Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Well? We're waiting to discuss the WMD stockpile. Who's up for it?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • WMD's can easily be hidden buried out in the deserts of Iraq..
    I mean, you could pack enough deadly viruses in a single gasoline can to wipe out New York.
    Maybe Saddam kept the can hidden under his bed but the weapons inspectors forgot to look there..

    Comment


    • Originally posted by smilingassassin View Post
      How long do you think it should have taken to defeat Nazi Germany? It bears dirrectly on how long it should take to defeat Iraqi insurgents/terrorists.


      If that questions for everybody my answer is that WW2 and Iraq are two entirely different scenarios and bear little resemblance to each other, hence the question is largely meaningless..

      Comment


      • Intervening Iraq was the STUPIEST idea which visited head of your president... I always stood on this position and seems it my pessimistic were in fact a bit optimistic..... I though that people of USA would tollerate the war which did not have any clear goals nor clear plans for at least five years.... well.... from what I read from your newspapers... even Republicans... your people has got enough pretty soon.

        However, part of the line of arguments why invading was stupid was that pooling out would be VERY VERY DAMAGING.... and this remains true..

        So pooling out now would be very STUPID. You have to hold now.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Garry View Post
          Intervening Iraq was the STUPIEST idea which visited head of your president... I always stood on this position and seems it my pessimistic were in fact a bit optimistic..... I though that people of USA would tollerate the war which did not have any clear goals nor clear plans for at least five years.... well.... from what I read from your newspapers... even Republicans... your people has got enough pretty soon.

          However, part of the line of arguments why invading was stupid was that pooling out would be VERY VERY DAMAGING.... and this remains true..

          So pooling out now would be very STUPID. You have to hold now.
          I think if the issue of WMD's had infact been true I along with many others would still support this war. Unfortunately like almost everything Rumsfeld and Bush promised and planned for its turned out to not be the case.

          There have been no significant stockpiles of chemical weapons found. Infact the only chemical weapons found where a small number buried and in such a state of disrepair that they couldn't have been used safely. More then likely the Iraqi's where trying to just dispose of them in a way their under trained borderline incompetent military could manage.

          No stockpiles of bio weapons (bacteria, viral) found at all and no nuclear weapons found.

          The attempted rebuilding of the country has been nothing short of an utter disaster given the original plan Bush has of 'turning Iraq into the crown jewel of the middle east' and the actual situation. Rumsfeld ignored the rather sage advice of the people in the Pentagon who knew what they were doing. Either the Rumsfeld actually believed his new transformational doctrine would actually work in this case or he was trying to conduct the war and follow-up occupation on the cheap. Either way he’s ideas have been tested and he’s been proven incompetent. The security situation is progressively deteriorating and in many ways the consequences of this war will make life far more difficult for the U.S and her allies in the future.

          The situation is so far gone now that’s its virtually impossible to make any significant short term improvements.

          In short the U.S government and military are now in a position where the war has become very unpopular at home. If the current trends hold the American public simply will not support this any longer unless there’s a rapid and dramatic change in the situation over there which is bloody unlikely to say the least. More then likely the U.S will pull out by around 2010 if not sooner.

          I think at this time a pull out is pretty much guaranteed, just an issue of how soon it will happen.
          Last edited by canoe; 27 Oct 06,, 15:33.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by canoe View Post
            I think if the issue of WMD's had infact been true I along with many others would still support this war. Unfortunately like almost everything Rumsfeld and Bush promised and planned for its turned out to not be the case.

            There have been no significant stockpiles of chemical weapons found. Infact the only chemical weapons found where a small number buried and in such a state of disrepair that they couldn't have been used safely. More then likely the Iraqi's where trying to just dispose of them in a way their under trained borderline incompetent military could manage.

            No stockpiles of bio weapons (bacteria, viral) found at all and no nuclear weapons found.

            The attempted rebuilding of the country has been nothing short of an utter disaster given the original plan Bush has of 'turning Iraq into the crown jewel of the middle east' and the actual situation. Rumsfeld ignored the rather sage advice of the people in the Pentagon who knew what they were doing. Either the Rumsfeld actually believed his new transformational doctrine would actually work in this case or he was trying to conduct the war and follow-up occupation on the cheap. Either way he’s ideas have been tested and he’s been proven incompetent. The security situation is progressively deteriorating and in many ways the consequences of this war will make life far more difficult for the U.S and her allies in the future.

            The situation is so far gone now that’s its virtually impossible to make any significant short term improvements.

            In short the U.S government and military are now in a position where the war has become very unpopular at home. If the current trends hold the American public simply will not support this any longer unless there’s a rapid and dramatic change in the situation over there which is bloody unlikely to say the least. More then likely the U.S will pull out by around 2010 if not sooner.

            I think at this time a getting out is pretty much guaranteed, just an issue of how soon it will happen.
            Hi Canoe, i think pool out is very bad... for regions far beyond Iraq... that is why I was against intervention in the begining. I remember aruing with Confed and others who were throuwing a lot of idealistic bs about building democracy fast and cheap on me and others who were pointing sadly that things will go wrong. I think I was wrong in my estimations - I though it would take at least 2010-12 for US to pool out.... so sad this would happen earler.

            Now we all will pay for this... When a global policemen turns weak it is no good for all of us...
            Last edited by Garry; 30 Oct 06,, 12:09.

            Comment

            Working...
            X