Re: Like I said, another layer of excuses.

Iraq did NOT use nuke/chem/bio.
Iraqi troops ARE fighting from within cities instead of in the open.
The US is killing civilians.

1. The war is not over (it actually began with Desert Storm, this has been a cease-fire), so all you can claim is WMD have not been used YET.
2. I never heard anyone say all the fighting would be out in the open. I fully expected the troops (the ones that have a death wish to fight) would pull into civilian districts out of cowardice. If they are willing to die, then let them die...not take civilians with them.
3. Never heard a claim that civilians wouldn't be killed. An effort would be made to keep the casualties to an absolute minimum, but it gets difficult when civilians are being herded into military installations and troops are sitting tanks in between apartment buildings.

The reason you have to layer on excuse after excuse after excuse is because you are starting with FALSE ASSUMPTIONS.

Therefore, you have to provide a SPECIAL CASE for each and every example.

When every example is a special case, the likelyhood is that your basis is flawed.

I'm not sure what excuses you are referring to. Is your definition of an excuse something like "relating facts and opinion counter to my godlike prediction capabilities"?

Well, I like examples. Everything is a special case. You like examples too, when they support your opinion. What false assumption did this thread start on?

1. The war is not over (it actually began with Desert Storm, this has been a cease-fire), so all you can claim is WMD have not been used YET.

And I will predict that they will NOT be used.

You are free to predict that they WILL be used.

Although, at this point, I understand your reluctance to do so.

2. I never heard anyone say all the fighting would be out in the open. I fully expected the troops (the ones that have a death wish to fight) would pull into civilian districts out of cowardice. If they are willing to die, then let them die...not take civilians with them.

It isn't "cowardice". If they are in the open, they will die from our long range weapons. I'm sure that if it came down to hand-to-hand combat, they'd be happy to take on our troops. Or do you think our troops were "cowards" in the first Gulf War because we wouldn't do mass charges at their dug in positions and, instead, bombed them?

3. Never heard a claim that civilians wouldn't be killed. An effort would be made to keep the casualties to an absolute minimum, but it gets difficult when civilians are being herded into military installations and troops are sitting tanks in between apartment buildings.

Ummm, you really don't understand modern urban combat, do you? We are taking CITIES. The troops and equipment will be INSIDE those cities.

Again, you can come up with all the excuses you need to "correct" your position.

We are invading Iraq. The Iraqi military will dig into civilian areas and we will have to kill LOTS of civilians to get them out.

Which is what I predicted.

You make excuses about how it is the fault of the Iraqi troops that they don't stay in the open so we can kill them at long range and "Free" Iraq without losing any of our troops.

I'm not sure what excuses you are referring to.

The excuses you keep giving. The defenders need good commo or they'll lose. Excuse: except in Vietnam because our leaders didn't want total victory. Excuse: except in Afghanistan where they had bad commo and our leaders wanted total victory because it wasn't really a "war".

Those excuses.

Is your definition of an excuse something like "relating facts and opinion counter to my godlike prediction capabilities"?

Nope. An "excuse" is an "excuse" you give AFTER the fact because something didn't work out the way you said it would.

Well, I like examples. Everything is a special case.

No. Everything is NOT a special case.

That is the reason I am able to predict the future with such amazing accuracy and you have to retreat to excuses.

What false assumption did this thread start on?

Here's a [link|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=90895|link] to one of your posts in this thread where you start with a false assumption (that Iraq has nuke/chem/bio weapons) and then you layer on the excuses as to why such have not been found or used.

Welcome to IWETHEY!