Alde,
I respect your point of view, though I doubt you respect mine. There’s no point in debating this. We just have to agree to disagree.
To me, one of the bigger cock-ups was Rumsfled’s trimming down the size of the force sent into Iraq in order to prove the Revolution in Military Affairs. Two divisions charging hell bent for leather at Baghdad worked to win the war, but the hope that they would be enough to provide post war (if that is really even where were at) security was foolhardy. The idea that technology will mean fewer asses in the grass will be needed reminds me of McNamara and the Whiz Kids.
Alde,
Don’t Forget The Prince of Darkness himself, Perle.
UY,
Do you honestly believe that Hussein made us bomb Iraq?
ummm… yeahh…,
Put down the flag for a second. “Domination” isn’t the point. It was an illegal and unproked invasion. “Dominating” doesn’t make it right. We were lied to about the reasons for the invasion and it’s becoming more and more obvious every day that the real reasons were just as Aldebaran described them.
Now we have an average of a soldier a day being killed in an unwinnable guerilla war, your “president” is urging the attackers to kill more Americans and those kids who are still out there ducking sniper fire (many of whom have already been lied to multiple times about when they’re coming home) are not going to be inspired by the pointless jingoism espoused in your posts.
The point of the OP is that daily American casualties will not be tolerated forever by the public (unfortunately, the American public never seems to give a shit about civilian casualties on the other side). Eventually Shrub is going to have to stop the bleeding or he’s going to be out on his ass next year. His approval ratings are already dropping like a turd in a well. The economy sucks, the whole world hates us, everybody knows he’s a liar and 20 year old kids keep getting the tops of their heads blown off. They’re not defending America they’re defending fucking Haliburton. It’s an unacceptable loss of life. Us killing lots and lots of them doesn’t make it any more acceptable.
astor,
They weren’t WAGs. They were intentional misrepresentations deliberately concocted by the Office of Special Plans. One of the groups heads, Feith, mentions that they couldn’t call it the Iraq Planning Office for political reasons- it was formed oct 2001. It was formed to link Iraq to al Qaeda and 9/11.
The campaign of “not-lies” was deliberate attempt to manipulate public opinion- manufacture consent as it were.
Okay.
I am a liberal. I opposed this war, and these casualties make me continue to agree with my opinion. I feel very sad for the families of these people, and wish they had never been put in this position.
But those troops had dang better well STAY there, and we probably should send more in. We put ourselves and the Iraqis into this position, we need to stablize the country and get things somewhat running again. If we get cold feet, and withdraw our troops, it WILL be a disaster for many, many years to come.
I’m not convinced that it bob up again like a turd in a punch bowl.
But yes, the price of something is only relevant in relation to its value. Since there doesn’t seem to be much good in this foreign “policy venture” coming to the US it seems easy to say that one American soldier’s life is too steep a price. The threat from Hussein was hypothetical. The invasion increased the pools of potential terorists.
The whole securing resources in our national interest is an interesting but flightless proposition. Consider that we’re in this for the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars. For 100 bil we could’ve given 1000 universities grants and endowments of 100 mil to research petro substitutes. Surely this would’v produced some viable alternatives. In addition to being freed from the economic, political and strategic pressures of international petro market, we’d be well positioned for the transition to the next energy economy.
Damn Fool War [sup]TM[/sup]!
Ummm…
That should be:
I’m not convinced that they won’t bob up again like turds in a punch bowl.
Any deaths at all. American or Iraqi would have been to high a price to pay for this god forsaken war.
What gets me is they insist that all the attacks can be attributed to the old Regime and criminals.
Bull excrement.
Ask the Iragi on the street about how they view revenge.
Astro, one thing you have to remember, the islamo-fascists have at least done their homework. The idea is simple, and logical. Virtually nobody can win against US forces in a stand-up, knock-down conflict. The idea is to exact enough deaths and casualties via sniping and guerilla activity to sway public opinion and political pressure to bring the boys home. This is what happened in Somalia.
It’s horrible, as war always is. But rest assured, the enemy is taking it up the ass a thousand times worse - that just doesn’t make it in the news. They are getting their clock cleaned, it’s a dirty job that nobody wants to do, and even fewer acknowledge the necessity of, in spite of the apalling atrocities in recent years perpetrated against Americans and our interests. All this, even from a country that sends our single mothers into combat, while emasculated “men” whimper in relative safety at home about so-called war crimes. It’s a strange world we live in. Take heed, and ignore the usual suspects, they are part of the problem.
What is the necessity of invading Iraq?
What does Iraq have to do with what “apalling atrocities in recent years perpetrated against Americans and our interests”?
The CIA said that going into Iraq will increase th elikelihood of banned weapons getting into the hands of terrorists and increase th epools of potential terrorists.
What intel estimates do you have that’re better than the CIA’s?
Tedster,
So you consider people who defend their country against murdering invaders “islamo-fascists”?
Interesting observation.
A question: what do you consider a person applauding his country because it invades and occupies a sovereing nation, murdering thousands and thousands of people and talking about them as “islamo-fascists”?
An other question: Who do you refer to when talking about “the enemy”?
Surely you know that when a country gets invaded and occupied by a foreign army, that army is rightfully seen as the enemy by the citizens who are murdered, humiliated, occupied by them?
An other question: What do you refer to when you talk about “our interests”?
An other question:
Why do you talk denegrating about people who don’t take part in this criminal invasion and occupation, and condemn these crimes?
An other question:
While you are condemning them, you are also not taking part of the invasion, if I’m not wrong?
Why not?
Salaam.A
Oh bull excrement! The simple-minded flower children have got their own Fox Channel and it is this thread!
And out of the mouths of babes comes baby talk…
*“Any deaths at all, American or Iraqi, would have been to high a price to pay for this god forsaken war.”
“The threat from Hussein was hypothetical. The invasion increased the pools of potential terorists.”
“Put down the flag for a second. “Domination” isn’t the point. It was an illegal and unproked invasion.”
“But is you want my favorite on the scale of evil, please put Rumsfeld on top. That man is fanatically obsessed. Only looking at him is enough to see that.”*
** …and on and on and on and on and on …ad nauseam.**
Milum,
Do you have any actual rebuttals?
Your point is well taken and I understand the realities of war, and that sometimes sacrifices must be made for a larger cause, but what really worries me regarding the current situation is two main things.
Firstly I am rapidly losing faith and confidence in the adminstration’s ability to sucessfully administer post-war Iraq with any degree of diplomatic or adminstrative skill. The US’s insanely clumsy handling of the corpses of Saddam’s sons simply stunned me. Is Rumsfeld on crack? I can well imagine that these guy’s may have not been liked, but to disrespect the bodies of dead by putting them on display like the latest special at the deli counter for journalists was beyond the pale, regardless of the rationalization that we had to “prove they were dead”. How really far away is this from the Somali street crowd dragging the American solidier’s corpse through the street that enraged so many Americans?
Secondly I am dismayed by the ever increasing indicatiions that the confident assertions by the adminstration to the US public regarding the presence of Iraqi WMDs and related potentially mortal threats to the US based on high quality intelligence, are now morphing into handwaving WAGs, and eyeryone is running for cover or falling on their swords to protect the POTUS.
In sum I am beginning to suspect that my natural inclination to support the President in a time of crisis has been played to achieve an end that does not significantly further US interests, and the real costs of which are only now becoming clear.
I agree with the OP. Our soldiers continue to die everyday, and for what? To kill Saddam’s sons? “Oh, Uday is so awful, killing and raping all those people!” Well guess what? There are people doing that here in the US and getting away with it. Hey Bush, before you go enforcing the law in other countries, try to fix things in our own fucking country, you ass.
That is so true. Tomorrow, I’m going to joing the National Guard and then go AWOL for a year, so I can be just as brave as our beloved President Bush.
You might not be as gently treated.
Thought not.
GeeDubya has himself quite the little problem. He needs to add a hundred thousand troops while simultaneously withdrawing at least a hundred thousand.
So now froggy must go a-courting, yes, he must. Time to make kissy face with Koffi Annan. Time to eat some frog’s legs, some bratwurst. Some crow.
Now, in terms of the tactics of diplomacy, should the Security Council insist on bending him over the podium and giving him a jolly good rogering, sequantially, from “A” for Angola…should he insist on condoms? Or is his position too weak to make such demands?
And if actually required to squeel like a pig, how loud should it be, so that he might preserve at least some dignity?