Can we finally admit the Iraq war is a complete failure?

Originally posted by JIMC5499
Some people seem to think that if the US pulls out of Iraq that all of these factions are going to suddenly become best friends and everything is going to be sweet and rosey.

I'm under no illusions that if we were to pull out that suddenly this beautifull democratic society will spring up. But I don't think, no matter how long we stay, that things will change. Either we significantly increase our presence and somehow completely wipe out the opposition once and for all (which I don't think is possible) or we get out and let them fight it out themselves or split the country up. But what we're doing there now is not working and its time to firgure out something else.

Originally posted by mecheng


Thanks, but do you honestly believe any of this will ever happen?

Depends on how well we do in Iraq. Its not like we are not doing anything.

Better yet, its better if you read Sun Tzu's "Art of War".

" (1) Which of the two sovereigns is imbued with the Moral law? (2) Which of the two generals has most ability? (3) With whom lie the advantages derived from Heaven and Earth? (4) On which side is discipline most rigorously enforced? (5) Which army is stronger? (6) On which side are officers and men more highly trained? (7) In which army is there the greater constancy both in reward and punishment?"

" By means of these seven considerations I can forecast victory or defeat. " -Sun Tzu.


[edit on 13-10-2006 by deltaboy]

Our backing of the fairly democratic state of Israel seems a pretty freaking lame excuse to keep killing people. Besides the sectarian violence has nothing to do with Israel. The Sunni's are Arabs and the Shi'ites are Persians and have been killing each other with great abandon for thousands of years. It's not going to stop cause we're over there to deomcratize them. The better plan would have been to create 3 states but we didn't want to offend the Turks by officially recognizing a Kurdish country. The Kurds are the largest ethnic group in the world without an official homeland. Thanks you, Great Britian for creating such a huge mess after WW2.

Declare Victory in Iraq and get the hell out. Close our now useless bases in Europe, East Asia and Turkey. The Cold War is over. Sell or give arms to the Israeli's and the Kurds until the Arab and other Muslim states recognize them. Statesmanship or diplomacy doesn't have to be delicate or rocket science.

The problem with American foreign policy is that it is primarily based on economics and trade rather than true American democratic principals and values. We shouldn't have embassy in any country with a monarch or a dictator. Screw the royals and the corporations!

I tend to agree. Our presence there isn't going to stop them. The more I think about it the more I think splitting the country is the way to go.

As for terrorism, I think its impossible to have a "war" on terrorism. Terrorism is not a place its a philosphy. Terrorists can and will be everywhere and anywhere.

So what to do... invade and occupy each and every country that has terrorists? Impossible. You need to stay alert with inteligence, utilize sanctions against countries that harbor them, and utilize the world community to stay one step ahead. But I think its absurd to think that somehow we could ever just wipe out terrorists completely militarily. There will always be someone to take their place.

[edit on 13-10-2006 by mecheng]

Originally posted by KnowItAll
I fully understand that this is generally a Bash Bush and Conservatives website. But this "Get out of Iraq now" BS has got to stop! Isn't this what you guys did in Vietnam? Cut and Run? Would you prefer that we just gather up all our tents and leave now?

Can't any of you at least admit that it's better to keep the terrorist busy in Iraq and Afganistan as opposed to having them work their magic in this country?

COWARDS!

I spent 20 years in the USAF and I'm a coward eh? I was in the Middle East for over 18 months with nothing between me and the terrorists but 3 rows of concertina wire. I'm a Libertarian who knows what it means to be a true conservative. Screw political correctness. Bush and company are bunch of neocon chickenhawks! The son of their idol Dwight D Eisenhauer before the last election told them to go take a hike because they had abandoned real conservative principals and were now doing the bidding of their global corporate elite masters. Bush and company have stripped you of constitutional rights for what gain? I know alot more about physical security than you probably do and I can tell you this right now: we're not one bit more secure against terrorism now than we were before 9/11/01. Nearly 3000 GI's are now dead and nothing has been accomplished except to make Iraq and Afghanistan civil war zones.

Coalition forces have killed almost 200,000 Iraqis since invading. This is from a British

A stable (if irritating) government was turned into total anarchy.

Religious tolerance -- not only between Sunnis and Sh'ites but also involving about 1/2 million Iraqi Christians was terminated and religious/ethnic 'cleansing' has been on the rise.

The current situation in Iraq is an average of one attack on coalition forces every 15 minutes.

I post all of this because it's obvious in this thread that some people listen to Pravda, er, Fox News, and believe everything they hear. A lot of facts about Iraq and Afghanistan don't make it into US media at all.

Democracy is Iraq is a fundamentally stupid idea. Democracy is not about freedom of speech, population participation in politics, it is about money and the denizen's ability to control the flow of money between the state and the people. After the U.S. and the Coalition pretty much destroyed Iraq between 1991 and 2003, Iraq was weak economically and militarily. How can a country with a government that has no money ever administer democratic process? Where is the give and take between the people and the state? That's right, there is none.

A lot of people considered Park Chung Hee of South Korea a bad man because he was a dictatorial ruler who oppressed the South Korean people. Those people who criticize him are heavily misguided. If not for the oppressive rule, there would never have been the economic build-up that resulted in South Korea having the economy it does today. If democratic process had been first priority, the country would've descended into complete disorder because people would have absolutely no capital or leverage against the state.

Until a person learns about the relationship between economics, finance, and politics, one can never comprehend or appreciate what democracy really is.

[edit on 13-10-2006 by sweatmonicaIdo]

Originally posted by KnowItAll
I fully understand that this is generally a Bash Bush and Conservatives website.

That's a broad assumption. What makes you think that all Consevatives support Bush?

Can't any of you at least admit that it's better to keep the terrorist busy in Iraq and Afganistan as opposed to having them work their magic in this country?

COWARDS!

Non sequiter. The troops are keeping the terrorists busy in their own countries but you call those that would bring those on the frontlines home COWARDS? Would you mind filling in then? I would hate to think you were just a keyboard warrior.

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
It's illegal to assassinate heads of state.

It's also "illegal" to invade a sovereign nation unprovoked.

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
When the job is done. I can't say when that will be, but it clearly is not yet.

When do you stop mowing the lawn?

Well, isn't that an interesting anology. You can't say when the job is going to be done, because you don't know what the job we're trying to accomplish is. Intially, it was to stop Saddam from having/distributing WMD's to the terrorists. Then it was to stop him from supporting Al Queda. Then it was to stop Saddam from committing Genocide. Then it was to bring freedom to the Iraqi people. When you haven't defined what your yard is, its impossible to finish mowing it.

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
We have no choice, but to fight or to surrender.

sarcasm
You're right. The only way to deal with any nation or group of people we disagree with is to either blow them up or run away. No one ever has ever found any middle ground, or a way to wage peace. People like Ghandi? Cowards. Unsuccessful cowards.
/sarcasm

And if you actually believe that the terrorists only want us dead, then you are incredibly niave. Terrorism is simply a tool used to achieve a political end (see Boston Tea Party), and if you think it's simply about us vs. them, then you need to actually take a look at what's going on in the world today. It's because of this narrow world view that wars like these break out in the first place.

Originally posted by KnowItAll
Isn't this what you guys did in Vietnam? Cut and Run?

Can't any of you at least admit that it's better to keep the terrorist busy in Iraq and Afganistan as opposed to having them work their magic in this country?

COWARDS!

Keep terrorists busy in Iraq and Afganistan? I'm sorry, did you miss any of the foiled terror attempts across the U.S. and Europe? Did the war in Iraq prevent the London bombing? Or the Madrid Bombing? Or the Bali Bombing? The strategy seems very successful thus far.

Also, characterizing anyone who is fighting as an insurgent in Iraq as a terrorist, and implying they are a member of Al Queda is a typical bush supporter tactic, and incredibly inaccurate. You do realize that less than 7% of the insurgents in Iraq are foreign fighters, and that even less of that 7% (the pentagon estimated about 3%) are members of Al Queda. So how exactly are we engagin the terrorists in Iraq? What a joke, and what a desperate attempt to save face in the reality of a failed policy. But maybe if you keep up the name calling, it will cover up your self inflicted ignorance.

Originally posted by KnowItAll
The US is the leader of the world, and just because you people do not like that notion, doesn't make it true. People and countries have always disliked the US simply because we prosper, we're secure, and we're free. Some folks just don't like that. Hell, even our French brothers hate our guts. Whooped-di-do!! Tell you the truth, I really don't give a damn about any of these third world countries that hate us. They could all go get in a big pile together. Would make it much easier to kill them.

Yes, I'm sure the terrorists and third world countries hate us because they hate prosperity and freedom, and it has nothing to do with the hubris of many americans, like yourself, who could care less about the pain and suffering of millions across the world, so long as you can keep watching The Simpsons and eating McDonalds. Thank you for perfectly demonstrating why our country has exactly zero credability in the international community. You can't write satire that hilarious. Well done!

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
The forces of good and evil are always at odds and will be until the end of time.

And here we come to the meat and potatoes. The rhetorical labelling of anyone who disagrees with your perspective as evil. The Iraqi's don't want us there, telling them what to do and establishing laws that favor the United States. Some of them choose to fight (not unlike our founding fathers did) and for that they are labelled "evil". What an incredibly myopic world view.

The root of the problem lies in good ol' fashion western imperialism. Thanks to Britain, who owned Iraq for a long time, and when they decided to leave post war, when we put an end to British Imperialism (for the most part), instead of dividing the country up into sections based on long standing athnic and national groups, Britain and the internation community decided to divide it up rather randomly, squishing three ethnic groups who have a long and bloody history together, into one nice little bloody package.

The solution? Probalby splitting the country up into three seperate countries along ethnic lines would be a good step, but we may not see peace in the iraq area for a long, long time, and it's incredibly naive to think that we can force democracy on a group of peopl ewho have hated eachother for thousands of years. We've created a monster, and now like a proverbial Doctor Frankenstien, we're completely shocked that that monster isn't doing exactly what we tell it.

Athenion i agree 100% with what you have said.

Splitting Iraq up into three independant nations is probably the smartest and best solution to the current civil unrest along with the removal of all foreign troops. Iraq only survived so long through a very harsh and strong dictatorship - what is occuring now would have happened sooner had it not been for Saddam.

By leaving the middle east i actually feel terrorism (freedom fighters?) would actually cease in the western world barring Basq seperatist and other seperatist groups like those in Sri Lanka and Indonesia.

We really have no right to be there. Leaving is not defeat but a viable solution as advocated by the Head of the British Army.

Hello. New here... Nobody can win. Wars are foolish. People die before they bloom. War speeds this outcome. Look around, do we not have what we need? Go outside. Check the moon out. I'm looking at it too. While I look at it, my stepson sleeps, as do many other people, dreaming of a future. Whatever that may be. Is the war in Iraq a failure?
Win? Of course. What are the criteria for winning a war? How do you define failure in war?
While having a scrap, over who has the best slice of the cake maybe human nature, talking about how smooth the cake is, sharing the cake, painting the cake on canvas, making music to express how good that cake is, jotting down the recipe and baking it yourself to give to somebody who has been eating inferior cake, is also human nature.

Parents have lost their children, children have lost their parents. Forever. Without any idea of why death came to their doorstep, other than the reason given to them by somebody who did not really like good, tasty, honest cake.

Mecheng, in my humble opinion, war is over rated as a means to an end. All wars are a failure. I have first hand experience. 1990/91. Rat. Just a bunch of scared people, fighting scared people, for scary reasons, doing scary things in order to scare other people into being scared all the time.

It was never going to be anything else than suffering and pain and death. We all failed, again.

Still, chin up, mucker.

I'm a Democrat and I will say this, the war is not a complete failure. Saddam is out of power and we have a new Iraq. All we need is a stable Iraq.

While I oppose the war (support our troops), my opinion on US presence in Iraq is not clear. Either we change our plan of action or pull out and so far, the Bush Administration refuses to do either.

Right now our plan of action is not working and I have tree options.
1. Increase troops to 300,000 to squash the insurgency (outrageous).
2. Pull out and see what happens (too simple and counts as a loss).
3. Work with the regional powers to protect the borders of Iraq, rebuild the coalition, and redeploy the US troops to focus on the insurgency.

Originally posted by Mr_Peel

Religious tolerance -- not only between Sunnis and Sh'ites but also involving about 1/2 million Iraqi Christians was terminated and religious/ethnic 'cleansing' has been on the rise.

No only that but the crime against women are in the rising too, to the point that woman are persecuted kidnapped and killed for getting out of their homes and work.

Woman were allow to work during Saddam's regime.

Now they have to cover their faces and face death if they try to work, even professional women.

It's that what democracy is bringing to Iraq?because they can vote? is now considered democratic?

Its not democracy in Iraq, Iraq is still ruled by Muslin laws.

Originally posted by Athenion

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
It's illegal to assassinate heads of state.

It's also "illegal" to invade a sovereign nation unprovoked.

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
When the job is done. I can't say when that will be, but it clearly is not yet.

When do you stop mowing the lawn?

Well, isn't that an interesting anology. You can't say when the job is going to be done, because you don't know what the job we're trying to accomplish is. Intially, it was to stop Saddam from having/distributing WMD's to the terrorists. Then it was to stop him from supporting Al Queda. Then it was to stop Saddam from committing Genocide. Then it was to bring freedom to the Iraqi people. When you haven't defined what your yard is, its impossible to finish mowing it.

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
We have no choice, but to fight or to surrender.

sarcasm
You're right. The only way to deal with any nation or group of people we disagree with is to either blow them up or run away. No one ever has ever found any middle ground, or a way to wage peace. People like Ghandi? Cowards. Unsuccessful cowards.
/sarcasm

And if you actually believe that the terrorists only want us dead, then you are incredibly niave. Terrorism is simply a tool used to achieve a political end (see Boston Tea Party), and if you think it's simply about us vs. them, then you need to actually take a look at what's going on in the world today. It's because of this narrow world view that wars like these break out in the first place.

Originally posted by KnowItAll
Isn't this what you guys did in Vietnam? Cut and Run?

Can't any of you at least admit that it's better to keep the terrorist busy in Iraq and Afganistan as opposed to having them work their magic in this country?

COWARDS!

Keep terrorists busy in Iraq and Afganistan? I'm sorry, did you miss any of the foiled terror attempts across the U.S. and Europe? Did the war in Iraq prevent the London bombing? Or the Madrid Bombing? Or the Bali Bombing? The strategy seems very successful thus far.

Also, characterizing anyone who is fighting as an insurgent in Iraq as a terrorist, and implying they are a member of Al Queda is a typical bush supporter tactic, and incredibly inaccurate. You do realize that less than 7% of the insurgents in Iraq are foreign fighters, and that even less of that 7% (the pentagon estimated about 3%) are members of Al Queda. So how exactly are we engagin the terrorists in Iraq? What a joke, and what a desperate attempt to save face in the reality of a failed policy. But maybe if you keep up the name calling, it will cover up your self inflicted ignorance.

Originally posted by KnowItAll
The US is the leader of the world, and just because you people do not like that notion, doesn't make it true. People and countries have always disliked the US simply because we prosper, we're secure, and we're free. Some folks just don't like that. Hell, even our French brothers hate our guts. Whooped-di-do!! Tell you the truth, I really don't give a damn about any of these third world countries that hate us. They could all go get in a big pile together. Would make it much easier to kill them.

Yes, I'm sure the terrorists and third world countries hate us because they hate prosperity and freedom, and it has nothing to do with the hubris of many americans, like yourself, who could care less about the pain and suffering of millions across the world, so long as you can keep watching The Simpsons and eating McDonalds. Thank you for perfectly demonstrating why our country has exactly zero credability in the international community. You can't write satire that hilarious. Well done!

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
The forces of good and evil are always at odds and will be until the end of time.

And here we come to the meat and potatoes. The rhetorical labelling of anyone who disagrees with your perspective as evil. The Iraqi's don't want us there, telling them what to do and establishing laws that favor the United States. Some of them choose to fight (not unlike our founding fathers did) and for that they are labelled "evil". What an incredibly myopic world view.

The root of the problem lies in good ol' fashion western imperialism. Thanks to Britain, who owned Iraq for a long time, and when they decided to leave post war, when we put an end to British Imperialism (for the most part), instead of dividing the country up into sections based on long standing athnic and national groups, Britain and the internation community decided to divide it up rather randomly, squishing three ethnic groups who have a long and bloody history together, into one nice little bloody package.

The solution? Probalby splitting the country up into three seperate countries along ethnic lines would be a good step, but we may not see peace in the iraq area for a long, long time, and it's incredibly naive to think that we can force democracy on a group of peopl ewho have hated eachother for thousands of years. We've created a monster, and now like a proverbial Doctor Frankenstien, we're completely shocked that that monster isn't doing exactly what we tell it.

You have voted Athenion for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have two more votes this month.

Beautiful.....absolutely beautiful, especially this part:

Yes, I'm sure the terrorists and third world countries hate us because they hate prosperity and freedom, and it has nothing to do with the hubris of many americans, like yourself, who could care less about the pain and suffering of millions across the world, so long as you can keep watching The Simpsons and eating McDonalds. Thank you for perfectly demonstrating why our country has exactly zero credability in the international community. You can't write satire that hilarious. Well done



brill

The true terrorists engulfing this globe are the governments and individuals like bush imposing decisions over the will of their own citizens.

Lieing in the present, admitting in 50 yrs... How many times has Scotland Yard, CIA and all those fascist organisations faked terrorist-attacks for political reasons? Countless times..

For instance: Red Brigade in Bologna, Italy. There was a bomb detonated at the main train station.. about 50 yrs ago. The Red Brigade were declared as responsible.. even if that city had most red-brigade supporters. So why would they blow up their own supporters?? Because in fact it was Scotland Yard.. who did that attack.

As with the Metro-Bombings in London. At the same time there was a "security-exercise" taking place with several thousand of participants... What a coincidence.

And what about WTC.. isn't it beautiful how those buildings dropped perfectly? What a coincidence that the administration and media were alrdy telling the people that there WILL BE AN ATTACK. Basically they already prepared the dumb masses to believe what would come next. Is it just mere coincidence? Every reasonable individual should judge with a "No!".

Many of the highest politicians and governors, if you properly look at law and the constitution.. should be accused for Highest treason! And Treason of Peace.
Sometimes they are even accused.. but the laws have no effect. Because Legislative and Executive are not properly separated, and therefore useless.

The laws only count for the slaves. They don't apply to the government.
And as long as an administration in those fake democracies is not 100% transparent for all of the citizens.. As long the media are not independent.

This will never change.

Every single person who still believes that the terrorists are somewhere out there.. in Irak.. or wherever.. Open that friggin' pair of eyes u got!!
And look at your own, fake.. Life and democracy.

OR: you can go on with that miserable entertainment lifestyle. Date your girlfriend.. Take care of your children... and family. Drive that nifty, black car.. go to the cinema. Study this, study that.. follow an Education and go for that career!

But dont forget.. one day we ourselves, or our children.. or maybe the children of our children.. will sit in some concentration camp. Starving to death..

And if they haven't got a Nazi ID-Tattoo on their Arm, it's because they have got a verisign chip implanted, instead.

A failure yes. A complete failure, I say no. Only becuase we have oil to gain and other unimportant things.

I think the question of this post is being asked way too much ahead of its time. Remember, wars take years to win, even the most historical wars happened over long years of battle.

A complete failure? well it depends what you consider a complete failure. I would consider a complete failure if we sent our troops out there only to get pushed back and still having Saddam in power.

The average Iraqi civilian now has more magazines to read, more TV channels to watch, internet access, things they never had before. To me and to them thats not a failure.

It also depends on what side you want to ask. Is it a failure for the US? The main goal to seize key targets and control oil flow? No matter what the media or government says in the mainstream, no one here can be dumb to argue about what they say. We all know the what its all about. So no, if its about controlling oil, then its not a failure, its a complete success.

What if you ask an Iraqi civilian maybe living in Baghdad, is it a failure? No. Why? because they see US soldiers controlling them. Americans setting curfews, raiding their homes, telling them what to do, where to go, what to say. That is not failure for the US. Its a failure for the Iraqi government not being able to take action.

And however wants to defend it and say it is a failure tell me something. To who is it a failure to? To what you hear on the media? Are you dumb enough to go by what the mainstream media says? i would really like to hear what you all have to say so please reply 2 my post if you disagree.

It is not a failure. It is a complete success. We are in control of key targets/cities in Iraq, we are showing Iraqis a new way of liviing. This is a slow war that will take years/generations to die out. This month alone we have over 30 US soldiers killed RIP to all of them and their families. They are not dying for fun and they are not risking their lives for fun. Its all about life, regardless of all the greed and corruption happening in our US governemnt, if we can kill/detain at least 1 person willing to blow themselves up & kill innocent, then it is worth it.

Alll those Iraqi civilians were being controlled before we came, TV's censored, magazines censored, internet controlled by "Saddam approved ISP's", very big war between kurds & shiites. Everything is changing now, slowly but surely. Its not stopping yet, but it will eventually.

I have asked this question before and here I find it appropriate to ask it again.
"For every terrorist killed, five new are born" Can't find no exact match, but the statement is so obvious. The sheer logic it states, should make any strategist go back to the drawing board. You can't win hearts by killing.

This war is about opening an alien market (so they can trade their oil in return). Only problem, they don't wanna buy the products attached with Amercan lifestyle. The "terrorists" are fighting for the freedom to deny the decadence of that style. Yes, untill recently such people were called freedomfighters.

The cold war - thank God - was won without any apocalyptic doomsday armour, because the people of Russia, Poland, Hungary, Chechoslovakia etc in their hearts longed to get part in the icons American culture represents. Rockmusic and Hollywood movies won the cold war. As nylonstockings, Hearsey bars and chewing gum won Europe for America in WW2.

Don't forget, what makes America a superpower is its culture, its ability to subdue any other culture. That's ok, but it shouldn't be force on anyone who don't want it.

If Americans could understand a little more about others than themselves, much would be gained, because respect can only emerge out of true understanding.
Deny arrogance as well as ignorance.

If this line of thought turns you on, click my signature post.

A great tradgedy,yes.An illegal war,yes.
A failure,no because the plan was chaos from the start.The main straem media in Britain are constantly telling us how Iraq is going to have to be carved up into three autonomous regions,due to the spiraling violence.

This was the plan from the start,to destroy the country steal the oil,and keep the whole fear and death racket going.The companies are doing very nicely are they not?

archive.gulfnews.com... Iraq split plan.

external source

"Iraq, rich in oil on the one hand and internally torn on the other, is guaranteed as a candidate for Israel's targets. Its dissolution is even more important for us than that of Syria. Iraq is stronger than Syria. In the short run it is Iraqi power which constitutes the greatest threat to Israel." taken from "a strategy for Israel in the eighties" which can be found here:

cosmos.ucc.ie...

Is`nt this all very convienient for Americas best buddy,Israel?

Originally posted by H34T533K3R
I think the question of this post is being asked way too much ahead of its time. Remember, wars take years to win, even the most historical wars happened over long years of battle.

The real question should be, if the war is won, who is the winner? From what I see,

Iraqi people: Dead, dying, waiting to die......NOT WINNERS
US Soldiers: Dead, Dying, waiting to die.......NOT WINNERS
American Public: Eating, sleeping, working, getting up and reading news, posting on ATS and going on with their life while their government slowly strips them of their freedom and sucks them out of their money.....NOT WINNERS
Saddam: Out of power, as good as dead..........NOT A WINNER
Bush and Co.: So much oil, OIL, OIL and power..WINNERS

American People should really read about how the banks loan money to US government. Why americans have to pay so much taxes. Why US is constantly in a debt of billions of Dollars. Read and understand how the banks control your country and your president and why average americans never seem to have enough money and end up paying taxes all their lives.

Originally posted by H34T533K3R
A complete failure? well it depends what you consider a complete failure. I would consider a complete failure if we sent our troops out there only to get pushed back and still having Saddam in power.

Well, then since thats not the case then you have obviously WON. CONGRATULATIONS....waitafriggin minute why are your troops still there then, why are they still fighting???

Originally posted by H34T533K3R
The average Iraqi civilian now has more magazines to read, more TV channels to watch, internet access, things they never had before. To me and to them thats not a failure.

HAHAHA....OMG I cannot stop laughing. The average Iraqi civilian have lost their homes and family members or perhaps their own lives. They have a war going on in the streets. They constantly live in fear of being killed by US military or their own people but hey.,...look at the bright side......(Sarcasm) they got the latest issue of the playboy. They dont have a roof over their head but they can happily watch 'Jerry seinfeld' now. They have internet access to post on ATS and let us all know how thankful they are to US for liberating them. (/Sarcasm).

Originally posted by H34T533K3R
It also depends on what side you want to ask. Is it a failure for the US? The main goal to seize key targets and control oil flow? No matter what the media or government says in the mainstream, no one here can be dumb to argue about what they say. We all know the what its all about. So no, if its about controlling oil, then its not a failure, its a complete success.

Good point there buddy....only problem is....We are trying to prove that the 'official' reason for war is false. By stating the war is a failure, we mean that Bush failed to achieve what he told us he would and now the goals do not seem to be what they were supposed to be.

Originally posted by H34T533K3R
What if you ask an Iraqi civilian maybe living in Baghdad, is it a failure? No. Why? because they see US soldiers controlling them. Americans setting curfews, raiding their homes, telling them what to do, where to go, what to say. That is not failure for the US. Its a failure for the Iraqi government not being able to take action.

So you are agreeing that US is NOT really liberating Iraq and its people. What are you trying to prove?

Are you saying that US actually achieved its purpose for war because the purpose was to gain control of oil and the country? Because in that case I wud have to agree with you.

Originally posted by H34T533K3R
And however wants to defend it and say it is a failure tell me something. To who is it a failure to? To what you hear on the media? Are you dumb enough to go by what the mainstream media says? i would really like to hear what you all have to say so please reply 2 my post if you disagree.

So then obviously you agree that the real reason for war was OIL. I agree with you on this one.