Political Motivation

[Pannonian]

You're all talking nonsense, and this kind of scepticism will lead to problems in the future. Luckily the US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld does not share your doubts, which is why the war has been a great success. We only need one more thing, the capture of Saddam Hussein (where is he anyway?), and we'll have achieved all our objectives. Just you guys wait.

[Tribesman]

But then, it is dated June 2003, so he might have come to his senses by now...

Nope Kurtz still writes crap .
Apparently being wrong about the WMDS isn't important

Not nearly as important as the deterrent effect of an America willing to brave 3,000 casualties for the sake of proving our willingness to take down rouge states.

Frigging moonbat isn't he . he swings month to month from OMG get the nukes , bring down rogue states and lets have democracy to .....support dictators that sell nukes , support terrorsts and bugger democracy because people vote the wrong way and governments don't do what he wants .

But anyway I think people should really thank Spartan for this topic and his "thoughts" . It does everyone good to have a really heartfelt laugh and Spartan has certainly supplied them aplenty

[Ronin]

I´m so tired of this crap....

shut up you goddamn hippies!!! because guess what, hippies? We ******' won! Yeah! We went in there and we met our stated objective to... Uh, hang on, we went in to go -- uh, liberate the... Hang on, no. Here's why we went. We went to get the, uh... to strike a thing, uh... WE ******* WON, OKAY?

the nice man playing top gun on that boat thingy said so a couple of years ago...so it must be true

[Adrian II]

You're all talking nonsense, and this kind of scepticism will lead to problems in the future. Luckily the US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld does not share your doubts, which is why the war has been a great success. We only need one more thing, the capture of Saddam Hussein (where is he anyway?), and we'll have achieved all our objectives. Just you guys wait.

Well, the U.S. will have to attack Iraq first and secure at least most, if not all of their territory. Rumsfeld seems to think it'll be a walk-over, but I have my doubts whether the number of troops he sent will be sufficient to pull it off and pacify the country.

Pannonian, is there some sort of post-invasion planning being done, that you know of?

[Ironside]

Just about everyone is implying that everything from my government is trash,while everything from their governments is the gleaming symbol of truth.

You remember that Duelfer report Redleg refered to in post 94? The CIA homepage was hacked 4 years ago by leet skillz liberal hackers that put that report on the homepage (sometimes later in a nice html format). At this day the CIA still haven't been able to remove this.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

It might also be the offical CIA report on the WMD projects in Iraq, but with the liberal media you never really know...

Well, the U.S. will have to attack Iraq first and secure at least most, if not all of their territory. Rumsfeld seems to think it'll be a walk-over, but I have my doubts whether the number of troops he sent will be sufficient to pull it off and pacify the country.

Pannonian, is there some sort of post-invasion planning being done, that you know of?

Well if what I've heard the oil money will be so much that it will basically pay the war and rebuilding by itself.
As for the actual rebuilding it will end up in competent hands (who can say that opportunists and Bush lovers aren't naturally compentent and won't ever put thier own interests over the common good) and by loading tons on money without any supervision the money will automatically end up in competent hands helping rebuilding swimming pools in the US Iraq.

[Adrian II]

[..] loading tons on money without any supervision the money will automatically end up in competent hands helping rebuilding swimming pools in the US Iraq.

So Cheney is on it then? Let's hope he doesn't shoot his hunting partner himself in the face foot.

[Ironside]

So Cheney is on it then? Let's hope he doesn't shoot his hunting partner himself in the face foot.

Cheney is on it and so it Rumsfeld, who suggested that we might be able to reduce the number of troops to about 30.000 at the end of the year. So according to plan, almost all the troops will be home in less than a year. Very impressive.

Cheney seems to be a bit more pessemistic and expects an insurgence, but it will most certainly be at it's last throes by the middle of 2005.

[CountArach]

Cheney is on it and so it Rumsfeld, who suggested that we might be able to reduce the number of troops to about 30.000 at the end of the year. So according to plan, almost all the troops will be home in less than a year. Very impressive.

Cheney seems to be a bit more pessemistic and expects an insurgence, but it will most certainly be at it's last throes by the middle of 2005.

Haha, man I got such a laugh at that

[Tribesman]

Yes, but can you really pick on him for what he did when he was your own ally...?

Of course you can , as long as you avoid questions about why you helped him do it . A quick execution might solve that issue though .

I mean you could of course explain that these Kurds were evil Iranian backed terrorists who were fighting against a good Iraqi dictator and were aiming to establish a Kurdish homeland in Iraqi territory which would be a good reason really as to why they deserved to be gassed
But then you would have to explain why these evil Iranian backed terrorists fighting for a Kurdish homeland in Iraq are now called a stabilising influence .

Or the satellite pictures the U.S. provided to him. Or the virus cultures they sent him with which to expand his biological warfare capability. Or the chemicals and expertise sold to him by the Europeans. Or the $1bn US contract to design and build a petrochemical plant which Saddam planned to use to produce mustard gas right after the Halabja massacre. Or the U.S. and UK blocking UN investigations into his gassing of Iranians. Or the hundreds of millions of dollars of U.S. loans with which Saddam paid for Russian and Chinese expertise and weapons systems which they sold to him in spite of all the sanctions.

Now now Adrian be fair , many western governments including your own helped him with his nastyness , not just the US and Britain , and many countries sold him weapons despite the sanctions......
actually which was the country that sold him helicopter gunships but called them agricultural machinery because to do otherwise would have been breaking not only its obligations under international sanctions that it approved but breaking its own national laws too ?
hmmm ....hard question that one isn't it , I think the answer is out there on a carrier pigeon somewhere .
Though obviously you will have to obtain the correct crib sheet to read it after you catch the pigeon as the answer is encrypted since such information is of course extremely sensitive and it wouldn't do for just anyone with the new babbage engine to be able to access it .
Plus there is the advantage that you can eat the pigeon after you retrieve the information , these new methods of information transmission are not only highly informative they are rather nutritious too .