we are not better than anyone else.
Although I do not believe that we should force democracy on Iraq, because they have a different culture that may not be capable of supporting it, I do not understand why everyone is overreacting about our attempt to share it with them. The United States is the greatest country in the world, and democracy is the reason why. Why we would not want to share the awesome power of the people with others, and you do not support this, I do not understand.
Iraq is not about oil. Look at OPEC and the prices at the gas pumps if you don't believe me. Supply and demand. Those of you who continue to use this as a reason to rant against the Bush administration need to step back and rethink your reasoning.
Ethnic cleansing is already occurring in Iraq. What do you suggest? Forcing these people who clearly do not want to work together to do so? That is no better than forcing democracy upon the people of Iraq.
Guess what? The United States is better than everyone else. The capitalist system is superior to the socialist system, and any other system out there. If you don't believe me, move to any socialist country for a year and write me back. This doesn't mean we have to be arrogant; it means that we have the responsibility to help others. Not to force it on others; but to share our wealth and knowledge for the benefit of the world.
Maybe you think we were right, maybe you think we were wrong, but we have to finish what we started. Otherwise more innocent civilians, American, Iraqi, or other, are going to continue to die at the hands of terrible people with no respect for human life.
We are the greatest country in the world, in my opinion. But when that pretentious mentality that we are better than everyone else is a reason people don't like us because we decide to make people conform to our ideas. It is not democracy, because we are not a democracy, I don't know how many times I've said that. Washington and Eisenhower warned of having standing militaries and pushing our beliefs on others. I do not support being assholes to the rest of the world. They are not children, they are adults, they can do what they want.
Excuse me I was wrong. The reason for Iraq isn't just oil, it's military might. It is to show the world that if you mess with us, we'll fuck you up. Until this idiocized america wakes up and realizes that our men and women are dying not for our misguided idea of democracy, but to line the pockets of the defense sector, until then we will be in continual war because we are afraid to say no.
Not as bad as it will get. Once they get tired of their third of Iraq, they will start ethnic cleansing on a massive scale. I like the contradiction you put forth. We are forcing democracy on Iraq.
I know that the capitalist system is superior. But when politicians hijack the system so that the people who volunteer for our army are the poor, then there is something wrong with a great country. We are being arrogant if you are too blind to notice. We are not sharing our wealth. We tell other countries, he is some money, pay us back for it when you can, but until then here is the interest we recieve each year from you. America doesn't use a capitalist system anymore. Keneysian economics rules the country, capitalism hasn't been in effect for years. Our responsibility is for ourselves, then for the rest of the world when they ask for it. We have no right to just say, I'm the biggest baddest motherfucker around so you have to do what we say.
You have no respect for human life. War has no respect for human life god damnit. God damn you for even saying that. We've killed millions of civilians in the name of democracy everywhere, even in Iraq. The first attack that we started the war in Iraq with killed 90% civilians and 10% soldiers. It was a failure.
I love being an American and am proud of this country. But I'll be goddamned if it means that I have to support a failed and flawed idea of why we're in Iraq. This is the greatest country in my mind. However it is not our jobs to convince the world of that. Our job is to protect ourselves and have good reasons for it. We went to Iraq on intelligence that was from the 80's. We gave Saddam these weapons, he was in fact our ally for a long time, until he invaded Kuwait. I consider myself a patriot for the American Ideal layed down by our founding fathers, not by the puppet who calls himself the president.
I support the troops, I support finishing the job in Iraq. I do not support reasons we went it, the politicians who lied to us, and I support that Congress gets off its ass and tells Bush to sit the fuck down and bring our troops home and use the power that they are constitutionally given. Instead of letting puppet Bush and his handlers control Congress.
I forgot to add.
This war has everything to do with al Qaeda and terrorism. Saddam, the dictator of Iraq, funded al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations, and he allowed Osama bin Laden to maintain a headquarters in his country. Now, the Iraqi government does not fund terrorism, and no terrorist organization can openly organize itself in the country, they have to go underground. I do not see how you can deny these FACTS.
On April 29, 2007, former Director of Central Intelligence George Tenet said on 60 Minutes that the Bush Administration "could never verify that there was any Iraqi authority, direction and control, complicity with al-Qaeda for 9/11 or any operational act against America, period."
No authority, direction, control, or complicity.
Only financial support and a home base for them, and other terrorist organizations. Not to mention the terrorism upon the Iraqi people. That's enough for me.
there was never a financial connection. Unless you decide to count the financial connection all Arabs have throughout the Middle East to organizations with incidental connections with terrorist groups.
In fact, Saudi Arabia is still, to this day, the most responsible for spreading terror across the world with not only direct funding to terrorist groups and suicide bombers, but its own people were directly responsible for 9/11.
Then maybe it's time we go and remove Saudi Arabia's government before more innocent people are killed in terrorist attacks across the globe. I am ashamed that the United States has somehow become afraid to defend itself against these cowards who won't even fight like men.
Evidence that Saddam Hussein financially and personally supported terrorists:
(It is completely ridiculous that I even have to post this.)
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=48827
http://counterterror.typepad.com/the_counterterrorism_blog/2006/01/will_...
http://www.nationalreview.com/robbins/robbins091903.asp
http://www.9-11commission.gov/hearings/hearing3/witness_yaphe.htm
My personal favorite: http://www.ccc.nps.navy.mil/si/2004/jul/joynerJul04.pdf
I very strongly believe that all this hoopla denying the connection is very political, when it is obvious to anyone that uses their brain and researches the history of the Middle East that there was a connection between Saddam and al Qaeda.
You are welcome to believe anything you like, but I believe the facts, straight from the horse's mouth. When a close friend of Saddam's says he worked with al Qaeda against the United States, I believe that over an ex-CIA Director who has political reasons, and no personal experience, to claim otherwise.
The 2005 Republican-led Senate Report of Pre-war Intelligence on Iraq says:
The CIA's assessment that Iraq and al-Qaeda were "two independent actors trying to exploit each other" was accurate only about al-Qaeda. "Postwar findings indicate that Saddam Hussein was distrustful of al-Qa'ida and viewed Islamic extremists as a threat to his regime, refusing all requests from al-Qa'ida to provide material or operational support."
Why are you focusing only on al Qaeda?
There are many other terrorist groups that you cannot deny he was associated with and funded. Our own government agrees on these points, as well as that he DID have connections to al Qaeda. See the links which I provided, and look at the FACTS.
Postwar findings indicate that Saddam Hussein was distrustful of al-Qa'ida and viewed Islamic extremists as a threat to his regime, refusing all requests from al-Qa'ida to provide material or operational support.
Our own government said this. It doesn't matter which notes you cite, this is our own governmental findings. So if the US government says Saddam had no connection to Islamic extremists and viewed them as a threat, I will believe them.
There is significant evidence to demonstrate a link between al Qaeda and Saddam. Not only that, but our own government has said there IS A LINK between Saddam and terrorist factions. I do not know why you keep denying these facts. See my links for proof.
I'm going to stop responding, because you keep running in circles saying the same thing but offering no facts to support your claims.
And the only recent one you posted for 2006 was of Al-Tikriti, who was hanged for treason. Every single person in Saddam's inner circle turned on him, but does that mean they were telling the truth? Because if you turned on Saddam, you might be spared.
Since 2005, the Senate findings of fact found that none of this is verifiable and true.:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saddam_Hussein_and_al-Qaeda
Yes, because Wikipedia, editable by the general population, is so much more accurate then government and independent findings and years of historical facts.
Don't ever trust Wikipedia. Trust the sources. Wikis always contain sources for the information. Sometimes a wiki is decidedly lefty, or righty, but clicking on the links themselves help you decide. In this case, click on the report from our Congressional findings.
Just for the record and because it is so often overlooked, the United States gave Bin Laden and Al Qaeda both guns and financial support in the 70s/80s to fight off the USSR invasion of Afghanistan.... sure, we didn't know that he would then turn against us, but that does not negate the fact that we helped the man rise to the power he then used against us. We tend to ignore that and act like Saddam was the only culprit here. He wasn't. We're now dealing with what we helped create and I don't see many acknowledging that. We're too busy pointing the finger.
When we attack Saudi Arabi and our other allies that have helped and continue to help contribute to the Al Qaeda problem and admit to everything we fudged or distorted, and start holding the Iraqi government responsible with more than lip service and slaps on the wrists (and investigate and do something about those both here and there who are playing games with hidden agendas), I'll consider supporting the war in Iraq. Until then, I'll keep sending my cards and letters, my packages of goodies and donating to the veteran charities and being there for my family and friends that are in Iraq, but I will not support the war. If that means I don't support the troops in any one else's view... I can live with that.
-----
~Fallon~
"I stood
Among them, but not of them; in a shroud of thoughts which were not their thoughts" -Lord Byron
-----
Excellent point about our giving them weapons. However, who is supposed to apologize? The Bush administration? Because they certainly weren't around in the 70's and 80's. I feel as though this is a little bit of a historical hypocrisy, and hindsight is 20/20.
Being there for individuals is different to me then "supporting the troops". I could say that I am supportive of my friend who works for an abortion clinic, and be against abortion myself (this has nothing to do with my personal beliefs, btw, it's just an example). I am simply arguing against the use of the phrase, "I support the troops" in conjunction with, "but I don't support the war" because I find it utterly ridiculous and against logic by definition.
I'm not saying we have to apologize, I'm saying that ignoring our part in Bin Ladens rise to power in order to point the finger at the parts others played is ridiculous and fails to deal in reality. We love to say that so and so and this country and the other helped him get where he is today, but we never once admit to our part in that. We have no right pointing the finger at what others did when we did similar and won't fess up or take responsibility for our part of the guilt.
I don't find it illogical to not support the war but to support the troops. Many of the troops themselves do not support the war, they still fight it. Why? Because that's what the signed on to do. You don't have to agree with the politics to support the people that have to do the dirty work. If that were the case, those troops that don't agree but fight anyway because it's their duty wouldn't be there now.
-----
~Fallon~
"I stood
Among them, but not of them; in a shroud of thoughts which were not their thoughts" -Lord Byron
-----
I agree with you that the U.S. should somehow acknowledge these truths, but I don't see how this would be productive or helpful in any way. Finger-pointing seems to have become an American pastime. The only finger-pointing I plan on doing here is honest facts: terrorists are responsible for killing thousands of innocent people, and we can stop or reduce these events by taking control and going on the offensive instead of waiting for them to come to us and being defensive. Being proactive is always better than being reactive.
Why would you fight for something you don't believe in?
Troops in Iraq who don't believe they are doing right are counter-productive, and ought to be back here. This brings me back to the problem that if you don't support the war, you aren't supporting the troops, and the troops ARE the war. Without the devotion of the troops, and their belief that what they are doing is RIGHT, then we can never succeed.
Funny, I was thinking about blogging a title called, "I do not support War in Iraq and I do not support the troops." Haha. Actually, I could care less about what's going on over there. Things have been said. But some people just refuse to give up. We can talk all we want. It still will not change the fact that the troops are in Iraq. Instead, we should encourage the troops to do their best, send them postcards or something. If we really want our troops back, let's gather people and strike the White House. I'm sure it will change their minds if we get 100000000000 Americans to be in front of the White House and start a revolution.
Then again, I don't see anyone desperate enough to have the troops back home.
----------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.mylot.com/?ref=truelife
That's sort of my point. You've got to have one or the other, and you have to be passionate about it. Otherwise we are doing our armed services a disfavor.
I used to be unsure about the war, and then I saw all these posts about it here. "I support the troops, but I don't support the war." Well, doesn't that seem a little hypocritical? So I did a little bit of research, and I realized that I do support the war. I don't particularly like all of President Bush's policies, but I really think we had good intentions and what went wrong was the lack of support from Americans. I think American desperately needs a leader we can all stand behind and be proud of... we need somebody less polarizing and who knows what is right for this country.
Now here I have to respectfully disagree. Bush goes in with "good intentions"? To be honest good intentions have nothing to do with it if you're president of the United States of America. You need to have a strong strategy and more than one plan. Because it's war.
"What went wrong was a lack of support from Americans".
i don't know where that came from. 9-11 America had the whole world behind it's back for that atrocity. (Y'know, the whole world besides the people that did it). We went to Afghanistan. We kicked ass with our allies. And then we hopped on over to Iraq and everyone fell off the bandwagon. You keep mentioning Saddam and how we have to make the world a safer place. I agree. But why choose Iraq out of all the other atrocities going on around the world? The Sudan? Korea? Wait, how about China?
The soldiers are doing their job. I personally want them to come home. Now. Today. Some of those soldiers are my dad, my best friend's 18 year old brother, kids from my high school that enlisted to pay for college. I want them to come home today. I love them. Don't tell anyone they can't support their loved ones in a war that makes no sense.
I'm sorry... are you accusing the President and Congress of less than good intentions? If so, what exactly are they? I'd love to know what exactly we are getting out of Iraq beyond what I have already outlined several times here.
We choose Iraq because Saddam was financially and personally supporting terrorists. We saw an opportunity to eliminate a source of support for these destructive and murderous organizations, and to eliminate a violent dictator preying off the citizens of his country. Those nations that "fell off the bandwagon" have now faced terrorist attacks themselves, and have they done anything to defend themselves? I don't think so. Those attacks have continued, and won't cease until they stand up for themselves like we did. The proof of success in Iraq is in the pudding: There hasn't been a terrorist attack on American soil since the war began.
Like I told Fallon... there is a difference to me in supporting individuals and "supporting the troops". If you are feeling as though they need to come home just "because", then you need to come to terms that these people (hopefully) knew what they were getting into when they joined the military, and enjoy many benefits from their membership. Their job is to risk their lives to protect innocent civilians. That's not being insensitive; it's just the plain old truth.
*Gasp" Politicians...may not have good intentions?? And that wasn't my point! That's what you said! You need more than good intentions you need a plan and our plan isn't working!
Their job is to protect the American people. Their job isn't to be sent out to further someone else's personal agenda. I am sick of this and your wild assumption that the American people can't support their troops and not support the war. You have not once proven that. You keep harping about terrorism. Terrorism is everywhere, that's why it's so scary. It's in our own country, people with blogs just like ours that try to "further the cause".
I do not see a personal agenda here. Whose personal agenda? To what benefit?
I see the United States defending itself, and being proactive against the deaths of innocent civilians.
Yes, you can support the troops without supporting the war. I may not like what they're doing, but I support their bravery in defending our country, which is their job. What's decided on by the higher-ups is not influenced by our brave men and women in the field, so I don't hold it against them.
I don't need drugs - I have genetics.
Saying that is completely hypocritical. If you don't support the war, you are condemning our troops who are fighting for their lives over there to failure and death.
The truth is, you have an influence on our higher-ups, and if you feel strongly about pulling out of the war, then write to your Congress-men and -women and tell them so. Stop playing the blame game for failures that occur because of your failure to educate yourself and truly support the armed services protected our freedom and lives. I am sick of people saying that they have no say, and blaming everything on "the higher-ups" and "the government", because the truth is that WE are responsible for what happens, and WE can make a difference.
Stand up for your values and beliefs if you feel that the United States is best served by leaving Iraq. If you can't do that, then sit down and shut up.
I guess she sat down and shut up. lol
No, I just wasn't here for a few days. Big difference.
I don't need drugs - I have genetics.
I'm an 18-year-old, lower class female from Iowa. They don't care about my vote, so they're not going to listen to a thing I say, no matter how eloquently I present it. I don't like war, and I would rather it not happen, but I have great respect for those that are willing to put their lives on the line when need be to protect their country, because it is something that needs done from time to time. I don't see how that's hypocritical.
I don't need drugs - I have genetics.
I don't know anyone who LIKES war.
No rational person thinks "Hey, where can we have war today?"
However, that doesn't change that war is necessary to confront evil... like those that oppress the iraqis and wish to destroy us. (They are related to one another, despite what the anti-war groups say)
Fighting evil is always to be encouraged of the good, or else the evil grows and prospers.
However, opposing the war, because 'war is bad' only serves to grant morale to those we fight, which prolongs the war. It gives the enemy courage, and lowers the morale of our soldiers.
In this day in age, the enemy gets our news on their doorstep. With the internet and satelite television, someone sitting in a cave in pakistan can access our news websites.
And they do. And they are encouraged when they see and hear the negative reaction here.
In today's day and age, protests and anti-war tv programs are seen by even our enemies.
While one does not have to like war (and who wakes up in the morning and says "Hey, who can we kill today?"), it is vital that they not engage in such protests.
Yes, you have a RIGHT to protest peacefully, even against the government. (One of the rights fought for and defended by the military, oddly enough
?) . . . but such protests and news reports gives morale to those we fight.
Here is an example from our past. After the Tet Offensive, we had won. The enemy was ready to surrender. They have, over time, admitted this. However, pictures of the Tet Offensive had become public and widespread in a way never really done before. People who know nothing about war saw these and public ranting against the war increased ALOT. This led to an overall drop in support for the war, which granted morale to our enemies. Our captured soldiers were tortured based on information from these protests (Especially calls by people like John Kerry that they were all war criminals). Our enemy received morale from seeing America Divided. They regained support while we in America lost support. We eventually pulled out before the job was finished and there was INCREDIBLE killings once we left.
The same is happening now in Iraq. They see our press and our protests, and they draw support from it. Whether the protestor WANTS to or not, they give relief and morale to our enemies.
While one has the RIGHT to protest, they ought to take the responsibility that comes with that right and avoid things that will give our enemies support, as it leads to morale for the enemy and further American Soldiers kiled. If we pull out, not only will the iraqis who helped us be killed, but no other resistance group will EVER help us again.
You're making the error of linking al-Quaida to Iraq. There was no such thing as "al-Quaida in Iraq" until we invaded. And while yes, Saddam is gone, I'm not so sure about the chaos that now grips the country and if it's any better or not. Also, we've "failed" so far because there was no real pre-war planning beyond "bombs away!" Quite frankly, they need to scrap that Parliament, because they're never going to get any meaningful majorities to pass any legislation with blocs quitting every week and the different factions holding out. The people are divided in the population, true, but the Parliament amplifies (and since it's government, also acts as a legitimizer) the differences between the different factions.
Iraq's government under Saddam financially supported the al Qaeda organization, as well as many other terrorist organizations. This country also was a headquarters for Osama bin Laden. It is no longer either of these things. I do not see how you can deny this.
I agree that the existing "government" installed in Iraq is terrible and needs to be dramatically changed. There is a blog coming about this.
You all keep talking like America cut off the head of al-Qaeda (Saddam). Uh, guess what? Terrorist factions don't have a head. They have/had supporters like Saddam but if people gets killed off, who cares? They have more money, more converts, more fanatics to carry on their evil deeds. We are not going to eradicate terrorism by stomping around and fighting wars, because terrorism isn't like fighting a regular enemy.
Ah-ha. But terrorism can't exist without funding. Did we remove a significant source of funding? Yes. Did we remove a violent dictator? Yes.
No intelligence agency even found any evidence that Saddam even worked with terrorist groups. But we did find Saudi Arabia had direct funding.
I just linked you multiple resources demonstrating evidence. These same resources support your assertion of Saudi Arabia's terrorist funding. Stop denying the facts.
I agree with you; we should be doing something about Saudi Arabia as well.
oh goodie, a three-front war. where shall we send our men and women to next?
It wasn't my suggestion; it was leftfield's.
I'm happy resolving Iraq and then focusing back at home.
Umm... saddam had a long history of funding and supporting terrorists. In fact, he changed the Iraqi flag to include more of a religious feel to get more support from the islamic groups that support terror.
source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_Iraq#1991.E2.80.932004
He had an open standing to pay the family of suicide bombers the equivalant of 20 thousand dollars.
He had direct and indirect ties to Bin Laden. He had direct and indirect ties to many terrorist groups.
Saying that he didn't doesn't make it true.
Remember folks, Iraq had a form of democracy for a long while.
You could go to vote for whomever you wished in the elections, and Saddam won by incredible numbers.
However, he won because if you voted against him, you wound up dead, and he made sure everyone knew it.
Those who ran against him also tended to end up dead (or have family members end up dead.)
Demcoracy isn't a new concept to the Iraqi people.... A democracy that isn't based on rigged and corrupt elections IS a new concept and, despite what CBS and the other mainstream media outlets have to say..... they like it.
http://www.opendemocracy.net/conflict-iraqconflict/women_2681.jsp
equates with me saying i don't support troops is your narrow mindedness and that's my opinion---
You can think whatever you want and I'll still be against the war BUT support our troops by wanting them home....
Regardless that people, such as yourself, call this being hypocritical--I don't care
I just wanted to share my feelings that I think the idea that if one does not support the war, by default they don't support the troops--is load of crap/bs, so i passionately yet respectfully disagree with your sentiments.
I want funding for the soldiers' protection, I don't want them to remain in harms way, I want them out and I don't think that the US will EVER be able to finish and solve the problems it has created in Iraq.
"I leave my one and only grain of spiritual sand
to universal scales of humanity, all humanity...
forever is finding a solution to a solution." -Forever Begins, Common
http://www.progressiveu.org/231615-this-is-a-muslim-girls-plight
If you don't support the war you don't support the troops. The troops ARE the war. Denying this is just ignoring logic. I don't "respect your opinion" on this, because it's not an opinion, it's a denial of a fact and pure reasoning.
Saying you want to take them out of harms' way for the sake of protecting them is silly. It is the job of the armed forces to protect us, and potentially put themselves in harms way in the process. They know that when they sign up for the job and accept the benefits of being a soldier, sailor, airman, or marine. Come to terms with with this.
No one has ever solved a problem or conflict without WANTING to solve it. People like you are the reason why we didn't finished our business in Iraq long ago.
It is also the same reason why we eventually failed in Vietnam.
The left has drawn many parallels between Vietnam and Iraq, but there is only one parallel:
The Left was against both wars and did all they could to protest and hate the war, giving morale to the enemy and eroding morale for our troops.
The Left isn't against war... look at Kosovo and the missiles Clinton launched... they're just against any war done by anyone with an R after their name. They don't even have the courage to be consistant... they only seek political points.
They have no foresight and, due to teaching a revised and anti-american history, they have no concept of the past. All they have is an egotistical sense of wanting what they think is right, right now, despite the future cost or trouble it will cause.
Because it would result in a quagmire? He publicly lambasted Clinton for even thinking about it because he says bringing us into Iraq would mean we will never see an end to war.
Please provide a link proving this is true. Otherwise I will assume this is a false statement.
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/09/27/1992-cheney-deposing-saddam-not-very...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B8MePwb6TEk&mode=related&search=
http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2007/08/cheney_94_invadi...
...and the deaths of huge numbers of innocent Iraqi, Afghani and Pakistani citizens? The American deaths will not be forgotten, but neither should those of other countries. We, too, have a lot of innocent blood on our hands.
Not to mention that a lot of things can happen in a decade. Including 9/11. Have you forgotten the number of people who died that day on American soil? Maybe you need to go back and remember.
I was not even born in the US, I was not here, and neither was ANY OF MY FAMILY when that "business with Iraq happened" please DO NOT ASSUME and make random statements like that, or as someone here calls them, LEAPS
This war is the one I do not support and I don't care that you think it's logic, I think it's you trying to support the right and Bush's administration NO MATTER HOW WRONG THEY ACTUALLY WERE TO USE THE ARMY TO GET SADDAM...
This war shouldn't have started, plain and simple, secondly, IT CAN NOT BE WON, you're never going to kill/annihilate those insurgents, and create an Iraqi democracy that is not corrupt...they will constantly breed, basically, it's a whole generation that will be against the US troops, while those who give the orders in the US army will ALWAYS be safely inside tanks and bunkers or in their mansions
GO AHEAD give into this fake shitty reasoning and "logic" that continues to support us losing our army troops. you want blood shed, well you're getting it. continue supporting the continued blood shed
"I leave my one and only grain of spiritual sand
to universal scales of humanity, all humanity...
forever is finding a solution to a solution." -Forever Begins, Common
http://www.progressiveu.org/231615-this-is-a-muslim-girls-plight
PEOPLE LIKE YOU who don't support the war. You have been on this website with me long enough to know I'm not racist. Grow up and realize that not everything has to do with your race or ethnicity, and stop jumping to conclusions.
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, including in government. If you want to deny the Iraqis their rights to govern themselves, and just make the assumption they are incapable of doing so, that is just as unfair as all the people you are constantly railing against as being discriminatory against Muslims.
It's not about bloodshed. It's about protecting innocent people. I refuse to allow the American government to continue to sit by and allow citizens to quietly die at the hands of terrorism, as it has for the last four decades, and I'm proud we stood up and finally did something about it.
like I was here and did not support the action in Iraq the first time ( I think you are talking about the fact that this could have been solved in the Gulf war)
so don't try to tell me that I need to grow up, that's not your issue--
how come the two people who have tried to tell me to not talk about my race or religion both did it when I am talking about politics and secular matters---
YOU BROUGHT IT UP AND YOU ARE ASSUMING THAT I THINK YOU ARE RACIST whereas I just think you jumped to the conclusion that I was here to not support the ""business in Iraq long ago." I clarified for you that I am an immigrant and WAS NOT in the US and I can't even vote but thankfully, my parents can==
These are your words----"People like you are the reason why we didn't finished our business in Iraq long ago." and they are in response to my comment and the business long ago seems to mean that It could have been solved quickly and easily? how so?
"I leave my one and only grain of spiritual sand
to universal scales of humanity, all humanity...
forever is finding a solution to a solution." -Forever Begins, Common
http://www.progressiveu.org/231615-this-is-a-muslim-girls-plight
Your race and religion have nothing to do with this conversation. Stop bringing them into every discussion, which you cannot deny that you do. If you continue to do this, I kindly request you refrain from commenting in my blogs where issues of race or religion do not apply.
History shows us that societal and economic problems are solved quicker and easier when there is majority or unanimous support from the people on a single solution.
WHERE DID I MENTION ME BIENG MUSLIM in this WHOLE BLOG AND COMMENTS?
I really think you are a very smart individual BUT you are the one who BROUGHT UP MY RACE so stop saying that I DID IT !!!!!!!!!!!!
I only said that I am an immigrant and was not even able to be here and I am not able to vote......REALLY where do I mention my being Muslim in this whole commenting process............FIND ME ONE PLACE
"I leave my one and only grain of spiritual sand
to universal scales of humanity, all humanity...
forever is finding a solution to a solution." -Forever Begins, Common
http://www.progressiveu.org/231615-this-is-a-muslim-girls-plight
my race and religion??? I really thought that Immigrants have variable races and religions and I did not mention my being a Muslim even once in this whole blog
"I leave my one and only grain of spiritual sand
to universal scales of humanity, all humanity...
forever is finding a solution to a solution." -Forever Begins, Common
http://www.progressiveu.org/231615-this-is-a-muslim-girls-plight
"No one has ever solved a problem or conflict without WANTING to solve it. People like you are the reason why we didn't finished our business in Iraq long ago."
And how would that have happened? Because if whatever you're thinking doesn't include a nuke, you're wrong. You think that's right? Then why doesn't Bush hurry up and finish our business so we can all stop bitching?
He can only "hurry up and finish our business" with the support of the American people. We need more troops and financial support so we can just do the job already, take out the insurgents, and let the Iraqis move on with their lives so we can do the same. The current surge has made a big difference, and the only way to get out of this mess is to put a troop on every corner so there's no place for them to hide.