Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 35 of 35
  1. #21  
    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    Maybe success will be that we give the Iraqi people a chance to have democracy. What they do with it from that point is up to them.
    t2gungho -- If as is likely, they choose an Islamic republic, closely aligned with Iran -- where the rights of women, minorities, and the non-religious are discriminated against -- will it have been worth it still, will it still be for you a success ??
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  2. #22  
    Barry, it's not up to us. If they are a democratic society - they are free to pursue what they want.
  3. #23  
    You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.
  4. #24  
    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE
    t2gungho -- If as is likely, they choose an Islamic republic, closely aligned with Iran -- where the rights of women, minorities, and the non-religious are discriminated against -- will it have been worth it still, will it still be for you a success ??
    Barye...you need to keep my post in its context. Clulup asked how we could measure success...I responded that "Maybe success is..." If you want to change the hypothetical question...then do so and I will try to answer your question

    My point is that Im not sure what success is and I am not sure that when we decided to go into Iraq that we knew what our definition of success would be. Do I think we are better off without Sadaam...yes. Do I think what we have done would be worth it if we only can measure success by having removed Sadaam....no. For me...to make it worth all that we have lost, Iraq needs to have a democracy. If we decide that everything is ready for us to pull out two years from now and they have less than a democracy and no constitution that protects individual's rights, than I would not consider that a success.
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

  5. #25  
    Quote Originally Posted by cardio
    Where did you get the numbers of precisely 1100 new insurgents (I call them terrorist) for every 1000 killed?
    It was more an example, in the sense of "this is exactly what is happening, insurgents/terrorists are killed, but new ones show up". But the figure is more or less correct, based on the estimates below. It's a constant up and down of course. Fact is, the civilian losses have become greater over time, and the US losses didn't go down.
    Quote Originally Posted by clairegrrl
    He made it up
    You wish.

    http://www.spacewar.com/news/iraq-05zq.html

    Analysis: Iraq Statistics Tell Grim Story
    by Martin Sieff, UPI Senior News Analyst
    Washington DC (UPI) Aug 08, 2005

    If the U.S. Army and its Iraqi allies are killing as many insurgents as reports indicate they are per month, why is the insurgency intensifying instead of collapsing? ...

    After falling from 18,000 in January and February and down to 16,000 in March and April, the U.S. estimate of the strength of the insurgency quietly crept up again from 15,000-20,000 for June to "No more than 20,000" in July, the IIP reported. Yet the U.S. military has also reported or estimated the number of insurgents detained or killed as 21,000 since Sept. 1, 2004, and 2,000 per month through May, June and July. ...

    Therefore, either many of those being killed and detained are not insurgents at all or, far more likely, they are indeed, but in general they are just foot soldiers being scooped up.

    Most alarmingly of all, the figures suggest that the insurgency is able to operate and organize among a far wider cross section of the Sunni Muslim minority in Iraq than the widely quoted estimates have suggested, and that it enjoys a far broader popular support base in the Sunni community This, in fact, is the conclusion reached by several U.S. military analysts, speaking on condition of anonymity to UPI.

    It appears, therefore, that the figures quoted are as accurate and reliable as it is possible for them to be in such a situation. But it is the conclusions to be drawn from them that make the grimmest reading.
    “Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.” (Philip K. ****)
  6. #26  
    Your source doesnt comfirm what your are saying. They are speculating, and even admit that "Those figures are not much lower than the one announced by Gen. Keane, who would have had access to more confidential and detailed data."

    Spacewar and CNN...two highly respected sources for news and information.
    Well behaved women rarely make history
  7. vw2002's Avatar
    Posts
    904 Posts
    Global Posts
    939 Global Posts
    #27  
    "But even the best army cannot compensate for a flawed strategy. They cannot take away inexistent WMDs"

    hussein never made it possible for us to rule that WMD'S were nonexistent.
    inspectors were allowed to look through "token" areas while being prevented from searching many other more suspicious locations at that time, so what would YOU suspect was being hidden there?
    monday morning quarterbacking is so, so easy.
    if we could have searched EVERY location, we wouldn't have had to go in. PERIOD. there would have been no reason. The iraq war, is in many ways, saddam's fault, not because we were flawed in our approach.
    I gotta have more cowbell
  8. #28  
    Quote Originally Posted by vw2002
    "But even the best army cannot compensate for a flawed strategy. They cannot take away inexistent WMDs"

    hussein never made it possible for us to rule that WMD'S were nonexistent.
    inspectors were allowed to look through "token" areas while being prevented from searching many other more suspicious locations at that time, so what would YOU suspect was being hidden there?
    monday morning quarterbacking is so, so easy.
    if we could have searched EVERY location, we wouldn't have had to go in. PERIOD. there would have been no reason. The iraq war, is in many ways, saddam's fault, not because we were flawed in our approach.

    regretably for your side of this argument, as the lead up to war was climaxing, Saddam pulled the string to reveal himself naked and disarmed (something he had tried feverishly to obscure previously).

    The UN was given ABSOLUTE access. Iraqi Scientiists were made available to answer questions. The UN got to see without restriction ANY site they demanded. (Saddam even destroyed all of a missile program he was developiong that was only slightly beyond the agreed distance limits.)

    This comprehensive unfettered inspection included of all of Iraq's WMD facilities. They checked ALL the sites that the pentagon claimed to be chemical, biological, and nuclear violators.

    The UN had already made the preliminary announcement that Iraq was fully cooperating (unlike previously) -- and that they had found NO WMDs.

    Perhaps that's why junior ordered the UN to leave Iraq just weeks before the inspectors were entirely finished -- perhaps that's why junior needed to rush into this war ....
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  9. vw2002's Avatar
    Posts
    904 Posts
    Global Posts
    939 Global Posts
    #29  
    Ill have to check in on what you're claiming. From what I remember, the UN and weapons inspectors were still asking for more time to inspect still more locations before "junior" pulled them out.
    this is why the head of wmd inspectors was upset, because he felt they needed more time, not because they had declared iraq free of wmds.
    I gotta have more cowbell
  10. #30  
    Quote Originally Posted by vw2002
    Ill have to check in on what you're claiming. From what I remember, the UN and weapons inspectors were still asking for more time to inspect still more locations before "junior" pulled them out.
    this is why the head of wmd inspectors was upset, because he felt they needed more time, not because they had declared iraq free of wmds.
    I don't think we really have a conflict --

    yes they wanted more time to FULLY investigate -- but they were already saying that the Iraqis were being completely forthcoming, and that they had not yet found ANY WMDs.
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  11. #31  
    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE
    regretably for your side of this argument, as the lead up to war was climaxing, Saddam pulled the string to reveal himself naked and disarmed (something he had tried feverishly to obscure previously).

    The UN was given ABSOLUTE access. Iraqi Scientiists were made available to answer questions. The UN got to see without restriction ANY site they demanded. (Saddam even destroyed all of a missile program he was developiong that was only slightly beyond the agreed distance limits.)

    This comprehensive unfettered inspection included of all of Iraq's WMD facilities. They checked ALL the sites that the pentagon claimed to be chemical, biological, and nuclear violators.

    The UN had already made the preliminary announcement that Iraq was fully cooperating (unlike previously) -- and that they had found NO WMDs.

    Perhaps that's why junior ordered the UN to leave Iraq just weeks before the inspectors were entirely finished -- perhaps that's why junior needed to rush into this war ....
    Barye....I have addressed this claim of yours at least 4 times (does this time make it 5 ). That is simply not true:

    http://discussion.treocentral.com/sh...6&postcount=47

    http://discussion.treocentral.com/sh...5&postcount=49

    http://discussion.treocentral.com/sh...6&postcount=50

    http://discussion.treocentral.com/sh...&postcount=202


    Other related posts:

    Plan to remove Saddam established and approved under Clinton:
    http://discussion.treocentral.com/sh...&postcount=289

    http://discussion.treocentral.com/sh...&postcount=290


    Democrat Quotes concerning WMDs in Iraq throughout the 90's under Clinton and even after the inspections started again under Bush:

    http://discussion.treocentral.com/tc...2&postcount=36
    Last edited by HobbesIsReal; 08/29/2005 at 07:45 PM.
  12. #32  
    [QUOTE=HobbesIsReal]Barye....I have addressed this claim of yours at least 4 times (does this time make it 5 ). That is simply not true:

    I can't address this now --- but I stand by those statements.

    but please participate in the "saving our soldiers...what would you do differently thread -- it seems the right wing here hasn't the balls to step up and deliver their own answers !!
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  13. #33  
    [QUOTE=BARYE]
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal
    Barye....I have addressed this claim of yours at least 4 times (does this time make it 5 ). That is simply not true:

    I can't address this now --- but I stand by those statements.
    What is not true? That I have not addressed your question, or that the reports from Blix having challenges getting a straight answer from Saddam is false and fraudulent?

    I see you side stepped the claims from the inspectors, the Dems, UN, and other foreign intel yet again!

    but please participate in the "saving our soldiers...what would you do differently thread -- it seems the right wing here hasn't the balls to step up and deliver their own answers !!
    I have been on the road for the last week and have not even opened that thread yet......but it appears that it is revisiting a very similar thread of when I asked for alternatives to Iraq with giving several alternate scenarios nearly 3 months ago..... But I promise to look through it when I can and respond to anything I feel inspired to.

    Okay...So...You Say Never Should Attacked Iraq....Then what would have happened?

    http://discussion.treocentral.com/sh...ad.php?t=89183
    Last edited by HobbesIsReal; 08/29/2005 at 04:59 PM.
  14. vw2002's Avatar
    Posts
    904 Posts
    Global Posts
    939 Global Posts
    #34  
    "but please participate in the "saving our soldiers...what would you do differently thread -- it seems the right wing here hasn't the balls to step up and deliver their own answers"

    - " the balls to step up and deliver their own answers?"

    this is something the american public looked for those who opposed bush to do when they were so vehemently attacking the right from the very beginning!

    sure, everyone was critical of the way the administration was approaching things, but did we hear any brilliant alternatives from the left coupled with their vitriole?

    a resounding no. nothing. just criticism.

    you're urging us to come up with our own answers, solutions, better ways?

    this was something the other side of the isle should have done LONG ago. its interesting that you flip that remark toward the right. amusing.
    I gotta have more cowbell
  15. vw2002's Avatar
    Posts
    904 Posts
    Global Posts
    939 Global Posts
    #35  
    "I can't address this now --- but I stand by those statements."

    you can't address this now? oh how curious! why not?

    I find it interesting that you duck out of answering to this issue and attempt to divert attention elsewhere.

    what was that you said about having the balls to defend certain stances? eh?
    I gotta have more cowbell
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions