mimo2005

Almost four years into the war an Army Captain puts together a q&d MS Paint plan for peace. It uses stick figures so even Bush can understand it



http://abcnews.go.com/images/US/how_...n_anbar_v4.pdf




I am really sad after reading that the author was just killed.

http://www.seeingtheforest.com/archi...o_win_in_i.htm

40sondacurb

I've heard that said many times that the Iraqis are actually effective in discerning who is a terrorist.

bry623

We should have went in and asassinated Saddam and any other until they started doing things fairly.

Fr4665

x2

95five-0

Darn Geneva Conventions

yustr

How quickly you forget: Go back to 2003; Saddam was nothing but a neutered dictator of an impotent country that happened to sit on vast reserves of oil. He had no air force. He had no navy. He had an army of the unwilling, commanded by the unworthy, equipped with the un-performing. He had no nuclear program. He had no chemical program. He had no biological program. (And don’t start the BS line “but everybody thought he had those” because the facts prove otherwise.) He posed no threat to anyone (outside of Iraq and we could have quickly stuffed anything he tried against Iraqis) – let alone the US some 6000 miles away.

So remind me again how invading or even killing Saddam made us safer?

Contrast this with what resulted; chaos that threatens to engulf the entire region in tribal warfare. Somewhere between 100,000 and 500,000 dead – nearly 3000 of who are the American soldiers you’re so proud to defend for standing up to protect our freedom. I defend them too as they’re just pawns of the criminal cowards who got us into this mess.

I can’t say it any clearer: They did not die protecting our freedom. Our freedom was never in jeopardy. They died because …who the hell knows why they died. Regardless they’re still dead and more will die unless we put an end to this fiasco.

forcifer

we should have killed him because he was supporting terrorists who WERE attacking us (see 9/11)

Ben123

Liberals will tell you that the al Qaeda in Iraq was not the same al Qaeda that struck New York. They will also say that the training grounds in Iraq, as well as material support was small potatoes. America tracks her enemies down and pulverizes them...

Another argument is the al Qaeda is no longer a viable threat to our interests... And the government had a hand in 9-11... which is pure stupidity and really doesn't deserve a response. And I have seen Loose Change, which makes me think these moonbats are even stupider than the appear. Sorry for the tangent.

Yeah, the al Qaeda and Iraq are close friends. And "neutered dictator" besides having a funny sound is a total oxymoron... and MS Works.

yustr

How often do you need to hear it before it sinks in?

Any linkage was purely in the spin of Bush, Cheney, Rove, Rice and the others...

The same commission also found no link between Saddam and the attacks of 9-11.

Wishing for something is not the same as facts. Bush's supporters want to believe that their hero would not order hundreds of thousands to their deaths on supposition or out right lies but those are the facts. No WMD. No al Qaeda. No involvement in 9-11. No threat to the US, in fact after 10 years of sanctions no threat to anyone. No justifiable reason whatsoever.

As Lenin said: "Lies told often enough become truth."

Ben123

Whose right?

Bubba

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20...2921-3401r.htm

Or the 9-11 commission? Either Bubba lied or else the 9-11 commission was wrong.

mimo2005

It's time to move on and get the thug in the white house.