Replies

But it still is funny that you think two shells justifies the deaths of US soldiers

Who was saying that exactly?

after this was told on behalf on this nation to the world: [Powell's UN address] Remember that? Of course you don't- but the rest of the world certainly does.

Could you state or point to your problem with Powell's UN address in detail?

We are not there to "build Democracy" at all and stay for 30 years?

I'll field that. Yes: I wouldn't be surprised if our military were to exist in Iraq, in some capacity, for 30 years give or take.

It's been 55+ years and our military is still in Germany.

Shocking!

Sadaam- that even his neighbors didn't think was a threat was such a "threat" to us that we just had to invade?

I've already explained this to you: the fact that his neighbors didn't find him a threat to them is irrelevant and doesn't mean jack squat to us. Oh what a relief, Saddam Hussein didn't threaten Syria, so we're safe. What the hell kind of fool logic is that?

Do you understand that "Saddam's neighbors" and "The United States" actually refer to different countries?

Let's turn it the other way around. Surely you agree that we, the United States, are not a threat to Canada (our "neighbor"). Does that mean we weren't a threat to Saddam Hussein? To use your logic, "there's no way the US will attack Iraq, they're not even a threat to their neighbor Canada."

If the debate for war against Sadaam only took two weeks what was to prevent Sadaam from giving away any WMD to anybody with a ship, plane, truck, car, donkey, bike, or backpack before we invaded?

What WMD, I thought he didn't have any.

So are we safer?

What does that even mean? It's such an asinine question.

There is absolutely no way to measure how Safe we are. There are no International Safety Units or Safety Rulers to do the measuring and calibrating for you. So there's no basis for looking around you at some point in time and declaring yourself to be "Safe", or "twice as Safe as three years ago, when I was half as Safe as I am now". It just doesn't make any sense.

The one thing you can do is to look at results. People either get attacked and killed, or they don't. And, attacks and murders occur at some rate, or another. But these are metrics which are only available after the fact, and in the context of long-term trends. Ten years from now perhaps we will be able to plot "terror deaths per year" on a curve and see a sharp upturn or downturn, but to ask someone for an instantaneous measurement "Are we safer????" invites people to draw a conclusion based on their feelings and their feelings only.

A lot of people would probably answer you "no we're not". That's because they "don't feel safer" (and often linked to their psychological feelings towards the President) and it's not based on anything other than feelings. But that's the only kind of answer you can possibly get by asking "are we safer?", which is part of what makes it such an asinine question.