U.S. Losing War in Iraq

Truth: The war in Iraq never ended.

Truth: Saddam may have been captured but a whole cabal of his generals have been leading the insurgency against the American/British/Australian occupation of Iraq.

Truth: They never captured Saddam's top general who is in charge of the isurgency.

Truth: Saddam's army has lots of money and people willing to fight against the occupation. So the war continues. The mission was never a success, much less accomplished.

Truth: The violence continues to escalate and the casualties from both sides continue to be mostly civilians.

Truth: Under Saddam there were few if any terrorists on Iraqi soil. Now there are hundreds if not thousands.

Truth: Under Saddam Iraq was far better off than they have been under the US Bush Occupation.

Truth: There is more fear, more death, more destruction than Saddam ever inflicted upon his country thanks to the American invasion of Iraq.

Truth: President Bush says we are making progress in Iraq and democracy there is thriving.

Truth: President Bush has NEVER told the truth about Iraq and the reasons for going there. Or should I say Karl Rove never allowed anyone to tell the truth (but that's another thread).

Truth: The US is there for the oil, and that is all they are protecting. The peace and security of Iraq and it's citizens are secondary (if that).

Truth: Iraq should not be united in the first place. Forcing these tribes to live together was a British plan foisted on the Iraqi people. Why? To keep the oil under the control of one country, run by foreigners.

So the US is losing the war in Iraq for the reasons above, and losing this world war for the mind of the planet's citizens. Once the US stood for universal values, but these are secondary (as usual) for republican administrations. Using war to seize the assests of another country is about as low as a government can go. And those who support this illegal invasion are going to see their karma come back in spades. Karl Rove is just the tip of an iceberg that is floating into a sea of hot water...

Add your own facts...

 

Here's another fact.

The US has turned their greedy actions in the middle east into what is now a low level world war.

And I believe it's just gettin' started.

Thanks, GW for destablizing the mideast and starting a world war. Your own paranoid fantasies have manifested this horror.

 

The proof is in the fresh blood flowing in the streets of Baghdad every fucking day the US is "in charge" there. Like I said, it never flowed this fast in Saddam's time. The Sunni, Shia & Kurds need their own fucking countries. It's way past time, and I think they would agree (except possibly the Sunnis who like the Americans want it all)

 

That's the problem with you Americans. You want fucking documents. You want and will only accept manufactured evidence delivered to you from Karl Rove via Fox News.

When you see blood flowing in Baghdad, Madrid and now London it's not enough for you. Those were all safe cities to live in until Bush declared war (IRA not with standing). You'd be surprised how many who were once allies for the US are now against it. That is another fact & reason the US is losing it's war.

 

Cadcruzer, guess you don't know what the words "not with standing" means. Look it up.

 

Eggszackly! Well put.

And now both the London bombings & the Karl Rove affair have finally got the media questioning the logic behind the Iraq war.

I noticed in every press conference the subject now comes up in almost every question!

Yippie the "free" press is finally doing it's job (too little, too late).

It is the LIES told by our governments that feeds the terrorism and in MANY minds justifies it, believe it or not!

 

Oooh yeah, we should invade a country and kill thousands of people there because they ONCE harbored A terrorist. So what if he's dead already.

Yes, Abu Nidal counts in the FEW that I mentioned, so where was I wrong? And from what I've read about the guy he had a valid grevience against Israel, even if I don't condone his activities.

 

Yes, the mayor of London is quite outspoken and sensible from what I've heard. Too bad he doesn't have more power. A mayor is pretty low on the national level of influence.