What have we learned from Iraq?

[Patroklos]

Interestingly enough, even Iraq would be able to make spare parts for its old Soviet model tanks. Who knows, maybe the USSR even sold to Iraq the license to build spare parts.

Care to provide a location for said tank factory?

Thought not.

[Patroklos]

These very boards were full of people saying that the existence of significant CNB capability was doubtful to say the least.

Actually these boreds were full of people saying America would be brought to its knees by this conflice, losing 10s of thousands. Again, whose version is closer to reality?

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Patroklos


References to pornogaphy are ironic, as you and Boris at lub to your circle jerk.

This sentence doesn't even parse.

If you're going to try to insult me, do it in such a way that I can at least understand what you're saying.

[GePap]

There were about 2 posters in this forum who backed the Iraq war solely for humanitarian reasons, Laz, and smone who used ot have a Kurdish flag. Everyone else went on about violating UN resolutions, but mainly about the grave threat of Iraq's WMD's (anyone remember those UAV's of doom?) and them giving them to AQ.

Arguing against the war were not only pacifists and the "War for OIl" crowd, but people who never believed the notion Iraq was a threat, because they didn't have any WMD"s, or because even if they had they were not a danger.

The only pro-war people who ever made a valid case were Laz and the other guy.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Patroklos


Care to provide a location for said tank factory?

Thought not.

Ahem, numnuts:

spare parts

Who said building whole tanks?

Are you stupid enough to believe the US destroyed all of Iraq's AFV's in the first gulf war?

[KrazyHorse]

I agree. Antebellum, Laz was the only pro-war poster I can remember making a strong case for war based on facts I did not dispute.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Patroklos
It was 30 year old tech that wasn't there after 91

And your point would be... what? Do you even bother to think about what you post?

Let's see... a country that has the world's 4th largest military is reduced to using decades-old tanks that can't hold a candle to modern technology and is essentially neutered military... and this is a problem for whom?

Before 1991, Iraq had a potent military force.

Post 1991, it was little more than slag, up until its complete annihilation in 2002.

Hmmm, looks like sanctions worked.

[Patroklos]

There were about 2 posters in this forum who backed the Iraq war solely for humanitarian reasons, Laz, and smone who used ot have a Kurdish flag. Everyone else went on about violating UN resolutions, but mainly about the grave threat of Iraq's WMD's (anyone remember those UAV's of doom?) and them giving them to AQ.

Arguing against the war were not only pacifists and the "War for OIl" crowd, but people who never believed the notion Iraq was a threat, because they didn't have any WMD"s, or because even if they had they were not a danger.

The only pro-war people who ever made a valid case were Laz and the other guy.

Negative

Most people used the WMD as there MAIN arguement for it because apparently that is all that moves you comotose libs. There are more that a few others that by themselves warrent war, least among them torture and mass murder. Again, not lib priorities.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Patroklos


Actually these boreds were full of people saying America would be brought to its knees by this conflice, losing 10s of thousands. Again, whose version is closer to reality?

Like I said, altering history to make your point.

You can't stand the fact that you were horribly wrong, so you lie about what other people had said in order to make them more wrong.

You're a real catch, pattie..

[Patroklos]

What exactly was I wrong about again?

[Patroklos]

Your right Gepap, I am going to go into my local junk yard right now and build myself a T-72, let alone a hundred of them

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Patroklos
There are more that a few others that by themselves warrent war, least among them torture and mass murder. Again, not lib priorities.

Which, of course, is more patent bull****.

Pre-9/11, the ONLY people saying anything about Afghanistan's mass-murdering, torturing regime were liberal groups like NOW. I remember having it come up frequently in issues groups in college back in 1993/94. Conservatives didn't give a damn. Hell, the Bush Admin. gave the Taliban 100+ million dollars prior to 9/11. Where was their concern for torture and murder then?

Right now, who's speaking out against the torture and mass-murder in Saudi Arabia? It sure ain't the conservatives.

[KrazyHorse]

Unless you're going to now tell me that you never believed in the existence of a significant CNB capability, how about that, for starters?

[GePap]

Originally posted by Patroklos
Your right Gepap, I am going to go into my local junk yard right now and build myself a T-72, let alone a hundred of them

Here is a nice link:

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/iraq/ground-equipment-intro.htm

Educate yourself, then say something. Otherwise you just keep looking like an idiot.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov


Which, of course, is more patent bull****.

Pre-9/11, the ONLY people saying anything about Afghanistan's mass-murdering, torturing regime were liberal groups like NOW. I remember having it come up frequently in issues groups in college back in 1993/94. Conservatives didn't give a damn. Hell, the Bush Admin. gave the Taliban 100+ million dollars prior to 9/11. Where was their concern for torture and murder then?

Right now, who's speaking out against the torture and mass-murder in Saudi Arabia? It sure ain't the conservatives.

The Tals were actually on my **** list of about 5 countries starting in the late 90s. They were exactly the type of country I thought of when I dreamt about humanitarian wars.