Start of Civil War? Attacks Across Iraq!

[Felch]

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse
Others would say the winning part is not essential and probably in conlfict with the second part.

I understand what you're saying, but America has the power to intimidate weaker nations into capitulating. It's about time we did.

And I also agree that the spin was mishanded from the start. This might just be a lost cause. But so it goes.

[Alexander's Horse]

Originally posted by Felch


I understand what you're saying, but America has the power to intimidate weaker nations into capitulating. It's about time we did.

Wouldn't that be counterproductive - exactly what OBL wants?

And I also agree that the spin was mishanded from the start. This might just be a lost cause. But so it goes.

It can be corrected but it takes time - and pollies have to stick to the "hard road ahead" line - but they find that very hard to do when elections are looming.

[monkspider]

It's unfortunate that the madness of war can turn otherwise good men into monsters.

[Bosh]

Well, even if they are innocent, I don't care. Evil is nothing to me. And I doubt you'll have to kill 8 million people. But I'm willing to support a President who does. I'm an American, not an Arab, and the only people I care about are Americans and people that are friendly to or at least don't kill Americans.

So you're saying that you'd happily support large-scale genocide? That's nice...

[Alexander's Horse]

I don't think he means it.

[Felch]

Yeah, you're probably right. I'm kind of bored with this troll anyways.

[Alexander's Horse]

takes one to know one

[Pax]

I once again ask people like felch, if the tables were turned what would you do. Do you think that the Iraqi's are not justified in their actions. You say you have a problem with americans your age being killed but they were sent there and they do not seem to have been welcomed or at least have overstayed there welcome. At this point when Saddam Hussein is no longer in power the Iraqi's should be grateful to us if he was so bad. But they're not.
Why do you propose to continue to try to force your will on foreign soil. They have not been linked to any attack on U.S. interests prior to the invasion so by definition our soldiers there are not fighting the war on terror.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Pax Africanus
I once again ask people like felch, if the tables were turned what would you do.

The problem is that even if we concede that the cause maybe just, it becomes tainted by the actions of the people carrying it out. Jus in bello and all that rot you know.

[Docfeelgood]

Iraq-NAM?



Boy, what a quagmire

[PLATO]

Originally posted by Docfeelgood
Iraq-NAM?

Iraqification?

[Argos65987]

Originally posted by monkspider
It's unfortunate that the madness of war can turn otherwise good men into monsters.

This is profound.

[Tripledoc]

There seems to be 135.000 American soldiers, as opposed to the stated offcial occupation force of 125.000, in Iraq now. This because of the current rotation.

The generals are exploring various options.

http://customwire.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_IRAQ?SITE=AKKEN&SECTION=HOME

Some sort of escalation seems likely now.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Felch
If not, then B-52s can carpet bomb the city, with a mixture of high explosive, incendiary, and possibly chemical munitions. I'm not an expert, but I'm sure people in the Pentagon know how to destroy cities.

Terrorism.

[Ted Striker]

MOBIUS did you get a hard on when you posted this?