Iraq: Did You Know

[Doppelgänger]

6 year long war and only 4200 or so deaths, pretty fuc king good war if you ask me

Dumbass of the day award goes to you. 4200 completely avoidable deaths.

Yup, 4000 dead US soldiers for NO GOOD REASON.
****ty economy, for NO GOOD REASON

It seems that the reason for the invasion was NO GOOD REASON.

**** Bush.

[soul]

Dumbass of the day award goes to you. 4200 completely avoidable deaths.

Yup, 4000 dead US soldiers for NO GOOD REASON.
****ty economy, for NO GOOD REASON

It seems that the reason for the invasion was NO GOOD REASON.

**** Bush.

your a dumbass. i didnt mention economy or anything, just posting a statistical fact about the war. compare it to anyother pointless war weve been in....

f cuk you dumbass go get high

[tony]

Dumbass of the day award goes to you. 4200 completely avoidable deaths.

Yup, 4000 dead US soldiers for NO GOOD REASON.
****ty economy, for NO GOOD REASON

It seems that the reason for the invasion was NO GOOD REASON.

**** Bush.

It's refreshing to know SOME people get it. Again I think some of you act like this is a video game.. where death is just a number. THESE ARE AMERICAN LIVES! Brothers, Sons, Fathers.. Mothers, Sisters and Daughters, let me make it more human for you.

[BKgen®]

It's refreshing to know SOME people get it. Again I think some of you act like this is a video game.. where death is just a number. THESE ARE AMERICAN LIVES! Brothers, Sons, Fathers.. Mothers, Sisters and Daughters, let me make it more human for you.

+whatever i give.

this why nobody likes you, soul.

[soul]

It's refreshing to know SOME people get it. Again I think some of you act like this is a video game.. where death is just a number. THESE ARE AMERICAN LIVES! Brothers, Sons, Fathers.. Mothers, Sisters and Daughters, let me make it more human for you.

ok.........i understand that, but also understand when enlisting in the military unless your a complete f ucktard you should understand the fact along as anyone else should, DEATH is a risk you sign up for and knowingly aknowledge and have to deal with., get the f uck over it

[redrumracer]

Dumbass of the day award goes to you. 4200 completely avoidable deaths.

Yup, 4000 dead US soldiers for NO GOOD REASON.
****ty economy, for NO GOOD REASON

It seems that the reason for the invasion was NO GOOD REASON.

**** Bush.

lol yall say **** bush but yet bush doesnt control the economy. the economy did take a turn for the worse till we had a democratic controlled congress. 4200 soldiers dead for no good reason, tell that to all the thousands that were killed in iraq just for having an opinion. yea its not our country but being the only real superpower left is a big responsibility, so no only 4200 isnt that bad for a 6 year war. so before yall condemn bush lets take a look at who really has power in theis country. a spokesperson with a little power or whole group of people that vote and decide how things run. and of course there will be a liberal response to this, saying its not our fault(liberals are used to placing blame instead of taking it)

[tony]

lol yall say **** bush but yet bush doesnt control the economy.

I just thought about this, the Executive Branch.. Commander in Chief is not responsible for the state of the United States Economy? The man who ultimately has Veto power over anything Congress approves and sign into law ANY bill isn't responsible?

lol You've got to be kidding me, I'm sure if the economy was exploding you would say we need to thank Bush but now its not his fault? Well why have a president then? I guess we can just get things done on our own.

Bad Economic policy is wasting $400 Billion on a war that shows no return on investment while your people are losing jobs to other countries, losing their homes and the value of your currency is plummeting at an alarming rate. Bad economic policy is not investing in infrastructure for energy independence while your citizens are held captive by the Oil industry because there is no competition and essentially.. a monopoly. Good economic policy would not leave millions of citizens without proper healthcare and allow an affordable solution for much needed medications.

Bush himself doctored "No Child Left Behind" and now almost half of our teenagers are not graduating from high school. Please explain how George Bush, the one man with the most control over domestic policy over the last 8 years bears not an ounce of burden over the state of the U.S?

[redrumracer]

I just thought about this, the Executive Branch.. Commander in Chief is not responsible for the state of the United States Economy? The man who ultimately has Veto power over anything Congress approves and sign into law ANY bill isn't responsible?

lol You've got to be kidding me, I'm sure if the economy was exploding you would say we need to thank Bush but now its not his fault? Well why have a president then? I guess we can just get things done on our own.

Bad Economic policy is wasting $400 Billion on a war that shows no return on investment while your people are losing jobs to other countries, losing their homes and the value of your currency is plummeting at an alarming rate. Bad economic policy is not investing in infrastructure for energy independence while your citizens are held captive by the Oil industry because there is no competition and essentially.. a monopoly. Good economic policy would not leave millions of citizens without proper healthcare and allow an affordable solution for much needed medications.

Bush himself doctored "No Child Left Behind" and now almost half of our teenagers are not graduating from high school. Please explain how George Bush, the one man with the most control over domestic policy over the last 8 years bears not an ounce of burden over the state of the U.S?

just as quick as the president can veto something the congress can still overturn his veto. he alone can not make the decision to go to war. it has to be voted upon and approved. he can do a military campaign but only so long until it has to be voted on and the troops brought home. also healthcare shouldnt be the responsibility of the government it should be up to the individual and no child left behind act is a public law that was still voted upon and accepted by congress. does bush deserve some of the blame? sure, but all of it? no. he is in the public eye all the time and as such is the easiest target. and no he doesnt have the most control the congress has the most control

[Reaper]

just as quick as the president can veto something the congress can still overturn his veto. he alone can not make the decision to go to war. it has to be voted upon and approved. he can do a military campaign but only so long until it has to be voted on and the troops brought home. also healthcare shouldnt be the responsibility of the government it should be up to the individual and no child left behind act is a public law that was still voted upon and accepted by congress. does bush deserve some of the blame? sure, but all of it? no. he is in the public eye all the time and as such is the easiest target. and no he doesnt have the most control the congress has the most control

best thing posted in this thread

People seem to forget that our country is NOT a democracy...its a REPUBLIC!!

Think for yourself, do things on your own. If you are not physically or mentally capable the there are safegaurds, but it should NOT be up to the government to save lazy peoples asses..

+whatever I'm worth

[Alan®]

I just thought about this, the Executive Branch.. Commander in Chief is not responsible for the state of the United States Economy? The man who ultimately has Veto power over anything Congress approves and sign into law ANY bill isn't responsible?

lol You've got to be kidding me, I'm sure if the economy was exploding you would say we need to thank Bush but now its not his fault? Well why have a president then? I guess we can just get things done on our own.

Bad Economic policy is wasting $400 Billion on a war that shows no return on investment while your people are losing jobs to other countries, losing their homes and the value of your currency is plummeting at an alarming rate. Bad economic policy is not investing in infrastructure for energy independence while your citizens are held captive by the Oil industry because there is no competition and essentially.. a monopoly. Good economic policy would not leave millions of citizens without proper healthcare and allow an affordable solution for much needed medications.

Bush himself doctored "No Child Left Behind" and now almost half of our teenagers are not graduating from high school. Please explain how George Bush, the one man with the most control over domestic policy over the last 8 years bears not an ounce of burden over the state of the U.S?

Having read your post I want to say something about all this. I generally agree with what you said but a couple of points I disagree with.

The first being

Bad Economic policy is wasting $400 Billion on a war that shows no return on investment

Please tell me what war in the history of our country has ever showed a return investment? When has a country ever fully payed its repreations and we made money off of it.

losing their homes

This is an issue I have been thinking about lately. While I feel bad that there are people who are losing their homes due to the big Adjustable Rate Mortgage trend in the end people are responsible for their own actions. Nobody put a gun to these people's head and told them buy the house or eat lead. If you don't read through the contract and now what comes after the first two years of being on the lower rate than you shouldn't be buying ahouse alone anyways. Maybe the government should not have allowed this but. I do not see how it is the governments responsibilty to save people from their own dumb financial decisions. I was watching Gretta Van Sustren last night and she did an interview with John McCain and I personally have been saying this all along. The only way for people to recover from this is to get to the bottom so that we can start over and begin growth again. The government negotiating with mortgate companies to extend the time underwhich they get the lower intrest rate does nothing but prolounge the problem.

[0p7!mu5]

Having read your post I want to say something about all this. I generally agree with what you said but a couple of points I disagree with.

The first being

Please tell me what war in the history of our country has ever showed a return investment? When has a country ever fully payed its repreations and we made money off of it.


This is an issue I have been thinking about lately. While I feel bad that there are people who are losing their homes due to the big Adjustable Rate Mortgage trend in the end people are responsible for their own actions. Nobody put a gun to these people's head and told them buy the house or eat lead. If you don't read through the contract and now what comes after the first two years of being on the lower rate than you shouldn't be buying ahouse alone anyways. Maybe the government should not have allowed this but. I do not see how it is the governments responsibilty to save people from their own dumb financial decisions. I was watching Gretta Van Sustren last night and she did an interview with John McCain and I personally have been saying this all along. The only way for people to recover from this is to get to the bottom so that we can start over and begin growth again. The government negotiating with mortgate companies to extend the time underwhich they get the lower intrest rate does nothing but prolounge the problem.

first problem is why the hell would anybody in their right mind go for an adjustable rate? you're better off ina n apartment at that point. Honestly imo Financial education and not saving nickles and dimes but real walstreet financial education is a better shot. real estate investing yeah saving your money helps but face social security isnt going to be around much longer at this rate. People jumping into houses without reading the fine print and living outside their mean doesnt help. If people really read and understood what they read it would soften the blow. Im reading into that now because im just tryin to get the hell out of renting a damn apartment but a fixed rate is just way smarter of an idea no surprise raise in mortgage.

[tony]

Having read your post I want to say something about all this. I generally agree with what you said but a couple of points I disagree with.

The first being

Please tell me what war in the history of our country has ever showed a return investment? When has a country ever fully payed its repreations and we made money off of it.

Contrary to belief.. I understand due to the great failure of this Iraq war its hard to believe there is a positive outcome of war but there are plenty of examples I could give that had a positive outcome. Civil War is the first that comes to mind, Desert Storm..

This is an issue I have been thinking about lately. While I feel bad that there are people who are losing their homes due to the big Adjustable Rate Mortgage trend in the end people are responsible for their own actions. Nobody put a gun to these people's head and told them buy the house or eat lead. If you don't read through the contract and now what comes after the first two years of being on the lower rate than you shouldn't be buying ahouse alone anyways. Maybe the government should not have allowed this but. I do not see how it is the governments responsibilty to save people from their own dumb financial decisions. I was watching Gretta Van Sustren last night and she did an interview with John McCain and I personally have been saying this all along. The only way for people to recover from this is to get to the bottom so that we can start over and begin growth again. The government negotiating with mortgate companies to extend the time underwhich they get the lower intrest rate does nothing but prolounge the problem.

I originally had the position you did, trust me I see what you are saying but I spoke with my sister at length about this, she is really intelligent on the subject. ARM's were tailored for residents of California where a conventional mortgage was not financially viable. Of course this caught on and even Alan Greenspan himself endorsed the ARM.

I have a 7 year ARM on my house and had an interest online loan on an investment I had.. I am one of the more educated home buyers but the average person just doesn't understand the legal talk in purchasing a house. Emotion gets involved, they hear they are approved for the house of their dreams and voila.. deal done and someone has more responsibility than they can handle.

I'm not saying the government should bail them out, there is a lesson to be learned here but certainly the role of the government is to make sure the market is fair, and that there are fair lending practices... I'm sorry but that did not go on.

[Alan®]

Contrary to belief.. I understand due to the great failure of this Iraq war its hard to believe there is a positive outcome of war but there are plenty of examples I could give that had a positive outcome. Civil War is the first that comes to mind, Desert Storm..

I think you missed what I was getting at as I am not entirely against the war nor do I believe that we should get out earlier. What I was trying to say in response to your coment earlier about the war being a $400billion dollar sink hole with no return investment. My point was other than say the revolution and maybe the Civil War where did we either break even or make money?

I originally had the position you did, trust me I see what you are saying but I spoke with my sister at length about this, she is really intelligent on the subject. ARM's were tailored for residents of California where a conventional mortgage was not financially viable. Of course this caught on and even Alan Greenspan himself endorsed the ARM.

I have a 7 year ARM on my house and had an interest online loan on an investment I had.. I am one of the more educated home buyers but the average person just doesn't understand the legal talk in purchasing a house. Emotion gets involved, they hear they are approved for the house of their dreams and voila.. deal done and someone has more responsibility than they can handle.

I'm not saying the government should bail them out, there is a lesson to be learned here but certainly the role of the government is to make sure the market is fair, and that there are fair lending practices... I'm sorry but that did not go on.

I understand and agree that there is a lesson to be learned in all of this all I'm saying is business is business and that if these people didn't sit down and see what they were getting themselves into than it's their own fault ultimately. I understand that buying a house is emotional but when your putting a great chunk of your credit on the line you should be going over your contract with a fine comb.