Bushs falurire in war

[MarineJarod]

Um... hmmm havent you guys ever wondered why Bush didnt keep the war in Afghanistan? That was origanally who attacked us right? The Al Khida were in Afghanistan so why did we go to war mostly with Iraq? Sure they posted a threat but havent you wondered if he was finishing his dads unfinished work with Sudam Huesain? After all his dad went to war with him during Operation Desert Storm in 1991. But unfortartantly he ws unable to stay in office. Also why are we still in Iraq think of all those soilders in Iraq still been there for 4 years wanting to come back. We got rid of Sudam and we have a trained a police force and a little army. Now we are trying to change them and since there is no longer an army of hostile threat against the U.S. only a very hard to deal with sucidal Iraqi resistance. i think we should get are men out of Iraq let them blow them selves up till they relize what they are doing then swap a fresh group of soilders to deal with our main problem Afghanistan. Also we should take some of the oil from Iraq to compensate for our loses and our time and our help and for our patience. We need to let Iraq be Iraq and we need to find Osama Bin Ladin who has been unfound because nothing has been lokking for him. So steep on it Bush do what you came to do first, find Osama Bin Ladin!

[SevenSeize]

We are still in Afghanistan. We never left. We went to Afghanistan promptly after 911, way before the Iraq war. Go do some research, then come back and try to develop an argument. And you incorrectly spelled failure.

[MarineJarod]

My argument is not that we left Afghanistan its why did we put our main focuse directly to Iraq i never at any point said we left Afghanistan completely we put 90% of our efforts to the Iraqi situation.

[SevenSeize]

At 6/25/06 12:57 PM, MarineJarod wrote: My argument is not that we left Afghanistan its why did we put our main focuse directly to Iraq i never at any point said we left Afghanistan completely we put 90% of our efforts to the Iraqi situation.:

Right after 9/11, we did directly put our focus on Afghanistan. It stayed that way until the war in Iraq. Then we put more troops in Iraq. We are still very active in Afghanistan. NBC nightly news said we are making somewhere around 100 air strikes a month in Afghanistan. I'm not advocating the war in Iraq, I'm simply stating that we started out with full efforts in Afghanistan. Operation Enduring Freedom began in Afghanistan, not Iraq. Right now, our main focus is on Iraq. It will eventually be back on Afghanistan. Even if we don't like the war in Iraq, some resolve must now be reached because we already invaded the country. We are still looking for Osama Bin Laden, but I don't think he's in Afghanistan anyway.

[MarineJarod]

At 6/25/06 01:05 PM, SevenSeize wrote:

At 6/25/06 12:57 PM, MarineJarod wrote: My argument is not that we left Afghanistan its why did we put our main focuse directly to Iraq i never at any point said we left Afghanistan completely we put 90% of our efforts to the Iraqi situation.:

Right after 9/11, we did directly put our focus on Afghanistan. It stayed that way until the war in Iraq. Then we put more troops in Iraq. We are still very active in Afghanistan. NBC nightly news said we are making somewhere around 100 air strikes a month in Afghanistan. I'm not advocating the war in Iraq, I'm simply stating that we started out with full efforts in Afghanistan. Operation Enduring Freedom began in Afghanistan, not Iraq. Right now, our main focus is on Iraq. It will eventually be back on Afghanistan. Even if we don't like the war in Iraq, some resolve must now be reached because we already invaded the country. We are still looking for Osama Bin Laden, but I don't think he's in Afghanistan anyway.

I agree I dont think hes in iraq but you did just answer my piont we went into Iraq not long after we were in Afghanistan which i see as why did we eradicate Sudam before finding our main problem Osama?

[sdhonda]

Because PNAC=Idiots who still think it's still 1990 and that saddam is a major threat to the world.

[MarineJarod]

At 6/25/06 01:55 PM, americaman wrote: Im sorry but I could not even read the origional post due to all those spelling errors.

There wasnt more than 10 if you think you can understand and aslo i was rushed

[Narusegawa]

Well first of all the Taliban is finnaly out of Afghanistan so that's probably the reason why you haven't been hearing a lot about the country.
And about Saddam the reason why we got him is because he's been commiting crimes against humanity for decades. The reason that we went into Iraq was because the CIA thought that there were WMD's in there but we soon found out that there weren't. There also was and still is a large number of Terrorist groups there.

Oh yeah and please learn to spell. I counted 13 errors in your first post in this topic.

[MarineJarod]

At 6/25/06 01:59 PM, americaman wrote:

At 6/25/06 01:58 PM, MarineJarod wrote: There wasnt more than 10 if you think you can understand and aslo i was rushed

Were you rushed in that post too?

Because i had to go to church

[MarineJarod]

At 6/25/06 02:00 PM, BigScizot wrote: Well first of all the Taliban is finnaly out of Afghanistan so that's probably the reason why you haven't been hearing a lot about the country.
And about Saddam the reason why we got him is because he's been commiting crimes against humanity for decades. The reason that we went into Iraq was because the CIA thought that there were WMD's in there but we soon found out that there weren't. There also was and still is a large number of Terrorist groups there.

Oh yeah and please learn to spell. I counted 13 errors in your first post in this topic.

Yes exactly there was a threat in Iraq i never said there wasnt. And if you had to take the time out of you life to count my errors then go pick on someone else like i said i was rushed (church)

[MarineJarod]

At 6/25/06 02:02 PM, MarineJarod wrote:

At 6/25/06 01:59 PM, americaman wrote:

At 6/25/06 01:58 PM, MarineJarod wrote: There wasnt more than 10 if you think you can understand and aslo i was rushed

Were you rushed in that post too?

what do you mean was i rushed there is no spelling errors in that post if this helps "if you think, you can understand" im sorry i didnt work on punctuation.

[Draconias]

At 6/25/06 02:00 PM, BigScizot wrote: The reason that we went into Iraq was because the CIA thought that there were WMD's in there but we soon found out that there weren't.

Actually, there were. We found mustard gas and serin gas shells hidden in various weapon silos, mixed among the normal weapons, even though Saddam claimed to have destroyed all of those weapons in the 90s.

However, we didn't find nukes, the specific WMDs that everyone got all scared about. For some odd reason, you say "mustard gas" and people just stare at you, but you say "nuclear bomb" and people freak the hell out. Both are defined as WMDs, and mustard gas has been completely illegal since WWI.

[MarineJarod]

this makes two people who arent offended by my spelling to where they have to change the subject.

[MarineJarod]

At 6/25/06 02:42 PM, americaman wrote:

At 6/25/06 02:29 PM, MarineJarod wrote: this makes two people who arent offended by my spelling to where they have to change the subject.

Well when its a useless and dumbass subject it kinda gets changed alot.

i know a lot of people who have the same question and um spelling mistake with a lot lol

[MarineJarod]

At 6/25/06 03:12 PM, americaman wrote:

At 6/25/06 03:09 PM, MarineJarod wrote: i know a lot of people who have the same question and um spelling mistake with a lot lol

I have no clue what the fuck your stupid ass is saying.

lol you want me to slow down okay i know people who have the same question as my main post.STOP. You have a spelling mistake with the word a lot.STOP. You spelt a lot the following way: alot.STOP. Do you understand now ?STOP.

[MarineJarod]

And now I will end this argument about spelling. This is not what my post is about i want answers and comments about my original post. If you have a problem with my spelling go to another fourm topic and start a new thread talking about my spelling.

[fli]

At 6/25/06 02:00 PM, BigScizot wrote: Well first of all the Taliban is finnaly out of Afghanistan so that's probably the reason why you haven't been hearing a lot about the country...
Oh yeah and please learn to spell. I counted 13 errors in your first post in this topic.

Nuaah-- Uhhh!
Taliban are not 'finally' out of their country. FOX and CNN have in the past few weeks dropped news about their comeback. So have BBC... but nobody is paying attention.

In certain areas they're gone, but they've captured some towns and are back full force in power. Others they have not captured, but once the United States leave, they will probably capture the whole country once more again.

"Mission complete" has not been achieved... although the photo opportunity was cool.

[MarineJarod]

At 6/25/06 04:00 PM, americaman wrote:

At 6/25/06 03:20 PM, MarineJarod wrote: If you have a problem with my spelling go to another fourm topic and start a new thread talking about my spelling.

Sorry skippy I cant dot hat jack.

if that made any sense id make a comeback or i would except the insult....

[MarineJarod]

At 6/25/06 04:17 PM, MarineJarod wrote:

At 6/25/06 04:00 PM, americaman wrote:

At 6/25/06 03:20 PM, MarineJarod wrote: If you have a problem with my spelling go to another fourm topic and start a new thread talking about my spelling.

Sorry skippy I cant dot hat jack.

if that made any sense id make a comeback or i would except the insult....

accept*

[Proteas]

OFFICIAL BUSH TOPIC, NOW.