Analysis: Iraqi Insurgency Growing Larger, More Effective

[Sgt Schultz]

Originally posted by LoungeMachine
define the word WIN in your view of this "war", and I'll answer the question.

jesus h christ

You stated "As far as Team Bush is concerned Oil flowing to us freely will be a "win" ". No matter what terms I state, you'll say it hasn't happened or it isn't possible. The leftists have it set up so no matter what, we'll have "lost" in Iraq. You know damn well what "winning"in Iraq is. My question remains - do you WANT the U.S. to win the war in Iraq" Yes or no?

I'll make the question easier for you. 100 years from now historians are writing books about the war in Iraq and they conclude that the U.S. "won" the war because their objectives
1. Find and destroy wmd and the capability to make them
2. Oust Saddam Hussein adn the Ba'athists from power
3. Set up an interim government
4. Hold elections

my question to you is - are you in favor of the objectives that the U.S. have already won and are you in favor of the U.S. winning future objectives as I have outlined? Can I make it any more clear?

[Knucklebones]

Originally posted by Sgt Schultz
Again, what is your point? That Americans did business with the German government in the 1930s? Is that your point? Then I take it back, Loftus is a genius.

Ah, he has reading comprehension problems. Sorry bout you being a dumbass.



The point is that the BUSH family did business with the NAZIS DURING WWII, even after Pearl Harbor. Which was how the Nazi war machine was funded, and how the Bush family became extremely rich.

[ELVIS]

How is it their oil, anyway ??

[kentuckyklira]

Originally posted by Sgt Schultz
Hey German fuckhead - it's too bad we missed your grandparents the last time, maybe next time. Fucking loser assholes like you who are for the Iraqi insurgents can go fuck off and die. Hopefully the latter. Fucking pathetic moron who doesn't even realize that the only reason he's able to fucking type his shit is because we liberated his fuckign country - FUCK YOU!

You sound like you appreciate a major owning, be my guest!

You "liberated" my country! Bullshit. Your ancestors gave us our, more or less, "freedom" because we were needed as a propaganda role model. Ask the people of Chile and/or Nicaragua what it´s like to be "liberated" with US help when leaving a good impression is of no profit to the USA.

BTW, history lesson, West Germany only got its full sovereignity (at least on paper) in 1953 after our government agreed to put up and pay for a new German army to become part of NATO so the USA could save some dough fighting their cold war. Before that most of our government´s decisions had to be OK´d by the allied command.

Plus, as another piece of evidence to our "liberty", Stalin offered West Germany the reunification with East Germany and full sovereignity if it didn´t join NATO. Our government, that even had German unification as one of the #1 goals in its constitution declined. Figure out why!

[Knucklebones]

1. Find and destroy wmd and the capability to make them
2. Oust Saddam Hussein adn the Ba'athists from power
3. Set up an interim government
4. Hold elections

1. Is not possible if we don't find them
2. To be replaced by?
3. So hows that going
4. Research a bit more about Shi'ite and Sunni culture will ya

[ELVIS]

Schults, you should make your posts look like this...

I enjoy your intelligent posts, but it's hard to read with multiple quotes...

You stated:

As far as Team Bush is concerned Oil flowing to us freely will be a "win" .

No matter what terms I state, you'll say it hasn't happened or it isn't possible. The leftists have it set up so no matter what, we'll have "lost" in Iraq. You know damn well what "winning"in Iraq is. My question remains - do you WANT the U.S. to win the war in Iraq" Yes or no?

I'll make the question easier for you. 100 years from now historians are writing books about the war in Iraq and they conclude that the U.S. "won" the war because their objectives
1. Find and destroy wmd and the capability to make them
2. Oust Saddam Hussein adn the Ba'athists from power
3. Set up an interim government
4. Hold elections

my question to you is - are you in favor of the objectives that the U.S. have already won and are you in favor of the U.S. winning future objectives as I have outlined? Can I make it any more clear?

[LoungeMachine]

Originally posted by Sgt Schultz


I'll make the question easier for you. 100 years from now historians are writing books about the war in Iraq and they conclude that the U.S. "won" the war because their objectives


1. Find and destroy wmd and the capability to make them

HISTORY WILL SHOW THEY WERE NEVER THERE, JUST AS THE AMINISTRATION WAS TOLD, EXCEPT BY TENET AND CHALABI

2. Oust Saddam Hussein adn the Ba'athists from power

WHICH SINCE RETURNED TO POWER BY ELECTIONS

3. Set up an interim government

WHICH COULDNT EVEN KEEP A POLICE FORCE ALIVE

4. Hold elections

WHICH CARRIED ONLY SYMBOLS OF THE PARTIES, AND NOT THE NAMES OF THE CANDIDATES, AND WERE ONLY VIABLE IN 58% OF THE COUNTRY

? Can I make it any more clear?

No, your revisionist history made your agenda perfectly clear.

I like those rose colored glasses you have.

[LoungeMachine]

Originally posted by ELVIS
How is it their oil, anyway ??

You're an Idiot

[Knucklebones]

Originally posted by kentuckyklira
You sound like you appreciate a major owning, be my guest!

You "liberated" my country! Bullshit. Your ancestors gave us our, more or less, "freedom" because we were needed as a propaganda role model. Ask the people of Chile and/or Nicaragua what it´s like to be "liberated" with US help when leaving a good impression is of no profit to the USA.

BTW, history lesson, West Germany only got its full sovereignity (at least on paper) in 1953 after our government agreed to put up and pay for a new German army to become part of NATO so the USA could save some dough fighting their cold war. Before that most of our government´s decisions had to be OK´d by the allied command.

Plus, as another piece of evidence to our "liberty", Stalin offered West Germany the reunification with East Germany and full sovereignity if it didn´t join NATO. Our government, that even had German unification as one of the #1 goals in its constitution declined. Figure out why!

I actually HAD a classmate from South America once. When the history teacher said something about the U.S, having a history of being saviors, he broke down and started yelling about the time U.S. forces came into his town and started gunning "the enemy" down. The nemy being random civilians, his friends, neighbors, family.

Then he said how the U.S. said it was necessary to out some drug lord or something. His father was some sorta military figure knowledgable about these kind if things and told him no, it was not necessary.

About half way through his outburst he started saying FUCK the US! They aren't fucking saviors! etc etc.

[Sgt Schultz]

Originally posted by kentuckyklira
You sound like you appreciate a major owning, be my guest!

You "liberated" my country! Bullshit. Your ancestors gave us our, more or less, "freedom" because we were needed as a propaganda role model. Ask the people of Chile and/or Nicaragua what it´s like to be "liberated" with US help when leaving a good impression is of no profit to the USA.

BTW, history lesson, West Germany only got its full sovereignity (at least on paper) in 1953 after our government agreed to put up and pay for a new German army to become part of NATO so the USA could save some dough fighting their cold war. Before that most of our government´s decisions had to be OK´d by the allied command.

Plus, as another piece of evidence to our "liberty", Stalin offered West Germany the reunification with East Germany and full sovereignity if it didn´t join NATO. Our government, that even had German unification as one of the #1 goals in its constitution declined. Figure out why!

You are a prime example of a post-moderinist, leftist Euroweenie who refuses to accept reality. You have lived in you safe little cocoon courtesy of the United States and have had the luxury of pacifist thought and self-denial. That's fine, because nothing will make you see differently - until you are forced to face your enemies ALONE. And when that happens you will come crawling to the U.S.

I have some questions for you moron - did Stalin consider Eastern bloc countries "sovereign"? Have you ever heard of the Marshall plan?

[whodat]

can you guys imagine with our troops in iraq, what syria and iran could do to us in addition to the threat from south korea. he us at our weakest regarding our troops. Who is protecting our borders other than the gringos and the police department. yea we have national gaurd but the majority of our forces are abroad. what say you guys?

[kentuckyklira]

Originally posted by Sgt Schultz
How interesting. The U.S and Britain liberated Germany, the Soviets occupied it and took it over.

History lesson, part 2.

In the first 2 years after WWII people were starving and freezing in the western occupation zones, while the USSR fed and kept the East Germans from freezing. Only after the cold war was imminent and the USSR started using the better shape East Germans were in for propaganda did the US, UK and the French start providing enough food and heating fuel to West Germans.

Originally posted by Sgt Schultz
Ever hear of the Berlin Wall?

Of course. And who watched it being built?? After all, an expert like you ought to know that West Berlin was under allied command till 1990! It only became an official and sovereign part of Germany after German reunification.

Originally posted by Sgt Schultz
And then to make this leap into the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan and comparing it to the U.S. in Iraq- it's so ludicrous I wouldn't even know where to begin.

What?? The USSR invaded Afghanistan to install a puppet government and reap the profits of Afghanistan´s strategic location.

The USA invaded Iraq for no different reason, especially if you consider controlling the world´s second largest oil reserves as a strategic advantage!

[Sgt Schultz]

Originally posted by LoungeMachine
No, your revisionist history made your agenda perfectly clear.

I like those rose colored glasses you have.

Care to answer yet?

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by Sgt Schultz
So since you won’t answer the question (don’t feel too bad, most lefties won’t answer) whether you want the U.S. to win the war or not I’ll guess that you DON’T want the U.S. to win the war. Bringing up the lame “chickenhawk” argument AGAIN I see? Fine.

Since you are in favor of the U.S. LOSING in Iraq and I’m sure you were not in favor of the war to begin with, and since there were no wmd then you are in favor of a return of Saddam Hussein, and since you and other leftists believe that free speech (in favor of winning the war) has certain caveats then I say that YOUR free speech means that YOU should show us all how YOU want to go live in Iraq after Saddam has been put back in power.

Actually I am in favor of a negotiated settlement that guarantees that the Sunni's aren't slaughtered by the Shiites and the Shiites aren't bombed out of existence if we draw down our forces and stop exposing our troops to roadside bombs and ambushes. There, now that's a creative solution. But it is really difficult to debate with someone that doesn't know what the fuck he is talking about when it comes to military matters and gives me black-and-white edicts. Saddam, back in power? He'll be killed by Shiite factions before he can utter allah akbar.

Then you dodge questions regarding your own commitment to the war effort so enthusiastically supported. Your chickenhawk stuff is weak dude, the argument notwithstanding, one must admit the members of congress are more enthusiastic to drop bombs and ship out Marines when their children are in some fucking law school somewhere instead of serving. So, like it or not not, the chickenhawk argument (that you named 'preemptively') is a valid one when you seem so full-throttle to fight to the last American in Iraq, victory or death, and spout your schoolboy speeches.

I can tell you really must have a political science degree, or perhaps you have extensively written about the geopolitical aspects of the Vietnam war? Or the Middle East for that matter?

Again, in another thread you spout your little preemptive chickenhawk statement, but don't come at me with your "I'm a super-patriot but I don't have to serve to be one" bullshit when you speak out of two sides of your mouth!

You sit here and give me your retarded absolutist "You're either with us or against us crap" but then tell everyone that you can be for the war but never serve! Yeah right, instead of "hit drum" or "'strum guitar," why don't you 'enlist Army' and 'pull trigger?' tough guy! Then you can be all tough and macho, with your worthless black-and-white, simple-minded solutions! You can really go get those Saddam lovin' Sunni Baathists!

Just try the National Guard, it's only one weekend a month, two weeks a year! Then you can come back and tell us all the answers supa'-patriot!

[LoungeMachine]

Originally posted by Sgt Schultz
Care to answer yet?

Read it again

I answered your hypothetical "history" with my own