Joe from Kokomo wrote:

Beam Me Up Scotty wrote:

NATO was to hit Afghanistan and leave us able to stomp Saddam into the
sand, NATO failed while We the USA succeeded, Iraq was beaten and
Afghanistan was a multinational failure.

Joe from Kokomo wrote:

Huh? "Iraq was beaten" you say?

Eight years later and we are still in Iraq and still pouring billions
per month down that rat hole. If you define that as "winning", I sure
would hate to see what you call losing.

Next thing you know, you'll be telling us "Mission accomplished!".

Beam Me Up Scotty wrote:

Is Saddam in power and shooting at our Jets? NO ?

We won.

Well, maybe we "won" by your definition, but...

-Are we still there after eight long years. YES!
-Is American blood still being spilled? YES!
-Are we still pouring HUNDREDS of BILLIONS into a bottomless pit? YES!
-Do we have young men and women suffering as amputees and from PSD for
the rest of their lives? YES!



WE are still in Japan and Germany 70 years after we beat the living ****
out of them.... Total and unconditional surrender.

Still being there is hardly a defining point of winning.

But leaving is up to the Generals.