75 Percent of Al Qaeda in Iraq has been Destroyed! by Skywalken

Let me do the math:
5 years/75% Al Qaeda destroyed= ? years/100% Al Qaeda destroyed...

Jaynemathisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, December 30, 2007 4:25 PM

Keep the Shiny side up

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Let me do the math:
5 years/75% Al Qaeda destroyed= ? years/100% Al Qaeda destroyed...

...one year, eight months from now. Just in time for whichever Democrat wins the Presidential election to claim they won the war.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, December 30, 2007 4:37 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:
Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Let me do the math:
5 years/75% Al Qaeda destroyed= ? years/100% Al Qaeda destroyed...

...one year, eight months from now. Just in time for whichever Democrat wins the Presidential election to claim they won the war.

My post wasn't meant as a real math problem, Geez. It was meant as a jab at how long it's taken to get this far, and a goof on the idea that it will ever truly be over- but then you probably already knew that

.

Wars on ideas are unwinable, unless they involve making of the enemy your friend. Or using nuc-u-lar weapons...

Glowing Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, December 30, 2007 7:49 PM

NEWOLDBROWNCOAT

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Let me do the math:
5 years/75% Al Qaeda destroyed= ? years/100% Al Qaeda destroyed...

Jaynemathisall

It's a diminishing returns problem , Chris. 5 years to destroy 75 %, 5 more years to destroy 75 % of what's left, 5 more years to destroy 75 % of what's left of that, and so on, forever ...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, December 31, 2007 5:33 AM

CANTTAKESKY

Quote:
Wars on ideas are unwinable, unless they involve making of the enemy your friend. Or using nuc-u-lar weapons...

Thank you Chris.

Even if this claim can be objectively verified (and how did they calculate the 75% anyway?), there are a couple of factors not considered.

1. At what rate is Al Qaeda growing elsewhere? If we have reduced Al Qaeda from 1000 member strong to 250 members remaining, but the Al Qaeda in Libya has grown from 1000 members to 3000 members because of the war, the war wasn't all that effective in the anti-terrorism effort, now was it?

2. At what rate is Al Qaeda re-growing in Iraq? Some of this is taken into consideration in the 5-year average, but surely Iraq Al Qaeda has changed tactics by now and gone further underground. Do we know what their true strength is today and how fast they are replacing lost members?

This is akin to living next to a garbage dump / sewer ditch, and rejoicing at having killed 75 rats. Unless the infrastructure of the dump and sewer ditch is sanitized, more rats will come.

I guarantee it. More will come.

--------------------------
After things go from bad to worse, the cycle will repeat itself.
-- Source unknown

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, December 31, 2007 6:20 AM

KIRKULES

Quote:
Originally posted by canttakesky:
[B
2. At what rate is Al Qaeda re-growing in Iraq? Some of this is taken into consideration in the 5-year average, but surely Iraq Al Qaeda has changed tactics by now and gone further underground. Do we know what their true strength is today and how fast they are replacing lost members?
--------------------------
B]

It's understandable that those who have invested themselves in the idea that the US can't win in Iraq would spin every bit of good news so that it's just a temporary improvement that will not change the "inevitable" outcome. The fact that many choose to see all successes in the most negative light does not however change the facts. The reason Al Qaeda has "gone further underground" is because when they stick their heads up they get themselves shot. Whether it's the surge or just that the Iraqi people are finally sick of the violence, I don't know. There comes a point at which a fighting force losses it's effectiveness whether it's 75% defeated or 90%, you don't have to kill 100% to call it a victory. I'm sure a large percentage of the Al Qaeda cells in the US are still here but they don't dare try anything because they know that they are being watched. With the Iraqi people now having turned against Al Qaeda they are providing intelligence to the Coalition forces and because the terrorists are foreign fighters they are fairly easy to spot for the local people. Even if Al Qaeda in Iraq is defeated it doesn't guarantee the success of the war but it may provide the stability necessary for Iraq to get their political process moving forward.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, December 31, 2007 6:24 AM

Holland was successful in securing certain areas of land from the hungry sea....

Mixing mental images Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, December 31, 2007 9:21 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:
...one year, eight months from now. Just in time for whichever Democrat wins the Presidential election to claim they won the war.

One year and six months from now, just in time to run commercials of Democratic leaders declaring the war lost and giving the Republicans a clean sweep victory in both the Presidential and Congressional elections.

H

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, December 31, 2007 9:23 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Holland was successful in securing certain areas of land from the hungry sea....

King Canute demonstrated his power by standing on shore and ordering the tide to stop rolling in. He was largely ignored. Little known fact is he later changed his name to Hillary and married a lawyer from Arkansas.

H

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, December 31, 2007 9:24 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:

One year and six months from now, just in time to run commercials of Democratic leaders declaring the war lost and giving the Republicans a clean sweep victory in both the Presidential and Congressional elections.

Friends don't let friends drink & post.

Sober Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, December 31, 2007 9:51 AM

MAL4PREZ

More like freebase and post...

-----------------------------------------------
hmm-burble-blah, blah-blah-blah, take a left

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, December 31, 2007 10:41 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Sober Chrisisall

That may be the saddest thing I've ever heard.

Happy New Year.

H

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, December 31, 2007 11:27 AM

Keep the Shiny side up

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Wars on ideas are unwinable, unless they involve making of the enemy your friend.

I disagree. The war in Iraq can be won when the folk there realize that Al Queda have nothing for them but death and terror. We don't have to be everyone's friend, just let them realize that Al Queda and the other groups that set off car bombs in markets and execute captives are their real enemy. This seems to be happening.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, December 31, 2007 3:47 PM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Hello,

The recent news in Iraq seems heartening, and makes me hopeful that Iraq won't end the way Vietnam did. I don't feel much better about going in there (I still think it was the wrong war) but I'm gratified that the bottomless pit of money and blood has a bottom after all.

That having been said, I wish the military would stop inventing numbers. 75% of Al Qaeda is destroyed? When did our enemy start submitting census forms?

As an olive branch to the pro-war people, I feel compelled to offer a quote from my friend Ron, who is a veteran of Vietnam:

"A million people died in the Battle of Somme in World War One. Twenty-thousand Brits bought it on the first day. About two-thousand Americans got planted at Normandy. Sixty-thousand Americans were killed in action during Nam. Nobody remembers what a f*cking war is like anymore. God help us if we ever get in a real war again. People will crap themselves while watching the news at eleven, and the country will lose the determination needed to win."

I don't agree with all his views, but he may have a valid point in there somewhere. Still, I think if we ever bothered to declare a war, we'd be in it to win it.

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, January 1, 2008 4:36 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

http://www.salon.com/opinion/blumenthal/2007/09/20/bush_draper/index_n
p.html

There has never been a moment when we were not winning in Iraq. Victory has followed victory, from "Mission Accomplished" to the purple fingers of the Iraqi election to, most recently, President Bush's meeting at Camp Cupcake in Anbar province with Abdul-Sattar Abu Risha, the Sunni leader of the group Anbar Awakening (who was assassinated a week later). Turning point has followed turning point, from Bush's proclamation two years ago of his "National Strategy for Victory in Iraq" to his announcement last week of his "Return on Success." "We're kicking ass," he briefed the Australian deputy prime minister on Sept. 6 about his latest visit to Iraq.

***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, January 1, 2008 7:23 PM

NEWOLDBROWNCOAT

Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:

As an olive branch to the pro-war people, I feel compelled to offer a quote from my friend Ron, who is a veteran of Vietnam:

"A million people died in the Battle of Somme in World War One. Twenty-thousand Brits bought it on the first day. About two-thousand Americans got planted at Normandy. Sixty-thousand Americans were killed in action during Nam. "

two more numbers worth mentioning: according to Wikipedia, approximately 2300 were killed in the Pearl Harbor attacks, and just below 3000 0n 9/11

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 2, 2008 5:27 AM

Keep the Shiny side up

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
http://www.salon.com/opinion/blumenthal/2007/09/20/bush_draper/index_n
p.html

Wow! An op-ed piece by Bill Clinton's former press flack! Oooh.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 2, 2008 5:39 AM

MAL4PREZ

Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:
Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
http://www.salon.com/opinion/blumenthal/2007/09/20/bush_draper/index_n
p.html

Wow! An op-ed piece by Bill Clinton's former press flack! Oooh.

As opposed to the article in the original post, from that bastion of fair and balanced misinformation, f*xnews.

-----------------------------------------------
hmm-burble-blah, blah-blah-blah, take a left

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 2, 2008 9:27 AM

JONGSSTRAW

75% in Iraq?.....That's a nice number Herbert! Of course it really means NOTHING, considering no one knows how many terrorists are in Iraq, and of that estimated number how many are bona fide Al Qaida, or just your average, ordinary sectarian maniac murderers.

Bush LIED to America & the world when he said that America would bring Bin Laden to justice. 6 years later, Bin Laden & Al Zawahiri, et al are laughing their asses off...more & more useful idiot suicide bombers are signing on with them...why?...because THEY'RE STILL ALIVE!.....still able to threaten the West, and still able to carry out enough mayhem to attract and excite all the miscreantic, pathetic, sociopaths in the Islamic world. That was Bush's JOB! Our quarry "went to ground"...so what did we do?..we gave him lot's of ground by playing kissypoo with Musharraf, instead of doing what the world would have backed us up on, wiping out Al Qaida & Taliban in Pakistan.
Only way we'll ever see Al Qaida go away is:
a) Kill or capture Bin Laden, Zawahiri, and Omar.
b) Strangle Islamic State of Iran financially
c) Blockade of Islamic State of Iran to prevent weapons shipments
d) re-negotiate our "security" deal with Saudi Arabia; something that includes a commitment by them to "bring moderation" to the madrassas teaching young Muslims hatred of the West year after year.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 2, 2008 9:32 AM

Keep the Shiny side up

Quote:
Originally posted by mal4prez:
As opposed to the article in the original post, from that bastion of fair and balanced misinformation, f*xnews.

You might have had a point, if the basic information in the Fox article hadn't also been reported by the networks, the news channels, PBS, AP, BBC, Reuters, Al Jazzera, the Washington Post, etc., etc., etc.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 2, 2008 9:38 AM

MONKSDAD

that is awesome.. 75% of al qaeda destroyed after 5 years of fighting.... and how many al qaeda were there before we invaded Iraq? I think that number was 0, yes ZERO.....So let me see,, we have destroyed 75% of the problem that wasn't even there when we got there...our leaders are so awesome.
awesome awesome awesome.

"And I think calling him that is an insult to the psychotic lowlife community."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 2, 2008 9:51 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by monksdad:
and how many al qaeda were there before we invaded Iraq? I think that number was 0, yes ZERO.....So let me see,, we have destroyed 75% of the problem that wasn't even there when we got there...our leaders are so awesome.
awesome awesome awesome.

Except for that one guy. The one they caught in Baghdad. And that camp...the one they destroyed in Northern Iraq with the help of our Kurd buddies.

And...oh, wait. You said Al Queda. There were none of those, except...and no Chemical weapons, except..., no prohibited missiles, except...,and the surge failed miserabley, except...and the war was lost, except...

So let me see,, we have destroyed 75% of the problem that liberals and Bush-haters never (because of intentional or negligent political bias) realized or admitted was there...your leaders are so awesome.
awesome awesome awesome.

H

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 2, 2008 10:19 AM

MAL4PREZ

Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:
...the networks, the news channels, PBS, AP, BBC, Reuters, Al Jazzera, the Washington Post, etc., etc., etc

Who also post articles without the "Yay! We're winning!" spin that dominates the f*x at f*x.

You'll note that the nytimes is saying: "The top American military commander in Iraq said Saturday that violent attacks in the country had fallen by 60 percent since June, but cautioned that security gains were “tenuous” and “fragile,” requiring political and economic progress to cement them.... Although the data showed a sharp fall in civilian deaths from their peak between mid-2006 and mid-2007, the rate of decline appeared to level off in the past two months... However, he conceded that while attacks were down in the rest of the country, they had not fallen in the northern province of Nineveh, which includes Mosul, Iraq’s third-largest city, with a population of 1.7 million."

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/30/world/middleeast/30iraq.html?em&ex=1
199163600&en=55142a753adccea6&ei=5087%0A

The times online headline is: "Iraqis fear surge is a temporary lull instead of permanent peace"
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/iraq/article3115872.ece

The BBC news: "Iraqi and American commanders said the improvement in security in the country over 2007 had been remarkable. But top US commander Gen David Petraeus warned al-Qaeda remained the greatest threat facing the country and security gains could easily reverse."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7164520.stm

Hey, I'm glad this was posted here because I was noticing that news of Iraq was getting pushed behind the piles of election BS, and I hadn't heard any updates in a while. I'm very glad to see the violence is in fact down. But it's hardly a sweeping victory. I think excellent points are being raised as to 1) the fact that there was no Al Qaeda in Iraq before we gave it a push and 2) Our administration and those it funds (the Iraqi interior ministry which released the 75% figure which "could not be independently verified and [Khalaf] did not elaborate on how the percentage was determined.") are constantly pushing this idea of near victory on us. Near - so we won't quit, and victory - so we'll feel good about supporting it, cause the good guys are winning.

Hero said: "And...oh, wait. You said Al Queda. There were none of those, except...and no Chemical weapons, except..., no prohibited missiles, except...,and the surge failed miserabley, except...and the war was lost, except..."

Yeah, and even you can come up with nothing to put after the "except..." huh?

Now, how come you two (Geezer and Hero) post so quick to this thread and won't answer me on the Bhutto thread? Too hot for you? Can't take it?

-----------------------------------------------
hmm-burble-blah, blah-blah-blah, take a left

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 2, 2008 10:28 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:

So let me see,, we have destroyed 75% of the problem that liberals and Bush-haters never (because of intentional or negligent political bias) realized or admitted was there

Things are getting better in Iraq? Well it's ABOUT GORRAM TIME!!!
We stirred up the hornet's nest, and turned on the garden hose...yay us.
And yes, I hate Bush liberally (that's a joke- I don't really know the man).
Bin Laden & Co. needed a can o' woopass opened on 'em...well, at least it got opened on somebody.

Disgusted Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 2, 2008 10:39 AM

The question isn't how many al qaeda we've killed. I really don't see how relevant that is. We've managed to kill and get killed a shit load of everybody over there.

The question is whether or not we've won any hearts and minds...

the question is whether we've convinced the people by-and-large that we are trying to help them, that we are not their greatest enemy, that they don't want to turn to terrorist organizations as a matter of defending against the threat of American imperialism.

Frankly, we've done a poor job of convincing even me. It's pretty obvious that we haven't been concerned with the Iraqi infrastructure, or we would have actually awarded most rebuilding contracts to Iraqi companies, rather than padding the pockets of big companies with powerful lobbies. If we were trying to help them, we wouldn't have gotten passed through their puppet government a huge oil giveaway to our oil companies at the expense of a resource that could go towards the people of Iraq.

This is a scam, and they know it too.

It doesn't matter how many Al qaeda we kill, if our precence there is breeding more enemies of America, Al Qaeda or otherwise...

unless we kill or displace all of them...that would solve it. At this rate that shouldn't take too long actually. Maybe this war won't last another 15 years.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 3, 2008 3:19 AM

Keep the Shiny side up

Quote:
Originally posted by mal4prez:
Who also post articles without the "Yay! We're winning!" spin that dominates the f*x at f*x.

How about an example of the "Yay! We're winning!" spin from the Fox article, please.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 3, 2008 5:21 AM

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:
The recent news in Iraq seems heartening, and makes me hopeful that Iraq won't end the way Vietnam did.

Why? Vietnam ended after we won the war, but the Democrats killed funding at the last minute so that we lost all the ground we had achieved, and the media spun major American victories as defeats and beamed millions of images of carnage without context to the American people. We didn't lose Vietnam because of anything going on in Vietnam, and we won't lose Iraq that way either.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 3, 2008 5:42 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
Vietnam ended after we won the war, but the Democrats killed funding at the last minute so that we lost all the ground we had achieved

You mean, if we had just stayed in Vietnam for like 10 more years, all would have been well there (real question hidden in the snark

)?

Anyway, good- we've done a man's job in Iraq- we can go home now.

Really naive Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 3, 2008 7:02 AM

CANTTAKESKY

Quote:
Originally posted by Righteous9:
It's pretty obvious that we haven't been concerned with the Iraqi infrastructure, or we would have actually awarded most rebuilding contracts to Iraqi companies, rather than padding the pockets of big companies with powerful lobbies. If we were trying to help them, we wouldn't have gotten passed through their puppet government a huge oil giveaway to our oil companies at the expense of a resource that could go towards the people of Iraq.

This is a scam, and they know it too.

THANK YOU!

(Standing ovation.)

--------------------------
Facts are stubborn things, but statistics are more pliable.
--Mark Twain

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 3, 2008 11:41 AM

KIRKULES

Quote:
Originally posted by canttakesky:
Quote:
Originally posted by Righteous9:
It's pretty obvious that we haven't been concerned with the Iraqi infrastructure, or we would have actually awarded most rebuilding contracts to Iraqi companies, rather than padding the pockets of big companies with powerful lobbies. If we were trying to help them, we wouldn't have gotten passed through their puppet government a huge oil giveaway to our oil companies at the expense of a resource that could go towards the people of Iraq.

This is a scam, and they know it too.

THANK YOU!

(Standing ovation.)

--------------------------
Facts are stubborn things, but statistics are more pliable.
--Mark Twain

Yep, everyone knows the Iraqis are famous for their giant infrastructure companies. Must be hundreds of companies over there that could whip out an few hundred power plants in no time flat. And of course it would have been totally safe to hand over millions of dollars to those trustworthy Iraqi companies.

Even the Russians and Chinese come to the US when they need quality infrastructure built. If we had hired Iraqi companies they would just have embezzled half the money and subcontracted the rest to some substandard foreign company.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 3, 2008 11:52 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kirkules:

Yep, everyone knows the Iraqis are famous for their giant infrastructure companies.

Greater Baghdad Builders and Suppliers, downtown, corner of Ahlmed & Sakir- legend has it the founders descended from Pyramid builders.
A subdivision of Halliburton U.S.

Believe me Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 3, 2008 12:01 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
legend has it the founders descended from Pyramid builders.

So its a Masonic Conspiracy...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 3, 2008 12:04 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:

So its a Masonic Conspiracy...

So it would seem...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 3, 2008 12:55 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

Kirkules:

"Yep, everyone knows the Iraqis are famous for their giant infrastructure companies."

After Gulf War the first aka Desert Storm (remember ? I know, I know, it was so loooong ago - but stretch your brain a little ) the Iraqis rebuilt their infrastructure in under a year.
After Gulf War - part Deux, Trois, Quatre et al, the US wasn't interested in using French, Russian or Chinese parts (for the French, Russian and Chinese systems that needed repair). No, the US wanted to use - guess what - entire US systems ! Why repair when you can make more $$$ replacing ?? ! Eh ? Unfortunately for the Iraqis, Bremer handed out billions (8 - 12B, but that's a minor detail) with no accounting, literally. http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=aRfRyhT0yHzU&refer
=us . And efforts since then have been hampered by - oh, US restrictions on who can bid, by lack of oversight to see if the projects have actually been, you know, done, and other minor details. Yeah, those horribly corrupt US contractors, I mean, er, Iraqis, are all to blame. Because it can't be the US. The US never does anything wrong.

"Even the Russians and Chinese come to the US when they need quality infrastructure built."

And the Pakistanis rely on the Chinese for their deep-water oil ports, the Venezuelans for oil field development, and Japan and China are both depending on Russia for the trans-Siberian pipeline. Yeah, the US has a lock on infrastructure, all right. HA HA HA HA HA Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ...

***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 3, 2008 12:59 PM

CAUSAL

Personally, I blame the Bush administration.

________________________________________________________________________

- Grand High Poobah of the Mythical Land of Iowa, and Keeper of State Secrets
- Captain, FFF.net Grammar Police
- Vote JonnyQuest/Causal, for Benevolent Co-Dictator of Earth; together, toward a brighter tomorrow!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 3, 2008 1:15 PM

KIRKULES

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
Yeah, the US has a lock on infrastructure, all right. HA HA HA HA HA Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ...

Are you trying to tell me you think the Iraqis or some other country could have rebuilt Iraq infrastructure quicker than the US companies. That's just ridiculous. If there was problem it was with the timely rewarding of contracts and the violence on the ground not the American companies.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 3, 2008 1:23 PM

Kirkules are you fucking serious?

or have you not heard about the umpteen scandals involving Haliburton and our american companies over there?

Yeah, they are on the up and up.

But where you have a point, you have a point. Embezzlement and bad faith is clearly a concern that would be worth avoiding, whether giving the money to American or Iraqi companies...thats where oversight comes in, somethig we had so little of over our own companies, and speaking of wasted money, wasn't it like 90 million dollars that just dissapeared over there...yeah Bush has really been minding the store.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 3, 2008 3:19 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

Kirkules,

Let me repost this as you seem to have not read it: "After Gulf War the first aka Desert Storm (remember ? I know, I know, it was so loooong ago - but stretch your brain a little ) the Iraqis rebuilt their infrastructure in under a year."

Quote:
Originally posted by Kirkules:
Are you trying to tell me you think the Iraqis or some other country could have rebuilt Iraq infrastructure quicker than the US companies. That's just ridiculous.

As for your second statement

Quote:
Originally posted by Kirkules:
If there was problem it was with the ... violence on the ground ...

I'd like to instruct you in some international law. As the occupying force, the US was obligated to provide internal security - ie policing. You may not have noticed, but the US made no plans for policing Iraq.

***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 3, 2008 3:39 PM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Quote:

Are you trying to tell me you think the Iraqis or some other country could have rebuilt Iraq infrastructure quicker than the US companies. That's just ridiculous.

Hello,

I fail to see what is rediculous about the premise that US corporations might not be the most efficient rebuilders of infrastructure.

Do you have some practical reason, beyond patriotism, to believe that US corporations are the most efficient in the world?

Do you have some practical reason, beyond disdain for the Iraqis, to believe that their own companies and workers would be unable to complete the work?

I don't know where you live.

I live in the United States, where it takes US corporations an entire year to re-pave a 10 mile stretch of road.

I live in the United States, where it takes nearly a decade to complete a light rail system.

I live in the United States, where corporations that win municipal contracts to enhance or repair the infrastructure routinely go overbudget, have shoddy worksmanship, and waste or steal appropriated funds at an alarming rate.

I live in the United States, and I love my country, but I'm not deluded into believing that we do everything better than everyone else.

Anyway, it would have benefitted the Iraqis to rebuild their own infrastructure. They would have gained pride, boosted their economy and workforce, and gained valuable experience in the industry.

Still, I suppose when you consider that we shouldn't have invaded in the first place, all of this is moot.

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 3, 2008 4:48 PM

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
Vietnam ended after we won the war, but the Democrats killed funding at the last minute so that we lost all the ground we had achieved
You mean, if we had just stayed in Vietnam for like 10 more years, all would have been well there (real question hidden in the snark)?

Why not? Isn’t all well in Japan? South Korea? Germany? Those are countries we didn’t give up on at the last minute.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 3, 2008 4:51 PM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Hello,

There is something to the notion that with enough time, effort, and money invested, you can make even a bad decision work.

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 3, 2008 8:14 PM

"So I built a second one, and that one sank into the swamp. So I built a third. That burned down, fell over, then sank into the swamp. But the fourth one stayed up."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 3, 2008 9:35 PM

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Well, while we're quoting Monty Python:

Armaments, chapter two, verses nine through twenty-one:

And Saint Attila raised the hand grenade up on high, saying, "O Lord, bless this thy hand grenade, that with it thou mayst blow thine enemies to tiny bits, in thy mercy." And the Lord did grin. And the people did feast upon the lambs and sloths, and carp and anchovies, and orangutans and breakfast cereals, and fruit-bats and large chu... [Skiped a bit] And the Lord spake, saying, "First shalt thou take out the Holy Pin. Then shalt thou count to three, no more, no less. Three shall be the number thou shalt count, and the number of the counting shall be three. Four shalt thou not count, neither count thou two, excepting that thou then proceedeth to three. Five is right out. Once the number three, being the third number, be reached, then lobbest thou thy Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch towards thy foe, who, being naughty in my sight, shall snuff it.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 3, 2008 10:09 PM