[ClintonBaller2]

Anyway back to worst case scenario for 2008. Hilary gets elected, bans all firearms, takes a full 4 years to get out of Iraq, and leans on Bill's shoulder the whole time.

[bleedonstage]

im guessing that offended you. hope so...

[Bunkered89]

Originally Posted by bleedonstage

hope this helps

I assume you are talking about 9/11 when you are saying that they blow down buildings with 20,000 casualties. Well, you might want to check your facts, because there were 2,998 casualties in 9/11. That is very far from 20,000.

War torn country with a dictator? Iraq? Iraq was not war torn, buddy. Iraq was a secure, secular state under Saddam Hussein. While the guy was a tyrant and a sick individual, Iraq was probably 150% more stable than it is now. There were no terrorists or Al-Qaeda there, with Saddam in power. Nor was there any "war" going on in there for it to be "war torn" from. Now if you mean the present, then yes. It is PRESENTLY a war torn country, but that is due to our occupation.

And I don't see how you perceive my comment, "ungrateful Iraqis" as racist. Do you even comprehend the meaning of the word? They are ungrateful because they are still letting OUR soldiers die and don't want to lead the country themselves. They are being lazy. Hell months ago, their entire government went on VACATION. You call that a group of people that are grateful for our help? No. They are freeloading off of us. Hanging Saddam was OUR doing. Don't think for a second that just because a few Iraqi puppets hung Saddam physically, that it rationalizes the statement that Iraqis are showing interest in helping themselves.

[Jim96SC2]

Originally Posted by Bunkered89

I assume you are talking about 9/11 when you are saying that they blow down buildings with 20,000 casualties. Well, you might want to check your facts, because there were 2,998 casualties in 9/11. That is very far from 20,000.

It was shear mistiming that caused less casualties. If they had hit in the middle of the day vs morning the body count would be much higher.

War torn country with a dictator? Iraq? Iraq was not war torn, buddy. Iraq was a secure, secular state under Saddam Hussein. While the guy was a tyrant and a sick individual, Iraq was probably 150% more stable than it is now. There were no terrorists or Al-Qaeda there, with Saddam in power. Nor was there any "war" going on in there for it to be "war torn" from. Now if you mean the present, then yes. It is PRESENTLY a war torn country, but that is due to our occupation.

Saddam provided funds and facilities for training. Iraq was war torn. Iraq wasn't secure unless you mean secured by the cruching weight of a dictator who had no problems gassing, murdering, raping, etc. We could do the same thing easily, but since we're trying to form a stable democratic government who can rule themselves we have to put up witht he BS.

And I don't see how you perceive my comment, "ungrateful Iraqis" as racist. Do you even comprehend the meaning of the word? They are ungrateful because they are still letting OUR soldiers die and don't want to lead the country themselves. They are being lazy. Hell months ago, their entire government went on VACATION. You call that a group of people that are grateful for our help? No. They are freeloading off of us. Hanging Saddam was OUR doing. Don't think for a second that just because a few Iraqi puppets hung Saddam physically, that it rationalizes the statement that Iraqis are showing interest in helping themselves.

I agree. A lot of Iraq needs to get a kick in the pants and get moving, especially their government. On the same token though, it took a decade or more in Germany and Japan after WWII. Russia and eastern nations are still having some troubles since democracy in the early 90's. Just don't blanket that statement because I also hear of a lot of good stories where soldiers are invited into private homes for meals after helping, etc.

[bleedonstage]

Originally Posted by Bunkered89

I assume you are talking about 9/11 when you are saying that they blow down buildings with 20,000 casualties. Well, you might want to check your facts, because there were 2,998 casualties in 9/11. That is very far from 20,000.

There were no terrorists or Al-Qaeda there, with Saddam in power.
And I don't see how you perceive my comment, "ungrateful Iraqis" as racist. Do you even comprehend the meaning of the word? They are ungrateful because they are still letting OUR soldiers die and don't want to lead the country themselves. They are being lazy. Hell months ago, their entire government went on VACATION. You call that a group of people that are grateful for our help? No. They are freeloading off of us. Hanging Saddam was OUR doing. Don't think for a second that just because a few Iraqi puppets hung Saddam physically, that it rationalizes the statement that Iraqis are showing interest in helping themselves.

did i ever say there was 20000 casualties, no, there was damn close to that many people in the buildings.

and you said iraqis as a whole were ungratefull.

no terrorists or al qaeda in iraq while suddam was in power....wow, i think if we have proven one thing it is that there was in fact al qaeda and terrorism being funded in iraq before we went in..

[p8ntballguy]

Originally Posted by bleedonstage

no terrorists or al qaeda in iraq while suddam was in power....wow, i think if we have proven one thing it is that there was in fact al qaeda and terrorism being funded in iraq before we went in..

First your wrong on your al qaeda point, go read the internets for information. Second im pretty sure that your u should be an a in saddam......Though I could be wrong.


idiot

[Bunkered89]

Originally Posted by bleedonstage

did i ever say there was 20000 casualties, no, there was damn close to that many people in the buildings.

and you said iraqis as a whole were ungratefull.

no terrorists or al qaeda in iraq while suddam was in power....wow, i think if we have proven one thing it is that there was in fact al qaeda and terrorism being funded in iraq before we went in..

Sorry, I misread the sentence about the 20,000. I did say Iraqi's were ungrateful. That does not have any racist connotation, still, so what is your point? And actually, there were no terrorists or Al-Qaeda in Iraq with Saddam. He ran that state and did not approve of any other forces competing with him for control. Not to mention, Saddam Hussein ran one of the most SECULAR Muslim states in the Middle East. Why would he let religious extremists mess around in his country?

[Murph1329]

-Obama or Clinton become President
-we pull out of Iraq
-this leads to a struggle for power amongst the different religious groups in the country (a civil war)
-Gas prices sky rocket because of this...Obama and Clinton can't even stop that
-Iraq becomes a safe haven and training ground for terrorist as no military power in the country is able to prevent it
-A nuclear bomb is detonated in Jerusalem
-Terrorism strikes most European countries to battle what extreme Muslims see as another Crusade lead by Christians


LIBERALS '08 FTW

[Bunkered89]

And just where will this nuclear bomb come from?

[Swerve22]

Originally Posted by Murph1329

-Terrorism strikes most European countries to battle what extreme Muslims see as another Crusade lead by Christians

It's always funny how Radical Islamists call everybody from the west "crusaders" and yet they're openly engaging in and promoting "jihad" which literally translated means "holy war". Nobody ever seems to pick up on that.

[naughtyDogs>YOU]

Originally Posted by Matt.is.back2011

It is impossible to bomb a country into submission. Ground forces are needed, that is why our country established The Army, the Marines, along with many different branches of the Air Force and Navy that all include ground soldiers.

Simply bombing a country would not work. If you do not believe me, go pick up a history book at look up Operation Rolling Thunder or The German bombardment of Great Britain in WWII.

War against Iran would most likley equate to a draft. Our military is stretched too thin as it is.

4,000 deaths in our military stretches it thin? We arent Taiwan.

Between Our reserves, and main military force, were at about 3 Million strong.

[Animalm0ther3]

Originally Posted by Murph1329

-this leads to a struggle for power amongst the different religious groups in the country (a civil war)
-Gas prices sky rocket because of this
-Iraq becomes a safe haven and training ground for terrorist as no military power in the country is able to prevent it

**** that would SUCK!!

[Haga652001]

Originally Posted by Murph1329

-this leads to a struggle for power amongst the different religious groups in the country (a civil war)
-Gas prices sky rocket because of this...Obama and Clinton can't even stop that
-Iraq becomes a safe haven and training ground for terrorist as no military power in the country is able to prevent it

this isn't happening?

[Matt.is.back2011]

Originally Posted by naughtyDogs>YOU

4,000 deaths in our military stretches it thin? We arent Taiwan.

Between Our reserves, and main military force, were at about 3 Million strong.

I'm not talking about the amount of deaths the current war in Iraq has caused, but rather the amount of troops we have available and ready for combat over there. Sadly, we have resorted to deploying the same brave men and women two, three, and even four times into the same hostile Iraq due to our military being, like I previously stated, too thin.

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/edi...diness_crisis/

[bleedonstage]

Originally Posted by p8ntballguy

First your wrong on your al qaeda point, go read the internets for information. Second im pretty sure that your u should be an a in saddam......Though I could be wrong.


idiot

after reading this i have come to 2 conclusions, you were drunk when you wrote it, or your I.Q is low enough that you could legally be considered mentally retarded... I'm leaning toward the second option.



IDIOT

[Swerve22]

Originally Posted by bleedonstage

after reading this i have come to 2 conclusions, you were drunk when you wrote it, or your I.Q is low enough that you could legally be considered mentally retarded... I'm leaning toward the second option.



IDIOT

He's right. There's lots of interenets, Al Gore only invented the first one

[p8ntballguy]

Originally Posted by Swerve22

He's right. There's lots of interenets, Al Gore only invented the first one

My point exactly!

Actually bush invented the term, "internets". Its a bushism, if you did not know, Im sorry that you mistook mistook me for a drunk instead of recognizing the use of our presidents raping of the english language as a moderately funny joke.

And by the way, yes, Saddam is spelled with an A. And there was no link between Iraq and Al Qaeda, heres the first link in google I found. http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0406/p99s01-duts.html

Internets for the win!


idiot

[TeddyBear1992]

Worst Case Scenario? Bush passes a surprise bill with "executive power" that allows him to run the country for the rest of his life. Then the power will go to Cheney, then it's the apocalypse and there won't be anyone after him.