You are sooooo full of it that I don't know where to begin. Lets start with this, shall we?

There is no doubt that Iran is aggressively pursuing an uranium enrichment program whose only riason d'etre is the nuclear bomb. In fact by waging a brutal war of aggression on Iraq on the pretext that Iraq is on the verge of possessing the ABS weapons claim since disproved, the USA has provided legitimacy to every lawless regime to insure itself against the mindless American assault by brandishing nuclear weapons. In fact the non proliferation regime has now virtually collapsed due to US intervention.

This has got to be one of the most ignorant statements I've EVER heard, and shows just how much you don't think. If anything they should have learned that "brandishing" nuclear weapons is a "sure" fire way to bring the US down on their neck!

If anything they should have learned that "brandishing" nuclear weapons is a "sure" fire way to bring the US down on their neck!

Not if the left can help it.

This is almost too stupid to address.

In fact by waging a brutal war of aggression on Iraq on the pretext that Iraq is on the verge of possessing the ABS weapons claim since disproved, the USA has provided legitimacy to every lawless regime to insure itself against the mindless American assault by brandishing nuclear weapons. In fact the non proliferation regime has now virtually collapsed due to US intervention.

If anything they should have learned that "brandishing" nuclear weapons is a "sure" fire way to bring the US down on their neck!

Bahu, with your rationale, please explain Libya. Qaddafi almost pooed his pants when the US invaded Iraq. Since then, he has totally complied with non-proliferation people at the UN and rolled over for all the world to see. He was unswayed by the example of Iraq? He saw the writing on the wall, my friend.

Nice hack job on the statistics. Your average killed does not say over what period of time you arrived at that average. From the numbers you used, it appears to be over days. Not a very accurate way to judge the numbers of a 3 year campaign. Did you subtract those killed in accidents before arriving at your average killed as well?

Serbia was a plant in the media?

The U.S. brutal aggression? You mean as opposed to the war of aggression Al Qaeda in Iraq is waging on all Iraqis and Baath loyalists wage on Shiites (before and after the war)?

First, before launching attacks about others making things up, you should try to avoid making things up yourself. Second, unless you have a verifiable poll gauging the opinions of Iragis on the subjects you spoke on their behalf about or have been there and received their permission to speak on their behalf from the majority, don't speak on their behalf.

It continues to amaze me how far left and extremist thinkers do not see the folly of their accusations when they themseleves actually take their way of how the world should be to a higher level of forced behavior and thinking on the masses than those they oppose.

This has got to be one of the most ignorant statements I've EVER heard, and shows just how much you don't think. If anything they should have learned that "brandishing" nuclear weapons is a "sure" fire way to bring the US do

USA will not attack a nuclear power. See how it is pussy footing over North Korea which is probably closer to a nuclear bomb than Iran.

Bahu, with your rationale, please explain Libya. Qaddafi almost pooed his pants when the US invaded Iraq. Since then, he has totally complied with non-proliferation people at the UN and rolled over for all the world to see. He was unswayed by the example of Iraq? He saw the writing on the wall, my friend

The Col Gadaffi had his own reasons including the sanctions imposed for the Lockerbie bombing. And also the Col was in the market for what can be called a"dirty nuke" and did not aim to produce nuclear reactor fuel. So do not crow over the succes with the Col.

Nice hack job on the statistics. Your average killed does not say over what period of time you arrived at that average. From the numbers you used, it appears to be over days. Not a very accurate way to judge the numbers of a 3 year campaign

The figures include those killed on the line of fire including private civillian defence and security contractors. The US military only refers to the 2453 soldiers killed in Iraq. What about the non military civillian combatants. That figure has not been revealed because it is just shocking for words. The USa is privaising iots war in Iraq.

This has got to be one of the most ignorant statements I've EVER heard, and shows just how much you don't think. If anything they should have learned that "brandishing" nuclear weapons is a "sure" fire way to bring the US do USA will not attack a nuclear power. See how it is pussy footing over North Korea which is probably closer to a nuclear bomb than Iran

Saying this just shows your ignorance!

Col Gadaffi had his own reasons including the sanctions imposed for the Lockerbie bombing.

The sanctions over the bombing of Pam Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie in 1988 had nothing to do with it! Oh my goodness, are you that selectively blind? You have the ability to overlook the single most important factor in Libya's compliance?!
BBC News shows that the UN sanctions over Lockerbie began in 1992:
8 December 1991: A seven year wrangle over the suspects begins when Libya, concerned they would not receive a fair trial in Scotland, refuses to hand the men over. Libya maintains its stance despite the introduction of UN sanctions on air travel and arms sales in April 1992 and a tightening of sanctions in December 1993.

From the US Dept. of State's Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs regarding Libya:
In 1999, Libya fulfilled one of the UNSCR requirements by surrendering two Libyans suspected in connection with the bombing for trial before a Scottish court in the Netherlands. One of these suspects, Abdel Basset al-Megrahi, was found guilty; the other was acquitted. Al-Megrahi’s conviction was upheld on appeal in 2002. In August 2003, Libya fulfilled the remaining UNSCR requirements, including acceptance of responsibility for the actions of its officials and payment of appropriate compensation to the victims’ families. UN sanctions were lifted on September 12, 2003. U.S. International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA)-based sanctions were lifted September 20, 2004.

On December 19, 2003, Libya publicly announced its intention to rid itself of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR)-class missile programs. Since that time, it has cooperated with the U.S., the U.K., the International Atomic Energy Agency, and the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons toward these objectives. Libya has also signed the IAEA Additional Protocol and has become a State Party to the Chemical Weapons Convention.

You're actually saying that mere months after the invasion of Iraq, when Qaddafi finally succumbed to international political pressure and turned over the keys to his chem and bio facilities (I never said he was developing nukes), it wasn't the images of the toppled Iraq and the in-hiding Saddam that finally did it for Moammar? It was the heretofore only slightly effective UN sanctions that made him roll over and play nice with the rest of the world?

While Qaddafi may have made steps to bring the terrorists to justice before the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan, I put it to you that it was the fall of Saddam Hussein that made Moammar Qaddafi see the light.

Nice hack job on the statistics. Your average killed does not say over what period of time you arrived at that average. From the numbers you used, it appears to be over days. Not a very accurate way to judge the numbers of a 3 year campaign The figures include those killed on the line of fire including private civillian defence and security contractors. The US military only refers to the 2453 soldiers killed in Iraq. What about the non military civillian combatants. That figure has not been revealed because it is just shocking for words. The USa is privaising iots war in Iraq.

Do you "really" have that much trouble comprehending what you read? Lets start with the number of US troops. I do not know where you are getting your figures but, they are wrong. The number is 2238 as of Jan 8th, 2006. As far as the civilian contractors go....conservative estimates put them at 500. Not quite the shocking figure you'd have us believe is it?

Bahu - "The figures include those killed on the line of fire including private civillian defence and security contractors. The US military only refers to the 2453 soldiers killed in Iraq. What about the non military civillian combatants"

And I quote your first post on this - "average mortality rate has increased to 7.5 soldiers per day"

You can't alter what you said just because you got caught intentionally skewing the statistics for dramatic effect. If you were stating statistics for all deaths, including civilian, then you should have said that. You still misrepresented the numbers to make them fit your view. I would still want to see your time period you base this on, including civilian contractors.