So the ranking of best cities in the world is out. What do you think of U.S. ranks and impact on Baghdad?

The report on best cities to live in, in the world shows Switzerland and Canada as having the highest rankings, while the U.S. has Honalulu at 27th place being the first U.S. city ranked on the list, and Baghdad is the lowest.

Most people would focus on the Best cities to live in and not really thinking so much about the worst - If Baghdad is the lowest ranked, doesn't that tell us that the U.S. (after 4 years) is doing a most terrible job of having any positive effect there?

If your barometer of how well a country is doing in a war is a magazine rating on the best places to live you have no clue what is going on.

First question you need to ask is. Where was Baghdad in 2002? I doubt it was in the top 10.

My point is, if they were say 195 out of 200 and they are now 200, we didn't make a big difference. Any place there is war, will not be a good place to live, I don't think cities in Darfur are good places either, nor Cehchnya, or any other place with conflicts. I don't think Stalingrad was a good place to live in the early 1940's, it is because of war. You know what, the Russians won, so because it isn't a good place to live now doesn't mean that it won't be a better place than it was before 5 years from now.
Gunslinger....so you think they were lower than last before we went in there? How is that possible? This ranking must have been done by the liberal media.....lol