So if we withdrew our troops from Iraq then the terrorists would stop bombing us?
No, but invading a country is not an answer and didnt solve anything. they should have just used special forces coming from saudi arabia to carry out anything that needed to be done. but the truth is iraq had NOTHING to do with 9/11. Osama and Saddam are enemies, they hate each other, Osama wants a religous country while saddam wanted his dictatorship. osama offered to push iraqi troops out of kuwait, yes thats right Osama was offering to fight Saddam.
Afghanistan was the real target, it had the taliban and housed Osama and his Al Quaida. NATO is helping us in afghanistan because it is the real culprit, yet we invade iraq, which takes resources away from afghanistan. and now the taliban is making a come back in afghanistan, yet most of our troops and supplys are in iraq.
learn your facts before posting dumb questions.
"The Pentagon, however, has tried before to influence the media, especially the Iraqi media, and fell on its face."- BBC news
No, but invading a country is not an answer and didnt solve anything. they should have just used special forces coming from saudi arabia to carry out anything that needed to be done. but the truth is iraq had NOTHING to do with 9/11. Osama and Saddam are enemies, they hate each other, Osama wants a religous country while saddam wanted his dictatorship. osama offered to push iraqi troops out of kuwait, yes thats right Osama was offering to fight Saddam.
Afghanistan was the real target, it had the taliban and housed Osama and his Al Quaida. NATO is helping us in afghanistan because it is the real culprit, yet we invade iraq, which takes resources away from afghanistan. and now the taliban is making a come back in afghanistan, yet most of our troops and supplys are in iraq.
learn your facts before posting dumb questions.
I quite agree. WE should have waited to take down Saddam. Eventually he had to go, but we should have secured Afghanistan first. Then we could hit Iraq, take out Saddam, and focus all of our attention on setting up a democracy there.
Th problem wasn't that either war was bad(in my opinion) it was that they handled the wars themselves wrong.
saddam wasnt all that bad, he only became bad after a series of events, which are
iran-iraq war - saddam was seeking to take iran while it was weak after the revolution, but failed, dumb mistake on his part.
invasion of kuwait- he invaded kuwait because he was in debt from the war with iran.
1991 iraq uprisings- after the failed war, uprisings began and he forced them down with power. but he feared an iran style revolution, so he put a image out of him being a more devout muslims and instituted islamic shia laws. he was trying to raise support. he was just trying to bring back lost support.
you have to understand history a little more to get a scope of why.
read this article. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saddam
why did we need to take out saddam?
"The Pentagon, however, has tried before to influence the media, especially the Iraqi media, and fell on its face."- BBC news
No, but invading a country is not an answer and didnt solve anything. they should have just used special forces coming from saudi arabia to carry out anything that needed to be done. but the truth is iraq had NOTHING to do with 9/11. Osama and Saddam are enemies, they hate each other, Osama wants a religous country while saddam wanted his dictatorship. osama offered to push iraqi troops out of kuwait, yes thats right Osama was offering to fight Saddam.
Afghanistan was the real target, it had the taliban and housed Osama and his Al Quaida. NATO is helping us in afghanistan because it is the real culprit, yet we invade iraq, which takes resources away from afghanistan. and now the taliban is making a come back in afghanistan, yet most of our troops and supplys are in iraq.
learn your facts before posting dumb questions.
My point is that, even if we did remove troops from Iraq, the terrorists would still bomb us. I never said anything about us being there being right. But thank you for writing a paragraph containing facts i already knew.
The media loves the latest tragic suicide. They exploit it then package it and profit from the people who died.
saddam wasnt all that bad, he only became bad after a series of events, which are
iran-iraq war - saddam was seeking to take iran while it was weak after the revolution, but failed, dumb mistake on his part.
invasion of kuwait- he invaded kuwait because he was in debt from the war with iran.
1991 iraq uprisings- after the failed war, uprisings began and he forced them down with power. but he feared an iran style revolution, so he put a image out of him being a more devout muslims and instituted islamic shia laws. he was trying to raise support. he was just trying to bring back lost support.
you have to understand history a little more to get a scope of why.
read this article. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saddam
why did we need to take out saddam?
Because he tortured 270,000 people to death, and if you need proof of that, you can buy it on his home made DVD collection available in downtown baghdad.
saddam wasnt all that bad, he only became bad after a series of events, which are
iran-iraq war - saddam was seeking to take iran while it was weak after the revolution, but failed, dumb mistake on his part.
invasion of kuwait- he invaded kuwait because he was in debt from the war with iran.
1991 iraq uprisings- after the failed war, uprisings began and he forced them down with power. but he feared an iran style revolution, so he put a image out of him being a more devout muslims and instituted islamic shia laws. he was trying to raise support. he was just trying to bring back lost support.
you have to understand history a little more to get a scope of why.
read this article. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saddam
why did we need to take out saddam?
Saddam was a murderer and a dictator, he had to go. I don't care if it was an internal problem or some other crap excuse someone might give, he was still evil, and evil people have to be dealt with, harshly.
I think it is a lose/lose situation. If we didn't invade Iraq.....it would still be the same.
Not me. Looking at the situation, terrorists werent festering and going about in Iraq as thier new homeland before the invasion, and bombing the shit out of everyone. and ecspecially after finding out that torture has been WORSE than when saddam was in power, and that our war over there is fueling more generations of people that hate the US, and increasing radicalism.
Quote:
My point is that, even if we did remove troops from Iraq, the terrorists would still bomb us. I never said anything about us being there being right. But thank you for writing a paragraph containing facts i already knew.
Dunno...Osama's agenda, like it or not, is to get ALL american forces out of the middle east, and to get america to withdraw it unholy support of israel. so your pretty much correct there, invasion or not, it was coming.
"I'm the 82nd Airborne. And this is as far as the bastards are going!"
Because he tortured 270,000 people to death, and if you need proof of that, you can buy it on his home made DVD collection available in downtown baghdad.
what about african countrys where this stuff happens, people are killed and tortured. why dount we help them?
and where did you get 270,000 from?
also i dount believe he killed 270,000 by torture. you need HUGE complexes to hold even a fraction of that at a time, and to man those large building takes even more money. even if it was spread out over years, this still applies. IDK where you got 270,000 tortured to death, some crazy pre war/pro war statement that was never confirmed.
"The Pentagon, however, has tried before to influence the media, especially the Iraqi media, and fell on its face."- BBC news
I dont think he TORTURED 270,000 people to death, maybe gas them or something.. but I do agree its good he left.
And yeah that question always comes up, some people find ways to avoid it.
i agree its good he left, but come on you dount need to invade a country to take out the leader. there is the CIA which carries out assassinations. it would be a lot less bloody. keep it low so he dount even see it coming before the first sniper shots and some tomohawk missles takeing out his comand buildings. then deny we had anything to do with it.
"The Pentagon, however, has tried before to influence the media, especially the Iraqi media, and fell on its face."- BBC news
This site is part of the Defy Media Gaming network
The best serving of video game culture, since 2001. Whether you're looking for news, reviews, walkthroughs, or the biggest collection of PC gaming files on the planet, Game Front has you covered. We also make no illusions about gaming: it's supposed to be fun. Browse gaming galleries, humor lists, and honest, short-form reporting. Game on!
The Pub 
Re: Pope offendes muslims 
Linear Mode
