Support our government!!!

[Reba]

... What about Cuba, I have heard too many bad stories about Castro I have not seen any Prez to overthrow him?

You never heard about JFK and the Bay of Pigs invasion? Granted, the attempt failed.

 

[jazzy]

You never heard about JFK and the Bay of Pigs invasion? Granted, the attempt failed.

I am talking about now, not back in 60's when we were having cold war with communist countries. Prez Bush want to remove Saddam becauses of what he did to people and Prez Bush did not do this to Castro. I have heard too many bad stories about Castro thru my Cuban friends because they have no proof of what Castro did to his own people.

 

[Reba]

I am talking about now, not back in 60's when we were having cold war with communist countries. Prez Bush want to remove Saddam becauses of what he did to people and Prez Bush did not do this to Castro. I have heard too many bad stories about Castro thru my Cuban friends because they have no proof of what Castro did to his own people.

Well, you said, "I have not seen any Prez to overthrow him", so I didn't know you were referring specifically to President Bush.

 

[jazzy]

Um, do you remember a time when Cuba ever tried to take over other countries? We managed to find a way to keep North Korea out of the south in the end. And currently, if N Korea can find a way to keep America out of the conflict between them and S Korea, They will easily be able to take over the south. If you think about it, even if S Korea is able to defend their country, their capital will be completely destroyed. If N Korea comes in and America does not help, the south will most likely capitulate.

As for peaceful solutions, could you name one we did NOT try? We did go through the UN, who weren't helping too much. The inspections they did only covered 1/4 of 1% of the weapons caches, which is why I was yelling back then about them not searching efficiently enough. Shoot, a community survey covers more percentage of the people than the inspections covered of the weapons caches.

We did not saved S. Vietnam. And we lost too many good men and women for nothing.

Why do we need to go after Iraq with our muscles when there is still time to solve thru peaceful.

 

[Reba]

...Why do we need to go after Iraq with our muscles when there is still time to solve thru peaceful.

Please explain the peaceful solution.

 

[sculleywr]

We did not saved S. Vietnam. And we lost too many good men and women for nothing.

Why do we need to go after Iraq with our muscles when there is still time to solve thru peaceful.

HMMM, HAHA.I was not talking about Vietnam. Iraq is not Vietnam. The war in Iraq isn't anything like Vietnam. Last I checked, we haven't lost whole brigades in Iraq. In Vietnam, Whole brigades and squadrons were surrounded and destroyed. In Iraq, we take out whoever comes after us. In Vietnam, hundreds and sometimes thousands died each day. In Iraq, we lose maybe 1-5 a day. In Vietnam, we lost the first war we have lost in our history. In Iraq, we are winning. No, sir, this is not anything like Vietnam. Heck, I know plenty of Vietnam Vets who are wondering what has gone wrong with the "idiots" who are criticising the president.

 

[sculleywr]

I am talking about now, not back in 60's when we were having cold war with communist countries. Prez Bush want to remove Saddam becauses of what he did to people and Prez Bush did not do this to Castro. I have heard too many bad stories about Castro thru my Cuban friends because they have no proof of what Castro did to his own people.

Overthrowing Cuba would be as difficult as our battles in the Pacific front of WW2. You know how many people lost their lives taking just one of those islands? They ball-parked it at more than five times as many as we have lost in Iraq. An attack of brute force in Cuba would require so many air raids on so many places that the collateral damage would be devestating to the Cubans. It is infeasible. The collateral damage in Iraq is below what they should have been, less even than Suddam would kill in the same time period.
When it comes to being safe, it is safer being an American soldier in uniform and unarmed than it is to be a civilian on the American streets. There are approximately 10000 murders EACH YEAR in the US, and that is the conservative estimate. Only 2500 American soldiers dead in Iraq in THREE YEARS. per capita, that is comparing the 6.2 from every 100000 in America to the approximately 3 from every 100000 American soldiers in Iraq.

 

[jazzy]

Please explain the peaceful solution.

We wait.

 

[Reba]

We wait.

Wait for what?

 

[jazzy]

Overthrowing Cuba would be as difficult as our battles in the Pacific front of WW2. You know how many people lost their lives taking just one of those islands? They ball-parked it at more than five times as many as we have lost in Iraq. An attack of brute force in Cuba would require so many air raids on so many places that the collateral damage would be devestating to the Cubans. It is infeasible. The collateral damage in Iraq is below what they should have been, less even than Suddam would kill in the same time period.
When it comes to being safe, it is safer being an American soldier in uniform and unarmed than it is to be a civilian on the American streets. There are approximately 10000 murders EACH YEAR in the US, and that is the conservative estimate. Only 2500 American soldiers dead in Iraq in THREE YEARS. per capita, that is comparing the 6.2 from every 100000 in America to the approximately 3 from every 100000 American soldiers in Iraq.

Are u telling us American soldiers are safer in Iraq than us being on American soil? Not what happen to my next door, he got blown up last week, lucky for him. he survived but somewhat damaged to his hand and his hearing. His family does not want him to go back to Iraq after he got well. It is more safer for him to stay in USA than to be there. 2500 death is still too much. IHMO.

Murders happen here in USA were mostly related to guns, drugs and money caused by evil doers. I have not seen enough money to spend on them to fight against crime on USA soil instead of our government spend more $$$$$$$ over there in Iraq.

I would love to discuss this more but I am done with it. It burned me out.

 

[jazzy]

Wait for what?

I do not think Saddam was threatened to USA and to this world so we should wait and see how it goes with Saddam but some people and Prez Bush think not so they rush to invaded believing Saddam threatened world. Wait and see how it goes then nothing happen. IMHO Prez Bush should never invaded Iraq in first place.

 

[pek1]

Thirdly, I really hope you aren't pulling the oil card, because that idea is laughable. The amount of money that this war was estimated at would still take over a decade or two to pay back with the amount we MIGHT save on oil. I haven't seen any results on oil prices. Anyways, if we were to go to war solely for oil, we should have gone to war with Saudi Arabia. Congress voted the ability to go to war with Iraq. Why take a vote if you aren't going to ACT ON THAT VOTE?

sculleywr,

I was a history minor in college and have personally done research on the reasons behind both WWI and WWII for a speech. Different individuals now, still related, same actors. Are you aware of what exactly is being fought over? Go back to your history books, man, and turn talk radio off and use your head. Any moron with half a brain would take a look at history and see, that, not only is it repeating itself, but the same actors are in the picture. Who do you think owns Iraq? You don't have to listen to me, in fact, I encourage you to research history to find it yourself . . . on your own . . . with no links from me. Others on the forum know who I'm talking about.

By the way, I've had servicemen tell me the reason the U.S. invaded Iraq, and it sure wasn't to get rid of Saddamm!

 

[pek1]

IMHO Prez Bush should never invaded Iraq in first place.

I concur, but, when the Queen says to do something to ensure her precious oil, the world better do something.

 

[sculleywr]

sculleywr,

I was a history minor in college and have personally done research on the reasons behind both WWI and WWII for a speech. Different individuals now, still related, same actors. Are you aware of what exactly is being fought over? Go back to your history books, man, and turn talk radio off and use your head. Any moron with half a brain would take a look at history and see, that, not only is it repeating itself, but the same actors are in the picture. Who do you think owns Iraq? You don't have to listen to me, in fact, I encourage you to research history to find it yourself . . . on your own . . . with no links from me. Others on the forum know who I'm talking about.

By the way, I've had servicemen tell me the reason the U.S. invaded Iraq, and it sure wasn't to get rid of Saddamm!

No, the reason to go to Iraq wasn't oil or Suddam. Suddam was a happy free part of that, and we probably wouldn't have nabbed him if he would have just admitted that what he had done was wrong instead of hiding in a spiderhole. I don't give a crap who OWNED Iraq. Iraq is now the property of the Iraqis. Remember, Britain OWNED the US. Who OWNS it now? The rightful owners should be the natives, and not a foreign power or a tyrannic idiot. Once the government is in place, and we finish a gradual pull-out and replacement of American troops with Iraqi troops, we relinquish all the costs and gains of a democratic government and nation to the Iraqis. Germany invaded places with no intention to restore the government to the people. Germany invaded for one reason, to wipe out all non-aryans, esp. Jews. America and Nazi Germany are not at all synonymous, if that is what you were talking about during the completely irrelevant World Wars.

 

[sculleywr]

I do not think Saddam was threatened to USA and to this world so we should wait and see how it goes with Saddam but some people and Prez Bush think not so they rush to invaded believing Saddam threatened world. Wait and see how it goes then nothing happen. IMHO Prez Bush should never invaded Iraq in first place.

Tell me one thing Suddam did that was good. then compare the few things you have to the mountain of evil things he did and wanted to do.

 

[sculleywr]

Are u telling us American soldiers are safer in Iraq than us being on American soil? Not what happen to my next door, he got blown up last week, lucky for him. he survived but somewhat damaged to his hand and his hearing. His family does not want him to go back to Iraq after he got well. It is more safer for him to stay in USA than to be there. 2500 death is still too much. IHMO.

Murders happen here in USA were mostly related to guns, drugs and money caused by evil doers. I have not seen enough money to spend on them to fight against crime on USA soil instead of our government spend more $$$$$$$ over there in Iraq.

I would love to discuss this more but I am done with it. It burned me out.

Compare the murder rates to the death rates over in Iraq. So, the murder rate is fine, but the death rates in a war aren't? I love the double standard, absolutely love it.

 

[sculleywr]

We wait.

For Suddam to blow the hell out of someone? hell, no. Remember what waiting did for WW2? Pearl Harbor.

 

[pek1]

No, the reason to go to Iraq wasn't oil or Suddam. Suddam was a happy free part of that, and we probably wouldn't have nabbed him if he would have just admitted that what he had done was wrong instead of hiding in a spiderhole. I don't give a crap who OWNED Iraq. Iraq is now the property of the Iraqis. Remember, Britain OWNED the US. Who OWNS it now? The rightful owners should be the natives, and not a foreign power or a tyrannic idiot. Once the government is in place, and we finish a gradual pull-out and replacement of American troops with Iraqi troops, we relinquish all the costs and gains of a democratic government and nation to the Iraqis. Germany invaded places with no intention to restore the government to the people. Germany invaded for one reason, to wipe out all non-aryans, esp. Jews. America and Nazi Germany are not at all synonymous, if that is what you were talking about during the completely irrelevant World Wars.

:roll: Go read history and turn off Rush Limbough. You'll learn more if you read it for yourself, don't be so gullible. You are :Owned:

 

[sculleywr]

:roll: Go read history and turn off Rush Limbough. You'll learn more if you read it for yourself, don't be so gullible. You are :Owned:

Sorry, these are things that have gotten me a gold and platinum level at an essay grading website called www.bookrags.com. and they were published BEFORE I even knew the difference between Rush Limbaugh, Neal Bortz, and Michael Moore. This is history, according to at least three history books, two high school and one college. Here are the books:

Streams of Civilisation Part 1
Streams of Civilisation Part 2
Traditions and Encounters: A Global Perspective on the Past, Third Edition.

I have read enough history books and websites to know what I am talking about. You claim that America is being Nazi-istic, when it most definitely is not. Tell me when the Hitler planned on giving Poland back to the Poles, or France back to the French. Bush plans on giving Iraq to the Iraqis. We give it to the Iraqis, not to the insurgents. Waving the white flag, cutting and running gives it back to the Hussein regime, with more ambitious people at the helm. Do we need that? Hell no. Iran is already giving us hell with the whole nuclear thing. What happens when the people who they had an agreement with get back into power? I would rather leave that as a hypothetical situation.

 

[pek1]

Sorry, these are things that have gotten me a gold and platinum level at an essay grading website called www.bookrags.com. and they were published BEFORE I even knew the difference between Rush Limbaugh, Neal Bortz, and Michael Moore. This is history, according to at least three history books, two high school and one college. Here are the books:

Streams of Civilisation Part 1
Streams of Civilisation Part 2
Traditions and Encounters: A Global Perspective on the Past, Third Edition.

I have read enough history books and websites to know what I am talking about. You claim that America is being Nazi-istic, when it most definitely is not. Tell me when the Hitler planned on giving Poland back to the Poles, or France back to the French. Bush plans on giving Iraq to the Iraqis. We give it to the Iraqis, not to the insurgents. Waving the white flag, cutting and running gives it back to the Hussein regime, with more ambitious people at the helm. Do we need that? Hell no. Iran is already giving us hell with the whole nuclear thing. What happens when the people who they had an agreement with get back into power? I would rather leave that as a hypothetical situation.

Interesting website. I just happened to look under "Fargo," as my favorite country singer's name is Donna Fargo. I didn't find her name, but Fargo was listed. We all know that "Fargo" is the second half of "Wells Fargo Bank." Interesting article on him and he was wealthy beyond belief!!

Thanks for sharing!