COL Gene COL Gene

Reid is Correct - We can not WIN the Civil War in Iraq

▼

Reid is Correct - We can not WIN the Civil War in Iraq

from JoeUser Forums


The U.S. Military WON the war that Congress authorized to remove Saddam and destroy his military. Our troops did an outstanding job and there is no doubt that we won that war.

The second war in Iraq began to develop the day after Saddam fell with the riots and has been getting worse ever since. Our removal of the control exercised by Saddam was NOT replaced with a level of force that was able to prevent the factions that hate each other in Iraq from organizing and fighting for control of the country. In addition, we were unable to prevent foreign terrorists from entering Iraq after Saddam fell and setting up operations from which they are making the sectarian violence worse by attacks like the one on the Golden Mosque about a year ago.

Senator Reid is 100 % correct and just about every senior military leader has said we can not win the civil war in Iraq. Most of the generals said in the end the surge will not bring stability to Iraq only the concerted effort of the Iraqi people can end this civil war that rages in that country. Even if for a brief period the attacks in Baghdad are lower the attacks like we saw on Wednesday clearly demonstrate the underlying hate of the factions within Iraq and the foreign terrorists are not under control. We are not able to control the level of violence with 160,000 U.S. Troops even with the help of the Iraqi forces we have trained. When we leave, this Civil War will continue until the Iraqi people find a way to end the killing. It may be because one side destroys the other or the country splits into factions along the lines of the three religious factions. It is also possible that the fighting and death will get to a point when the vast majority of the Iraqi’s force an end to the fighting.

Our military won the war they were sent to Iraq to fight. The Commander-in-Chief allowed a second war to emerge that we are not staffed or equipped to fight. Thus the loss that Senator Reid talks about is the loss of the war caused by George W. Bush. No matter how long we remain in Iraq the basic hatred and fight to control Iraq will not be changed. That is why we have LOST this second war- The Civil War in Iraq! If we had followed the advice of our military leaders and followed the military planning with the 500,000 troops when Saddam fell the situation today might be very different. The reality is Bush did not listen to the military experts and turned his back on decades of military training and experience when he sent 150,000 troops when the military experts said we need more then 3 times number. What might have happened is speculation. The reality is that we can not win the Civil War in Iraq with 160,000 of our brave military.

It is time to accept we won the war Congress agreed to fight in Iraq and lost the war that Bush allowed to develop after Saddam and his army was defeated.
politics
16,324 views 65 replies
Reply #51 from JoeUser Forums Top
That is what Bush said but guess what that is NOT what has resulted from our invasion of Iraq! Thus what Reid said is correct. WE are NOT achieving the objective Bush said was the reason to invade Iraq. Saddam was not a threat and NO we did not establish a democracy that was to spread peace in the region!
Reply #52 from JoeUser Forums Top
We had the UN Inspectors back into Iraq and if Bush had allowed them to complete their job we would have learned what we KNOW TODAY-- Saddam did not have WMD or and sort of a nuclear program!


you mean those people who answered to the ones taking bribes from saddam


you mean after that year of disclosers from the un that the sun of sec. general's son was taking bribes that it was how did you put it

That is BS.


and have you heard or read the news today the iraqi people not the iraqi military or the government is now starting to take on al quida claiming to have taken out the new top man

Groupy 2 - Organize multiple applications into grouped tabs on your Windows desktop
Reply #53 from JoeUser Forums Top
a true democracy is where the people of the country stand up for themselves

it doesn't matter what the government or other leaders say

the people will stand up for themselves

Reply #54 from JoeUser Forums Top
That is BS. There was no reason to attack Saddam in March 2003. He was no threat, the weapons inspectors were back in Iraq and the military Assessment was that Saddam had NO capability to attack ANYONE


You keep repeating this lie over and over to the point that you think you believe it yourself. The lie you have told over and over has been refuted over and over to the point that no one even cares. You are a liar and I am tired of refuting it.

We know that the CIA Intel DID NOT support much of what Bush and Cheney claimed about the danger from Saddam!


We also know that the intelligence from France, Great Briton, Germany, and Spain did not support what we know to be true now. Unfortunately you can’t get into a way back machine and change the past. It happened because we were attacked, we as a nation was scared, the information we had was given to us by trusted sources and action was required. The Congress was given all of this information and they voted for war. We went to war and now we want to stop the war because some politicians are trying to get a political victory in November.
Reply #55 from JoeUser Forums Top
You mean those people who answered to the ones taking bribes from Saddam


You mean after that year of disclosers from the UN that the sun of sec. general's son was taking bribes that it was how you put it

THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH A DANGER TO THE U>S>

And have you heard or read the news today the Iraqi people not the Iraqi military or the government is now starting to take on al Qaeda claiming to have taken out the new top man

Until the violence is brought under control, NOITHING else in Iraq can take place. April 2007 four years after Mission Accomplished was one of the MOST violent in 4 years.


We went to war and now we want to stop the war because some politicians are trying to get a political victory in November. NO the American People and the majority of the Congress want this war to END. In a democracy that is what needs to happen. Dictator Bush needs to be put in his place-- IN JAIL!
Reply #56 from JoeUser Forums Top
You mean those people who answered to the ones taking bribes from Saddam


Yes, and in every case there was a person or two on the saddam pad. You learned that from me.

You mean after that year of disclosers from the UN that the sun of sec. general's son was taking bribes that it was how you put it


What about it?

THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH A DANGER TO THE U>S>


Sure it does. You are just too feebleminded to see it, or too dishonest to admit it.

Until the violence is brought under control, NOITHING else in Iraq can take place. April 2007 four years after Mission Accomplished was one of the MOST violent in 4 years.


For ten years Detroit was murder capital of the world. You could get killed for no reason at all. New York held that title for a few years. Foolish col. Gene, we lose more people in motor car accidents in one year than we have lost in the total war on terror including 9/11. I don’t see you screaming that we are losing and should ban cars. The death toll keeps rising because more people are driving. Our deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan are going up because we are putting our people in more dangerous places with less cover.


NO the American People and the majority of the Congress want this war to END.


If that were true then the Congress would have a veto proof bill to end the war. Where is it?
Reply #57 from JoeUser Forums Top
Paladin77

THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH A DANGER TO THE U>S>


Sure it does. You are just too feebleminded to see it, or too dishonest to admit it. If you are saying that warranted 3,300 dead, 25,000 injured and a Trillion dollars you are an IDIOT!

What is going on in Iraq has NO relevance to Detroit. You show your total ignorance with every post you make.


It does not require a Veto Proof Congress to know the Will of Congress is to end this war. The polls all show that about 1/3 of Americans support Bush and 2/3 want this war to end. We have an arrogant and stubborn man in the White House who has lied to the military, Congress and the American People. He is not supported by the VAST MAJORITY and all those GOP members of Congress that are up for re-election in November 2008 and support Bush had better look for another vocation.
Reply #58 from JoeUser Forums Top
The polls all show that about 1/3 of Americans support Bush and 2/3 want this war to end


actually think that number should be 1/3 support bush and 3/3 want this war to end

i know i want the war to end but i also support bush

the house represents the people
the senate represents the states
the president represents the nation

it is the president that negotiates with other nation
it is the senate that passes treaties

it is the house that pays the troops
it is the president that controls the troops

now someone is over stepping their bounds tell me who it is
Reply #59 from JoeUser Forums Top
It is the house that pays the troops ( The Congress pays the military)
It is the president that controls the troops

Now someone is over stepping their bounds tell me who it is BUSH

Congress passes the budget which includes the term under which it can be spent. Congress is the one to approve War. This Congress having been elected in 2006 has said this war should end.



the house represents the people
the senate represents the states
the president represents the nation HERE is the Problem !

What Bush is doing DOES NOT REPRESENT WHAT THE NATION WANTS!!
Reply #60 from JoeUser Forums Top
i know i want the war to end but i also support bush YOU HAVE A PROBLEM You will need to pick one or the other.
Reply #61 from JoeUser Forums Top
If you are saying that warranted 3,300 dead, 25,000 injured and a Trillion dollars you are an IDIOT!


So tell me genius, what is worth the price of freedom, and safety? Are you suggesting that once we get or noses bloodied we should cower in the corner and beg the enemy not to hurt us anymore? How safe and free would we be then? Wars cost lives and anyone that does not know this is a fool. There are no such things as bloodless wars. Just like there are no such things as cheap wars. Only a fool would believe in such things. Are you a fool?

What is going on in Iraq has NO relevance to Detroit. You show your total ignorance with every post you make.


Sure it does your just too ignorant or dishonest to see or admit the truth. You lie so much you don’t know what is real anymore.

It does not require a Veto Proof Congress to know the Will of Congress is to end this war.


Please explain why is it that in order to express this will of the people the democrats who are in power now had to bribe other democrats to vote for this bill? If it is the will of the people why spend 24 billion dollars to entice people to vote for it? It is not the will of the people or the Congress because even with the bribes there were only enough votes to pass the bill that the president said he would veto and they did not have enough votes to override the veto means it is not the will of the people, the will of Congress, or anything but a political ploy.

The polls all show that about 1/3 of Americans support Bush and 2/3 want this war to end.


Actually 100% want the war to end but only on third wants to end the war by losing. You know your side of the isle wants to lose at any cost.

Congress having been elected in 2006 has said this war should end.

Sorry it get in the way of your dream world but the constitution says that congress has to override the veto in order to make it law. They failed to do this so the will of the Congress is not to pass this piece of bad legislation. You keep talking about respecting the will of the majority, well the majority spoke today by not overriding the veto. The war is the will of the people.

Anymore lies you wish refuted?
Reply #62 from JoeUser Forums Top
know i want the war to end but i also support bush YOU HAVE A PROBLEM You will need to pick one or the other.


why
Reply #63 from JoeUser Forums Top
So tell me genius, what is worth the price of freedom, and safety? The Iraq war has NOTHING to do with either. We have enabled both internal elements to tear Iraq apart and have allowed foreign terrorists to get a foot hold.

Know I want the war to end but I also support bush YOU HAVE A PROBLEM You will need to pick one or the other.


why If you support Bush this war will never end.


Actually 100% want the war to end but only on third wants to end the war by losing. You know your side of the isle wants to lose at any cost. This Civil War we allowed to develop is LOST!
Reply #64 from JoeUser Forums Top
and there was no holocoust
Reply #65 from JoeUser Forums Top
Reply By: danielost Posted: Wednesday, May 02, 2007
"and there was no holocaust "

There was a Holocaust and there is a Civil War in Iraq that we can not win! You are like the President of Iran who refuses to acknowledge the Holocaust despite the facts that clearly show it DID take place. You used a good example but misapplied it. What I posted is correct:


The U.S. Military WON the war that Congress authorized to remove Saddam and destroy his military. Our troops did an outstanding job and there is no doubt that we won that war. The second war in Iraq began to develop the day after Saddam fell with the riots and has been getting worse ever since. Our removal of the control exercised by Saddam was NOT replaced with a level of force that was able to prevent the factions that hate each other in Iraq from organizing and fighting for control of the country. In addition, we were unable to prevent foreign terrorists from entering Iraq after Saddam fell and setting up operations from which they are making the sectarian violence worse by attacks like the one on the Golden Mosque about a year ago.