How many deaths will it take?

[DA]

Don't forget potential secular totalitarianism (e.g., Saddam).


"WHAT DO THESE PEOPLE HAVE AGAINST FREEDOM???"
Would you feel more free if a huge country came into your moderatly sized country and told you how you are goign to run things?

We're not telling them how to run things.  We are trying to restore order and establish a popularly-elected government so that the people of Iraq can decide how to run things.

How would you feel if you were ruled by a brutal dictator who gassed ethnic minorities, had sick, sadistic kids who liked to torture people for sport, and built opulent palaces while you had barely enough food to survive - and the world stood by and did nothing out of respect for your "national sovereignty?"

Now, it's not my intention to justify the decision to go to war in the first place - just to say that all these people fighting against the American presence need to get some friggin' perspective!  WE ARE ON YOUR SIDE!

 Trying to establish a new government is telling them how to run things. Once it is established they theoretically will be running the show, but until them we are telling them what to do.
  Yes, his sons were sick. I think they were worse then him, honestly. In addition, it isn't the job of any country to help another out. It's nice if one does, but I would never expect it. For futher information see the foriegn policy of those of us in yellow.
  Amist all of this freedom building we are doing in the middle east (bringing Afganistan into the picture) what's happening to our local freedoms? Perhaps they had to collect ours for the war effort like the scrap metal of yesteryear.
  We are not on the side of those that want us out, obviously, otherwise they wouldn't want us out. We think we are on their side, but that kind of relation ship takes two sides. Remember that episode of the Simpsons with Itchy and Scratchy wherein Itchy makes a cloning machine for scratchy then sets it up in front of a death machine making the whole process automated? That's kinda' how I see this situation. We just send in the troupes that say, "Let's be friends... don't pay attention to the weapons hanging off of me." and they say it until they fall into the death machine.
  Ack, ok so that was the most horribly mixed analogy ever... but screw it, I'm done tping about this.

[Huckleberry Finn]

How is it the most successful when nothing has been achieved yet?

We achieved our mission, to forcibly disarm Saddam Hussein. I didn't agree with this war, but Bush did what he set out to do.

What about how we were going to spread democracy to the people of Iraq?  That worked out real well.

The mission may be achieved but it has not yet, so it's silly to call it the most effective war in American history.

Al Queda has lost a lot of their people in Iraq, and antagonized a lot of personnel in Iraq.

But they have killed lot of your troops who they couldn't kill without war on Iraq.

Sorry, but you have to remember the number of deaths that would have resulted had the United States failed to act.

In the case of war on Afghanistan and war on terrorism in general this is true. The war on Iraq didn't prevent anything.

You should have been more worried about North Korea. But what Bush has done? Nothing! And now he is even decreasing amount of your troops in South Korea!  

[CARLHAYDEN]

Actually, you just haven't heard about the developments with respect to North Korea.

One of the most important is that Japan is increasing its defense budget.

[2952-0-0]

Well, at least your consistent.  Consistently WRONG!

First, North Korea was producing nucleqar warheads under Clinton and now they feel that people like you will make sure that they are immune.  

Second, the war has NOT increased antiAmericanism.  People like you have always hated the United States.  

Third, if you think that countries like Egypt are suddenly becoming more brutal, you really need to stop doing the drugs (or perhaps start taking your medicine).

Fourth, not particulary interested in establishing a democracy in Iraq, just interested in their being a government which doesn't support terrorism or antiamericanism.

Fifth, the Iraqi people do NOT support the terrorists.  While it is clear where you sympathies lie!

Sixth, the US forces repeatedly stopped offensives against Sadr due to the fact that the Iraqi government asked us to.  In short, they are in charge.

First, you have noticed NK and Iran have been thumbing their nose at UN inspectors even harder lately, no?

Second, all the polls around the world have shown that antiamericanism HAS increased. Show me a scientific poll to the contrary. And I am not antiamerican, I'm antiwar. Different.

Third, we're telling dictatorships like Libya Egypt Saudi Arabia and Uzbeckistan and Pakistan it's okay to oppress your people as long as you explain it's for fighting terrorism.

Fourth, that's how Saddam got in (though it was aganist the Russians at the time).

Fifth, I never said Iraqis spport terrorism. They sympathize but do not participate in it.

Sixth, when a guy who was in Saddam's secret service leads a new country, you know everything is OK.

[DA]

You go UAPE!