Thread: Quagmire....

Attacks kill 52 more in Iraq , 30-40 people kidnapped each day, more than 180,000 people displaced by violence since February.

Why it's time to consider it a civil war but the U.S. to afraid of calling it that. 6,000 dead in May and June alone, 14000 just this year alone.

Budget contraints and worn out equipment may hamper the ability of U.S. to stay in Iraq.

Many Democrats and some key Republicans want troops to come back.

Ah, the brilliant foreign policy of George W. Bush. Makes me embarassed (and yes I initially supported the war on the grounds that it was legitimate and I voted for Bush). Throw in a little Israeli-Lebanon conflict and you have a foreign policy in disgrace. A little quagmire here, a little there, and it's time for the Democrats to take control of Congress this fall.

One thing he and the current PM of Israel have in common: Zero military experience. The leader of your country should ALWAYS have military experience.

Originally Posted by surasak

One thing he and the current PM of Israel have in common: Zero military experience. The leader of your country should ALWAYS have military experience.

FDR had zero military experience as well and he did all right...

George W. Bush is no FDR.

Originally Posted by surasak

George W. Bush is no FDR.

True but Condi has balls!

As of September, 2006, the U.S. will have spent (and gone into debt for) about $300,000,000,000 for a war with no justification. Over 2000 soldiers have lost their lives for a war with no purpose. Thousands of people have had their incomes go down as reservists are called to action for a war with no justification. Tens of thousands of Iraqis will have died for a war with no justification. Overall the cost to taxpayers may hit $1 trillion or more by the time the interest on debt is paid on the money borrowed for the war.

Originally Posted by surasak

The leader of your country should ALWAYS have military experience.

I strongly disagree. That's what you have a ministry of defense and experienced advisers for.
Military nuts should be barred from running for pres.

Yes, but, experienced military officers would know whether a war can be won or not. A military President would be less likely to enter situations where the outcome is, shall we say, a quagmire?

Ariel Sharon was a horrible person when he was younger but in his wisdom he was on the right path to solving the problems between Israel and the Arabs. He knew it was futile to take a well organized military against a guerilla force.

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Originally Posted by surasak

One thing he and the current PM of Israel have in common: Zero military experience. The leader of your country should ALWAYS have military experience.

FDR had zero military experience as well and he did all right...

I guess he listened to the intelligence service and the armed forces rather than trying to dictate them.......

I think a large part of our victory in WWII was the effectiveness of our intelligence (and that of the British). Ironically a major part of the failure in Iraq is the failure of intelligence.

Originally Posted by surasak

The leader of your country should ALWAYS have military experience.

Only if your country is given to warmongering.

Having the power of concious thought is better. Sadly Bush is a retard, hence the mess he and his administration has put the world in. Shame on America.

The problem being that the leader of a nation is generally the defacto leader of the military. Here in the states the President is also the commander in chief (means he can fire any military officer at will...witness Truman's stupidity in firing MacArthur). It also means conceivably you have a leader of the military without a day of experience, or, worse, a draft dodger or cheated to avoid service. Do you really want such a person to lead the world's most powerful military? Would you just pull a random person out of the crowd and make him a 5 star general? So why do it with someone who's finger is on the big red button?

I'd have a draft-dodging pinko pacifist as pres any time.

- hey, that's me! Vote stroller!

Originally Posted by Surasak

The leader of your country should ALWAYS have military experience.

Out of topic post.

The leader of my country is a military general and he is the chief of army staff and S.S.G (special services group) trained.Thats why I love him.

LONG LIVE MUSHARRAF.

Those fockwits are the one's I hate the most but there are some negetive things in Musharraf's government i.e.He aint that strict.hehehe,the fockwit chieftans of the Balochistan province fired rockets when Musharraf was ththere on a visit.Now after the Air Force did the job they are so nice kids and run to their daddy whenever he whistles.

Originally Posted by surasak

Would you just pull a random person out of the crowd and make him a 5 star general?

Can't really see the difference between making a general out of a noob , or making a president out of him.
GWB is just a puppet on a string , "his decisions" are made elsewhere.

Only in USA my friends, only in USA..

Originally Posted by lom

Can't really see the difference between making a general out of a noob , or making a president out of him.

Hehe, stroller for president!

Originally Posted by stroller

Originally Posted by lom

Can't really see the difference between making a general out of a noob , or making a president out of him.

Hehe, stroller for president!

Believe what you've got in mind is more along the lines of Fuehrer...

Zieg Hiel!

Originally Posted by stroller

Originally Posted by surasak

The leader of your country should ALWAYS have military experience.

I strongly disagree. That's what you have a ministry of defense and experienced advisers for.
Military nuts should be barred from running for pres.

Agree with you again stroller. No way military experience should be mandatory. The only job I think should have military experience is the SECDEF job. And we need a President who once he decides to use the military be also prepared to totally unleash the hounds ... that's my only complaint about Bush ... he's done better job in this regard than some Presidents ... but he's tempered it with his PC concerns.

Observation: Notice how the current CNN reports in the Israel/Hezbollah conflict only show views of the hills and after affects of attacks ? That's all the fuck you should be seeing in Iraq as well.

Originally Posted by lom

Only in USA my friends, only in USA..

That is a naive statement if I ever saw one. Do you really think the US is unique in this?? Gotta admit though, we sure got the dumbest fuckin' puppet in the show...

GW Bush is a great puppet though

Speaking of puppets and quagmire, this quote almost made me spray my drink all over my monitor:

Olmert called for an international combat force to implement a U.N. resolution calling for Hizbollah to be disarmed, saying Israel had already destroyed much of the group's military power.

Soon after he spoke, one of at least 206 rockets launched by Hizbollah landed just inside the West Bank after flying further than any fired at Israel in the past three weeks.

Israeli police and Hizbollah said it was the highest number of rockets fired into Israel on one day since the war began. The barrage, which killed one person near the northern city of Nahariya, followed a two-day lull in such attacks.

Yeah, you destroyed much of their military power?

Link

12 children killed while playing football and the puppet American government thinks it can take over security by the end of 2006?