Worry when your king says ...

[iago]

That vote was started by the leading democrat that is against the war, IIRC.
Also, that vote just shows HOW NO ONE believes that we can leave now & let that country fall further apart from where it was before we went in.  Iraq is well on its way to being a full functiong country that doesn't opress & slaughter its own citizens

I agree that leaving the country right now will make things worse than you already have by going there in the first place. 

I disagree that they will ever be a full functioning country, but time will tell. 

Couldn't it be said that America also oppresses and "slaughters" its own citizens?  I realize those are rigged terms that you'd only apply to other countries, but from this side of the border the Death Penalty looks a lot like slaughter to me.  And don't get me started on oppression in the western world, again

[Invert]

The senators that represent you voted to send the troops to Iraq 77-23. Their votes represented the majority of the people who wanted our government to wage war on Iraq.

It's unfortunate that people are so easily influenced by lies.  Well before you went to war, people here (in Canada) were talking about how bogus it was.  It was well known that what your citizens were being told (about WMD, Terrorists in Iraq, etc) were blatent lies.  And look where we are now?  They're acting surprised that attacking Iraq was a mistake!  Maybe your citizens should have been thinking of that instead of vandalizing Canadian cars (because Canada refused to go to a war based on lies)?

Your comment has no merit because you ignored the rest of my post, specifically the part where I mention that we recently (Nov. 19, 2005) had a vote in the House for a nonbinding resolution calling for an immediate troop withdrawal and that resolution failed 403-3.

The majority voted for the troops to remain in Iraq. If the majority believed it was a mistake they would have voted to pull out.

Didn't I read somewhere that that vote set up to fail?

In any case, I don't support withdrawing now.  I thought going into the war was a dumb idea, and it was.  But now that you've committed to it, you're stuck running another country until it's ready to be self-governed (how long do we figure that'll take? ever?)

How can you set up a vote to fail? Everyone just knew that the politicians that scream about how we should pull out would not put their vote where their mouth is besides those 3.

How can you say that you do not support the war and that the United States should not be there but say that you are for the continuation of the occupancy of Iraq by the United States? If you believe that it's good for the Iraqis to have the United States there then you are for the war!

It's a fact that the majority of Iraqis are much better off now then when Sadam ruled the country and before the United States occupation. I have provided evidence of this a few times before but here it is again...

Here is an excerpt from this article:

Average household incomes have soared by 60 percent in the last 20 months (to $263 a month), 70 percent of Iraqis rate their own economic situation positively, and consumer goods are sweeping the country. In early 2004, 6 percent of Iraqi households had cell phones; now it's 62 percent. Ownership of satellite dishes has nearly tripled, and many more families now own air conditioners (58 percent, up from 44 percent), cars, washing machines and kitchen appliances.

You don't have to agree with me if you want to keep contradicting yourself and ignoring the facts.

[iago]

How can you set up a vote to fail? Everyone just knew that the politicians that scream about how we should pull out would not put their vote where their mouth is besides those 3.

Anyway, it's easy to make a vote fail, by making a ridiculous vote that nobody with common sense would vote for.  I thought I read that this vote was like that, I could be wrong.  I have no evidence or sources to cite on it, so let's forget that topic, unless somebody has a source on it. 

How can you say that you do not support the war and that the United States should not be there but say that you are for the continuation of the occupancy of Iraq by the United States? If you believe that it's good for the Iraqis to have the United States there then you are for the war!

Easily.  It's like saying that you shouldn't impregnate a girl when you're 16, but if you do, you'd better bring up the child.  I didn't support the kid knocking up the chick, but once it's done he can't just abandon the responsibility he's made for himself.  It's a similar situation, in my eyes. 

It's a fact that the majority of Iraqis are much better off now then when Sadam ruled the country and before the United States occupation. I have provided evidence of this a few times before but here it is again...

Here is an excerpt from this article:

Average household incomes have soared by 60 percent in the last 20 months (to $263 a month), 70 percent of Iraqis rate their own economic situation positively, and consumer goods are sweeping the country. In early 2004, 6 percent of Iraqi households had cell phones; now it's 62 percent. Ownership of satellite dishes has nearly tripled, and many more families now own air conditioners (58 percent, up from 44 percent), cars, washing machines and kitchen appliances.

You don't have to agree with me if you want to keep contradicting yourself and ignoring the facts.

That's assuming that more consumer goods and better economics indicates that the country is "better".  I think that the US could be better with less consumer goods and more culture, which is what you've robbed of Iraq. 

[hismajesty]

How can you set up a vote to fail? Everyone just knew that the politicians that scream about how we should pull out would not put their vote where their mouth is besides those 3.

Listen, birdbrain... (kidding).

Anyway, it's easy to make a vote fail, by making a ridiculous vote that nobody with common sense would vote for. I thought I read that this vote was like that, I could be wrong. I have no evidence or sources to cite on it, so let's forget that topic, unless somebody has a source on it.

I think there were two bills up a few days apart, and one of them had something in end that was odd or something. But, really, there is this whole power the Senate has that allows the ammending of a bill before it goes into voting procedure and all...

[Adron]

That vote was started by the leading democrat that is against the war, IIRC.
Also, that vote just shows HOW NO ONE believes that we can leave now & let that country fall further apart from where it was before we went in.

Incorrect. The numbers 403-3, means SOME ONE believes you can leave now. Three someones.

And the vote was rigged, from being about leaving Iraq to being about leaving it *right now*. If the US was to leave Iraq right now, the US should first pay damages, rebuild everything broken, reequip the Iraqi military, etc. Going in, tearing stuff down and then leaving is much worse than not going in at all.

[Grok]

Correct.  The vote was about leaving *right now* and Invert you even knew this.  In your posts here you make the distinction between "leaving right now" and just "leaving" when challenging others.  Apparently you think that people were fooled by the vote.

Had the vote been something like "vote for/against a congressional plan for an orderly controlled pull out with a relatively set time table keyed to specific milestones as enumerated within the plan", the vote would have passed.  But asking for an immediate vote on "leave right now" is incredibly irresponsible and rigged.

[CrAz3D]

The death penalty is not a slaughter of jack shit & you know it!  They humanely inject people & they fall asleep to their death, its simple & clean.  Saddam Hussein slaughter with toxic gasses that made them suffer, they just blatantly KILLED people by physical violent means, that's comparing apple & oranges & you know it.


So nobody with common sense wants to leave Iraq then?...hmm, thanks for pointing that out.

More goods = better economy = better standard of living (running water, FREEDOM!)


Adron, what the fuck do you think we're doing overthere?  Everything is being rebuilt, including their the people's basic freedoms.


Of course a vote to leave (in an indefinite time period) would pass, it would pass by everyone I'd be willing to bet.  But you have the far leftists saying to bring the troops home now, so, Mr. Murtha?(the D. from back east) said lets bring them home now.
According to iago that shows incompetence, that guy should be removed from office.

[K]

The death penalty is not a slaughter of jack shit & you know it!  They humanely inject people & they fall asleep to their death, its simple & clean.

I wouldn't say you "fall asleep to your death."
Actually, they use three chemicals:
a short acting anesthesia,  a muscle paralizing agent, and finally potassium chloride, which stops the heart.  Often the anesthesia wears off before the subject is dead, leaving them  paralyzed and in excruciating pain, but unable to express this because of the paralizing agent. In addition, some people seem to have additional reactions to the chemicals used, such as extreme convulsions.

But this is for another thread.

[CrAz3D]

ooh, hmm, not fun, but still I'd bet its better than walking around & having that happen minus the anesthetic

[iago]

you're still murdering your own citizens, I don't care how humain the way they do it is. 

Craz3d, I don't know how you can say that's a bad thing, I have it on record that you support both torturing them and you support nuking the middle east into oblivion (I'll find quotes of both if you want), then you go on to use the fact that they say the same thing against them.  That's a very hypocritical standpoint. 

[CrAz3D]

Those people being executed are being punished

Who says the same thing against what?

[Invert]

How can you set up a vote to fail? Everyone just knew that the politicians that scream about how we should pull out would not put their vote where their mouth is besides those 3.

Anyway, it's easy to make a vote fail, by making a ridiculous vote that nobody with common sense would vote for.  I thought I read that this vote was like that, I could be wrong.  I have no evidence or sources to cite on it, so let's forget that topic, unless somebody has a source on it. 

How can you say that you do not support the war and that the United States should not be there but say that you are for the continuation of the occupancy of Iraq by the United States? If you believe that it's good for the Iraqis to have the United States there then you are for the war!

Easily.  It's like saying that you shouldn't impregnate a girl when you're 16, but if you do, you'd better bring up the child.  I didn't support the kid knocking up the chick, but once it's done he can't just abandon the responsibility he's made for himself.  It's a similar situation, in my eyes. 

It's a fact that the majority of Iraqis are much better off now then when Sadam ruled the country and before the United States occupation. I have provided evidence of this a few times before but here it is again...

Here is an excerpt from this article:

Average household incomes have soared by 60 percent in the last 20 months (to $263 a month), 70 percent of Iraqis rate their own economic situation positively, and consumer goods are sweeping the country. In early 2004, 6 percent of Iraqi households had cell phones; now it's 62 percent. Ownership of satellite dishes has nearly tripled, and many more families now own air conditioners (58 percent, up from 44 percent), cars, washing machines and kitchen appliances.

You don't have to agree with me if you want to keep contradicting yourself and ignoring the facts.

That's assuming that more consumer goods and better economics indicates that the country is "better".  I think that the US could be better with less consumer goods and more culture, which is what you've robbed of Iraq. 

I don't see how you can call that vote ridiculous when we have one group of politicians calling for immediate withdraw and when the vote is put right in front of them only 3 out of hundreds vote for an immediate withdraw.

Your analogy is not completely accurate since the factor of your analogy is age implying that it was bad for the United States to initially invade when the majority of the people agreed with the initial invasion. My point is in your country and my country the majority of the people believed that it's not ok for a 16 year old boy to impregnate a girl. If the majority of people in my country and your country believed that it was okay for a 16 year old boy to impregnate a girl then your analogy would work just fine and your argument would fail.

Also when the majority of Iraqis (A poll conducted Oct. 8 to Nov. 22, 2005, in person, in Arabic and Kurdish, among a random national sample of 1,711 Iraqis age 15 and up by Oxford Research International) say that their life is better now then it was under Sadams regime is an indication that the country as a whole is doing better according to Iraqis.

You say that we robbed Iraq of culture without any proof behind your statement, not very convincing of you.

Let me point this out to you, the people of the United States wanted this to happen to Iraq before President G. W. Bush was even in office. The Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 was passed in the House and Senate and signed into law by the then United States President Bill Clinton on October 31, 1998. Its stated purpose was: "to establish a program to support a transition to democracy in Iraq." And the Congress found: "It should be the policy of the United States to support efforts to remove the regime headed by Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq and to promote the emergence of a democratic government to replace that regime."

Here is the link to Public Law 105-338: http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=105_cong_public_laws&docid=f:publ338.105

[Invert]

Correct.  The vote was about leaving *right now* and Invert you even knew this.  In your posts here you make the distinction between "leaving right now" and just "leaving" when challenging others.  Apparently you think that people were fooled by the vote.

Had the vote been something like "vote for/against a congressional plan for an orderly controlled pull out with a relatively set time table keyed to specific milestones as enumerated within the plan", the vote would have passed.  But asking for an immediate vote on "leave right now" is incredibly irresponsible and rigged.

Adron: The vote was not "rigged". You can't just bring up a random vote in the House or Representatives. The vote was brought on by a democratic lawmaker's call for an immediate troop withdrawal from Iraq. Everyone knew what the vote was going to be for and everyone knew what they were voting for.

You assume that the United States has done more damage in Iraq than good without any proof of that you have no argument. Just like I can say that the Iraqis should repay us for all the good we have done for them because the good outweighs the bad.

Grok: In my original post about that (it does not sound like you went back and read it) I specifically stated that the vote was for an "immediate troop withdrawal", what can be confusing about that? My point was that the democratic lawmakers made a big stink about having our troops in Iraq and wanted them out immediately but when it was time to vote only 3 of them put their vote where their political point of view was. I believe that most of them did not want to vote yes was because they did not want to leave a mark in their records for their failed policies for future elections.

I am all for the eventual withdraw of troops from Iraq.

Other then that all you are doing is throwing what ifs. What if this, what if that will not prove any point of yours.

[hismajesty]

Repay what damages? Have you not noticed that we're exponentially throwing money at that country trying to mondernize and rebuild it? Trying to secure it? Trying to train and equip the military and police forces, trying to keep the citizens safe. What money do we owe them?

[Adron]

Keep rebuilding and eventually you may not owe them. Other than that, all the property destroyed and all the people killed during your invasion of Iraq is what you owe them.

And yes, the vote was rigged. The text as it was laid out to vote on was dumb, while the suggestion from the democrat was not.