Well, if it had been the same person, you might have a point. Considering my comment came after his, then you pointing it out is spectacularly useless.

Third, I'm not arguing Saddam should be in power, just that it would have been the most beneficial to the safety of the US of the TWO SITUATIONS. One: Saddam in power. Two: The US invasion and destruction of a society.

You're claim that Saddam had to be REMOVED from power, IMO, is just fucking stupid, considering what we have witnessed over the past five years. There was a way to remove Saddam without creating a power vacuum, but since that sort of thinking is beyond people like Bush and yourself, then I hold the opinion that keeping him in power was the best thing to do.

Also, you have no ability to understand complex thought.

How about this idea, genius? We could have waited for the Iraqi people to, oh, I dunno, decide for themselves to oust Saddam. His army had this tendency to disappear in the face of any sort of force, which means they weren't all that loyal to him.

If they had wanted to get rid of Saddam, they would have. The easy supply of weapons being used against US forces could have been used against Saddam.

If we had just let him implode, no US troops would have been needed.

Maybe I'm way off base, but I have always believed that people should be allowed the right of self-determination. We're trying to force a system of government on a people who were not ready to take it up for themselves.

Go ahead, tell me I'm wrong. Prove it, if you think you can.

Thank you, I've been saying that to people for years. When we broke away from Britain, we did it on out own volition after deciding we were ready to step out and create our own nation. We had help from the French, but we did most of the work.

What we did in Iraq is the equivalent of France invading America in the 1740s on the pretense that we were ready to be our own nation even though we hadn't matured enough to the point where we ourselves could make that decision. It wouldn't have worked at all for the same reasons our little endeavor now isn't working in Iraq.

Sweet jesus, man. You are aware that Saddam gassed his own people? What about the Shia uprising in 1991 after the Gulf War? Oh, and lets not forget failed 1996 coup against Saddam by his own generals, who were put to a painful death shortly afterwards. Of course, I'm sure none of those count to you because they weren't actually successful.

Did you even read the damn message fool. I am saying I too got caught in all the bullshit that was being said e.g WMD etc. however I realize a few years ago that we were there for the wrong reason, very wrong. My point of the message as you pointed out was that the Iraqis never did anything to us but we destroyed their cities and its culture for no reason but fiscal gain and politics.

if we had covertly (or overtly, with the Shia rebellion) supported that, and then let the Iraqi people decide what the fuck they wanted to do with their country, things would be a fuckload better than they are now by going through with this fucked up occupation.

one of the biggest mistakes in the whole endeavour (fuck you, spell-checker, i like it the Brit way!) is forcing democracy on Iraq. they just really don't seem to know what to do with it. they just haven't had the same social evolutionary track as the West, which had democracy intertwined within it since the classical Greeks. it's not that it makes them less civilized, their society has evolved differently from ours. our forcing democracy on them is kinda like if Japan forced their state Shinto religion and (formerly) Divine Imperial Family on us in the US. it's just not our bag, man.

Look dumbass,did you even read the damn message fool. I am saying I too got caught in all the bullshit that was being said e.g WMD etc. however I realize a few years ago that we were there for the wrong reason. My point of the message was that the Iraqis never did anything to us but we destroyed their cities and culture for no reason but fiscal gain and politics.

Yes, I am aware of these, you submoronic fruitcake. Those uprisings didn't work because the people of Iraq, ALL the people of Iraq, were not ready to set aside their differences and unite. And I doubt they will be, with us going in and setting groups against each other. The U.S. Revolution wouldn't have worked either if the people from New York were more interested in seeing the people from New Jersey taken down than they were in removing the British rule.

This county has become increasingly wussified. No one wants to stand up and take on Bush and the government since they feel we'll get locked up for speaking our minds. Bush destroyed our civil liberties as well.

Great article.

Don't let the focus die people.

DO NOT let some sort of irritation with the democrats over the long primary let people become complacent and apathetic,
and decide there really isn't much difference btn John McCain and the people vowing to STOP the war...

That might be the only difference at this point, though it might be worth a vote for the same old Democrat bullshit. This is a tortuous election year, isn't it?

But the Dems could still get us unto hot water, internationally, in any case. Between our insistence on brokering peace between Israel and the Arab World, and our proxy interventionism with UN peacekeeping forces, there are almost limitless ways for us to invite hatred and terror back to US soil. If I vote Democrat this year, it will be with much loathing for our short-term situation. I just want our troops out of Iraq, badly, for their sake and ours.

I'd say it didn't work because they didn't have enough Atropine. Actually, during the Revolution, we had a lot of help from an outside power (France), and the percentage of loyalists was quite large. Conversely, the South's secession from the Union was assisted by no outside power (thank God), and they were ultimately defeated, despite their early victories.

Yes, I believe the bit about the French helping was mentioned above by JekyllAndHyde. We had HELP from the French. We did not have the French invade us "for our own good." Ok, somehow you managed to prove my point. If we had waited for the Iraqis to unite against Saddam, then supplied them with arms and training, we would have had a strong ally in the Middle East, who would be able to buffer the rest of the world from Iran. Instead, we are growing generations of enemies who wouldn't have had anything against us if we had let them decide to make themselves free.

Thanks for the glorious vid of Captain Bringdown, This too shall pass... I shall now go pass.

well i come from australia and i'd like to let you all know that it makes no difference christian/islamic/jewish, they are all movements created for power and wealth. thats why they fight behind the killing in the name of(enter faith here) i see no reason why islamic news would be reporting the terrible deeds of u.s, uk, aus. all founded on chritian beliefs.
the other thing you almost get but you keep tripping over the word democracy just like the major religous beliefs, be it democracy, communism, socialism or plain dictatorships, each and every system is dictated by the the $ it's all capitalism ask a sociologist they have studied all of them. so yup your right when the $ runs the show you and i are gonna get exploited just as you and i exploit those below us..... oh you don't. i suggest you find out which country and under what pay and condition thhey were produced. not your fault well we keep buying the shit the cheaper the better. sounds like enablement to me.
no there is not much we can do the capitalist avelanch is well in truelly in motion and we are all in it!
as an after thought why wasn't saudia arabia attacked 9/11 was bankrolled and pulled of by saudi's each and every one of them.
they never found any weapons of mass destruction. to my way of thinking NATO who voted ok more time. we went in anyway should we at least have our vito rights stripped not aus is big enough to have them.