southsider2k5 Posted May 17, 2004 Share Posted May 17, 2004 http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3683270/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlaSoxxJim Posted May 17, 2004 Share Posted May 17, 2004 This has really become an intractable position for the Coalition and the US appointed Iraqi ruling government. The average Iraqi will not see any of the appointees as being legitimate after the handover, and many will never recognize the authority of a US-appointed bunch. Kimmit insists the transfer has to stay on track, but what does that really mean for US occupying forces? We will have to remain in place in large numbers as a security force to prevent overthrow of the appointed governing body, majority revolt and civil war. At the same time, the anger level of the average Iraqi will rise as the US presence continues well after the nominal handover. This will be accompanied by continued uprising of pockets of insurgents, casualties will keep mounting on all sides, and I don't see how it can end well. There's really something to that old yarn about winning the war only to lose the peace. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlaSoxxJim Posted May 17, 2004 Share Posted May 17, 2004 In another explosion in Iraq, unrelated to the assissination and in which no casualties occurred, the nerve agent Sarin was found to be incorporated in the device: http://abcnews.go.com/wire/World/ap20040517_821.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted May 17, 2004 Author Share Posted May 17, 2004 In another explosion in Iraq, unrelated to the assissination and in which no casualties occurred, the nerve agent Sarin was found to be incorporated in the device: http://abcnews.go.com/wire/World/ap20040517_821.html I heard the report on MSNBC, and I was waiting to find a link to post. I guess you are too quick for me Jim. So who gets to be the first to suggest that the CIA planted it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted May 17, 2004 Share Posted May 17, 2004 I heard the report on MSNBC, and I was waiting to find a link to post. I guess you are too quick for me Jim. So who gets to be the first to suggest that the CIA planted it? That would be you Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted May 17, 2004 Share Posted May 17, 2004 cnn.com has it as their lead. Must be because it potentially hurts Bush's chances. I have no idea why they ae not reporting instead on the happy news of Iraqi children going to school and utilities working. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mreye Posted May 17, 2004 Share Posted May 17, 2004 I guess they were right. Link Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mreye Posted May 17, 2004 Share Posted May 17, 2004 Oops. I see the other post now. Delete this, please. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Queen Prawn Posted May 17, 2004 Share Posted May 17, 2004 Considering there is evidence Al-Queda is in Iraq, unless it can be directly traced to Saddam and his regime, I would be more inclined to believe they were brought in and not originated in Iraq. (hope this make sense I need to leave work to drop off some parts, but the PO guy is talking so i can't get my damn P.O. corrected! lol) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mreye Posted May 17, 2004 Share Posted May 17, 2004 I heard the report on MSNBC, and I was waiting to find a link to post. I guess you are too quick for me Jim. So who gets to be the first to suggest that the CIA planted it? That's the first thing two people here at work said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JUGGERNAUT Posted May 17, 2004 Share Posted May 17, 2004 What a conflicting war. Now that a WMD link is being established to the radical shiite cleric how will the nation perceive this war? If more is found in months to come does this suddenly legitimize Bush's WMD argument? If that's the case does this created a bigger blank check for the war? I pray that's not the case. It's clear to me this is a war of liberation that we can not win. The warlords in Iraq are no less powerful than the ones in Afghanistan & surgical bombing runs have proven most ineffective against them. The only way to weaken them is to use the traditional methods of slaughter that have weaken them in past centuries. But that's not even a thinkable option in the modern world. So we have no means of weakening them. Period. Which means both of these military actions will go on indefinitely. We need allies in these causes & I'm not talking about the French, Germans, or any other European aristocrats. I'm talking about Muslim allies. We need to choose sides on both these fronts & back the lesser of two evils that is more inclined to allow democracy & capitalism to take hold. In Iraq it's clearly the Kurds & in Afghan .. wel I'm not really sure but there must have been some rebel faction there as well. Nothing makes for better friendships than a shared enemy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted May 17, 2004 Share Posted May 17, 2004 fortunately we have billions of dollars in surplus to spend helping out our good friends in Iraq. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted May 17, 2004 Author Share Posted May 17, 2004 The Sarin was in an attempt at a roadside bomb. Most likely the sabatoures didn't know what they had. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4997808/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.