Originally posted by NaplesX
Good, then I will expect to see instances where you place the blame where it lies, no?
Blame for what? Our soldiers torturing Iraqi prisoners? That's what this thread is about
. See, this is what I was talking about. You can't just invent claims and then not tell us what they are. You seem, I think, to want to turn this thread from that into some kind of vilification of the people who were tortured for not being nice to us. Is that it? If that's the case, then you didn't ask the question in a direct manner. You asked what kind of people would respond to "mistreatment" with a desire to kill their mistreaters. I very clearly responded that some of them weren't just mistreated. They were tortured. And if you think you could be tortured and then say "Ah well, it was just a misunderstanding. Forgive and forget!" you're a fool.
Most wars take far longer, and then rebuilding takes even longer. So yeah, yay for the Iraqi people they can start to move forward.
This war has been OVER for a year. Don't you remember Bush standing on that carrier and declaring that major combat operations are over? But yes. The rebuilding and shepherding of Iraq into the warm glow of democracy will no doubt take a long time.
You have been watching too many "Pinky and the Brain" cartoons.
And you haven't been paying attention to history. At all. What do you think, that we conquer some country, rebuild it and then say "see ya later, sorry for all that death and destruction"? Seriously. I'm asking. Do you not understand why we rebuild a conquered country?
I didn't say you were trying to do anything, I was trying to point out the choice one has to make to lay sole blame at US' doorstep, MATE. You seem to have made that choice, and you are allowed to. Don't get mad when I point out the flaw in that logic. OK, mate?
I love it when you try to be condescending. It's so cute. But watch the logic of your sentence:
Step 1: "I didn't say you were trying to do anything."
Step 2: Make some crazy-assed claim about what other people are arguing that bears no resemblance to reality. In this case, that ANYONE here is laying blame for something "at the US's doorstep." The only thing I'm putting on the US doorstep is that OUR BOYS TORTURED PEOPLE. But you need to keep in mind that the moment we invaded Iraq, it became OUR PROBLEM. We own it now.
Step 3: "You seem to have made that choice."
So in other words, "I didn't say you were trying to do anything other than make some dumb-assed claim that I'm just pretending you tried to make."
Nevertheless, you didn't point out a flaw in any logic that I remember.
I guess we got to keep Germany, Russia, and France?
This makes no sense at all. NONE. Not one bit. Germany: we're still there, and it was ours, as Greg points out, until the 50s. Russia? When did we invade Russia aside from 1919? France? We conquered France? STOP THE PRESSES! REWRITE THE HISTORY BOOKS! We ran the Germans out of France and then kept Germany.
I am not sure what you mean by that, but according to the "conquer the world" and then this, I can only guess you feel that this is imperialistic war.
As opposed to some other kind of war? What do you think wars ARE, anyway? Seriously. I'm asking.
I say history proves that notion wrong.
I say rubbish. I say utterly insane rubbish that indicates no knowledge of history whatsoever.
The countries I mentioned have free will and are not tied to the US, as made obvious by their decision to protest the US decision.
You do know that France and Germany existed prior to their opposition to the US invasion of Iraq, right?