Saturday, July 19th 2008
Firefox 3 Release & Stardock Site Compatibility
Jul 30, 2008 12:59

Firefox 3.0 goes final and is scheduled for release on Tuesday, June 17th.

There are currently known incompatibilities between Firefox 3 and many of our sites and forums. For the most part, the sites function properly, but have formatting issues. A specific example are the login & password fields to log into these forums. In Firefox 3, instead of both being on the same line, they are stacked vertically.

We will be addressing these visual issues in time. Please do NOT post threads on the forums pointing out Firefox 3 site issues. They will be deleted. We are aware of the problems and will work as quickly as we can to resolve them.

Until posted otherwise, the only version of Firefox our sites support at the moment is Firefox 2.

Reasons for staying in Iraq until America wins.

By Posted May 11, 2008 13:39:24

As the title says I will give several reasons why we should stay in Iraq until we win.

Reason 1: We have already put many resources into Iraq. Be money, oil, lives. This war has cost us alot, so why not see a return in this investement.

Reason 2: If we pull out before we can secure Iraq what do think is going happen? Total choas, the conquest of South Vietnam will not compare to what will happen to Iraq with the excutations, warlords, and just everything going to hell. you think the civilian casualty rate is bad now? It will be nothing compared to what will happen if we pull out now.

Reason 3: We are making progress in this war, the troop surge and the awaking movement made by some sunni tribes has pushed down attacks, and we are forcing the terriosts to make more drastic action. A example would be using mentaly disabled people in sucide attacks.

Reason 4: the Iraq goverment and military are shaping up. The Iraq prime misters recent stance agaisnt Al-sadher and the militaeas has shown growing confidence. I will amit that the Iraq paralment is pretty incapale of making a decison and that the military kind of fell apart when facing of agaisnt the militaes.

Reason 5: The U.S army is getting more bold with its operations. If you read the news you would have seen that the U.S army has started making moves against the city of Mosul, thouht to be the last urban stronghold of Sunni militants loyal to Al-queda in Iraq.

that is all the reasons I can come up with for right now. I will update it with new info when I can, also sorry for the spelling errors. 

0 Karma 8 Replies 4 Referrals
May 15, 2008 08:42:49
No need to update anything you listed more than enough good reasons to stay. The question is, will the next president agree with you?
May 18, 2008 03:16:45

there is just some flaws in your reasons and allow me to say my side...

1. you wont see a return on this investment...our economy is showing it

2. leaving a good thing save our resources and allow the un to adjust the mess  - we ay the un alot of money time they use it

3. there is no progress learn your history the people there will never fold and give up historical fact we are only wasting time and money and lives for nothing

4. as soon we leave in any way what will happen iran will take control reguardless

5. the army is hurting soldiers commiting suicide alot are dying for no reason.

to sum all things up... if bush would of listened to our founding fathers then this would of not happened . remeber iraq had NOTHING to do with 911 second our fathers have stated and i quote "the united states is not and shall not ever occupy or control and foreign lands" we are not occupiers but bush is doing it. and last we wont go into the geneva conventions  ..... remeber the words all treaties and law of the land and bush broke how many of geneva convention laws also he used torture which fathers said again we will not use and the united states is to keep out of others bussiness.

May 18, 2008 12:56:24
1. you wont see a return on this investment...our economy is showing it


We invested billions of dollars rebuilding all of Europe and people said the same thing back then. Yet we have seen that return on our investment many fold. Every time it has been tried it has worked, and every time we hear the same crap that it won’t work, what makes you think that it won’t work this time?

2. leaving a good thing save our resources and allow the un to adjust the mess - we ay the un alot of money time they use it


You’re kidding right? Name one mess the UN has fixed? Let’s see if I remember correctly. In 1950 North Korea invaded the south and the UN sent in peace keepers. When china entered the war the UN got gutless and called for an armistice. That war is still going on 58 years later and America is stuck there defending the peninsula by its self under UN mandate. We have our people being killed on a regular basis there but you don’t seem to care about that do you? I was wounded there in the 70’s while deactivating an IED my partner was turned into air pollution. Remember the Blackhawk down situation? That was another UN mandate. Was it ever resolved? No we left there with our tails between our legs because Al Qaeda set a trap for us and the president ran away proving that when we get hurt we run away. Where was the UN to fix that mess? How about Bosnia? Wait that was UN and NATO, we are still getting our people killed there do you care? When Mr. Carter was president we lost 20 thousand troops in his four years as a peace time president. Yet Mr. Carter is called a man of peace. Mr. Bush has been president for 7 years and we have lost less than 5 thousand in a war that the opposition said would take 10 thousand deaths the first day. If you want to save resources then how about we pull our troops out of Korea, Japan, Italy, Spain, and Germany? We have over 2 million troops in the US military.

3. there is no progress learn your history the people there will never fold and give up historical fact we are only wasting time and money and lives for nothing


People like you have said the same exact thing during the civil war, Spanish American war, WWI, WWII, Korean War, Vietnam war, the Gulf war, and the war on terror. Each war we have won and two that we have won we ended up losing because of the naysayers.
Add to that the sayings that the people don’t want to be free, can’t handle freedom, and would prefer living under a dictatorship. Sound familiar? It is what was said when we freed German, Italy, and Japan from dictators. Also we have the naysayers telling us that we can’t beat the Soviet Union because they are too big and they have the Bomb, yet we defeated them, it took 40 years to do it because of the naysayers but we did it. We have done something no on had ever done we defeated the nation of Afghanistan with military force. The British, and the Soviet Union both failed to do that. Yet you say we are failing.

4. as soon we leave in any way what will happen iran will take control reguardless


They can only take control if we leave a weak Iraq behind. This is going to take years just like it did in Germany and Japan. Back then we had the USSR dipping its fingers in to slow progress in this case we have Iran. What is the difference? Iran does not have the bomb and their troops are not able to fight us and their people don’t want to fight us. This means that if we do in Iraq what we did in Germany and Japan we will not have to go to war with Iran. If we leave we will. So your solution is we pull out let Iran take over let Iran get nuclear weapons and then when they threaten Israel and or the United States directly then go back and fight a bloodier war. This does not save our troops it endangers more of them. It also endangers us at home. Not too wise a choice.

5. the army is hurting soldiers commiting suicide alot are dying for no reason.


When I was active duty during the Carter administration we lost 20 thousand people in four years of peace. Look at the numbers and tell me that we were better off with an appeaser as president. The army is not hurting as you say we have 2 million troops of which less than an eighth are involved in the war. We are sending in our second stringers in to do the fighting because the enemy is not up to the task of dealing with our first string troops. Just so you know, we have three lines of warriors. Active duty, active reserve, and inactive reserve. We are currently using our active reserves with some active duty people. That is two million active duty, three million active reserves, and then the bottom of the barrel the inactive reserves which is anyone that served that is under age 68. Can you guess at how many people that is? So no we are not hurting and won’t be since recruitment is up, retention is up so we are not losing troops like we have been told.

if bush would of listened to our founding fathers then this would of not happened .


Oh please tell me what our founding fathers said that would have stopped the war that started in 1996? Remember Al Qaeda declared war on us when Mr. Clinton was president.

remeber iraq had NOTHING to do with 911


Who said that Iraq had anything to do with the attacks on 9/11? I remember President Bush in his address to congress that any nation that supported, harbored, or aided terrorist would be treated as a terrorist state. People on both sides of the isle stood and applauded showing a united front. The result of that was from that point on all those bad guys started tripping over themselves giving us aid and intelligence except Iraq. Iraq who publicly provided money and aid to terrorist around the world, said he would give his weapons of mass destruction to any terrorist that would use them on Israel and or the United States. Then he gave safe harbor to terrorist wounded in Afghanistan while we were fighting there. This information was not secret he made public broadcasts stating this. Sounds like he violated the Bush Doctrine to me, if he did not wish to be attacked he could have let the UN inspectors in to finish the job as he promised he would. He could have denied wounded terrorist access to his hospitals and his country.

What caused Iran to stop giving us aid was our own opposition party showing the world we are a nation divided. Then Iran began to go back to its old ways of messing with every nation in the region. Since the democrats have opposed our president Iran now controls Syria, and Lebanon and is funding terrorist again. We show weakness and they fill the void.

second our fathers have stated and i quote "the united states is not and shall not ever occupy or control and foreign lands


Our founding fathers said this? Wow you should tell someone about that. Does this mean that the land we took in the Spanish American war was illegal? We have to give back Guantanamo bay to the Spanish since it was taken from Spain along with the Philippines. How about our occupation of the Philippines before WWI and Germany, Italy, Japan, France, Spain, and Korea after WWII or our re-occupation of Korea by UN mandate, or our occupation of Vietnam no one noticed in the last hundred years we were breaking the law? Or is it that you wish to see it as breaking the law when it suits you?

we are not occupiers but bush is doing it. and last we wont go into the geneva conventions


Legally he can’t use the Geneva Conventions because they are written for war with other nations not terrorist. According to the conventions if a combatant is not wearing the uniform of his nation he can be shot on sight as a spy or saboteur. There are no provisions in the conventions that deal with terrorist or stateless persons. Terrorist and spies are specifically excluded from the conventions to prevent a gorilla war. If you are not in uniform then you have no rights on the battle field. Try reading them. At least once a year every service member must take 6 hours of classes on the laws and rules of war. If Al Qaeda wants to be covered by the conventions all they need to do is form a nation, declare war, and wait for us to respond. The reason they don’t do this is because once they have a piece of land to call their own it will be a smoking crater, the only chance they have is to fight a gorilla war with us. Gorilla warriors also known as terrorist are not sanctioned by the Geneva Conventions. By international laws and agreements any terrorist is a non person with no rights. We may legally do with them what we want.

remeber the words all treaties and law of the land and bush broke how many of geneva convention laws


According to what I know of the laws of warfare he broke none of them. Can you list any?

also he used torture which fathers said again we will not use and the united states is to keep out of others bussiness.


I love history but I seem to have missed this in the founding documents please tell me where I might be able to see them. It is against the Geneva Conventions to torture any soldier of any nation during a time of war. Since AQ is not a nation it is not covered by the conventions. I don’t see you complaining about the torture done to our people, or is cutting off heads of captive Americans okay with you?
May 18, 2008 13:09:51
we are not occupiers but bush is doing it.


Sorry I forgot this little one. If what you say is true then we have to go back to the original 13 states plus the land purchased as our nation and give back the rest. Let’s see the Louisiana Purchase, and Alaska were bought and paid for. The rest was done by occupation. We have to give back everything west of the Adirondack mountain range we took Florida from Spain so we would lose that as well. I think that gives the United States of America a total of 17 maybe 18 states, the rest belong to native Americans, Canada, Mexico, France, Great Briton, and Spain. Or is this one of those deals where you oppose it only partially? When it is inconvenient for you then it is okay to occupy a nation but when it is convenient for you then it is illegal?
May 18, 2008 13:37:38
why we should stay in Iraq until we win.


I thought Emperor Dubya already won?



But wait . . . 'Mission Accomplished isn't what that really means, is it?

May 18, 2008 14:03:39
But wait . . . 'Mission Accomplished isn't what that really means, is it?


Nice try. At the end of a successful deployment the people are told that they accomplished their mission well. It is normal for a celebration of some sort and the sign in the background is part of that. Did the president mind that it was there? I seriously doubt it. Just remember that he gave this speech to the men and women of the carrier and to the nation. He never said the war was over just offensive fighting was over. The mission accomplished was for the people of that task force. Now if you wish to set up a straw dog argument that he was meaning that for the entire nation or the world then you are going to have a hard time proving it with those silly things called facts.
May 22, 2008 16:06:40
No need to update anything you listed more than enough good reasons to stay. The question is, will the next president agree with you?


Depends. If it is Mcain then yes. Obama then no.
May 22, 2008 16:12:00
To be perfectly honest, something like this was probally going to happen. Humans are aggresive and sometimes we need to vent. Some were along the line there was going to be some FF (Fulda Fucktard) how is pissed of that he spent his nard drop years training for a war that never happend (Cold War) and decide that we need to fight some were to so are might. If not in Iraq than probally Lebanon, or some African country.
Stardock Forums v1.5.3112.18688
© 1995-2008 Stardock Corporation. All rights reserved.
All times are EST. The time is now 03:09:50
Server Load Time: 00:00:00   Page Render Time:
Copyright © 2008 Stardock Corporation. All Rights Reserved.