|
|
Post by roxxstar on Jan 7, 2009 19:00:03 GMT -6
www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/01/07/army-apologies-sending-john-doe-letters-survivors/ This is pretty fucked up. Can you imagine getting one of these letters and having it being addressed to "John Doe"? Talk about insensitive. Mistake or no, this is a PR nightmare. On a side note, 7,000 letters to family members who had loved ones die in these two wars. That's an awful lot of people who had their mom, dad, brother, sister, etc die. At least they died for a good reason I guess. Wait........what's the reason again? 
|
|
|
|
Post by Iowafan1 on Jan 7, 2009 19:08:20 GMT -6
Why don't you ask virtually every Democrat and republican who voted yeah on Iraq. Nothing quite like you playing Monday morning quarterback.
|
|
|
|
Post by TBELL on Jan 7, 2009 19:12:20 GMT -6
Wow....just wow.
|
|
|
|
Post by MoHawk on Jan 7, 2009 21:37:04 GMT -6
Why don't you ask virtually every Democrat and republican who voted yeah on Iraq. Nothing quite like you playing Monday morning quarterback. At least they realized they'd made a mistake and owed up to them. There is little doubt we were led into Iraq under false pretenses. We as a nation were lied to by people who had wanted war with Saddam for quite sometime. I think Bush actually had little to do with it. I think blame can be laid at the feet of his advisors who either blatantly lied to him or were too dumb to not make sure the intelligence they were given was completely accurate. That said is it your opinion Iowafan that admitting you were wrong about something in the past is somehow showing weakness? I prefer those who constantly re-evaluate their opinions based on new information. On top of that, what the hell was the army doing in this case? Who could possibly be dumb enough to send that out? |
|
|
|
Post by Iowafan1 on Jan 8, 2009 6:58:33 GMT -6
Why don't you ask virtually every Democrat and republican who voted yeah on Iraq. Nothing quite like you playing Monday morning quarterback. At least they realized they'd made a mistake and owed up to them. There is little doubt we were led into Iraq under false pretenses. We as a nation were lied to by people who had wanted war with Saddam for quite sometime. I think Bush actually had little to do with it. I think blame can be laid at the feet of his advisors who either blatantly lied to him or were too dumb to not make sure the intelligence they were given was completely accurate. That said is it your opinion Iowafan that admitting you were wrong about something in the past is somehow showing weakness? I prefer those who constantly re-evaluate their opinions based on new information. On top of that, what the hell was the army doing in this case? Who could possibly be dumb enough to send that out? Your left wing conspiracy theory immediately throws your credibility in the toilet. Having said that, by the time the "mistakes" were owned up to as you say, we were already neck deep in Iraq. Whether you choose to acknowledge it or not, many more thousands of people would have been killed had we withdrawn at the time the "mistakes" were found. Just FWIW, you do realize the following, don't you?: 1. Saddam acknowledged having WMD's at the time of Desert Storm surrender. 2. As part of the Desert Storm surrender decree, Saddam agreed to destroy all WMD's. 3. As part of the Desert Storm surrender decree, Saddam agreed to document the destruction, including the disposal sites of the WMD's. 4. As part of the Desert Storm surrender decree, Saddam agreed to allow unlimited, unfettered access to weapons inspectors to oversee and confirm that #'s 2 and 3 were being complied with. 5. In violation of the surrender decree, Saddam routinely prevented the weapons inspectors from fulfilling their mission or evicted them out of the country altogether.......double digit UN resolutions ring a bell? 6. Saddam easily could have prevented the entire invasion by simply abiding by the terms of the Desert Storm surrender decree. 7. To this day, those WMD's have not been accounted for. Please don't pretend that the WMD's, or "mistakes" as you call them, weren't ever there. You further drag your credibility into the gutter by doing so. |
|
|
|
Post by MoHawk on Jan 8, 2009 7:38:26 GMT -6
I never said we should leave Iraq ASAP. Thanks for putting words in my mouth. YOUR credibility is shit my friend because you refuse to admit that there are often more than just liberal and conservative ideas on issues.
I could care less what some dittohead thinks of my opinion because you know what? At least it is MY opinion. I'm not sure you can say the same thing about yours.
|
|
|
|
Post by socal on Jan 8, 2009 9:30:46 GMT -6
Your left wing conspiracy theory immediately throws your credibility in the toilet. Having said that... Having said exactly what? That by ignoring the facts again in the hope that closing your eyes and chanting ad hominem BS that's been thoroughly refuted many times... will keep you from pineapple enemas in hell? Why would we give a shit if Saddam said he had WMD's? We friggin knew he had WMD's --- because we gave him the receipt. Having said that... What always fails to link up in the minds of you water-brains... What is the shelf life of VX/Nerve Gas/Botulinium (things we sold to Saddam) when stored in desert warehouses? Someday before you meet your maker, you should spend a bit of time on "the Google" - searching for "Iraq weapons inspectors", and "Iraq No Fly Zone". |
|
|
|
Post by roxxstar on Jan 8, 2009 11:20:43 GMT -6
Why don't you ask virtually every Democrat and republican who voted yeah on Iraq. Nothing quite like you playing Monday morning quarterback. I don't really care which Democrats voted for the war. I don't really care what Republicans voted for the war. It's not a partisan issue. Most things in life that are not black and white. Everything is not a Republican vs. Democrat thing, no matter how much you want it to be. Some things are just about right vs. wrong, smart vs. stupid, good vs. evil, etc. Regardless of who voted for what, the war in Iraq was/is a stupid fucking war. The whole reason this shit started was because terrorists attacked us on our own soil, killing over 3,000 people. So we, as a nation, became pissed off and wanted revenge. I understand and relate to that. I was fucking pissed off too. My gut instinct was to go an a rampage as well. But, revenge is a flawed concept. It doesn't ulitmately help anything. So, what did our government do? We decided to go after Bin Laden and Al Queda. In doing that we invade Afghanistan and the Taliban (who is supporting Al Queda). We bomb the shit out them, kill a bunch of their guys, kill even more innocent civilians, and put a pretty good hurting on their organization. But ulitmately, we can't wrangle up the ring leader (the guy everyone ultimately wants punished). Now, up to this point I can sort of get behind what we did. I, personally, don't believe that humankind will ever evolve if we stick with an "eye for an eye" mentality. But that is neither here nor there. The majority of Americans wanted this done and we did it. Now here is where the story takes some weird fucking turn that doesn't make any sense. Somehow, the government uses this never before witnessed climate of fear, (pepertuated by the government itself) that every American is vulnerable to an attack from terrorists at any second of any day at any place, to pull off a sleight of hand move rivaled only by the likes of magicians such as David Blaine. This sleight of hand move was to convince the American public (not exactly the smartest group of people, as a whole, to begin with) that we should initiate a full scale invasion of Iraq. Wait a minute.........what the fuck just happened? What the hell does Iraq have to do with 9/11? I'll tell you what is has to do with 9/11, nothing. The government was under pressure to find Bin Laden and couldn't. They needed a more palpable enemy; one they knew where to find. So the next thing you know Saddam is the new enemy and we have to go after him. It's like some sick magic trick where the magician has you watching him make an egg transform into a dove, but then secretly shoves a banana up your ass. WTF? So, here we are 8 years later and what has transpired? Al Queda kills 3,000 Americans. In turn we have lost over 4,500 American troops in retaliation. We have killed, depending on what sources your read, anywhere from 25,000 to 150,000 innocent civilians in these two wars. If you take a step back and look at those numbers, you see why revenge is a flawed concept. We lost more Americans then we did as a result of 9/11. And what's even further depressing; we have killed countless thousands of innocent civilians who had jack shit to do with 9/11. After all of that is said and done, we still don't know where Bin Laden is. And ultimately, we really aren't any safer then we were. Evil people can still attack Americans on American soil at any time and any place.  |
|
|
|
Post by socal on Jan 8, 2009 11:59:51 GMT -6
I don't really care which Democrats voted for the war. I don't really care what Republicans voted for the war. It's not a partisan issue. Most things in life that are not black and white. Everything is not a Republican vs. Democrat thing, no matter how much you want it to be. Some things are just about right vs. wrong, smart vs. stupid, good vs. evil, etc. Regardless of who voted for what, the war in Iraq was/is a stupid fucking war. The whole reason this shit started was because terrorists attacked us on our own soil, killing over 3,000 people. So we, as a nation, became pissed off and wanted revenge. I understand and relate to that. I was fucking pissed off too. My gut instinct was to go an a rampage as well. But, revenge is a flawed concept. It doesn't ulitmately help anything. So, what did our government do? We decided to go after Bin Laden and Al Queda. In doing that we invade Afghanistan and the Taliban (who is supporting Al Queda). We bomb the shit out them, kill a bunch of their guys, kill even more innocent civilians, and put a pretty good hurting on their organization. But ulitmately, we can't wrangle up the ring leader (the guy everyone ultimately wants punished). Now, up to this point I can sort of get behind what we did. I, personally, don't believe that humankind will ever evolve if we stick with an "eye for an eye" mentality. But that is neither here nor there. The majority of Americans wanted this done and we did it. Now here is where the story takes some weird fucking turn that doesn't make any sense. Somehow, the government uses this never before witnessed climate of fear, (pepertuated by the government itself) that every American is vulnerable to an attack from terrorists at any second of any day at any place, to pull off a sleight of hand move rivaled only by the likes of magicians such as David Blaine. This sleight of hand move was to convince the American public (not exactly the smartest group of people, as a whole, to begin with) that we should initiate a full scale invasion of Iraq. Wait a minute.........what the f**k just happened? What the hell does Iraq have to do with 9/11? I'll tell you what is has to do with 9/11, nothing. The government was under pressure to find Bin Laden and couldn't. They needed a more palpable enemy; one they knew where to find. So the next thing you know Saddam is the new enemy and we have to go after him. It's like some sick magic trick where the magician has you watching him make an egg transform into a dove, but then secretly shoves a banana up your ass. WTF? So, here we are 8 years later and what has transpired? Al Queda kills 3,000 Americans. In turn we have lost over 4,500 American troops in retaliation. We have killed, depending on what sources your read, anywhere from 25,000 to 150,000 innocent civilians in these two wars. If you take a step back and look at those numbers, you see why revenge is a flawed concept. We lost more Americans then we did as a result of 9/11. And what's even further depressing; we have killed countless thousands of innocent civilians who had jack shit to do with 9/11. After all of that is said and done, we still don't know where Bin Laden is. And ultimately, we really aren't any safer then we were. Evil people can still attack Americans on American soil at any time and any place. Related: www.theonion.com/content/news/terror_experts_warn_next_9_11 |
|
|
|
Post by roxxstar on Jan 8, 2009 12:40:02 GMT -6
That's pretty funny.
|
|
|
|
Post by lpcalihawk on Jan 8, 2009 12:45:12 GMT -6
At least they realized they'd made a mistake and owed up to them. There is little doubt we were led into Iraq under false pretenses. We as a nation were lied to by people who had wanted war with Saddam for quite sometime. I think Bush actually had little to do with it. I think blame can be laid at the feet of his advisors who either blatantly lied to him or were too dumb to not make sure the intelligence they were given was completely accurate. That said is it your opinion Iowafan that admitting you were wrong about something in the past is somehow showing weakness? I prefer those who constantly re-evaluate their opinions based on new information. On top of that, what the hell was the army doing in this case? Who could possibly be dumb enough to send that out? Your left wing conspiracy theory immediately throws your credibility in the toilet. Having said that, by the time the "mistakes" were owned up to as you say, we were already neck deep in Iraq. Whether you choose to acknowledge it or not, many more thousands of people would have been killed had we withdrawn at the time the "mistakes" were found. Just FWIW, you do realize the following, don't you?: 1. Saddam acknowledged having WMD's at the time of Desert Storm surrender. 2. As part of the Desert Storm surrender decree, Saddam agreed to destroy all WMD's. 3. As part of the Desert Storm surrender decree, Saddam agreed to document the destruction, including the disposal sites of the WMD's. 4. As part of the Desert Storm surrender decree, Saddam agreed to allow unlimited, unfettered access to weapons inspectors to oversee and confirm that #'s 2 and 3 were being complied with. 5. In violation of the surrender decree, Saddam routinely prevented the weapons inspectors from fulfilling their mission or evicted them out of the country altogether.......double digit UN resolutions ring a bell? 6. Saddam easily could have prevented the entire invasion by simply abiding by the terms of the Desert Storm surrender decree. 7. To this day, those WMD's have not been accounted for. Please don't pretend that the WMD's, or "mistakes" as you call them, weren't ever there. You further drag your credibility into the gutter by doing so. "Whether you choose to acknowledge it or not, many more thousands of people would have been killed had we withdrawn at the time the "mistakes" were found. " Prove it dumbass Say "hi" to the unicorns for me |
|
|
|
Post by twinegarden on Jan 8, 2009 16:10:21 GMT -6
|
|
