The Daily Ilhan

HardlyClothed

RaceBannon said:

HardlyClothed said:

YellowSnow said:

RaceBannon said:

PurpleThrobber said:

YellowSnow said:

HardlyClothed said:

YellowSnow said:

HardlyClothed said:

RaceBannon said:

Asked and answered @HardlyClothed

You don't have to like the answer

Do unto to others before they do it to you

Do you agree with the Death to America sentiment in the mid east? Who are you rooting for?

I just wanted his answer on if we should have overthrown Saddam in ‘03 so we could all see how dumb he is.

I don’t think the response to Death to America sentiment is to wage endless war against them and wasting our blood and treasure.

I voted for the invasion, but in hindsight feel it was a mistake and have apologized for it. That said, it wasn't like leaving Saddam in power was a great option either for stability in the region and international precedent when it comes to WMD inspections regimes. It's much like Vietnam in this respeck in that there weren't a lot of good options on the table.

The good option was to do nothing. Saddam didn’t have WMD and the IAEA said so in 2002, which the Bush admin sought to discredit. We should listen to the people that do the inspections, and probably the people who were against the war from the outset. Removing Saddam was far more disastrous for regional stability than letting him remain in power would have been.

Yes, the good less bad option was to leave him in power.

We? should have gone in hard without lube on Saddam during Desert Swarm when the entire fucking world was on our? side.

Then pivoted and rammed it hard into Iran after a brief refractory period just because we? were tanned and ready.

This

I remember 1979 as one of the working stiffs when I saw a guy with a Bomb Iran shirt

Should have nipped that shit in the bud

Many of our problems in the Middle East (and Persia) stem from our not going in dry on the Ayatollah in 1979. That was an act of war that required blowing them back into the stone age. Embassies are sovereign soil.

YellowSnow said:

RaceBannon said:

PurpleThrobber said:

YellowSnow said:

HardlyClothed said:

YellowSnow said:

HardlyClothed said:

RaceBannon said:

Asked and answered @HardlyClothed

You don't have to like the answer

Do unto to others before they do it to you

Do you agree with the Death to America sentiment in the mid east? Who are you rooting for?

I just wanted his answer on if we should have overthrown Saddam in ‘03 so we could all see how dumb he is.

I don’t think the response to Death to America sentiment is to wage endless war against them and wasting our blood and treasure.

I voted for the invasion, but in hindsight feel it was a mistake and have apologized for it. That said, it wasn't like leaving Saddam in power was a great option either for stability in the region and international precedent when it comes to WMD inspections regimes. It's much like Vietnam in this respeck in that there weren't a lot of good options on the table.

The good option was to do nothing. Saddam didn’t have WMD and the IAEA said so in 2002, which the Bush admin sought to discredit. We should listen to the people that do the inspections, and probably the people who were against the war from the outset. Removing Saddam was far more disastrous for regional stability than letting him remain in power would have been.

Yes, the good less bad option was to leave him in power.

We? should have gone in hard without lube on Saddam during Desert Swarm when the entire fucking world was on our? side.

Then pivoted and rammed it hard into Iran after a brief refractory period just because we? were tanned and ready.

This

I remember 1979 as one of the working stiffs when I saw a guy with a Bomb Iran shirt

Should have nipped that shit in the bud

Many of our problems in the Middle East (and Persia) stem from our not going in dry on the Ayatollah in 1979. That was an act of war that required blowing them back into the stone age. Embassies are sovereign soil.

Come see the chickenhawks call for more pointless brutal war. What great threat does modern Iran represent that we needed to level their country now or 40 years ago.

We're rooting for America

I understand that you aren't

Agree to disagree

You let someone attack without consequence they keep attacking. You would have made a great Hitler apologist too

Modern Iran is just like Nazi Germany. We must defeat them into total submission in order to secure us from their nefarious activity.

RaceBannon

HardlyClothed said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

RaceBannon said:

YellowSnow said:

RaceBannon said:

PurpleThrobber said:

YellowSnow said:

HardlyClothed said:

YellowSnow said:

HardlyClothed said:

RaceBannon said:

Asked and answered @HardlyClothed

You don't have to like the answer

Do unto to others before they do it to you

Do you agree with the Death to America sentiment in the mid east? Who are you rooting for?

I just wanted his answer on if we should have overthrown Saddam in ‘03 so we could all see how dumb he is.

I don’t think the response to Death to America sentiment is to wage endless war against them and wasting our blood and treasure.

I voted for the invasion, but in hindsight feel it was a mistake and have apologized for it. That said, it wasn't like leaving Saddam in power was a great option either for stability in the region and international precedent when it comes to WMD inspections regimes. It's much like Vietnam in this respeck in that there weren't a lot of good options on the table.

The good option was to do nothing. Saddam didn’t have WMD and the IAEA said so in 2002, which the Bush admin sought to discredit. We should listen to the people that do the inspections, and probably the people who were against the war from the outset. Removing Saddam was far more disastrous for regional stability than letting him remain in power would have been.

Yes, the good less bad option was to leave him in power.

We? should have gone in hard without lube on Saddam during Desert Swarm when the entire fucking world was on our? side.

Then pivoted and rammed it hard into Iran after a brief refractory period just because we? were tanned and ready.

This

I remember 1979 as one of the working stiffs when I saw a guy with a Bomb Iran shirt

Should have nipped that shit in the bud

Many of our problems in the Middle East (and Persia) stem from our not going in dry on the Ayatollah in 1979. That was an act of war that required blowing them back into the stone age. Embassies are sovereign soil.

You and I do agree on a lot

It's almost like people with common sense see things similarly.

When I think people with common sense I think of brutal military campaigns on the other side of the world against countries that don’t threaten the United States. Just common sense.

Don't threaten the US?

This piece of shit is trying to get nukes and Obama wanted to help him

HardlyClothed

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

HardlyClothed said:

YellowSnow said:

RaceBannon said:

PurpleThrobber said:

YellowSnow said:

HardlyClothed said:

YellowSnow said:

HardlyClothed said:

RaceBannon said:

Asked and answered @HardlyClothed

You don't have to like the answer

Do unto to others before they do it to you

Do you agree with the Death to America sentiment in the mid east? Who are you rooting for?

I just wanted his answer on if we should have overthrown Saddam in ‘03 so we could all see how dumb he is.

I don’t think the response to Death to America sentiment is to wage endless war against them and wasting our blood and treasure.

I voted for the invasion, but in hindsight feel it was a mistake and have apologized for it. That said, it wasn't like leaving Saddam in power was a great option either for stability in the region and international precedent when it comes to WMD inspections regimes. It's much like Vietnam in this respeck in that there weren't a lot of good options on the table.

The good option was to do nothing. Saddam didn’t have WMD and the IAEA said so in 2002, which the Bush admin sought to discredit. We should listen to the people that do the inspections, and probably the people who were against the war from the outset. Removing Saddam was far more disastrous for regional stability than letting him remain in power would have been.

Yes, the good less bad option was to leave him in power.

We? should have gone in hard without lube on Saddam during Desert Swarm when the entire fucking world was on our? side.

Then pivoted and rammed it hard into Iran after a brief refractory period just because we? were tanned and ready.

This

I remember 1979 as one of the working stiffs when I saw a guy with a Bomb Iran shirt

Should have nipped that shit in the bud

Many of our problems in the Middle East (and Persia) stem from our not going in dry on the Ayatollah in 1979. That was an act of war that required blowing them back into the stone age. Embassies are sovereign soil.

YellowSnow said:

RaceBannon said:

PurpleThrobber said:

YellowSnow said:

HardlyClothed said:

YellowSnow said:

HardlyClothed said:

RaceBannon said:

Asked and answered @HardlyClothed

You don't have to like the answer

Do unto to others before they do it to you

Do you agree with the Death to America sentiment in the mid east? Who are you rooting for?

I just wanted his answer on if we should have overthrown Saddam in ‘03 so we could all see how dumb he is.

I don’t think the response to Death to America sentiment is to wage endless war against them and wasting our blood and treasure.

I voted for the invasion, but in hindsight feel it was a mistake and have apologized for it. That said, it wasn't like leaving Saddam in power was a great option either for stability in the region and international precedent when it comes to WMD inspections regimes. It's much like Vietnam in this respeck in that there weren't a lot of good options on the table.

The good option was to do nothing. Saddam didn’t have WMD and the IAEA said so in 2002, which the Bush admin sought to discredit. We should listen to the people that do the inspections, and probably the people who were against the war from the outset. Removing Saddam was far more disastrous for regional stability than letting him remain in power would have been.

Yes, the good less bad option was to leave him in power.

We? should have gone in hard without lube on Saddam during Desert Swarm when the entire fucking world was on our? side.

Then pivoted and rammed it hard into Iran after a brief refractory period just because we? were tanned and ready.

This

I remember 1979 as one of the working stiffs when I saw a guy with a Bomb Iran shirt

Should have nipped that shit in the bud

Many of our problems in the Middle East (and Persia) stem from our not going in dry on the Ayatollah in 1979. That was an act of war that required blowing them back into the stone age. Embassies are sovereign soil.

Come see the chickenhawks call for more pointless brutal war. What great threat does modern Iran represent that we needed to level their country now or 40 years ago.

Islam knows all about pointless brutal war. I guess embassies can get attacked with 0 consequences

Chickenhawk wants to go to war against every country in which our embassy was attacked. Gotta be ready to deploy in dozens of them. It’s just common sense.

YellowSnow

HardlyClothed said:

YellowSnow said:

RaceBannon said:

PurpleThrobber said:

YellowSnow said:

HardlyClothed said:

YellowSnow said:

HardlyClothed said:

RaceBannon said:

Asked and answered @HardlyClothed

You don't have to like the answer

Do unto to others before they do it to you

Do you agree with the Death to America sentiment in the mid east? Who are you rooting for?

I just wanted his answer on if we should have overthrown Saddam in ‘03 so we could all see how dumb he is.

I don’t think the response to Death to America sentiment is to wage endless war against them and wasting our blood and treasure.

I voted for the invasion, but in hindsight feel it was a mistake and have apologized for it. That said, it wasn't like leaving Saddam in power was a great option either for stability in the region and international precedent when it comes to WMD inspections regimes. It's much like Vietnam in this respeck in that there weren't a lot of good options on the table.

The good option was to do nothing. Saddam didn’t have WMD and the IAEA said so in 2002, which the Bush admin sought to discredit. We should listen to the people that do the inspections, and probably the people who were against the war from the outset. Removing Saddam was far more disastrous for regional stability than letting him remain in power would have been.

Yes, the good less bad option was to leave him in power.

We? should have gone in hard without lube on Saddam during Desert Swarm when the entire fucking world was on our? side.

Then pivoted and rammed it hard into Iran after a brief refractory period just because we? were tanned and ready.

This

I remember 1979 as one of the working stiffs when I saw a guy with a Bomb Iran shirt

Should have nipped that shit in the bud

Many of our problems in the Middle East (and Persia) stem from our not going in dry on the Ayatollah in 1979. That was an act of war that required blowing them back into the stone age. Embassies are sovereign soil.

YellowSnow said:

RaceBannon said:

PurpleThrobber said:

YellowSnow said:

HardlyClothed said:

YellowSnow said:

HardlyClothed said:

RaceBannon said:

Asked and answered @HardlyClothed

You don't have to like the answer

Do unto to others before they do it to you

Do you agree with the Death to America sentiment in the mid east? Who are you rooting for?

I just wanted his answer on if we should have overthrown Saddam in ‘03 so we could all see how dumb he is.

I don’t think the response to Death to America sentiment is to wage endless war against them and wasting our blood and treasure.

I voted for the invasion, but in hindsight feel it was a mistake and have apologized for it. That said, it wasn't like leaving Saddam in power was a great option either for stability in the region and international precedent when it comes to WMD inspections regimes. It's much like Vietnam in this respeck in that there weren't a lot of good options on the table.

The good option was to do nothing. Saddam didn’t have WMD and the IAEA said so in 2002, which the Bush admin sought to discredit. We should listen to the people that do the inspections, and probably the people who were against the war from the outset. Removing Saddam was far more disastrous for regional stability than letting him remain in power would have been.

Yes, the good less bad option was to leave him in power.

We? should have gone in hard without lube on Saddam during Desert Swarm when the entire fucking world was on our? side.

Then pivoted and rammed it hard into Iran after a brief refractory period just because we? were tanned and ready.

This

I remember 1979 as one of the working stiffs when I saw a guy with a Bomb Iran shirt

Should have nipped that shit in the bud

Many of our problems in the Middle East (and Persia) stem from our not going in dry on the Ayatollah in 1979. That was an act of war that required blowing them back into the stone age. Embassies are sovereign soil.

Come see the chickenhawks call for more pointless brutal war. What great threat does modern Iran represent that we needed to level their country now or 40 years ago.

Fucking Christ. Is an attack on an Embassy and seizing hostages an act of war or not?

HardlyClothed

RaceBannon said:

HardlyClothed said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

RaceBannon said:

YellowSnow said:

RaceBannon said:

PurpleThrobber said:

YellowSnow said:

HardlyClothed said:

YellowSnow said:

HardlyClothed said:

RaceBannon said:

Asked and answered @HardlyClothed

You don't have to like the answer

Do unto to others before they do it to you

Do you agree with the Death to America sentiment in the mid east? Who are you rooting for?

I just wanted his answer on if we should have overthrown Saddam in ‘03 so we could all see how dumb he is.

I don’t think the response to Death to America sentiment is to wage endless war against them and wasting our blood and treasure.

I voted for the invasion, but in hindsight feel it was a mistake and have apologized for it. That said, it wasn't like leaving Saddam in power was a great option either for stability in the region and international precedent when it comes to WMD inspections regimes. It's much like Vietnam in this respeck in that there weren't a lot of good options on the table.

The good option was to do nothing. Saddam didn’t have WMD and the IAEA said so in 2002, which the Bush admin sought to discredit. We should listen to the people that do the inspections, and probably the people who were against the war from the outset. Removing Saddam was far more disastrous for regional stability than letting him remain in power would have been.

Yes, the good less bad option was to leave him in power.

We? should have gone in hard without lube on Saddam during Desert Swarm when the entire fucking world was on our? side.

Then pivoted and rammed it hard into Iran after a brief refractory period just because we? were tanned and ready.

This

I remember 1979 as one of the working stiffs when I saw a guy with a Bomb Iran shirt

Should have nipped that shit in the bud

Many of our problems in the Middle East (and Persia) stem from our not going in dry on the Ayatollah in 1979. That was an act of war that required blowing them back into the stone age. Embassies are sovereign soil.

You and I do agree on a lot

It's almost like people with common sense see things similarly.

When I think people with common sense I think of brutal military campaigns on the other side of the world against countries that don’t threaten the United States. Just common sense.

Don't threaten the US?

This piece of shit is trying to get nukes and Obama wanted to help him

Gotta start a war against everyone who says death to america. Just common sense.

They don’t have a weapon and aren’t actively trying. But hey, ignoring the IAEA worked out great last time.

RaceBannon

HardlyClothed said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

HardlyClothed said:

YellowSnow said:

RaceBannon said:

PurpleThrobber said:

YellowSnow said:

HardlyClothed said:

YellowSnow said:

HardlyClothed said:

RaceBannon said:

Asked and answered @HardlyClothed

You don't have to like the answer

Do unto to others before they do it to you

Do you agree with the Death to America sentiment in the mid east? Who are you rooting for?

I just wanted his answer on if we should have overthrown Saddam in ‘03 so we could all see how dumb he is.

I don’t think the response to Death to America sentiment is to wage endless war against them and wasting our blood and treasure.

I voted for the invasion, but in hindsight feel it was a mistake and have apologized for it. That said, it wasn't like leaving Saddam in power was a great option either for stability in the region and international precedent when it comes to WMD inspections regimes. It's much like Vietnam in this respeck in that there weren't a lot of good options on the table.

The good option was to do nothing. Saddam didn’t have WMD and the IAEA said so in 2002, which the Bush admin sought to discredit. We should listen to the people that do the inspections, and probably the people who were against the war from the outset. Removing Saddam was far more disastrous for regional stability than letting him remain in power would have been.

Yes, the good less bad option was to leave him in power.

We? should have gone in hard without lube on Saddam during Desert Swarm when the entire fucking world was on our? side.

Then pivoted and rammed it hard into Iran after a brief refractory period just because we? were tanned and ready.

This

I remember 1979 as one of the working stiffs when I saw a guy with a Bomb Iran shirt

Should have nipped that shit in the bud

Many of our problems in the Middle East (and Persia) stem from our not going in dry on the Ayatollah in 1979. That was an act of war that required blowing them back into the stone age. Embassies are sovereign soil.

YellowSnow said:

RaceBannon said:

PurpleThrobber said:

YellowSnow said:

HardlyClothed said:

YellowSnow said:

HardlyClothed said:

RaceBannon said:

Asked and answered @HardlyClothed

You don't have to like the answer

Do unto to others before they do it to you

Do you agree with the Death to America sentiment in the mid east? Who are you rooting for?

I just wanted his answer on if we should have overthrown Saddam in ‘03 so we could all see how dumb he is.

I don’t think the response to Death to America sentiment is to wage endless war against them and wasting our blood and treasure.

I voted for the invasion, but in hindsight feel it was a mistake and have apologized for it. That said, it wasn't like leaving Saddam in power was a great option either for stability in the region and international precedent when it comes to WMD inspections regimes. It's much like Vietnam in this respeck in that there weren't a lot of good options on the table.

The good option was to do nothing. Saddam didn’t have WMD and the IAEA said so in 2002, which the Bush admin sought to discredit. We should listen to the people that do the inspections, and probably the people who were against the war from the outset. Removing Saddam was far more disastrous for regional stability than letting him remain in power would have been.

Yes, the good less bad option was to leave him in power.

We? should have gone in hard without lube on Saddam during Desert Swarm when the entire fucking world was on our? side.

Then pivoted and rammed it hard into Iran after a brief refractory period just because we? were tanned and ready.

This

I remember 1979 as one of the working stiffs when I saw a guy with a Bomb Iran shirt

Should have nipped that shit in the bud

Many of our problems in the Middle East (and Persia) stem from our not going in dry on the Ayatollah in 1979. That was an act of war that required blowing them back into the stone age. Embassies are sovereign soil.

Come see the chickenhawks call for more pointless brutal war. What great threat does modern Iran represent that we needed to level their country now or 40 years ago.

Islam knows all about pointless brutal war. I guess embassies can get attacked with 0 consequences

Chickenhawk wants to go to war against every country in which our embassy was attacked. Gotta be ready to deploy in dozens of them. It’s just common sense.

Root root root for the away team

If they don't win its a shame

For its one two three nuclear strikes and its the old ball game

PostGameOrangeSlices

YellowSnow said:

HardlyClothed said:

YellowSnow said:

RaceBannon said:

PurpleThrobber said:

YellowSnow said:

HardlyClothed said:

YellowSnow said:

HardlyClothed said:

RaceBannon said:

Asked and answered @HardlyClothed

You don't have to like the answer

Do unto to others before they do it to you

Do you agree with the Death to America sentiment in the mid east? Who are you rooting for?

I just wanted his answer on if we should have overthrown Saddam in ‘03 so we could all see how dumb he is.

I don’t think the response to Death to America sentiment is to wage endless war against them and wasting our blood and treasure.

I voted for the invasion, but in hindsight feel it was a mistake and have apologized for it. That said, it wasn't like leaving Saddam in power was a great option either for stability in the region and international precedent when it comes to WMD inspections regimes. It's much like Vietnam in this respeck in that there weren't a lot of good options on the table.

The good option was to do nothing. Saddam didn’t have WMD and the IAEA said so in 2002, which the Bush admin sought to discredit. We should listen to the people that do the inspections, and probably the people who were against the war from the outset. Removing Saddam was far more disastrous for regional stability than letting him remain in power would have been.

Yes, the good less bad option was to leave him in power.

We? should have gone in hard without lube on Saddam during Desert Swarm when the entire fucking world was on our? side.

Then pivoted and rammed it hard into Iran after a brief refractory period just because we? were tanned and ready.

This

I remember 1979 as one of the working stiffs when I saw a guy with a Bomb Iran shirt

Should have nipped that shit in the bud

Many of our problems in the Middle East (and Persia) stem from our not going in dry on the Ayatollah in 1979. That was an act of war that required blowing them back into the stone age. Embassies are sovereign soil.

YellowSnow said:

RaceBannon said:

PurpleThrobber said:

YellowSnow said:

HardlyClothed said:

YellowSnow said:

HardlyClothed said:

RaceBannon said:

Asked and answered @HardlyClothed

You don't have to like the answer

Do unto to others before they do it to you

Do you agree with the Death to America sentiment in the mid east? Who are you rooting for?

I just wanted his answer on if we should have overthrown Saddam in ‘03 so we could all see how dumb he is.

I don’t think the response to Death to America sentiment is to wage endless war against them and wasting our blood and treasure.

I voted for the invasion, but in hindsight feel it was a mistake and have apologized for it. That said, it wasn't like leaving Saddam in power was a great option either for stability in the region and international precedent when it comes to WMD inspections regimes. It's much like Vietnam in this respeck in that there weren't a lot of good options on the table.

The good option was to do nothing. Saddam didn’t have WMD and the IAEA said so in 2002, which the Bush admin sought to discredit. We should listen to the people that do the inspections, and probably the people who were against the war from the outset. Removing Saddam was far more disastrous for regional stability than letting him remain in power would have been.

Yes, the good less bad option was to leave him in power.

We? should have gone in hard without lube on Saddam during Desert Swarm when the entire fucking world was on our? side.

Then pivoted and rammed it hard into Iran after a brief refractory period just because we? were tanned and ready.

This

I remember 1979 as one of the working stiffs when I saw a guy with a Bomb Iran shirt

Should have nipped that shit in the bud

Many of our problems in the Middle East (and Persia) stem from our not going in dry on the Ayatollah in 1979. That was an act of war that required blowing them back into the stone age. Embassies are sovereign soil.

Come see the chickenhawks call for more pointless brutal war. What great threat does modern Iran represent that we needed to level their country now or 40 years ago.

Fucking Christ. Is an attack on an Embassy and seizing hostages an act of war or not?

Answer the fucking question @hardlyclothed

YellowSnow

RaceBannon said:

YellowSnow said:

RaceBannon said:

PurpleThrobber said:

YellowSnow said:

HardlyClothed said:

YellowSnow said:

HardlyClothed said:

RaceBannon said:

Asked and answered @HardlyClothed

You don't have to like the answer

Do unto to others before they do it to you

Do you agree with the Death to America sentiment in the mid east? Who are you rooting for?

I just wanted his answer on if we should have overthrown Saddam in ‘03 so we could all see how dumb he is.

I don’t think the response to Death to America sentiment is to wage endless war against them and wasting our blood and treasure.

I voted for the invasion, but in hindsight feel it was a mistake and have apologized for it. That said, it wasn't like leaving Saddam in power was a great option either for stability in the region and international precedent when it comes to WMD inspections regimes. It's much like Vietnam in this respeck in that there weren't a lot of good options on the table.

The good option was to do nothing. Saddam didn’t have WMD and the IAEA said so in 2002, which the Bush admin sought to discredit. We should listen to the people that do the inspections, and probably the people who were against the war from the outset. Removing Saddam was far more disastrous for regional stability than letting him remain in power would have been.

Yes, the good less bad option was to leave him in power.

We? should have gone in hard without lube on Saddam during Desert Swarm when the entire fucking world was on our? side.

Then pivoted and rammed it hard into Iran after a brief refractory period just because we? were tanned and ready.

This

I remember 1979 as one of the working stiffs when I saw a guy with a Bomb Iran shirt

Should have nipped that shit in the bud

Many of our problems in the Middle East (and Persia) stem from our not going in dry on the Ayatollah in 1979. That was an act of war that required blowing them back into the stone age. Embassies are sovereign soil.

You and I do agree on a lot

There's really only one main difference between you and me @RaceBannon ...

HardlyClothed

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

YellowSnow said:

HardlyClothed said:

YellowSnow said:

RaceBannon said:

PurpleThrobber said:

YellowSnow said:

HardlyClothed said:

YellowSnow said:

HardlyClothed said:

RaceBannon said:

Asked and answered @HardlyClothed

You don't have to like the answer

Do unto to others before they do it to you

Do you agree with the Death to America sentiment in the mid east? Who are you rooting for?

I just wanted his answer on if we should have overthrown Saddam in ‘03 so we could all see how dumb he is.

I don’t think the response to Death to America sentiment is to wage endless war against them and wasting our blood and treasure.

I voted for the invasion, but in hindsight feel it was a mistake and have apologized for it. That said, it wasn't like leaving Saddam in power was a great option either for stability in the region and international precedent when it comes to WMD inspections regimes. It's much like Vietnam in this respeck in that there weren't a lot of good options on the table.

The good option was to do nothing. Saddam didn’t have WMD and the IAEA said so in 2002, which the Bush admin sought to discredit. We should listen to the people that do the inspections, and probably the people who were against the war from the outset. Removing Saddam was far more disastrous for regional stability than letting him remain in power would have been.

Yes, the good less bad option was to leave him in power.

We? should have gone in hard without lube on Saddam during Desert Swarm when the entire fucking world was on our? side.

Then pivoted and rammed it hard into Iran after a brief refractory period just because we? were tanned and ready.

This

I remember 1979 as one of the working stiffs when I saw a guy with a Bomb Iran shirt

Should have nipped that shit in the bud

Many of our problems in the Middle East (and Persia) stem from our not going in dry on the Ayatollah in 1979. That was an act of war that required blowing them back into the stone age. Embassies are sovereign soil.

YellowSnow said:

RaceBannon said:

PurpleThrobber said:

YellowSnow said:

HardlyClothed said:

YellowSnow said:

HardlyClothed said:

RaceBannon said:

Asked and answered @HardlyClothed

You don't have to like the answer

Do unto to others before they do it to you

Do you agree with the Death to America sentiment in the mid east? Who are you rooting for?

I just wanted his answer on if we should have overthrown Saddam in ‘03 so we could all see how dumb he is.

I don’t think the response to Death to America sentiment is to wage endless war against them and wasting our blood and treasure.

I voted for the invasion, but in hindsight feel it was a mistake and have apologized for it. That said, it wasn't like leaving Saddam in power was a great option either for stability in the region and international precedent when it comes to WMD inspections regimes. It's much like Vietnam in this respeck in that there weren't a lot of good options on the table.

The good option was to do nothing. Saddam didn’t have WMD and the IAEA said so in 2002, which the Bush admin sought to discredit. We should listen to the people that do the inspections, and probably the people who were against the war from the outset. Removing Saddam was far more disastrous for regional stability than letting him remain in power would have been.

Yes, the good less bad option was to leave him in power.

We? should have gone in hard without lube on Saddam during Desert Swarm when the entire fucking world was on our? side.

Then pivoted and rammed it hard into Iran after a brief refractory period just because we? were tanned and ready.

This

I remember 1979 as one of the working stiffs when I saw a guy with a Bomb Iran shirt

Should have nipped that shit in the bud

Many of our problems in the Middle East (and Persia) stem from our not going in dry on the Ayatollah in 1979. That was an act of war that required blowing them back into the stone age. Embassies are sovereign soil.

Come see the chickenhawks call for more pointless brutal war. What great threat does modern Iran represent that we needed to level their country now or 40 years ago.

Fucking Christ. Is an attack on an Embassy and seizing hostages an act of war or not?

Answer the fucking question @hardlyclothed

So what’s the fucking response you want? A bombing campaign killing hundreds? Thousands? Last I checked our hostages were eventually released. Tell me what you think a good response would have been. And if it’s regime change like you suggest then you’re just another chickenhawk.

HardlyClothed

RaceBannon said:

HardlyClothed said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

HardlyClothed said:

YellowSnow said:

RaceBannon said:

PurpleThrobber said:

YellowSnow said:

HardlyClothed said:

YellowSnow said:

HardlyClothed said:

RaceBannon said:

Asked and answered @HardlyClothed

You don't have to like the answer

Do unto to others before they do it to you

Do you agree with the Death to America sentiment in the mid east? Who are you rooting for?

I just wanted his answer on if we should have overthrown Saddam in ‘03 so we could all see how dumb he is.

I don’t think the response to Death to America sentiment is to wage endless war against them and wasting our blood and treasure.

I voted for the invasion, but in hindsight feel it was a mistake and have apologized for it. That said, it wasn't like leaving Saddam in power was a great option either for stability in the region and international precedent when it comes to WMD inspections regimes. It's much like Vietnam in this respeck in that there weren't a lot of good options on the table.

The good option was to do nothing. Saddam didn’t have WMD and the IAEA said so in 2002, which the Bush admin sought to discredit. We should listen to the people that do the inspections, and probably the people who were against the war from the outset. Removing Saddam was far more disastrous for regional stability than letting him remain in power would have been.

Yes, the good less bad option was to leave him in power.

We? should have gone in hard without lube on Saddam during Desert Swarm when the entire fucking world was on our? side.

Then pivoted and rammed it hard into Iran after a brief refractory period just because we? were tanned and ready.

This

I remember 1979 as one of the working stiffs when I saw a guy with a Bomb Iran shirt

Should have nipped that shit in the bud

Many of our problems in the Middle East (and Persia) stem from our not going in dry on the Ayatollah in 1979. That was an act of war that required blowing them back into the stone age. Embassies are sovereign soil.

YellowSnow said:

RaceBannon said:

PurpleThrobber said:

YellowSnow said:

HardlyClothed said:

YellowSnow said:

HardlyClothed said:

RaceBannon said:

Asked and answered @HardlyClothed

You don't have to like the answer

Do unto to others before they do it to you

Do you agree with the Death to America sentiment in the mid east? Who are you rooting for?

I just wanted his answer on if we should have overthrown Saddam in ‘03 so we could all see how dumb he is.

I don’t think the response to Death to America sentiment is to wage endless war against them and wasting our blood and treasure.

I voted for the invasion, but in hindsight feel it was a mistake and have apologized for it. That said, it wasn't like leaving Saddam in power was a great option either for stability in the region and international precedent when it comes to WMD inspections regimes. It's much like Vietnam in this respeck in that there weren't a lot of good options on the table.

The good option was to do nothing. Saddam didn’t have WMD and the IAEA said so in 2002, which the Bush admin sought to discredit. We should listen to the people that do the inspections, and probably the people who were against the war from the outset. Removing Saddam was far more disastrous for regional stability than letting him remain in power would have been.

Yes, the good less bad option was to leave him in power.

We? should have gone in hard without lube on Saddam during Desert Swarm when the entire fucking world was on our? side.

Then pivoted and rammed it hard into Iran after a brief refractory period just because we? were tanned and ready.

This

I remember 1979 as one of the working stiffs when I saw a guy with a Bomb Iran shirt

Should have nipped that shit in the bud

Many of our problems in the Middle East (and Persia) stem from our not going in dry on the Ayatollah in 1979. That was an act of war that required blowing them back into the stone age. Embassies are sovereign soil.

Come see the chickenhawks call for more pointless brutal war. What great threat does modern Iran represent that we needed to level their country now or 40 years ago.

Islam knows all about pointless brutal war. I guess embassies can get attacked with 0 consequences

Chickenhawk wants to go to war against every country in which our embassy was attacked. Gotta be ready to deploy in dozens of them. It’s just common sense.

Root root root for the away team

If they don't win its a shame

For its one two three nuclear strikes and its the old ball game

Some Condi “we don’t want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud” fear mongering right here.