Iraqi "democracy" will be exactly as Ambrose Bierce described, "Four wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for dinner."

The majority of the country (and the oil) will be Iranian-controlled within a year. The Sunni west will ally with Syria if the situation there dies down a little. And the Kurds are set up with new oil wealth to be a permanent armed and rebellious thorn in the side of Turkey (for which Turkey will blame the U.S.)

Exactly what has happened was why the State Department warned GHW Bush to stop the First Gulf War short of deposing Sadaam. They understood the religious and politican divisions and what would happen if we created a power vacuum. But W, Cheney, and Rumsfeld et alia were soooooooooo much smarter than anyone else.

And for the critics who say there were NO WMD's --- during the Iran/Iraq War, Ronald Reagan gave Sadaam two trailers made by the American firm Bechtel. One was set up to produce Mustard Gas and the other to produce a military-grade binary nerve gas. Reagan also sent along a pair of solid gold spurs for Sadaam as a birthday present. The person who accompanied the two WMD production trailers and made the presentation of the spurs was none other than Rumsfeld himself. When the Second Gulf War happened, this was the "ace in the hole." They had been tracking those trailers for years. But when special teams swooped down on them, the one used to make nerve gas was being used to store documents and empty water bottles and the one for mustard gas was being used to make hydrogen gas for weather balloons. Apparently the manufacture of the two gases is highly corrosive and the trailers had a very limited lifetime. They also never found the golden spurs. This was going to be their "proof" of WMD's --- proof sup[plied by the United States by way of Rummy himself.

The start of war in Iraq was a catastrophic mistake. A national blunder. It was a success for the men/women (Bush/Cheney & Co) who knowingly led our country into this war. I have no regrets for staying in Iraq as long as we did to attempt to correct our American mistake. I'm not sure how, but we must hold those that purposefully directed us into this war accountable for their actions.

**Cheney's** oil dream is what it was all about from the start!

Out of almost a $TRILLION $ the cost....one third of that amount went to Halliburton!

What a loaded question!

The war in Iraq was a complete, idiotic was of time and US resources, including the lives of our young men and women.

There was absolutely NO REASON to be there in the first place. The UN was handling the question of WMD but little George decided to invade anyhow.

In the end, our reason for war was the WMD, which was never found, and the waste of exorbitant resources which could well have been used here in our own backyard.

Pathetic!

Saddam was never a threat to the US and he had no WMDs at all. He was in fact a bulwark against the fanatical regime of Iran and that leverage is lost now. Even if US / aka Bush Jr. wanted to hoist the flag of Democracy in Iraq, there were better ways to do it (get rid of Saddam and his henchmen) rather than a full-scale invasion. That full-scale invasion done by the mighty army of the US, without even thinking what we should or need to next to build the conquered country. Unimaginable. Untold miseries to our country. Only time can heal the wounds wrought by Bush, Cheney, Rice, Rummie & Co.

Cheney, Rumsfeld and puppet Bush , will never understand the tragedy they caused. That is, until they find themselves facing the millions, of lives they destroyed, by their greed, ignorance and arrogance. No, it will not be a place with furnace's, coal and shovels, it will be hell.

It is doubtful that President George W Bush's legacy will be any different from Obama. Both suffered the War and the down turn of the economy. The difference is that people will favor the response to the mass killings of 9/11 verses the multi trillion dollars that Obama added to the debt.

Your thought is flawed in thing that one piece of a presidency defines a president. It is the sum of the whole that defines him. And more positive came out of the Bush Administration then did the Obama Administration. Further remember that it will be historians that write what actually took place and not your interruptation of what took place. You, me and the rest of the public are far removed from what takes place in Washington and the White House. Even when you think you know you really dont. So much for that transparent government idea...

Finally if you look at the promises made and achieved by the two Presidents you will find that President Bush far surpass, again, the achievement of promises. Was it a different time and climate, yes it was. But I fall back on and old saying, "Don't make promises your body cannot cash". Obama made a lot of promises that his administration could not present on and that will be a part of his legacy.

dmd, you are delusional. Obama has kept his promise to get us out of Iraq. He GOT Bin Laden (sp?). He has made health care more available and affordable. Sounds like a better legacy than war criminal Bush's war and a deficit that has half of the population below the poverty level.

A catastrophic waste of time and taxpayers' money. Insensitive, barbaric, phenomenal arrogance on the part of the Bush administration. We will never be able to hold our head up as far as the Middle East is concerned. Nor should we.

dmd - you could not be more wrong. Bush's war was not needed. It cost us the lives of over 4,000 of our men and women - for nothing. This was not a response to 9/11 but a response to Saddam Hussein threatening Bush's dad. We've all paid dearly for his stupidity and some will continue paying for the rest of their lives.

The downturn in our economy is a direct result of Bush doing nothing to curtail spending; our dependence on foreign oil; and his own stupidity. President Obama will be revered as the man who had to come in and clean up 8 years of Bush's mess. There is no comparing President Obama to Bush. Obama is honest; intelligent; and working for the people of the United States. Bush was and is a dishonest buffoon who does nothing unless he personally benefits from his actions. And Cheney - it's disgraceful we have to call him an American.

He got bin laden... the US military that Bush put in place got Osama, not Obama. Remember he wanted it all to end, right? He presented a Health Care bill that is not only unconsititutional it was force through congress on party line votes. By the time it was actually passed 59% or more of Americans did not feel it was even worth the paper it was written on. Further 18 states have existing laws that forbid the mandate of health care requirements on their citizens. As a rule the requirement of such a thing would be a state issue and not one that the federal government should be involved in unless we are a dictatorship or socialist government. Further you are correct he kept one of his promises. Just in time for the elections I might add...hum now that is some interesting timing...

@mozzie - if it was so bad why did not Obama end the war when he took office. You can not continue to blame the woos of America on someone who is not even in politics any more. It is time to grow up and swallow the pill. Obama continued the war. He did not close gitmo, the government is not transparent and it is larger than ever with countless numbers of new committees to study more than is humanly possible. You want to talk about a waste of time and taxpayers money (of it is not really taxpayers money because of the income tax cuts, it is more like printed money that goes straight to the national debt) lets talk about all these government funded programs that where added during his administration that have to be funded straight from the national debt...Oh wait we do not want to have conversation about that because then Obama would look really bad...

@Cutie12 - I did not ask for your understanding of why we went to war. Further if call removing a dictator who has killed hundreds of thousands of innocent people because they did not believe what he believed nothing than so be it. If you call the celebration of the attack on 9/11 in that country nothing than so be it. But you must know that the only way to keep the violence out of your home is to make sure that everyone knows you will tear them limb from limb if they try it. I mean really you can not be that naive to believe that we could have just said, "now now mister Osama you have been very bad, please do not do that again". No we had to go after their training camps, their homes, their money and in the end their very life. It was one of Osama's own men that finally turned on him. We could not have gotten that without getting a little rough with our response. No I think you understand that the response had to be purportional to the action. He attack innocent Americans simply because he wanted too.

As for your Obama comments, I do not know what else to say other then remove the wool from your eyes. He is not the box of chocolates or dozen roses that your boyfriend gave you for valentines day. He is a man that has broken promises that got him to the white house and one that will leave office having put the country in a far worst position then it was when he was elected. His health care law will be struckdown or atleast the mandatory part will be removed making the law worthless. A larger than ever national debt fuel by bigger government that cannot get anything accomplished.

As for your comment about spending...have you not seen the numbers on spending that Obama is putting up. Near 5 trillion with 3.2 trillion in the first year...all debt. I mean really do you read anything? Or are you just here to protect Obama?

dmd, its people like you that come up with half-baked logic that supported the invasion of Iraq. Think for a minute, if there was no invasion of Iraq and no tax cut for the rich, the US treasury will be healthier now. Those two costly moves, among a few bad choices, have largely aided the downward-spiral of the US economy.

This discussion has nothing to do with healthcare reform and if you want to go there, the reform started by Pres. Obama is a better option than what we have now. I pray none in your family suffers a catastrophic illness that can easily push you into bankruptcy, then you will realise how badly we need to reform the system and curtail the greed of the healthcare industry.

dmd - if it was so bad why did not Obama end the war when he took office.

Your argument is erroneous and specious. Ending a war is not like flipping a switch. It took eight years of deep entrenchment into that country by the United States, so exiting could not possibly have been done overnight. Get real. Unless you were on the Presidential advisory team for Iraq when Mr. Obama took office, you have no argument that exiting that country should have or could have been done earlier.

You can not continue to blame the woos of America on someone who is not even in politics any more.

What?? Of course I can, and rightfully so. The Bush II legacy is one of disgrace. And it's "woes" and not "woos".

The arguments put forward that state we should stay in Iraq are very hard for me to comprehend. If you have been in a war you would never argue for its necessity in any way, shape or form. I have read these arguments and have listened to all the Republican/Tea Party war mongers with total disgust. Anyone that has experienced war up close and personal and has survived will tell you; war is mankind’s worst sin and should be abolished forever.

Did you forget the house crisis, the market failure, the schemes, the list is endless. In a market economy it is less about the government and more about the market place. On top of that the government is only 1/8 of the overall economy in the first place. I mean really mortgage credit bubble, any of this ringing a bell? No no thats right it is all the fault of the government...because we cannot blame the 80/20 high risk mortgage loans or the banks that bought the loans or stock market and investment issues. No no it is the government, make it bigger. More agencies so the government can spend spend spend. Oh wait did you say you way saved money. Because bigger government with Obama approved income tax cuts, and additional tax cuts means less money. But then how do you pay for bigger government? Oh wait the national debt, we will just keep writing checks off that!

I agree with those who say the survey is loaded. The war in Iraq was a crime. I second BigAl -- war is one of the most terrible things a country can do -- to itself and to others. It must not be done, as it was here, to get revenge cos' of what they did to your daddy.

Iraq may not have had anything to do with 9-11, but Bush used 9-11 to get revenge on Saddam, to enrich his corporate buddies with our tax money and to scale back our constitutional rights. I hope EVERYBODY on newsvine reads Naomi Klein's book, The Shock Doctrine. She outlines very clearly the way these folks use a crisis to their own ends.

We are not invulnerable. We have to pay attention and prevent them from further manipulation of us as a people and our country as a whole!

BigAl - does that include John McCain?

mozzie - No you cannot the cost of the war is on Obama when he took office until now. If he did not like the spending he did not have to stay. Whether it is ok to leave or not. Most people honestly believe that no matter whether we left when Obama came to office or today there will be civil war in Iraq. There is no way around it. If not this year next. They will most like become a dictatorship again based loosely on the support of Iran. So why not just leave when he took office? Must have been something that was important enough to stay? Must have been something keeping us there? No I think you just want to blame the woos of Obama on Bush so that he does not look as bad as he really is.

And just so we are clear, exit strategies for Iraq where in place and estimated to cost more than the war itself. Seriously the cost of leaving was more than what was spent on the war. You can look that up. It is all about timing and cost, nothing grand or principled about this departure. And I feel sorry for that believe otherwise.

dmd - never have I seen a more stark, real-life illustration of the phrase "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing," than in your comments.

DMD-43..... You don't even have your facts correct. No one turned on Osama, one of his aides made a mistake. Bush did not put this military together,Carter did. Osama wasn't in Iraq nor were any of his followers. There were no ties to terrorism found in Iraq, not to mention WMDs. You must be getting all your information from Fox News.

As for Bush's legacy? It can be summed up in two Bush quotes, "You're doing a good job Brownie," and "mission accomplished!" Bush was a porrly inform bufoon who allows those around direct his thinking and actions. DMD, read a book, pick up a newspaper and turn Fox off.

FYI, I live in Alaska and I think Sarah Palin is an idiot.

dmd-433801...You sure have been drinking the KoolAid ! Bush destroyed the economy and the financial system with his unpaid for war and unpaid for medicare drug plan. We may never recover, but if we do recover it will be as a result of the acts of Obama to save the economy. Not fast enough, maybe, but he kept it from completely melting down. Exactly what promises are you referring to that Obama has not kept ? He promised health care reform, we got health care reform, he promised to keep hunting bin Laden after Bush gave up, he got bin Laden, he promised to get out of Iraq, he got out of Iraq. The only promise I can recall him not keeping is the one to close Guantanamo in Cuba, and I respect him for realizing that there was no better alternative abailable so he kept it open once saw the true situation. Would you prefer that he had closed it down ? He admitted he was wrong and did the right thing !

In fall of 2008 we had the largest drop in employment since the great depression, I don't think Obama did enough, but it happened on GWB's watch and Obama was handed a chit sandwich when he came into office in January. Not perfect, far from it, but Obama is certainly head and shoulders above the cluster***k that was the last administration !

dmd

Under every scenario, from the war in Iraq, to the housing debacle, to the Wall street disaster, the huge jobs loss, lack of repairing our infrastructure, Medicare, Social Security, sending our jobs overseas, taxing the middle class but, not the rich and many more cons; can all be placed, at the clay feet, of your idol george bush and his administration. I deliberately did not capitalize, W the puppet's name because, he does not deserve any gesture, that would make him special.

His pal cheney, rumsfeld, rove, and the rest of the murders and liars, who almost caused the ruination of our country, did one thing and that was for themselves. They made themselves and the rich friends, even richer.

cheney still appears on FOX Lies and talks as if, he has done some wondeful accomplishment for this country. He is evil and he spawned a daughter, who spews the same illogical hubris.

As for President Obama, his only mistake, was believing the Republicans actually cared, about the middle class. Every attempt President Obama has made, to do what is good, for every American, has been shot down by the Republicans. Why? Because the Republicans have been bought by the wealthy. The GOP is rich because of their "contributors" and they are not about to lose their gravy.

The only solution is, to elect Democrats back into power and put laws in place, that will shift some of that "trickle down" money, where it belongs, in the middle class.

And no, I am not so naive as to believe every Democrat is honest and caring. But if I had "$10,000.00" to bet, I put it on a Democrat before I would a Republican.

So dmd, All your bellowing and ranting leaves me to believe, you do not keep up with the facts, you watch FOX Lies, you have slept through the last ten years or you have the IQ for GW.

don't forget the hidden tax on the american people to pay for these wars, inflation. they print more money to pay for their off-budget expenditure Iraq war and our buying power and savings diminish as a result. We have had 31% total inflation since 2000!!! This hurts the working and middle classes more than anyone else

dmd - No you cannot the cost of the war is on Obama when he took office until now. If he did not like the spending he did not have to stay. Whether it is ok to leave or not.

I hope at some time soon, you will consider taking a class in English and grammar. Your comments are unintelligible.

DMD=Dumber-than-dumb

Wow how little we really know. How did the war ruin the economy? War strengthens economies, through a rapid growth in manufacturing. Destroyed military vehicles means we need to build more. No the economies of the world went the way they went for other unrelated reasons, most of which can be found with a simple internet search, housing crisis, stock market, etc. More fact less guess helps to make for an intellectual conversation verses a smear campaign.

dmd, are you on drugs? Prescription medication?

No are you?

War only helps your economy if it is someone else war or you are supplying lots of allies. When it is mostly your war that you are paying for and you have few allies you are supplying you are not adding money to the economy you are just spending it in a different place. This is one of the simple ones that most people get wrong, because we believe it is common knowledge that war improves the economy...it does not. In our case the government could have printed more money (adding to the economy) to pay for the war or they could deficit spend with the promise of future monies. Both bad ideas with long term harm to the economy. We chose to borrow and will pay for that over the next couple of decades unless we get leadership that is principled and realistic with our budget and taxes.

@thrakenglarv - Printing money or deficit spending do not harm the economy the harm the state of the dollar. You misrepresent this, dont confuse it. This is a market economy not a governmental economy. Yes the state of the dollar can define the prices that are charged for goods and services but that is up to those that are selling and manufacturing them. You should not mislead the droves that easily latch on to misdirection and false thoughts. There is more to the economy and the government part is only about an 1/8 of it in the overall grand picture.

it was Bush's decision to spend the money on Iraq and encourage the American people to continue on and spend spend spend. But on the iraq war, certainly even if we disagree on whether we should ever have gone there, you cannot be so blind as to think that it was intelligently pursued. When Brewer eliminated the Bathist party, he did away with the infrastructure of irag. He allowed the iraqi people to destroy thier antiquities which did untold damge to their self worth and National identity. He fired the Repubican guard and allowed them to keep their weapons (how dumb is it to make a soldier unemployed and arm him?). Rumsfeld ignored the generals including Colin Powell and put too few troops in country and thus extended the war and killed far more Americans than needed to die.

It was only his decision while he was in office. The next president can make that decision for himself. Further it was a congressional vote that made the decision to go not President Bush. How little the people care to remember about such a basic process. I agree only that if we want to keep our borders safe from other possible attackes like this people have to know that they well meet the full brunt of our force on and off the battle field. Further he allowed none of what you are saying...he allowed them to destroy the antics of history. They were there in that country and its people made their own choice to do so. We are not going to spend the lives to protect that property without properly protecting the area. A event that would be a waste. If the people of Iraq want to destroy those things than that is there own choice. The amount of troops vs deaths vs extention of war is something that will be debated till the end of time. You can stand on your pine box yelling your side and me on mine and no one will ever be right or wrong. There is no proven number of troops that will end a war in XX amount of time. It is just not possible to calculate such a thing.

For a veteran you know little. Colin powell stated often that we should never be out gunned. never shoukd we go in with too few troop. Rumsfeld did it on the cheap. Too few feet on the ground. Most military types believe that we could have ended it much more quickly with a larger force.And it was the Bush adminstrator in iraq that made the decision to allow the Iraqis to loot their country. Some reports indicate that he even encouraged it.

And while we are all bringing out our bonifieds, I was a 130 pilot in Viet Nam.

Just because Collin Powell said so is not a very good defense. Show me the scientific equation: Man power x equipment = time at war. You cannot because there is not one. You evaluate your enemy and your resource and you put just enough at it to achieve victory without losing your ability to defend. Officers of the military are always going to tell you they need more manpower and equipment. Because they do not have to consider the other details, they are simply considering the one situation. There is not a response that you can provide this, it is proven over time and history.

@dmd, I am not sure how you separate harm to the dollar from harm to the economy based on the dollar. Without a US dollar or a weak US dollar there is no economy. Whether weakened by inflation (printing of new money) or the high interest of borrowing, deficit spending ( government set the % rate of borrowing for the market) our economy is damaged. When you find me an economist that will say a weak dollar is not damaging to the economy you can win this point. I understand you may want to make this semantic argument, but it rings hollow. As for the setting of price it is based on what the market will bare not on an individuals decision, this is basic theory of economics. Yes, an individual will pick the final price they charge, but it will not be out of line with the market otherwise they will be driven out of business for lack of profits or abusing the customers. The one thing you did get right is the size of government spending as compared to the economy. But if for one moment you believe that government spending is the only way they impact the economy, your understanding of the interaction between government and the economy is lacking. Monetary policy and fiscal policy have a huge role in the market forces of our economy. Right now there is something like 4 trillion in capital sitting in banks waiting for the right fiscal and monetary conditions and until the market believes those conditions exist they will wait.

While we may disagree on the impact of deficit and inflationary monetary policy, I see you must have agreed with the premise of my argument which in a war fought by us funded by us does nothing to improve the economy, just reallocated resource to war rather than there current purpose.

Oh Kathy, we did let them blow themselves up and then they came to our country and blew some of our people up. Live and let live did not work, we had to go to the bible and take the eye for an eye approach. You cannot deal with that kind of mass terror without putting brave men and women into harms way, but you can do it as safely as possible. To be honest I am not exactly sure of the actual number of KIA but it was far less than WWI, WWII, Korean War, Vietnam, etc. And we got to partake in the great victory of our age, remove both the head of terrorist organization and removing a dictator who already killed hundreds of thousands of people without just cause.

People compare what happened on 9/11 to Pearl Harbor because those are the only two attacks on US soil and if we want to keep it they way they have to know that we mean business. We cannot cry to the UN or appeal to world to "leave us alone". We must strike back hard and fast. We did it in WWII and we did it this time. As a disabled veteran myself I do feel bad for those that were lost and their families will alway be in my prayers, but you shame their name by thinking what they did or achieved is a waste.

dmd your experiences have apparently taught you very little, Saddaam didn't destroy the twin towers, he was too busy sitting in his starving country, starving from our sanctions, Iraq was no more a threat to us then than they are today, maybe moreso today with their majority aligning with Iran

How is any war moral? Is there ever a war that is moral right? Maybe when they bombed Pearl Harbor in WWII that was a moral war right? Or maybe when the attacked the world trade centers and pentagon and we attacked a place we knew was housing and hiding those responsible. Further we removed a dictator that killed hundreds of thousands of people simply because they did not believe what he did. I mean it was not moral to do such a terrible thing. We should have let more people die and let those responsible for the 2nd worst tragedy in American history just continuing doing what they do without putting them in check.

How little you paid attention in economics or government class. The government does control the economy unless it is a dictatorship. The people control the economy. Look at the news after Black Friday, the economy is looking good. Same thing last year after Black Friday and through the Christmas season. When people spend instead of save they create need which then creates jobs. It is called SUPPLY and DEMAND and it makes this economy. The only governmental factor is the national debt, and thanks to Obama we now have about 5 trillion additional added. 3.2 trillion in the first 2 years of his presidency. That debt creates a weaker dollar which increases prices. I wonder if that will be mentioned in the history books...

Balanced budget, what dream are you living in. Americans can not have tax cuts, breaks, income tax cuts, etc. and still have a balanced budget. It does not work, besides you dont every get the real budget numbers. Again so much a transparent government.

celnav, Totally agree.

This was the most egregious, ego-maniacal kind of 'leadership' since Hitler.

Yes, I said Hitler. If other Viners want to give me grief about that, be my guest.

celnav, I'm an Air Force brat, and I know my dad has been screaming in his grave since this all began. He served in 'the Big One'....'One' which seemed to have a reason. But this....I cannot even describe the outrage I have felt since it began.

I wept at news footage, photos and reportage of Viet Nam. I have done the same with this 'war'.

It is a wonder that Bush, or any of his minions, can even sleep at night.

I'm sorry...I'm just prattling on now. I just hope the 'fat lady' has sung on this one. NO MORE. Let's take care of the other headline on MSNBC today...the one about one out of two of us living in poverty in the United States.

...and thanks to The Vine and for the rest of you for giving us a place to vent...

celnav. SEMPER FI

Well for certain Obama got to fulfill a promise before the election. That will be a plus as we head to the polls but at what cost.

@M.Forrest - you mention the Big One One, I assume you meant World War II. May I ask, how did we enter that war? Could it have been the 1st and worst attack to ever happen on US soil? Could it have been after the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor. Interesting, knowing that story you of all people should then understand that it is through hard and fast action to save off any additional attacks on US soil. But yet again someone got brave enough to attack the US on its on soil. What where we supposed to do, cry to the UN, tell the world "leaves us alone"? No we attack, hard and fast. Cut off there supply of money and create a wall of allies around them that shrink their numbers and choke them into a small hiding spot. Then we sneak up in the night and cut of the leadership.

As for taking care of other headlines, like poverty. What do you expect the government to do? Should we setup bread lines, print additional debt and pass it out to people that dont have enough? Poverty is poverty. You either step up and face the music or ban together and call yourself Occupied XXX because you want someone else to blame and hand you money.

As for you comment about Hitler...well I am not even sure I want to touch this. But Hitler wanted to create a single race of people, clean from all else. And in doing so sparked a war which he killed hundreds of thousands of innocent people. To compare that Bush is an incorrect comparison. However to compare that to the dictatorship that was dismanteled in Iraq is well a meritted or honest foundation. We wanted to remove a dangers dictator that was harboring terrorism, terrorist, and that already killed hundreds of thousands of people simply because they did not believe what he did. No I think you might want to hit the history books and really examine Hilter before making such a comparison.

@celnav - In case I or anyone has forgotten, thank you for your service. One final question, how does the cost of the war differ from the cost of keeping the military active? If you really look the cost between the two is simple the replacement cost of vehicles, weapons, etc. The cost of the war is not quite as much as you have slated there.

celnav

As a Nam Vet and father of a Iraq Vet (Marine) We wish to thank you for your service and the HELL you have been put through. Just piece one of advice, Talk about what happened over there. Get it out of your system, It does help.

dmd-433801

Name one person from Iraq that attacked the US. NOPE NOT ONE!!!

And to answer your question about war cost, How about almost 500 Billion for Private Contractors, 300 Billion in destroyed equipment and weaponry and the most impotent the over 4,000 service men and women lost. I know you will say oh well their just volunteers, as all the neo-cons say.

dmd, if you like war so much, why didn't you join the military? Or did anyone in your family join- your brother, sister, first cousin? We still have troops in Afghanistan, pls feel free to enlist today.

Explain the paintings on the wall? Oh you cannot. Explain the terrorist camps? Oh you cannot. Explain the proven ties between Osama and Saddam? Oh you cannot. The list goes on and on. And if I am not mistaken we did catch several Al Quida leadership persons as well as militants in Iraq. But hey who am I JoetheLib you know everything there is to know.

As for your thoughtless and heartless comments in the, I am a disabled veteran myself. Opps you did not know that did you? Well I guess you will have to think about that next time before you make comments about whether someone cares about the services members that were killed by both the enemy and friendly fire. As a matter of fact I probably care more than you do. You just want to use that number for your own benefit, throw it around like a ragdoll to help your cause. Instead I tell you that those men and women died to secure the freedom of a grateful nation. Volunteer or not we all owe them a debt of graditude and their families will always be in my prayers.

Now if you and your liberals where so concerned about the cost why didnt they just stop the war when they had control of the white house and congress? Why not save the american lives and money spent over the last three years if it was all a lie? Why not simply pull the troops out day one and say ok well the countries is your now, see yea? Whats that you say? No answer? Interesting, and isnt it interesting that as we approach this election year all of a sudden we are ready to bring the troops home. Well of course we are...it is was time... No I was politically time because it was one of the only election promises left he had a chance at keeping. If you are going to come at with this crock of yea yea please do so with little more than NOPE NOT ONE!!!

@lalli - A member of my family has been in military service for every generation. Was there something more you wanted to say? I personal have served this great nation in the US Army like my father before me, and my Grandfather before him and my Great Grandfather...do I have continue the list or did you already get the picture?

dmd, So you want to talk history?

Yes. In case you didn't know, WWII has been called 'The Big One' and sometimes "The Great One' ('tho that has mostly been used for WWI, I have been told.) for many, many years.

Hawaii was not a state of the Union when Pearl Harbor was attacked, and therefore not literally American soil.

As to the United Nations...that entity did not exist until 1945. The League of Nations was in place before that.

As to us being attacked and immediately gathering arms and soldiers and creating a "wall of allies"...we joined the war rather late. Europe was in it from 1939 and already had a 'wall of allies' to which we became one more after the raid on Pearl.

As to the poverty issue. It is a valid issue in our country. The choices are not as simple as you would like them to be. You don't either starve to death by 'facing the music'...or occupy because you want a handout. It is a problem that needs to be addressed and fixed...and it can be. It doesn't have to be fixed by simply handing out food or money. Men and women could be given jobs working on our infrastructure...and be paid a wage for doing so. Hate to tell you, but a certain Roosevelt took that approach, and we brought ourselves back up by our bootstraps.

Back to someone who seems to have found grace in your eyes...Hitler...The comparison to Hitler was related to his ego-maniacal mind and egregious acts against others...including his own countrymen...which in my mind Bush did by 1) Not going after the people who took down the towers. 2) Lied about the weapons of mass destruction. 3) Sent thousands of our young men to their deaths in an unwarranted war...not getting the perps of 911 but to get even for Big Daddy B's embarrassment and Dick Cheney's plots.

And just for the record: We are not the world's policemen and never should be.

So, re-read my post. You may see it differently...That is re-read it before you hit the history books...as they say, "You can look it up."....as for me I will not be jousting with you any more.

It is a policy of mine not to do intellectual combat with an unarmed opponent.

dmd, somewhere in there you seem to have the notion that 9/11 and the iraq war are somehow connected. It has been disproven so many times as to be boring that Saddam had absolutely nothing to do with 9/11. to even think that a secular dictator would cooperate with a religious fanatic is just anti logical.

DMD. I now understand you are a Disabled Army Vet, with a severe head wound and no cognitive connection to the real world. I now know were All the CRAP you spew comes from.

dmd FOX and Bush were the only ones that said Saddam and Osama had a connection. Anyone who looked at the FACTS saw that Saddam wanted Osama dead. Don't forget G W Bush said less than 90 days after 9-11, I frankly don't care about Osama or even were he is at. Obama didn't forget he ordered the kill, another promise kept.

dmd:

I am on prescription drugs because I am taking chemotherapy and it is painful. That does not make me mentally incompetent. I have read your posts and I think you slept through the last twenty years like "Rip Van Winkle!"

Why are you on this site if you are so pro bush and anti President Obama? You seem to believe the power of the few should outweigh the power of the many.

Plus I have had a relative fight in every war, since the Revolution. That does not make ME a hero! It makes me luck,y to live in a country that use to have, fair elections and the American Dream. I wish some of those relatives could speak now. Maybe, people like you, would wake up and realize, their are decent Americans in every culture, ethnicity and yes, political party.

dmd, you must be one of the 1% or one of the misguided souls who still believe their are WMD in Iraq.

Hard to believe in the 21st century, we still use barbaric strategies. Will we ever learn?

Peace:

I agree whole-heartedly. War is always about politics and greed. It is time we send in the cheneys, rumfelds and bushs, of this country, to fight their own fights. The only affect the Iraq war had on those murders is, it made them richer.

Agreed,

I served with the 3rd Marines in Quang Tri and Thua Thien Provinces of Vietnam; the "welcome home" then was not quite the same.

How would I describe the war? In the Corps back then, we would have described it in 2 words; first word is "Cluster"

Chris - I was at Dong Ha and Cua Viet. Welcome Home and Thank You for Your Service. Please read www.riflewarrior.com/vietnam.html. Peace. I agree with Cluster (blank) 100%.

semper fi chris I Corps 66/67

Dick Cheney? Conscience? Don't think so

So what? Their problem, NOT OURS!

Right, and what Bin Laden wanted was the military base in Saudi Arabia closed. We allegedly don't barter with terrorists, but Bush quietly did just that while instead saying he was jealous of our freedom, something Bin Laden never said whatsoever in his numerous publicized rants.

That's why we're opening up a new one in Kuwait, where the troops in Iraq will be restationed.

This was all a decoy for a bait and switch so that we could save face while acquiescing to Bin Laden without admitting it or having anyone notice.

I saw that comment, too, but really hope and pray it was sarcasm on the writer's part ...

Dude, that comment was total sarcasm.

DO NOT just blame the Republicans, NO ONE in congress is free from guilt as they allowed this to take place under their watch. Checks and balances people, that is why the separation of powers exist, so ALL of them failed except for a handful who said it was a mistake from the beginning.

No you are wrong. George W, and Cheney made up lies and had Congress buy it. Weapons of Mass destruction! This was a Republican war! And again McCain still wants to be there. check your facts!

Congress is mostly just guilty of believing that a US president wouldn't be so irresponsible and reckless as to lie us into an unjustified war.

Democrats are guilty of being spineless appeasers to Republican aggression, I see people bringing up Neville Chamberlain when they try to defend war with Iraq well the real aggressors were in the White House and the Democrats capitulated to their demands time after time to enable "peace" in government, you see how the Republicans paid them back. You want to talk about someone in Congress who stood against the war from the beginning watch clips of Ron Paul from late 2002, early 2003 including a stirring speech in the House which fell on deaf ears. He has more guts than the top 50 members of his party combined

The problem is the people going to Congress want war!