There is no nuance to take when were drone striking innocent families which is what our conversation was regarding. I
So civilians in the middle east were more deserving of harm than our soldiers were? If they wanted funding they shouldn't have carried out an illegal war.
That's the thing you aren't getting though, those who voted against the war but for funding were the ones trying to fulfill our obligations to the troops and the people of Iraq by not leaving them with a country in disrepair and instability. Blame those who decided to go in (with no plan at that) not those who were forced to fix the screw up.
In fact, if U.S truly wanted to ensure we (U.S and Iraq citizens)came out of it better, more funding and a significantly higher occupational force was necessary.
Again, dont blame those who as Samoyed said, tried help get the water out of a sinking boat that they were forced on.
Invading Iraq in the first place was illegal, our presence there brought more harm than good, and I was referring to your egregious stance on drone strikes that posited they are not a pressing issue for us.
The 2008 collapse then resulted in a slow death rather than a catalyst of change where the same people kept their jobs and are seeing weaker regulation beings stripped away like Frank Dodd which is only going to give us a repeat of last time.
Oooh, okay I think I know what post of his your talking about, I will leave him to respond to that bit.
I will respond to your criticism of the bailouts though. I understand where you are coming from, but you must understand that doing nothing meant an economic depression.
The goal shouldn't be retribution, it should be about trying to prevent it from happening again. Though i wouldn't mind if a lot of those people went to join or had assets taken, I am not well knowledgeable of any actual laws being violated since a lot of the regulations were removed.