So far the conservatives have NOT EVER been correct on Iraq. Not once. No sponsoring terrorism, no nuclear weapons, no other WMDs, and no democracy.
The "constitution" leaves out much of the country, and basically creates a very loose federation of two factions.
And even so it leaves the difficult questions for the future. That's just reality.
Now, why do you think some people said the UN was looking for WMDs, that destabilizing Iraq would lead to civil war, that it would be a quagmire, that lotsa people would die, more maimed, etc., etc., and so on?
Is it that we don't want happiness, freedom, a chance to grow, enjoy families and friends, and prosper for Iraqis?
Get serious. We do, that's why we don't adocate killing 'em, whether it's Saddam killing 'em with US WMDs, or the US killing 'em directly.
We've been right on Iraq, the conservatives have been wrong, and that's very, very sad.
And I don't see how anyone who advocates not killing Iraqis can be accused of wanting anything but the best for them. And this occupation, stealing their resources, ain't the best.
Arf
Current Events » in reply to You really want Iraq to fail , don't you? Unfrakingbelivable!
Well, think about it.
The whole thread (44 posts)
- The Greatest Strategic Disaster in United States History
- That election is killing the Left, isn't it? (n/t)
- That election solved squat, didn't it.
- The Far Left can't stand the idea of democracy. (n/t)
- What election? (n/t)
- The Greatest Strategic Disaster in United States History was PEARL HARBOR. (n/t)
- That election is killing the Left, isn't it? (n/t)
