And YOU failed to mention that John McCain expanded upon his remarks within the same question saying it wouldn't matter how long troops were there so long as they weren't being shot at.


You continue to repeat the "War continuing for 100 years in Iraq" lie, and YOU tell ME to be accurate? What a laugh! This, of course, being precisely the reason I told Aus22 it was a waste of effort to remind anyone of what John McCain actually said, because the lunatic left will continue to pretend McCain said he had no problem with the war in Iraq continuing for 100 years. And McCain never said that. He never said it. He never said it. He never said it.

He never said that. But you continue to lie about about that. And why? Probably because your audience doesn't know any better. The conservatives around here do. But apparently your audience, primarily liberal Democrats, doesn't know any better.

What was the name of that book? Oh yeah:

It's okay for American troops to be in Iraq as long as they're not being shot at? What the hell....??

Why would it be okay? And with whom, besides McCain?

Would it be okay to have some peaceful, uniformed Iraqi troops walking around Little Rock with weapons? Would that be okay?

I guess it would be OK with the same people who think it's OK for American troops to be in Germany not getting shot at.


Good heavens! Are American troops walking around Dusseldorf in uniform, armed?!? Oh wait! I get it. This is another one of your apples and oranges arguments. Hahaha. Oh, you silly, silly Dax. What a card!

Okay, let's remove the weapons and keep them in the Iraqi armory in Little Rock, and just let the Iraqi soldiers move about the town. Just in case someone might threaten us, then they'd be there to help us defend ourelves. What say? C'mon.

I guess my real question is, would you like to see foreign troops in an American city?

And no, I don't think the troops in Dusseldorf are armed in public too much, unless they are military police, or conducting exercises, or travelling in a convoy or, you know, things like that.

I might, depending upon why they are there. What are foreign troops doing in Little Rock?

He also said the hundred year timeline would be fine as long as Americans were not dieing and things were stable. So, I suggest you take your advise and be accurate too...

Ray, thanks at last answering part of my question.You claim that
I think there is more to this than just speaking to the pupett government. It is obvious that the Americans have spoken also to Sunni leaders who have suspended their campaign against the Shiete dominated goverment. To me this is veryt similar to Henrey kissinger meeting the North Vietnamese ignoring the so called duly elected Diem government of South Vietnam.

Your statements may be true. If so it just shows we can not take most notice of what Bush or the pupett government says. The only people who will decide the future are the two Presidental candidates and the strongest forces in Iraq .Whether Mc Cain meant a centutuy he certainly has not been honest with his plans for Iraq.

It is true that there are Allied forces are in Germany and Korea. However in Korea at least they are very unpopular. Koreans want unity not a cold war division and are moving in this direction.

Americans have become unpopular in most of Asia not because they carry arms but because of their atitude in the countries. You don't need arms to visit a brothel but you can still be as unpopular.

Oh God, I hope they're here to bring us democracy!

Yes, I'm well aware of that, my question then becomes why would we be in a peaceful Iraq for a hundred years when our stated goal was/is to stabilize the government and leave?

Maybe it's the Embassy. That's it, the billion dollar Embassy, isn't it?

The Germany-Korea argument falls apart because we are there with the permission and cooperation of the governments of the countries in question.

If the German government, or the government of S. Korea asked us to leave, we would.

The same doesn't hold true for Iraq.