AOI:Wow, Dixie, you are in denial aren't you?
Dixie: Nope, you are!
Stunning retort. You forgot to write at the end.... "I know you are, said you are but what am I?"
You can see why we all rate you as a debator now.... lol
AOI: Replaced a secular, though brutal, dictator with a nation collapsing about itself.
Dixie No, replaced one of the most heinous rulers of modern history, also known as The Butcher of Baghdad, with a unity government trying to form a democracy in a place where democracy has never existed.
Heinous rulers in modern history? No he wasn't. He was a third rate tin pot dictator, not even a patch on people like Pol Pot, Hitler or Stalin.
And he has been replaced by an ineffective government who are stuffing their fat faces as the country desolves into civil war. Your rose tinted glasses must filter out the fact that the country is collapsing, despite every man and his dog stating the obvious that it is.
AOI: Held an election and called it the world's first Arab democracy, despite the fact that an election doesn't make a democracy.
Dixie No, held 3 elections, all of which, garnered more support from Iraqi citizens under the threats of death, than any modern American election. And I am sorry, but the dictionary has a definition of "democracy" and this fits, precisely.
I'll think you'll find that the dictionary calls that a 'ballot'..,..
ballot
• noun 1 a procedure by which people vote secretly on an issue. 2 (the ballot) the total number of votes cast in such a process. 3 a lottery held to decide the allocation of tickets or other things among a number of applicants.
• verb (balloted, balloting) 1 obtain a secret vote from (members). 2 cast one’s vote on an issue. 3 allocate by drawing lots.
http://www.askoxford.com/results/?v...570&textsearchtype=exact&sortorder=score,name
AOI You claim to have freed 25 million people....freed them into a civil war and a higher death rate than under SH.
DixieNo, I don't "claim" it, this is a fact. As for the "death rate" under Saddam, this is a fact we simply can't confirm or know for certain, so there is no way to compare. We can assume that Saddam was honest, and the "death rate" under his regime was properly reported, but since we know that Saddam is a brutal tyrant dictator who does nothing but lie, it seems a little stupid to assume the "death rate" under Saddam, as being totally accurate.
Even by the most conservative estimates of the death toll today it dwarfs the death toll under SH. You make out SH to be akin to Pol Pot or Stalin, in truth the figures you use include those of the Iraq/Iran war.
We now have sectarian death squads taking over towns and executing those not of their sect. We have open warfare in areas three years after 'mission accomplished' and we have bombings and killings on an hourly basis. You call this freedom?
AOI: It is the first large scale debacle of the C21st.
Dixie In your wrongheaded opinion, this is the case. In historic retrospect, it will be the single greatest military accomplishment of our generation, perhaps the entire 21st century, if it pans out the way it should.
It hasn't panned out as it should. It has been a total failure, something being admitted by everyone except the Bush regime and those who follow the leader to the end like you. You have nothing to justify calling this a military accomplishment, let alone the greatest.
In the context of a battle against Islamic extremism, we have removed a tinpot third rate dictator and created an open sore, a running wound that feeds extremism and aids AQ, something your own government has admitted.
AOI Strategically it was a total clusterfuck and troops on the ground have acted so badly and used such poor tactics that they have exasperated the problem.
DixieNot really, there have been some tactical and strategic errors, but this happens in every war. There have been some bad apples, again, happens in every war. No one has "exasperated" anything, except for Democrats, who have exasperated themselves beating the anti-war drums... I think you might have meant "exacerbated" the problem, which hasn't happened either... the problem was Saddam, and he is currently on trial, not exacerbating the problems for us and his people anymore.
No, I mean 'exasperated', as in 'aggravated'.
This has been a total strategic fuck up. In the context of fighting Islamic extremism, we have removed a secular (though brutal) leader and created an ideal training and support garnering situation for the extremists, as well as a cause celebre. We have caused a nation to move to sectarian violence and civil war which destablises the region, giving the extremists another victory. We have demonstrated our inability to fight extremism by being so incapable of dealing with the insurgency. In short, strategically, we have played into the extremist's hands.
This has been a total tactical fuckup. The use of force protection tactics by US troops, being under the impression that overwhelming firepower can resolve situations in an insurgency, being brutal and aggressive against civilians and being unable to differentiate (and thus divide and conquer) between the jihadists and insurgents have all played into the extremists hands.
History won't vindicate Bush and acolytes such as yourself, it will be merciless to you.
AOI: You need to move past the denial and stop hanging onto false victories such as the holding of a ballot, removing SH and accept what is actually going on on the ground, take note of what senior generals and former SoS's say.
Dixie: I pay attention to one thing, how effectively we are accomplishing the overall objective in Iraq and the War on Terror. I don't pay attention to doom-and-gloom from the left, who didn't want to be in this war in the first place. What the fuck does anyone expect their position to be, other than, against this war?
You obviously don't. If you were interested in defeating Islamic extremism rather than supporting that blue-jeaned cowboy you love so much (your words) you would open your eyes to what is going on on the ground, what our generals et al are saying etc
AOI: This thread really makes you look daft.
Dixie Well, you see... I think you have to make an argument for this, rather than just proclaim it. It's real easy to just throw out something like that... watch this... AnyoldIron, this thread makes you look like an idiot! See how easy it was for me to say that? Of course, it's not based on any facts or even true in the least, everyone knows, you don't need a thread to make you look like an idiot, you can do that all by yourself.
Dixie, your defence of an obviously failing strategy makes my argument for me. That you would defend your leader over supporting the fight against extremism makes you look daft, if not a little treasonous.....
Perhaps he want to see what a place that we pulled out of in defeat look like today 