Question for the Pro-Iraq War Folks

[WhatsHisNuts]

I've been hearing a lot of the Conservative talk show hosts talking about winning the war in Iraq, and now I'm reading posts by Wayne talking about the Democratic presidential candidates handing over victory to our enemies if/when they take the office.

My question is: What constitutes a "win"in Iraq?

Looks like pulling out now is supposedly a loss, so I'm trying to get an understanding of what a win would look like.

 

[kosar]

I've been hearing a lot of the Conservative talk show hosts talking about winning the war in Iraq, and now I'm reading posts by Wayne talking about the Democratic presidential candidates handing over victory to our enemies if/when they take the office.

My question is: What constitutes a "win"in Iraq?

Looks like pulling out now is supposedly a loss, so I'm trying to get an understanding of what a win would look like.

Don't bother. We've tried this one before several times and not one person could quantify wtf a 'win' means. That's because there's no such thing in this 'war.'

I suggest they go with the 'we got Saddam, his sons and set up 'some' type of democracy', call it a win and let it go. If we leave tomorrow or in 5 years, it will be the same result.

As if the current state of Iraq is any prize.

 

[danmurphy jr]

Can someone explain this ??
WASHINGTON - The Bush administration plans to cut funding for veterans' health care two years from now ? even as badly wounded troops returning from Iraq could overwhelm the system.
Bush is using the cuts, critics say, to help fulfill his pledge to balance the budget by 2012.
After an increase sought for next year, the Bush budget would turn current trends on their head. Even though the cost of providing medical care to veterans has been growing rapidly ? by more than 10 percent in many years ? White House budget documents assume consecutive cutbacks in 2009 and 2010 and a freeze thereafter.
The proposed cuts are unrealistic in light of recent VA budget trends ? its medical care budget has risen every year for two decades and 83 percent in the six years since Bush took office

 

[RAYMOND]

A WIN WOULD BE TAKING IRAN OUT , THERE THE REAL PROBLEM IN THE WORLD, THE LAST 27 YEARS , IS OUR GOVERMENT GOING TO EVER WAKE UP! IF CARTER WOULD HAVE DEAL WITH THESE PEOPLE WE WOULD NOT BE IN THE MIDDLE EAST RIGHT NOW :nono:


THE WORLD AS A WHOLE IS IN BIG DANGER

 

[kosar]

A WIN WOULD BE TAKING IRAN OUT , THERE THE REAL PROBLEM IN THE WORLD, THE LAST 27 YEARS , IS OUR GOVERMENT GOING TO EVER WAKE UP! IF CARTER WOULD HAVE DEAL WITH THESE PEOPLE WE WOULD NOT BE IN THE MIDDLE EAST RIGHT NOW :nono:


THE WORLD AS A WHOLE IS IN BIG DANGER

Yes, Carter. You are correct that his response to the embassy kidnappings was inept and impotent.

What did Reagan do after that? He cut and ran after Irans Hezbollah arm killed 244 Marines in Beirut and THEN, shortly thereafter, sold them arms. That doesn't sound like a real strong position on Iran, does it?

Let's try to be fair and spread the blame around a little, huh? I really don't think Carter is responsible for the problem in Iraq right now.

Hi Ray.

 

[RAYMOND]

Yes, Carter. You are correct that his response to the embassy kidnappings was inept and impotent.

What did Reagan do after that? He cut and ran after Irans Hezbollah arm killed 244 Marines in Beirut and THEN, shortly thereafter, sold them arms. That doesn't sound like a real strong position on Iran, does it?

Let's try to be fair and spread the blame around a little, huh? I really don't think Carter is responsible for the problem in Iraq right now.

Hi Ray.

agree Reagan is to blame also! all the president up

 

[RAYMOND]

matt 100% right:yup if you read right i say our goverment , sorry jimmy carter :mj07:

 

[RAYMOND]

carter and Reagan should have sent the tune!
but more carter , he was in office went the shit went down:shrug: signs of weakness big time

 

[Chadman]

carter and Reagan should have sent the tune!

And the Dixie Chicks could have delivered it...for the record.

That's for should.

 

[djv]

Chad :mj07: :mj07: nailed that one.

 

[kosar]

And the Dixie Chicks could have delivered it...for the record.

That's for should.

:mj07:

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

I think Win in Iraq would be anything that left the terrorist from claiming victory--would like base set up permanantly in green zone--with our troops basically in air support--no way to stop a suicide bombers but would say victory would be when Iraq'is take over that end of it--and let them pay the price rather than our troops.

dan Could you be specific on where the cuts are coming?

I heard the same spiel from others last year--
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/interactives/budget06/budget06Agencies.html

The Department of Veterans Affairs would see its discretionary spending rise $880 million to $33.4 billion, including revenue from fees collected for some medical services. Most discretionary spending at the VA goes to health care, and the department expects to provide care for 5.2 million patients in fiscal 2006.

In a change criticized by some veterans groups, the budget would more than double prescription drug co-payments for some veterans from $7 to $15, and require them to pay an annual enrollment fee of $250. VA officials said the increases, which would generate about $454 million in revenue, would apply to about 2.37 million non-disabled, higher-income veterans, only about 1.2 million of whom actually use the VA health care system.

Overall, the department's budget would rise to $70.8 billion, including $37.4 billion in mandatory funding on entitlements, such as disability payments, pensions and education and rehabilitation programs for veterans.

 

[smurphy]

A WIN WOULD BE TAKING IRAN OUT , THERE THE REAL PROBLEM IN THE WORLD, THE LAST 27 YEARS , IS OUR GOVERMENT GOING TO EVER WAKE UP! IF CARTER WOULD HAVE DEAL WITH THESE PEOPLE WE WOULD NOT BE IN THE MIDDLE EAST RIGHT NOW :nono:


THE WORLD AS A WHOLE IS IN BIG DANGER

that sounds kind of vague. what does "taking iran out" mean? I remember people screaming for the exact same thing regarding Iraq - but here we are - with no tangible goal. Please be specific, raymond. Muchos gracias, senor.

 

[The Sponge]

My question is: What constitutes a "win"in Iraq?

To me this answer is quite simple. The neocons already won the war. They are making a killing with war profiteering and they got involved with the Iraq's oil. This is another huge win. The only loss for the neocons is they have no idea how to fight a war and they thought this would be simple. Since neocons never fight and just pound their chest they got us in way to far. They made their money so in essence they won. They thought this would be so easy and they would just sweep up the middle east on the backs of our military. Can't understand why people don't see it this way. If you just follow the money trail its not that hard. Halliburton huge profits, Kellog, Brown, Root, huge profits. Bectel, Parsons it goes on and on. Carlyle group before 9/11 12 billion net assets and now over 40 billion in net assets. Now the democrats definitions of winning since the neocons got us in this incredible mess to begin with is somehow get us the hell out with minimal damage. Hydrogen cars would fix this whole mess where we wouldn't have to ever deal with them again but we cant hurt our oil thieves feelings.

 

[RAYMOND]

that sounds kind of vague. what does "taking iran out" mean? I remember people screaming for the exact same thing regarding Iraq - but here we are - with no tangible goal. Please be specific, raymond. Muchos gracias, senor.

how old are you number

 

[smurphy]

just answer the question. you know how old me number is.

 

[djv]

Ray that almost sounds like a birthday party. How old are you how old are you. Go screw your self go screw your self. this is a party for grown ups only. Wheres the strippers. Ok belly dancers?:mj07: :00hour

 

[WhatsHisNuts]

I think Win in Iraq would be anything that left the terrorist from claiming victory--would like base set up permanantly in green zone--with our troops basically in air support--no way to stop a suicide bombers but would say victory would be when Iraq'is take over that end of it--and let them pay the price rather than our troops.

What terrorists are you referring to? The insurgents? If that's the case, do you honestly think that is a possibility? I mean, think about it. You're telling me that as long as an undefined group of people don't claim victory, we win. Is that what you're saying is a win?

The second part of your answer says that perhaps it is "when Iraqi's take over" with us only providing air support. Now, for the fun question: If a Democrat takes office, pulls troops (save air support),and puts Iraqis in charge......is that going to be a win?

 

[djv]

Insurgents depends what you mean. According to Bush's buddy Putan. We are Insurgents. I guess that's better then be calling invaders.

 

[Underbar]

A WIN WOULD BE TAKING IRAN OUT , THERE THE REAL PROBLEM IN THE WORLD, THE LAST 27 YEARS , IS OUR GOVERMENT GOING TO EVER WAKE UP! IF CARTER WOULD HAVE DEAL WITH THESE PEOPLE WE WOULD NOT BE IN THE MIDDLE EAST RIGHT NOW :nono:


THE WORLD AS A WHOLE IS IN BIG DANGER

Raymond, are you Colin Quinn's not-so-little brother?

I just wish we could be liberated from Iran, which is stealing $15 million a day out of our tax pockets. Oh wait, that's Israel. The country with 400++ nukes that doesn't allow inspections. Man, I love double standards.