350 Casualties in Baghdad Today - Worst Since Invasion 49 replies

Please wait...

Mihail VIP Member

President of Novistrana

50 XP

19th January 2003

0 Uploads

15,509 Posts

0 Threads

#21 13 years ago
Yup, he'd probaly be in Israel, or Indonesia, or somewhere in the West. Or, he might have been shot by Saddam, on video of course, for Saddams personal pleasure.

Stay focused, try and learn to string replies together better, your all over the map. The likely hood is, he would be at home or at work living life, the poor life it was after UN sanctions of course, where more then likely his son or daughter staved to death, just one of millions who died that death.

Clarify on this one. Who is "they"? Iraqi insurgents?

Well you got the iraqi apart right, I never understood how you can connect native home-grown with insurgent, must be a neo-con thing.




Faceless32

I follow teh Moo!

50 XP

22nd August 2006

0 Uploads

2,681 Posts

0 Threads

#22 13 years ago

Iraq was ten times better under the rule of Saddam. He may have been a col-blooded basterd but he still managed to keep his country under control. The day when US invades, shiates, and sunnis start blowing each others brains out. Sure this has haapend all the time in history, but it's never been this extreme. I must read everyday in the newspaper about another sunni bineg kidnapped /tortured/killed, Once a month theres another bombing. It wasn't like this untill bush invaded. There was a govermnet in Iraq during saddams rule, now Iraqs is in a anarchist state. The goverment issn't the demorcy we hoped to bring to Iraq; it's a bunch of Shaites kweiding guns and bombs. Every accomplishment we have made in iraq, has resulted in even worse consequnces. So yeah, it is bushes fault.




Captain Blade

custom user title

50 XP

16th July 2006

0 Uploads

1,403 Posts

0 Threads

#23 13 years ago

Don't forget - Saddam also had nukes

So it's not like giving the Iraqis their freedom was the only reason we went in




Guest

I didn't make it!

0 XP

 
#24 13 years ago
Mihail;3383903Stay focused, try and learn to string replies together better, your all over the map. The likely hood is, he would be at home or at work living life, the poor life it was after UN sanctions of course, where more then likely his son or daughter staved to death, just one of millions who died that death.

I'll admit, him being in Indonesia or Israel raising hell is unlikely, but being killed by Saddam, or atleast imprisoned wouldn't be.

Well you got the iraqi apart right, I never understood how you can connect native home-grown with insurgent, must be a neo-con thing.

Still not entirely sure what you meant by your first statement. But in response to the above quote, insurgent is the proper term to use. An insurgent is just someone who is rising up. And they are certainly rising up.

Terrorist would also be proper as they are using terror to accomplish their goals, as opposed to tactical strikes.

Exactly..no offense, this dictator kept EVERYTHING in order...Shi'ites, Kurds, and Sunnies lived normaly together without any of this shit. Hell Sunnies and Shi'ites always got married together, and now some families ARE SPLITTING APART because of the violence....Thanks, and god job bush you messed up a great and beautiful country. And I blame YOU, not the CIA, or the Military. YOU.

Did Bush order people to kill each other? Did he force people to split apart? Did he force people to fight and wage war? Nope. You know what the Iraqis could have done? Worked with the U.S. to establish a democracy in their country. If they had done that instead of killing each other do you know where the U.S. military would be? In the U.S.(actually probably in North Korea or Iran, but that's a different story) and Iraq would be a democracy run by the people. Instead they decided to throw that out the window and wage civil war.

Good job Iraq! You had an opportunity staring you in the face and instead of embracing it you kicked it int he balls.




Dot Com

I'm too cool to Post

50 XP

26th June 2000

0 Uploads

6,116 Posts

0 Threads

#25 13 years ago
Captain Blade;3383962Don't forget - Saddam also had nukes..

I would LOVE to see proof of this. We did find, however, WMDs (chemical weapons) that we gave him in the 80s though...;)

So it's not like giving the Iraqis their freedom was the only reason we went in.

I doubt Dubya gives two rat shits about Iraqi freedom. Once a cocaine snorting frat boy, always a cocaine snorting frat boy...




Captain Blade

custom user title

50 XP

16th July 2006

0 Uploads

1,403 Posts

0 Threads

#26 13 years ago
Jeffro;3383973I doubt Dubya gives two rat shits about Iraqi freedom. Once a cocaine snorting frat boy, always a cocaine snorting frat boy...

Oh I'm sorry. I thought that was what the average gf member was, not Bush. (I'm obviously not average)

To me, the ones that actually think stuff like that about Bush, are the cocaine sniffers.




Faceless32

I follow teh Moo!

50 XP

22nd August 2006

0 Uploads

2,681 Posts

0 Threads

#27 13 years ago
Captain Blade;3383984Oh I'm sorry, I thought that was what the average gf member was. (I'm not one though)

LOL, vey funny.




Dot Com

I'm too cool to Post

50 XP

26th June 2000

0 Uploads

6,116 Posts

0 Threads

#28 13 years ago
Captain Blade;3383984Oh I'm sorry, I thought that was what the average gf member was. (I'm not one though)

Doing a line on a strippers ass cheeks is a weekly deal for me. ;)

I know the president had his vices while in college (who doesn't!?) and I don't judge the man on that. My statement was for pure comic (or lack of comic) value. I judge him on much more important things...:p




Guest

I didn't make it!

0 XP

 
#29 13 years ago

Jeffro;3383996Doing a line on a strippers ass cheeks is a weekly deal for me. ;)

I know the president had his vices while in college (who doesn't!?) and I don't judge the man on that. My statement was for pure comic (or lack of comic) value. I judge him on much more important things...:p

Penis size?




Guest

I didn't make it!

0 XP

 
#30 13 years ago
Faceless32;3383949Iraq was ten times better under the rule of Saddam. He may have been a col-blooded basterd but he still managed to keep his country under control. The day when US invades, shiates, and sunnis start blowing each others brains out. Sure this has haapend all the time in history, but it's never been this extreme. I must read everyday in the newspaper about another sunni bineg kidnapped /tortured/killed, Once a month theres another bombing. It wasn't like this untill bush invaded. There was a govermnet in Iraq during saddams rule, now Iraqs is in a anarchist state. The goverment issn't the demorcy we hoped to bring to Iraq; it's a bunch of Shaites kweiding guns and bombs. Every accomplishment we have made in iraq, has resulted in even worse consequnces. So yeah, it is bushes fault.

Wrong.

The country was calm under Saddam's rule because he was Sunni, so he favored the Sunnis. This kept the Shiites, the majority, from doing anything. He kept the Shiites from doing anything through threats, murder, torture, and just good old public beatings.

Perhaps you should read up on your history before you spout off like that.