Let’s see how I do.

France
Afghanistan
Uzbekistan
Poland
South Korea
Australia
Britain
Germany
Micronesia
Costa Rica
South Africa
Luxembourg
Pakistan

I know there were 49 members but damn, I wonder what aid they provided?

US and Britain furnished 98% of the military with Australia and Poland furnishing the last 2% I think. Must have been money. Screw it let’s look it up.

My work is done here.

Did the UN support the current war?
Did NATO?

that money must be rolling in, the war must be paying for itself. No?

If you really want to debate something Dugger you have to have a grounding in reality, little boy.

The increasingly obscene and shrill midder made this ridiculous assertion. I bet even his progressive buddies are embarrassed. Or maybe I’m wrong. Maybe Great Britain, Australia, Poland, Italy, et al are really US states and their participation doesn’t count as international. Or maybe like “lying” (something Bush says that makes progressives feel uncomfotable ),
‘international’ has a special hate-Bush meaning.

You shouldn’t make it so easy for me. I suggest learning some stuff or getting a grown up to help you debate.

Bush’s Blunder.

If the mission is accomplished as you claim, why do you object to people wanting the soldier’s brought home?

Dugger when you address points, you might be able to claim victory but :

“Dugger apparently forgets what congress was told by Bush. That he needed the authorization to go to war to force Hussein into inspections and compliance, all of which Bush got before he invaded anyway. In other words, most of those Democrats that you say supported the war, did so conditionally (conditions that were met so war was unnecessary) and never supported the war as Bush prosecuted it.”

No way around it, Bush & Co. lied to get a war resolution, and that is my point you keep failing to address. Read the resloution, WMDs WMDs, Need to remove the threat of WMDs. Whereas and etc, WMDs. What was that? No threat from Hussein, no valid reason for war.

At this point, there’s no use. Dozens of lies have been documented. You should know that. But stay willfully ignorant.

So Midder you are saying the war vote that Edwards speaks of, that Bush speaks of, that major news outlets spek of, was not a war vote and that any one who says it was a war vote is a big, bad liar. What a child!

WASHINGTON Nov 25, 2005 (AP)— “Three years ago, Massachusetts congressmen Martin Meehan, Stephen Lynch and Edward Markey bucked their state Democratic colleagues and cast votes to give President Bush a green light to go to war in Iraq. ”

Chuckle.

No. Even one death in the furtherance of this immoral war would be too many. Why does there have to 59,000 american deaths before we can say they are dying in vain for a lie? You keep wanting to combine two separate issues and I won’t let you.

Now Bush is stuck on some ineffective course, unwilling to change it as our soldiers die, and each time one dies, it just points out exactly how incompetent Bush’s strategy (or lack of) is and how dishonest and unnecessary the invasion was in the first place.

John Edwards:

“Almost three years ago we went into Iraq to remove what we were told — and what many of us believed and argued — was a threat to America. But in fact we now know that Iraq did not have weapons of mass destruction when our forces invaded Iraq in 2003. The intelligence was deeply flawed and, in some cases, manipulated to fit a political agenda…

The argument for going to war with Iraq was based on intelligence that we now know was inaccurate. The information the American people were hearing from the president — and that I was being given by our intelligence community — wasn’t the whole story. Had I known this at the time, I never would have voted for this war…

George Bush won’t accept responsibility for his mistakes. Along with Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld, he has made horrible mistakes at almost every step: failed diplomacy; not going in with enough troops; not giving our forces the equipment they need; not having a plan for peace.”

Why is it, using your standards, statistics and sources we usually end up with the opposite of what you argue?

Hey Midder, talk to progressive John Edwards. He doesn’t call it a ‘compliance vote’. he doesn’t call it an ‘inspection vote’. He calls it a ‘war vote’. Wonder why???

And the military surely “accomplished their mission.”

When we asked for a sign of progress, we meant one favorable to us and our troops, not signs of progress favorable to Iran.

Dugger apparently forgets what congress was told by Bush. That he needed the authorization to go to war to force Hussein into inspections and compliance, all of which Bush got before he invaded anyway. In other words, most of those Democrats that you say supported the war, did so conditionally (conditions that were met so war was unnecessary) and never supported the war as Bush prosecuted it.

Have the Neocons been right in any aspects of the Iraq occupation? No. Met with flowers? no. Pay for itself? No. 6 months? No. Mission Accomplished? No. Milestone after Milestone? No. Their record speaks for itself. If you do horse races Dugger, do you bet on the horse that loses every race, who is going up against horses that have beaten it time and time again? Your wallet must be empty.

frame aid

“Dugger, if you could point to any sign of progress in Iraq”

which is what I did.

And I don’t vouch for your statistics, but to be complete, I argue we are safer since 9-11 and Bush, who tricked a whole bunch of evidently dumber Democrats in supporting a war they really didn’t want to support, gets the credit – like it or not.

And yes S, life and the ever-changing situation in the world is complex and very few of us can predict, relaibly, what will happen in Iraq, the mideast and the world five years now. If you have a way and can definitely prove the neocon’s projections wrong, would like to know about it. I need help on some horse races. Otherwise the arrogance and juvenile certainty seems a little misplaced. But if you can foretell the future and can prove it, I will apologize.