Occupation death toll of U.S. troops equal to that of war

[chequita guevara]

Here's my opinion. I was absolutely opposed to the war. Now that it's over and we've destroyed their infrastructure and society, we have an obligation to fix it. That means we stay and die.

[Bereta_Eder]

you cant! your deficit is skyrocketing. you're reduced to pleed for europe's assistance and accept the un in iraq.


of course are unifrom responce is **** the **** off!

not to you of coruse che. to the bush hurt my eye administration/.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by MOBIUS
Another British soldier dead...

A couple of Americans died as well, but that's becoming so common now that it's almost not newsworthy.

The Americans also seem to be admitting defeat to such an extent that after previously refusing UN military help, they're actually begging for it!

What a humiliating climb down...

Well, that fantasy seems to get you off, so go for it. If we're "admitting defeat" that's kinda funny, since we still own the ****ing country.

And asking the UN is a no-lose proposition. If we get the help, it increases the density of forces in critical areas because we can concentrate there. If we don't get the help, then Bush can say "we asked, and those petty gutless bastards won't help rebuild Iraq, so we have to secure the peace ourselves."

Either way, like it or not, we still run Iraq and we ain't going anywhere.

Hoo-ah!

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by paiktis22
of course are unifrom responce is **** the **** off!

I don't know for greece, but quite a few UN countries (at least France and India) would be eager to help if the UN takes control. I suppose it means to give these countries their share of the loot as well.

Give some loot, restore the importance of the UN, and I'm sure you'll have plenty of French blue helmets smiling at USUK soldiers

[Bereta_Eder]

EURO PUSSIES

**** USA!

[Bereta_Eder]

but i suppose yeah. if un takes controil and shoves it up bush's ass we'll all help and make money

[Verto]

What will change if the UN takes control? What kind of difference will there be? I don't understand why France is insisting the UN commander not be American, before they will go along with the plan.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Verto
What will change if the UN takes control? What kind of difference will there be? I don't understand why France is insisting the UN commander not be American, before they will go along with the plan.

There are two reasons for that:

1. The UN is the only tool for France to have worldwide diplomatic power. The EU could become one in the future, but isn't mature enough to be it today.
So, France wants to have an as much powerful UN as possible, because it makes France indirectly more powerful. Besides, the French public opinion widely holds the UN as the only bastion of international legitimacy. So, the French people will back any policy that empowers the UN.

2. If the UN takes control, you can bet it won't give all the reconstruction contracts to Halliburton et al. You can bet the UN sponsored Iraqi regime will give exploitation contracts to Exxon and other American companies, but also to British BP, French Elf, Russian I-forgot-the-name etc.
This is a very simple matter of realpolitik. OTOH, the French diplomats aren't playing snotty or being all "I told you so". They're really cooperating with American diplomats to find an agreement that'll fill our purse, and that'll cut some slack to Bush's popularity.

A win-win situation of sorts. Sure the Iraqi riches will continue to be raped by the west, but that'll be by the WHOLE west

[Ted Striker]

Greece is like paiktis

Always thinking of putting something up another man's arse

[Bereta_Eder]

Ted is like USA: always happy to take it up the ass when it screwed itself over


Spiffor true the whole west. what a shame. Freedom for Iraq!

[Odin]

Sava has had the most sense in this whole thread.

Anyway, anybody can connect Cheney's connections with Haliburton to Bush giving Haliburton the cintracts. If you don't understand that example of CORRUPTION you are a moron or are in denial. I know also why the Chickenhawks don't want the UN in, they would have to take out the Haliburton contractors, and they won't disobey thier corporate overlords. I was not against this war, I am just mad at the the neo-cons giving the UN the finger and lying about WMDs to appease thier Big Business masters. Bush changing the excuse from WMDs to liberation also ticks me off. I can't believe people follow him like lemmings walking off a cliff. Neo-cons deserve to be beaten to death because of thier lying caused the death of 100's of US and British troops.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat

And asking the UN is a no-lose proposition. If we get the help, it increases the density of forces in critical areas because we can concentrate there. If we don't get the help, then Bush can say "we asked, and those petty gutless bastards won't help rebuild Iraq, so we have to secure the peace ourselves."

Maybe once the United States pays the United Nations what it owes them, the United Nations might be more willing.

[Odin]

Originally posted by MrFun


Maybe once the United States pays the United Nations what it owes them, the United Nations might be more willing.

The US should be banned from the UNSC untill it pays it's dues.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Then we just kick their ass out of New York and redevelop the real estate.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Odin
Neo-cons deserve to be beaten to death because of thier lying caused the death of 100's of US and British troops.

Don't forget the thousands of Iraqis killed. Does anybody know the precise bodycount of the war, both sides, civilians and miltaries added ?