The reason that any of them would say this is because they'd like to see us taught a lesson so that our hawkishness doesn't continue. Including the 5% of Republicans. You guys should kill those people for being traitors to your party.

Seriously, has any other country, especially amongst civilized ones, been at war as often in the past 150 years? Maybe they just want a break.

___________________
"Go back to bed america your government is in control
Here's American Gladiators, here is 56 channels of it,
Watch these picturary retards bang their fuckin' skulls together and congratulate you on living in the land of freedom,
Here you go America you are free to do as we tell you
We want your soul
Your cash, your house, your phone, your cash, your house, your life" -Adam Freeland - We Want Your Soul

Hey wait, we can still "win"?

quote:

Originally posted by LatinLover NEW YORK — Nearly one out of every five Democrats thinks the world will be better off if America loses the war in Iraq, according to the FOX News Opinion Dynamics Poll released Thursday. The percentage of Democrats (19 percent) who believe that is nearly four times the number of Republicans (5 percent) who gave the same answer. Seven percent of independents said the world would be better off if the U.S. lost the war. Overall, 11 percent of Americans think the world would be "better off" if the U.S. lost the war, and 73 percent disagree. Opinion Dynamics Corp. conducted the national telephone poll of 900 registered voters for FOX News from Sept. 25 to Sept. 26. The poll has a 3-point margin of error. Praying for Peace Large majorities of Americans say they have said a prayer for soldiers serving in Iraq and for the war to end, while just over half say they have prayed for President Bush. Most people — 87 percent — say they have said a prayer for the troops, and another 77 percent have prayed for the war in Iraq to end. A much smaller 54 percent majority of Americans say they have prayed for the president. Among groups, Democrats (80 percent) and Republicans (76 percent) are about equally likely to say they have prayed for the war to end, and women (80 percent) are only slightly more likely than men (73 percent) to have done so. Republicans (74 percent) are twice as likely as Democrats (37 percent) to have included the president in their prayers, while just over half (52 percent) of independents have prayed for Bush. Appealing to a higher authority on behalf of the president does not appear to be influenced by gender, as about as many men (51 percent) as women (56 percent) say they have prayed for Bush. "It’s interesting to see the parallel between overall voter sentiment toward the president and the relatively reduced likelihood to pray for him," says Ernest Paicopolos, principal of Opinion Dynamics. "It’s also striking to see a more than 30-point gap between prayer for the troops and prayer for the commander-in-chief of those same troops." In general, more Republicans (64 percent) than Democrats (53 percent) and independents (48 percent) say they pray every day. Southerners (66 percent) are 20 percentage points more likely than those living in the Northeast (46 percent) to pray daily. Overall, a 56 percent majority of Americans says they pray every day, including 64 percent of women and 47 percent of men. Another 17 percent say they pray several times a week and 7 percent several times a month. Few Americans — 7 percent — say they never pray. RESULTS

So? Want to go ahead and give an opinion on this? Or is this just for the sake of posting?

___________________
Poetry>Byron//Blog>TheMean

quote:

Orbax At that point you kind of crossed the rubicon and you might as well lay siege to Rome

quote:

Originally posted by venomX So? Want to go ahead and give an opinion on this? Or is this just for the sake of posting?

+1...I think he is too busy and important to post his superior opinions...

Why lose if we can withdraw? That way we don't win OR lose... Like Vietnam...

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton +1...I think he is too busy and important to post his superior opinions... Why lose if we can withdraw? That way we don't win OR lose... Like Vietnam...

Who says that we are going to lose?
This is why I dont get, Krypton what is the main goal of the insurgency in Iraq?

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton College tuition should be free, so should healthcare.

quote:

Originally posted by LatinLover Who says that we are going to lose? This is why I dont get, Krypton what is the main goal of the insurgency in Iraq?

Which part of the insurgency? They do not all have the same goals. Lumping them together is just a strategy to vilify all of the at the same time and make it easier to justify attacking them.

___________________
Poetry>Byron//Blog>TheMean

quote:

Orbax At that point you kind of crossed the rubicon and you might as well lay siege to Rome

quote:

Originally posted by LatinLover Who says that we are going to lose? This is why I dont get, Krypton what is the main goal of the insurgency in Iraq?

So is this about simply saving face? We must fight, or else risk looking like a dimwit? The insurgency in Iraq is like the War on Drugs, you are never going to end it with force. Especially FOREIGN FORCE!!

The goal of most of the insurgency is to end the occupation. But with the absence of law and order, people like Al-Qaida and criminals have been given a free reign to terrorize more than 1 million Iraqis to pack up and leave the country, a "brain drain" {{{CLICK}}} if you will. It is not the insurgency that is the cause of this. The cause of the insurgency is the occupation. End the occupation...

___________________

The best thing to do would be to change the target of the mission.

By establishing a goal that is close to complete or, even better, already complete then victory will be assured.

For example, if the target had been to have George Bush land on an aircraft carrier to be greated by an adoring crew, well, Mission Accomplished.

....

And what is this about praying for the war to end????

How many of these people have written letters to thier federal representatives?

And if 73% of people don't think the world would be better off if the US lost yet a majority of them are praying for an end to the war, they are clearly praying for a US victory.

In this case they could be more effective bringing about this end by enlisting, encouraging thier relatives to enlist, contributing free labour to the production of millitary supplies, or all kinds of other efforts that would aid the war effort (even consuming less would be a start, like driving less).

Praying seems like a way to pretend to do something.

quote:

Originally posted by LatinLover This is why I dont get, Krypton what is the main goal of the insurgency in Iraq?

I think there are three goals that can be identified and applied to any group operating against the US occupation.

1. An end to the occupation. The people who hold this goal view the western efforts as a varriant of colonialisim or even of the crusades.

2. Gain power. The armed factions have been fighting to attempt to gain certain powers in the event of stability being established. There are people moving to secure the rights to the sale of oil, to the control of the government, and of the military / police force (should they ever emerge).

3. Fight the US. Some forces, notably Al-Q, are using Iraq as a battle ground in which to fight the US. Tactically the optimal resolution for this target is to make sure the US forces remain in the country while sustaining massive amounts of ingury, not death. And this needs to be carried out with minimal use of resources (both human and financial).

The reason this for this third goal is that it allows Al-Q and any associates they have to open other fronts while working to bankrupt the US. So long as they are able to keep maiming soilders they are able to slow the "pull out" factions in America (the populus reacts more strongly to deaths then inguries) while causing maximum financial penalties on the country. Amputees cost a country more money then dead in the long run. They are less productive, potentially not productive, yet continue to drain resources so long as they are alive.

I'm confused as to whether you are posting this sort of blatant propaganda to convince others of your point of view, or in order to solidify your own already solidified point of view against the potential for it be affected by outside influence?

quote:

Originally posted by atbell I think there are three goals that can be identified and applied to any group operating against the US occupation. 1. An end to the occupation. The people who hold this goal view the western efforts as a varriant of colonialisim or even of the crusades. 2. Gain power. The armed factions have been fighting to attempt to gain certain powers in the event of stability being established. There are people moving to secure the rights to the sale of oil, to the control of the government, and of the military / police force (should they ever emerge). 3. Fight the US. Some forces, notably Al-Q, are using Iraq as a battle ground in which to fight the US. Tactically the optimal resolution for this target is to make sure the US forces remain in the country while sustaining massive amounts of ingury, not death. And this needs to be carried out with minimal use of resources (both human and financial). The reason this for this third goal is that it allows Al-Q and any associates they have to open other fronts while working to bankrupt the US. So long as they are able to keep maiming soilders they are able to slow the "pull out" factions in America (the populus reacts more strongly to deaths then inguries) while causing maximum financial penalties on the country. Amputees cost a country more money then dead in the long run. They are less productive, potentially not productive, yet continue to drain resources so long as they are alive.

Wow, I don't know whether this is true or not, but it's really good thinking.

I'm glad you're not bin laden.