AutoBanter - View Single Post - "China buys all-American Hummer for $150 million"

**rob**

well that didnt reply correctly. oops!

"rob" > wrote in message
g.com...
>
> > wrote in message
> ...
> On Oct 14, 1:12 pm, "SteveT" >
> wrote:
>> > wrote in message
>>
>> ...
>> On Oct 12, 1:23 pm, "SteveT" >
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> >> "MoPar Man" > wrote in message
>>
>> ...
>>
>> >> > QX wrote:
>>
>> >> >> This country is going down the road to hell, and Mr. Obama is
>> >> >> yelling full steam ahead all the way.
>>
>> >> > And Bush was different?
>>
>> >> > What did he do in 8 years, besides send thousands of US troops to
>> >> > their
>> >> > death at a price of a trillion dollars and counting?
>>
>> >> You might as well ask, what did FDR and Truman do besides sending
>> >> thousands
>> >> of US troops to their death at a price of <whatever number of current
>> >> dollar-equivalents was spent in the execution of WW II>)?
>> > You really think WW II was the same? Iraq was no threat to us,
>> > period, and Bush either knew it or should have known it.
>>
>> First: I wasn't trying to equate them, I was simply trying to point out
>> that the question, as asked, was not sufficient to make the point I
>> believed
>> the poster was intending to make. And I certainly think that WW II in
>> Europe
>> *was* similar. Germany and Italy were no direct threat to the US but our
>
> When the US declared war on Japan after Pearl Harbor, Germany declared
> war on the US.
>
>
>> allies were either overrun (happily avoided by allied intervention
>> against
>> Iraq by GHW Bush) or in danger of attack by mad despots who were killling
>> and/ or imprisoning thousands or millions of their own people. World
>> powers
>> don't necessarily react only to direct threats to themselves (which is
>> the
>> point of organizations like NATO, although NATO itself is not otherwise
>> relevant to my point). And, still, your blanket statement that Iraq under
>> Hussein was not a threat to the US is not universally accepted
>
> So what was the threat
>
>
>>(WMD and the
>> possibility of their falling into the hands of terrorists,
>
> But there was no clear evidence Saddam had WMD (all the evidence he
> didn't was dismissed) and the inspectors were there doing their job.
>
>
>>Iraqi
>> interference with US attempts to verify and enforce the conditions that
>> ended the first Gulf war).
>
> Meaning they didn't take kindly to being denied 2/3 of their country's
> airspace?
>
>
>
> the first war never really ended....cease fire only. restrictions from
> that war were still in place.
>
>
>
>
>>
>> >> But I expect
>> >> everyone gets your point, you believe it was a waste. Millions of
>> >> now-free-from-Ba'ath-domination Iraqis, Iranians and Kuwaitis
>> >> threatened
>> >> by
>> >> their formerly bellicode neighbor and Israelis would almost certainly
>> >> disagree with you.
>> > Yet poll after poll shows the Iraqis resent our presence there and
>> > want us out.
>> > <snip>
>>
>> Sure, now that the real work, getting rid of the Ba'athists, is done.
>
> And with it, the ones who knew how to make a gov't work and who knew
> how to make a military work; then we had 5+ years of Amateur Hour.
>
>
>> Many knowledgeable Iraqis who do not viscerally oppose allied presence
>> just
>> because we are us and who understand the current state of Iraqi readiness
>> to
>> defend itself and its people are happy we're there.
>
> Polls say it's a tiny number. You might also note Iraq has lost a
> huge portion of its population since we invaded to people simply
> leaving.
>
>
>>As are a significant
>> number of Kuwaitis, Israelis and no doubt other members of the
>> governments,
>> militaries and general population of Iraq's neighbors.
>
> Oh great, 4000 American lives and a trillion dollars so the royal
> family of Kuwait can be happy. The country where women cannot vote or
> drive.
>
>
>>
>> > Now the threat is Iran (which Iraq held in check) and terrorists
>> > recruited by American actions in Iraq.
>>
>> Terrorists existed and were acting against Americans and allies well
>> before we were embroiled in Iraq.
>
> Iraq was a great recruiting ground.
>
>
>>And I disagree with the notion that the US
>> should necessarily ignore the evils of one despot to hold another in
>> check,
>
> So I assume you advocate invading North Korea, China, Russia, Somalia,
> Sudan, ...
>
>
>> that is just one more element to include among those bearing on the
>> decision. Also, you forgot to mention Afghanistan; I assume you
>> deliberately
>> excluded North Korea because of geography. <grin>
>
>