Elaborate.

[You seem to like that word]

I gave him the response he deserved. He gave me one freaking word. I should have responded in kind, but I was actually generous and gave him TWO words! He should be grateful I didnt respond with a simple "NO"!

Also, Im not very fond of reiterating things Ive already explained in detail.

OK...so 2 words is classified as "in detail".

Thankyou for your elaborate response to my request.  It shows the exact degree of articulate experiential learning and profound understanding of world affairs we all have come to know and love from Internet intercourse.

Perhaps you'd like to elaborate just how Iraq was improved by being invaded. I'm not fond of the place, but after so many casualties:

"In the United States, the cultural “gold standard,” as Andrew Bacevich has put it, for the

casualties that matter is the US uniformed soldier, killed in action. That number for Iraq

and Afghanistan, 6,051, is relatively small as America’s wars–or anyone’s wars, for that

matter–go: over 53,000 US soldiers died in the Korean War, and 405,000 in World War

II. But that small number is the result, one could argue, of the increasing emphasis over

the years on force protection, cost containment, and of the extent to which other allied

forces have fought, died, and been wounded alongside Americans. Force protection

efforts have kept down the number of US soldier deaths at the expense of higher numbers

of civilian deaths and injuries and, perhaps as well, of a more drawn out war with more

insecurity and violence. Cost containment efforts have led to the privatization of many

functions previously performed by soldiers and so high death and wounding rates among

the contractors who do those jobs, and much higher proportions of non-citizens doing that

work and taking the risk.

The Afghan, Iraqi, and other allied military deaths and injuries have been extensive. By

conservative estimate, nearly 20,000 of these troops have died, and over 68,000 have

been wounded. Together with the US numbers for troops and contractors of 8,000 dead

and 150,000 wounded, the total grinds up to 28,000 dead and 218,000 wounded,

officially or by conservative estimate.The true numbers are significantly higher.

Considering that many TBI, mental injuries, and toxic exposures in all the troops and

contractors involved are not symptomatic or diagnosed until return home, the actual

wounded figure is likely at least double the official 218,000.

More than twice as many Americans have died as a result of taking the country to war

after 9/11 as died on that day. The U.S. wounded of these wars – in uniform and out –

now number in the hundreds of thousands." - http://costsofwar.org/sites/default/files/articles/11/attachments/Lutz%20US%20and%20Coalition%20Casualties.pdf

I can only conclude that this (Afghanistan, Iraq especially) was a colossal waste of humans. Moreover, it was based on lies, misunderstandings and ignorance.

Those figures above were generated by closely watched and documented Allied sources. Even then, you can probably double those numbers as suggested above.

G-d only knows how many Iraqis were killed and injured by us and the various insurgencies.

So, again: No, it wasn't worth it. No country is "improved/bettered" by that kind of carnage.

Again, I regret no "Prime Directive" exists.

I especially regret that the ones who declare and cause the various wars aren't forced to lead the troops into those wars as well as those who lead the industries and economies into those wars... To bad they are so very far from the hell they unleash, hiding behind their "principles, ideologies and 'need' for them to be at home, leading others".

And now MASSIVE amounts of money is being spent on Drone development/implementation ....so we can all play Call Of Duty and do real Killing from the armchair.

Even better than snuff movies.

Look guys, if the good old USofA and Isreal can launch a *pause for effect* cyber attack against Iran's nuclear refining plant then Anonymous won't pose much of a threat to national security.  But hey what do I know??

I'd be interested to know the average GDP as it changed from before the Gulf War, to the end of the Gulf War, to the Iraq War's beginning, to today.

Ah, but whose?  Iraq's or USA's ? ...

Hard to say... GDP was severely affected by sanctions and war... starting way back in the 80's, 90's with the war with Iran. Then came recovery followed by sanctions and 2 wars (Desert Storm, Iraqi Freedom) and recvering very slowly as their infrastructure is not good.

As ive indicated to Jafo, Ive already explained this. I suppose Ill just have to do it again though. Mainly weve brought democracy, taken the power from the dictatorship government and given the people the means to govern themselves. In the end whatever loss or destruction resulted was worth its outcome. Due to this democracy many things are beginning to improve there. Quality of life is increasing and people are generally happier. Minimum wage (if Im not mistaken) public schools, etc.

I think Im just about done with these forums (or this thread at least). Anyways, please explain lies, misunderstandings, "colossal waste of humans", etc. And no, you did not already explain it otherwise I would not be asking.

And likewise you can double the figures of people who died during WW2 and such. Furthermore body counts have always been exaggerated by reporters to be "underexaggerated". Id say body counts are more or less 90% accurate. The ten percent that arent accounted for are the bodies that have been blown apart, taken, etc. How many bodies get taken or blown apart after all?

If you dont want to take his name in vain thats cool or whatever, but if your gonna do that then you might as well spell the whole thing.

So by definition, the US shouldnt have entered WW2 either? Sorry friend but youre lost.

Strawman?