ironingtheflag.com— On August 15, 2006 21:30 EST the United States will have been at war in Iraq longer than it was at war with Germany in World War II.
Aug 14, 2006View in Crawl 4
I think you will find that the American troops stationed in Germany were not fighting and slaughtering Germans in their thousands up until the 80's so this is hardly a valid comparison.The US troops in Germany are there to counter the thousands of Russian tanks all facing west.
@azurechaosWell, The US for one was happy to see the Kurds get gassed. They were the political refugees that the US denied status and forced them into Iraq to get gassed in the first place. They were the Commy fighters that the US trained in Iran in the 70's. By all accounts the US gov't was cleaning up loose ends. Or more accurately, letting loose ends clean themselves up. You see at that time, US security interests controlled the Syrian borders, and they turned the Kurds back into the norther desert of Iraq in a heartbeat, knowing full well their fate.
Different war, people, time period, and method of waging war. Though I would not have invaded the country to remove Saddam, I support the President and the troops. If your going to go to war though, then go to war. You cannot wage a politically correct, sensitive war against this enemy and expect to be quickly victorious, or victorious at all. Accept the fact that war is cruel and cannot be refined, as Sherman said, and then wage it totally or not at all. The only reason this war is taking so long is that we are trying to defeat our enemy without offending them or anyone else.
the thing is that we all knew the neighborhood Iraq was in when this started...the anti-war peoaple said that it won't be as easy to put a democracy in Iraq as it was in Germany or Japan...Hell everyone with a basic knowledge of history said that a democracy in Iraq would immedietaly vote for one of the three groups which would then want to torture and kill the others(Sunnis and Kurds), Duh....the "democracy" there is no more stable or morally superior to Sadam....so don't send troups over to do this....even george w said he was against "nation building" ...i actualyl thought he had some common sense when he sadi that in his first presidential debates....unfortunately he was a liar just like his dad who promised "read my lips no new taxes"....libertarians tried to remind republicans of the lies of Bush 1...but they didn't care now we are stuck with the lies of Bush 2.
@lane.montgomery You are missing out on the term's historical context. I suspect you're referring to Hillary Clinton, and the term "Carpertbagger" is a harsher insult than you realize.The term "Carpetbagger" was coined in post Civil War America, during the Reconstruction. Carpetbaggers were people, stereotypically Yankees, who went South to take advantage of the chaos and disorder for their own personal profit. They misappropriated funds meant to rebuild the Southern infrastructure and were general parasites, sucking the life out of an already ravaged South.Many attribute existing anti Yankee sentiments more to the actions of the Carpetbaggers than to the Civil War itself!So calling Hillary a Carpetbagger wasn't just a way to accuse her of moving to another state just to run for office. It was a way of calling her a parasite willing to destroy New York state for her own political gain.
dankolearyAug 15, 2006
Iraq is not Vietnam. Iraq is a stepping point to conquest. In case you haven't heard, we are "already at war with Iran." Yeeeeeeeeeeah.
dswinscoeAug 15, 2006
what? support for Civil War? Are you kidding? How much longer must this charade continue, and exactly who is supposed to fund this fine "humanitarian" support effort. This is a genocidal mission to intimidate, subdue and ultimately control yet another sovereign state, just as the U.S has done FOURTEEN times in the last century:<a class="user" href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0805078614/sr=8-1/qid=1155668504/ref=pd_bbs_1/102-9499712-7821759?ie=UTF8)">http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0805078614/sr=8-1/qid=1155668504/ref=pd_bbs_1/102-9499712-7821759?ie=UTF8)</a>Stop kidding yourself.
Closed AccountAug 15, 2006
You better watch out Kim Jong Il. You're next. Nukes or not. Booya.
chuymattAug 15, 2006
How many American solders have been killed in operations fighting the German insurgents?
piper999Aug 15, 2006
I think you will find that the American troops stationed in Germany were not fighting and slaughtering Germans in their thousands up until the 80's so this is hardly a valid comparison.The US troops in Germany are there to counter the thousands of Russian tanks all facing west.
wackygAug 16, 2006
We still have occupation bases in Germany and Japan.
tehnicoAug 16, 2006
@azurechaosWell, The US for one was happy to see the Kurds get gassed. They were the political refugees that the US denied status and forced them into Iraq to get gassed in the first place. They were the Commy fighters that the US trained in Iran in the 70's. By all accounts the US gov't was cleaning up loose ends. Or more accurately, letting loose ends clean themselves up. You see at that time, US security interests controlled the Syrian borders, and they turned the Kurds back into the norther desert of Iraq in a heartbeat, knowing full well their fate.
suninmoonAug 16, 2006
Different war, people, time period, and method of waging war. Though I would not have invaded the country to remove Saddam, I support the President and the troops. If your going to go to war though, then go to war. You cannot wage a politically correct, sensitive war against this enemy and expect to be quickly victorious, or victorious at all. Accept the fact that war is cruel and cannot be refined, as Sherman said, and then wage it totally or not at all. The only reason this war is taking so long is that we are trying to defeat our enemy without offending them or anyone else.
louiekitAug 17, 2006
(without sounding redundant...)H O L Y S H I T
Closed AccountAug 21, 2006
the thing is that we all knew the neighborhood Iraq was in when this started...the anti-war peoaple said that it won't be as easy to put a democracy in Iraq as it was in Germany or Japan...Hell everyone with a basic knowledge of history said that a democracy in Iraq would immedietaly vote for one of the three groups which would then want to torture and kill the others(Sunnis and Kurds), Duh....the "democracy" there is no more stable or morally superior to Sadam....so don't send troups over to do this....even george w said he was against "nation building" ...i actualyl thought he had some common sense when he sadi that in his first presidential debates....unfortunately he was a liar just like his dad who promised "read my lips no new taxes"....libertarians tried to remind republicans of the lies of Bush 1...but they didn't care now we are stuck with the lies of Bush 2.
halleyscometAug 28, 2006
@lane.montgomery You are missing out on the term's historical context. I suspect you're referring to Hillary Clinton, and the term "Carpertbagger" is a harsher insult than you realize.The term "Carpetbagger" was coined in post Civil War America, during the Reconstruction. Carpetbaggers were people, stereotypically Yankees, who went South to take advantage of the chaos and disorder for their own personal profit. They misappropriated funds meant to rebuild the Southern infrastructure and were general parasites, sucking the life out of an already ravaged South.Many attribute existing anti Yankee sentiments more to the actions of the Carpetbaggers than to the Civil War itself!So calling Hillary a Carpetbagger wasn't just a way to accuse her of moving to another state just to run for office. It was a way of calling her a parasite willing to destroy New York state for her own political gain.
halleyscometAug 28, 2006
Remember, we were NEVER at war with Vietnam. It was only a "Police Action."