Bush is getting desperate in his campaign.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Arrian
Right, sure Ned. Just like we would have won in Vietnam if that goddamned liberal traitor press hadn't mucked it up?



-Arrian

Not necessarily. The problem was that the likes of Kerry delayed peace. You got it BACKWARDS.

[Drachasor]

Originally posted by Defiant


Arrian,
First of all, he never said the War was over, Mission Accomplished for a battle group and we had taken over the infrastructure of Iraq. The war against terror goes on, show me where Bush said the war on terror is over.

He said the war in Iraq was over, and that is what Arrian was talking about. Of course, it isn't really over.

http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/05/01/bush.transcript/index.html

Admiral Kelly, Captain Card, officers and sailors of the USS Abraham Lincoln, my fellow Americans, major combat operations in Iraq have ended. In the battle of Iraq, the United States and our allies have prevailed.

This nation thanks all of the members of our coalition who joined in a noble cause. We thank the armed forces of the United Kingdom, Australia and Poland who shared in the hardships of war. We thank all of the citizens of Iraq who welcomed our troops and joined in the liberation of their own country.

And tonight, I have a special word for Secretary Rumsfeld, for General Franks and for all the men and women who wear the uniform of the United States: America is grateful for a job well done.

Secondly,
Sir Ralf indicated that Fullaja residents are willfully helping the insurgents and I said if that is correct, it makes them like a Japan or Germany, we are against that city. And we should treat it as such, meaning, bringing the devastation so miserable to them, that we take the fight out of them.

That is simply not how you win the hearts and minds of the people. Especially in Iraq, you need to reach out and show people a better way.

Of course, Bush could have stopped the take-over of Fullaja, but he didn't want the deaths during an election year so he didn't order our troops in. So now we aren't even in control of Iraq as much as we could be (not even considering the insufficient troop numbers, etc, etc).

Way to be a leader

-Drachasor

[Drachasor]

Originally posted by Ned
Not necessarily. The problem was that the likes of Kerry delayed peace. You got it BACKWARDS.

A statement with nothing to back it up.

The likes of Kerry are not the likes of Fonda. Kerry and those like him did nothing to delay peace. If anything, such protestors made the war end sooner.

-Drachasor

[Defiant]

Originally posted by Sir Ralph


They are YOUR enemies. I doubt the majority in Iraq calls, for example, Fallujahs population "enemy".



I doubt you would gain the trust of the rest of the Iraqis by slaughtering their brothers, and be it only "a fraction". Imagine, for some reason the USA were occupied by a foreign power and there would be an uprising, say, in California, against the occupants. If they would squash it by firebombing (like you said), or by slaughtering the "rebels" otherwise, would the rest of the American population now obey?



If you try to impose a democracy in the Iraqis (or anybody else for that matter), you will fail miserably. You can not force a democracy at a gun point. The Iraqis will choose their form of government themselves, and if they choose to be a Theocracy, so be it.

I don't know where you are getting the Iraqi brotherhood from, Kurds really don't care for the Sunni Muslims and we know how well the ****tes and Sunni Muslims care about each other. In all honesty at this time I don't think the Shiite's give a rats ass what happens to the Sunni Muslims.

BTW, the USA did have that happen, it was around the 1860's and we called it the Civil War, we killed alot of Americans in those 4 years.

[Defiant]

Originally posted by Drachasor


He said the war in Iraq was over, and that is what Arrian was talking about. Of course, it isn't really over.

http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/05/01/bush.transcript/index.html

That is simply not how you win the hearts and minds of the people. Especially in Iraq, you need to reach out and show people a better way.

Of course, Bush could have stopped the take-over of Fullaja, but he didn't want the deaths during an election year so he didn't order our troops in. So now we aren't even in control of Iraq as much as we could be (not even considering the insufficient troop numbers, etc, etc).

Way to be a leader

-Drachasor

The war over in Iraq is the Infrastructure being controlled and we did that, this is the war on terror in Iraq, now. You have outsiders and some remnents of Saddam fighting. When they are beheading civilians, blowing up school children, this is not a country war, it is a terror war and that is what we are fighting.

OK, so if Bush could have taken Falluja earlier, I agree and we should have, why is he now piling up forces around Falluja getting ready for a massive assault in an election year, just days away?

[Arrian]

You overestimate the divisions between the Sunnis and Shiites. Nothing unifies a divided people more than an outside invader.

Ned,

So you believe that the USA would have gotten out of Vietnam (I assume with what Nixon termed "peace with honor") sooner had people not protested the war? I'm EXTREMELY skeptical of that argument, if I understand you correctly.

-Arrian

[Ned]

Originally posted by Drachasor


A statement with nothing to back it up.

The likes of Kerry are not the likes of Fonda. Kerry and those like him did nothing to delay peace. If anything, such protestors made the war end sooner.

-Drachasor

I have repeatedly quoted the NV negotiators themselves to this effect. I have also pointed to Kerry's shrine in the NV War Memorial.

Please, please accept what I say as true, or search here in Apolyton for another of my transcriptions of their negotiating points.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Arrian
Ned,

So you believe that the USA would have gotten out of Vietnam (I assume with what Nixon termed "peace with honor") sooner had people not protested the war? I'm EXTREMELY skeptical of that argument, if I understand you correctly.

-Arrian

Arrian, you misunderstand. Nixon was elected to end the war. What he found when peace talks first began is an intransigent NV position calling for unilateral US withdrawal. The NV informed Kissinger/Nixon that all they had to do was wait and the peace movement would force a withdrawal.

The peace movement had nothing to do with "Nixon" decision to withdraw from Vietnam.

[Defiant]

Originally posted by Sava
Did you even listen to that speech? He said major combat operations are over. We need to come up with a name for the universe you live in... it's not quite the Nedaverse... maybe the Defiantaverse.

Do we still have two naval battlegroups attacking Iraq? Are the majority of the Abhrams firing everyday, are we facing a mechanized army, execept for Falluja does the enemy controll any infrastructures that need to be taken. We now what world you live in, CIRCUSWORLD.
We are facing stragglers and terrorists.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Sir Ralph

If you try to impose a democracy in the Iraqis (or anybody else for that matter), you will fail miserably. You can not force a democracy at a gun point. The Iraqis will choose their form of government themselves, and if they choose to be a Theocracy, so be it.

This is more racist garbage you hear constantly from the left. It justifies their coddling of dictators worldwide. It prevent anyone for actually doing something in this world about oppression and the lack of human rights. This viewpoint is inhumane and insufferable -- akin in many respect to the opposition of the Republican Party just prior to the Civil War.

[Defiant]

Originally posted by Arrian
You overestimate the divisions between the Sunnis and Shiites. Nothing unifies a divided people more than an outside invader.

Ned,

So you believe that the USA would have gotten out of Vietnam (I assume with what Nixon termed "peace with honor") sooner had people not protested the war? I'm EXTREMELY skeptical of that argument, if I understand you correctly.

-Arrian

Yea, the Iraq-Iran war really proves that point, what did they kill between them, a million, yea we can do so much worse.

[Drachasor]

Originally posted by Ned
I have repeatedly quoted the NV negotiators themselves to this effect. I have also pointed to Kerry's shrine in the NV War Memorial.

Please, please accept what I say as true, or search here in Apolyton for another of my transcriptions of their negotiating points.

The shrine is to him trying to make peace, was it not? (though I admit I can find no evidence on the 'net--including reliable news sites) that this even exists.

The only other evidence is that he talked to the NV negotiators about releasing POWs and trying to get peace to happen sooner.

-Drachasor

[Drachasor]

Originally posted by Defiant
Yea, the Iraq-Iran war really proves that point, what did they kill between them, a million, yea we can do so much worse.

The test is not wether we can be better than the Iraq-Iran war, the test is wether we can win the peace and convey our friendship and peaceful desires with Iraq and the Middle East. Massive deaths are not going to do that.

-Drachasor

[Sava]

Originally posted by Defiant


Do we still have two naval battlegroups attacking Iraq? Are the majority of the Abhrams firing everyday, are we facing a mechanized army, execept for Falluja does the enemy controll any infrastructures that need to be taken. We now what world you live in, CIRCUSWORLD.
We are facing stragglers and terrorists.

and they seem to be doing a good job killing Americans... I think you underestimate the enemy.

[Drachasor]

Originally posted by Ned


This is more racist garbage you hear constantly from the left. It justifies their coddling of dictators worldwide. It prevent anyone for actually doing something in this world about oppression and the lack of human rights. This viewpoint is inhumane and insufferable -- akin in many respect to the opposition of the Republican Party just prior to the Civil War.

His point was that if they democratically choose to have a theocracy, then what can we do?

You can't force democracy on people that choose something else. If they choose something else then it is indicative of not being ready for a democracy; but in time they will become so.

-Drachasor