@mx5 kris
These facts you have stated are true. But this is because they are a new Goverment.
No, it is because of mismanagement of this war and a burgeoning insurgency that the war in Iraq is failing.
Look, the same happend in the us when we had the revolutionary war. Econo0my at a low, and starvation
I can find no evidence of either of these conditions being true because of the American Revolution. Please cite your sources.
There was not enough food and clothes, so starvation was the cause.
This was true only for some in our fledgling militia, not the general populace.
The french revolution. Starvation and death.
I haven't found any evidence for this at all. Please cite your sources.
This is a natural fact. Economy will perk when the new goverment is in, and Iraq is in order.
There in lies the key.
If Iraq gets order the economy
could perk. But there is little sign of that occuring anytime soon. You also haven't really bothered to read any of my links. Thanks to a lack of any protectionist trade policies the Iraqis are being forced to compete with foreign investors who have
way more economic clout then they do. The result is obsurdly low prices with the Iraqis just unable to compete. Couple this with foreign investors allowed to buy Iraqi industries with
40 year ownership leases and you have yourself a recipe for economic hardship that will last for many years to come.
This has always been. Afghanastan is the same.
Errr...you haven't actually looked at Afghanistan have you?
It would go faster, as more nations will finally realise we have protected them, and in that they will finally help us.
Tell that to the Spanish who had their own little 9/11 not too long ago.
Kid, you need to join reality here. We have not made the world safer. Terrorist attacks have increased. Anti-Americanism as at an all time high throughout the entire world.
Without us germany would falter, infact the european economy will falter.
Without germany/EU our economy would collapse.
Soon these countries will realise to help us, in economy and all, that is the only way to have economy and military. If our economy falls-your guys's are not going to get better. If our army falls-you guys are screwed.
You seem to be laboring under the impression that europe doesn't have an army. You are wrong. They do.
Fact is, we have our roots in you, so by the end you guys will end up fighting with us.
I'm sorry if this offends you, but that is hopelessly naive. They are not going to come running to our aid anytime soon.
We will open trade, but by that time, bush not president.
We already have opened trade. That is part of the problem. Read the links.
Hopefully we will have a more economically strong republican in office the next 4 after bush.
Or better yet. An economically strong democrat.
*sigh*
How I long for the good ole Clinton years.
Understand that logically, many people there are skeptic. Have they had democracy for years though? No. They do not know how it works, so they do not realise democracy yet.
And yet, this didn't stop you from proclaiming earlier "Economy will perk when the new goverment is in, and Iraq is in order." You seem to believe that the new government will bring prosperity, but you don't think the Iraqis can handle the new government. Why the contradiction in your views?
@Mouse
I knew you were as excited about Ashcroft leaving as I was, but it appears he will be replaced by someone just as bad.
Quote: " Gonzales drew criticism after the terrorist attacks in 2001 when he wrote a memo in which Bush claimed the right to waive anti-torture law and international treaties providing protections to prisoners of war. That position drew fire from human rights groups, who said it helped lead to the type of abuses uncovered in the Abu Ghraib prison scandal.
Specifically, Gonzales' memo said the Geneva Convention that had long governed the treatment of prisoners did not apply to al-Qaida or the war in Afghanistan. The memo said some of the Geneva Convention's provisions were "quaint."
Gonzales also has defended the administration's policy — essentially repudiated by the Supreme Court and now being fought out in the lower courts — of detaining certain terrorism suspects for extended periods without access to lawyers or courts."
However, it appears that some people don't exactly think he is all that bad.
Quote: "Two Senate Democrats normally critical of Ashcroft — one of the most powerful and polarizing members of Bush's Cabinet — sent positive signals about Gonzales' future on Wednesday.
"It's encouraging that the president has chosen someone less polarizing," said Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y. "We will have to review his record very carefully but I can tell you already he's a better candidate than John Ashcroft.""
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&u=/ap/20041111/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/bush_cabinet
Of course, a blind chimp could be better than Ashcroft, but I don't share Schumer's optimism. This guy worked to get torture legalized in this country. I don't find him much better than Ashcroft at all.
