Do You Support The War In Iraq?

Great Debates
21

[QUOTE=DiosaBellissima]
I’ve seen you hold these particular opinions before, but I have to ask: would you say this to the face of a war widow? Would you tell her the same thing that the Phelps klan told her- that her husband (and children’s father) deserved to die? What about the children? Would you tell them their father’s death (which was surely horrible, people there tend to get blown to bits) was ultimately scoring one for humanity? 'm genuinely curious.
[/QUOTE]
Of course not; that’s both tacky and pointless. Well, not unless she demanded my honest opinion. Meeting some stranger isn’t the same as expressing one’s opinion on a message board.

And as far as his death being horrible, how about all the horrible deaths of Iraqis ? Why is it only OK to support the US side ? Especially when we are so clearly in the wrong ? People die in wars; I’m only hoping for the deaths of the bad guys. If you support the troops, then you support the horrible deaths of Iraqis; what would you say to their grieving families ?

22

No. I think we should get out, immediately. We never should have been in there in the first place. We, instead, should have sunk those troops and resources–with the blessing of the world–into helping Afghanistan get its ass in shape like we started out doing. Then, we not only wouldn’t have the ongoing clusterfuck we have there, but we might actually have been able to work with Pakistan to control the Taliban types in the border region that are currently tearing that fragile nuclear power to pieces.

I admit that I fell, reluctantly, for the BS regarding Iraq before the war. I was far from gung ho, but my senator at the time, Mrs. Clinton, made what seemed like a reasoned speech that helped sway my opinion. I hadn’t foreseen the fact that my govt. would actually out-and-out lie to its people to start an unnecessary war. That’s some sort of crazy fucking conspiracy theory, right? Little did I know, then.

Where are we now? Thousands of Americans died in vain, tens of thousands of Iraqis. Our country has lost billions of dollars, lost a first-class military machine (men and materiel are worn out), and lost the good will of the entire world. We could have taken the global support we had after 9/11 and really used it to change the world in a positive way. Instead, we’ve fucked the world up and don’t appear to be ready to stop anytime soon.

And yes, I do say the American troops have died in vain. Just as they did in Vietnam. A pointless waste of human life. It doesn’t make the troops themselves any less heroic, though–they have gone above and beyond the call of duty, trying to accomplish an impossible task in the service of their country. We’re the ones to blame, for allowing them to be put in harm’s way for no good reason.

23

I don’t support the war in Iraq, but on the plus side, out of the universe of possible things George W. Bush could have done, the war in Iraq is not the worst possibility. For that, I am truly grateful.

24

How cute- ivylass thinks after a few more years/decades of US presence in Iraq, eventually America will win out, and the different factions will join together and embrace not only each other, but Democracy and western values, just as long as the US “stays the course”. And will all convert to Christianity as well!

25

Maybe someone can link to the pit thread we did a month ago or so on this exact subject. It went to quite a few pages, IIRC.

26

[QUOTE=Der Trihs]
Of course not; that’s both tacky and pointless. Well, not unless she demanded my honest opinion. Meeting some stranger isn’t the same as expressing one’s opinion on a message board.

And as far as his death being horrible, how about all the horrible deaths of Iraqis ? Why is it only OK to support the US side ? Especially when we are so clearly in the wrong ? People die in wars; I’m only hoping for the deaths of the bad guys. If you support the troops, then you support the horrible deaths of Iraqis; what would you say to their grieving families ?
[/QUOTE]

I realize this is going to be one huge circular debate, so hopefully we can just end the hijack after not too much more discourse- I mean, we aren’t going to sway one another regardless.

That said, supporting the troops is not the same as directly supporting the murdering of Iraqis. I don’t think that’s a fair assessment to say, as most soldiers don’t enlist to become lean, mean, killing machines.

What would I say to an Iraqi family that has suffered? The same exact thing I tell my friend whose husband was killed why she was pregnant: I’m sorry. I’m so sorry. And while me apologizing probably does nothing to help the hurt, I’m still incredibly sorry that any person had to suffer like that. Justified or not though, war is a horrible thing.

As I said upthread, I don’t support this war. Hell, I don’t support this administration or the decisions they are making, but the soldiers are effectively the pawns in some huge political game and aside from the few that have committed horrible atrocities, most are good guys that were just trying to get a leg up in life by joining the service.

Every Iraqi that died is equal to every American that has died. A life is a life. While that may just be my little cosmopolitan theory, I don’t understand how anyone can say one side or the other deserved to suffer like that. Defining “good guys” and “bad guys” is far too subjective of a thing to pass judgment on an entire group of people on. Your cries that the American soldiers deserved it are no different than the rednecks at the Toby Keith concert screaming from the back of their tailgate that “every single one of those A-rabs in Iraq deserves to die!!!”

Further, I’m sure someone could argue my side of things a whole lot better than I can. But I hope I’m at least coming across clearly.

27

I think every death and injury in this misguided act of aggression is extremely unfortunate, unnecessary, and in support of an immoral effort. I think that the fact that I would not commit troops to action unless absolutely necessary reflects a greater respect for the value of those individuals, than those who irresponsibly tossed them into this meatgrinder. There is nothing “heroic” about out actions in Iraq, although I can imagine that once there individuals have acted heroically to save themselves or their brothers in arms.

But like Der Trihs, I would hope I would refrain from expressing any such thoughts to someone who recently lost a loved one. I can imagine I might simply absent myself from any such situations, however, in the same manner that I have removed myself from situations where folks went on about the courage and sacrifice of their loved ones who joined up and have been sent to Iraq.

28

[QUOTE=Der Trihs]
If you support the troops, then you support the horrible deaths of Iraqis; what would you say to their grieving families ?
[/QUOTE]

I would apologize and beg for thier forgiveness because this war (that we started) is wrong on many levels. But not supporting our troops is not the answer. I know a soldier that just got back from Iraq and I could barely speak to him choking back the tears. I told him I knew why he was there. And It wasn’t for our C.I.C. It was for the men and women he fought side by side every day. I told him it was one of the greatest honors of my life to know a man as brave and courageous as him. I asked if their was anything that I could do for him. He told me, simply, support the troops. What we as a country have asked them to do is , what I can only imagine, some of the most horrible things a human being can do to another. People like me aren’t fit to polish their boots.

29

[QUOTE=DiosaBellissima]
As I said upthread, I don’t support this war. Hell, I don’t support this administration or the decisions they are making, but the soldiers are effectively the pawns in some huge political game and aside from the few that have committed horrible atrocities, most are good guys that were just trying to get a leg up in life by joining the service.
[/quote]
They are killers and torturers and rapists. They are not mostly good guys.

[QUOTE=DiosaBellissima]
Every Iraqi that died is equal to every American that has died. A life is a life.
[/quote]
No. The life of the murderer is not equal to the life of the victim.

[QUOTE=DiosaBellissima]
Defining “good guys” and “bad guys” is far too subjective of a thing to pass judgment on an entire group of people on.
[/QUOTE]
Not when it’s a clearcut case of unprovoked aggression. The only reason this is considered a morally unclear situation by Americans is because the perpetrators are Americans. If, say, France or China invaded a country with as little justification and acted the way we have you wouldn’t see this nonsense about how you can’t blame one side more than the other. And you certainly wouldn’t hear this nonsense about ‘supporting the troops’ ( like we do that anyway ).

30

It seems that you and I agree completely. In fact, my friend and I have had several discussions on the matter and I’ve expressed to her a sentiment similar to yours (that if the government really supported the troops, they would never do to them what they are doing). I also agree that there isn’t anything inherently heroic about enlisting and shipping off to the giant sand box, but- on the same token- there isn’t anything inherently evil about it either (as it seems Der Trihs is suggesting).

And for the record, I don’t think my friend would argue that her husband was heroic just for enlisting (while she may think of him that way herself, she’s a very intelligent woman and realizes that such an idea might not extend to everyone, and rightfully so). I do think though that she’d have some very strong words for anyone - even a good friend- who tried to argue with her that her husband’s death was necessary for the betterment of humanity. Like I said, that’s exactly what the Phelps Klan said when they called her and she had less than friendly things to say to that kind of ignorance as well.

31

[QUOTE=Der Trihs]
They are killers and torturers and rapists. They are not mostly good guys.

[/QUOTE]

Alright, I’ll do it: Cite? Preferably a cite that shows what percentage of the total military population has (in any capacity, really) killed, tortured, and/or raped anyone or anything.

Don’t forget, there are plenty of folks in the service that are medics, nurses, cooks, photographers, and the like.

And woo hoo- double post.

32

[QUOTE=DiosaBellissima]
Like I said, that’s exactly what the Phelps Klan said when they called her and she had less than friendly things to say to that kind of ignorance as well.
[/QUOTE]
So you equate disapproval of mass murder with disapproval of homosexuality ?

33

[QUOTE=Der Trihs]
So you equate disapproval of mass murder with disapproval of homosexuality ?
[/QUOTE]

They told her that God killed her husband because it needed to be done to make the world a better place. Granted, their justification involved some convoluted ideas about homosexuality, but the basic premise is no different than yours: he needed to die for the betterment of humanity.

34

[QUOTE=John Mace]
Maybe someone can link to the pit thread we did a month ago or so on this exact subject. It went to quite a few pages, IIRC.
[/QUOTE]

I realize that in the 4+ years that this war has been going on that this question has been asked and answered many, many times.

However, opinions change. I have been noticing at work that several supporters of the war have been wavering. Most of them are conservatives.

Might as well admit it: ALL of them are. I was simply seeking some other input.

This question could be asked every two weeks. Pros could become Cons, or vice versa.

A thread from a month ago may not be reflect current views.

35

[QUOTE=ivylass]
For what it’s worth, yes, I do. I believe it was necessary. I’m tired of the screeching and the attention span of the American people, accustomed to instant gratification, who can’t figure out why we’re not out of there yet.
[/quote]

And yet, Because Osama escaped from Afghanistan and there was more profit in Iraq, this administration had to go in a hurry to Iraq (inspectors were beginning to show what BS the explanations for the invasion were and Bush had to show some head in a platter to the American people in a hurry). I have to conclude all those chanting in favor of the war were indeed accustomed to instant gratification.

Of course they did not die in vain, they died to protect the contractors and the thieves that are in Iraq.

That is ok, we are responding to influence more independent minds.

36

[QUOTE=DiosaBellissima]
Alright, I’ll do it: Cite? Preferably a cite that shows what percentage of the total military population has (in any capacity, really) killed, tortured, and/or raped anyone or anything.
[/quote]
I’ll see if I can dig one up ( although I’ll point out that as part of a military organization they share responsibility even if they never see an Iraqi ). Offhand, IIRC a third or so support torture, and rapists are common enough that female American soldiers don’t dare go outside alone after dark for fear of American soldiers raping them. And the entire Iraq war is an exercise of mass murder.

[QUOTE=DiosaBellissima]
They told her that God killed her husband because it needed to be done to make the world a better place. Granted, their justification involved some convoluted ideas about homosexuality, but the basic premise is no different than yours: he needed to die for the betterment of humanity.
[/QUOTE]
Except that there’s no sensible reason to consider homosexuals some sort of great evil or a danger to humanity. There are good reasons to feel that way about people who engage in wars of conquest.

37

[QUOTE=Der Trihs]
(snip) Offhand, IIRC a third or so support torture, and rapists are common enough that female American soldiers don’t dare go outside alone after dark for fear of American soldiers raping them.

[/QUOTE]

I’d definitely like a legitimate cite for that one. I take particular interest in the study of the day to day lives of soldiers in our modern military, but more relevant to me than any book I buy is what I hear from my many friends in the military. Anecdote isn’t the plural of data and all of that, but what I hear certainly supports what I’ve read. All of my male service member friends are constantly talking about their female friends (who are often a rank or two above them, strangely enough) and how much they adore and respect them.

Sure, there’s going to be sexual harassment and other vile things, just like in real life. Hell, there may even be a slightly higher incidence of it. But I’ve never in my life heard of female soldiers being afraid to walk outside for fear of being gang raped. Oh, outside of some alarmist report on Dateline during sweeps week. I genuinely don’t think that problem is nearly as common as you seem to think.

[QUOTE=Der Trihs]
IIRC a third or so support torture
[/quote]

You aren’t attempting to cite that poor excuse for a survey that was administered at 29 Palms Marine Base, are you? It’s been squarely proven that those questions were phrased in an incredibly biased and misleading way. Questions like (not a direct quote, just an example), “If an enemy were about to kill your friend, would you shoot him?” were taken out of context and it was reported that “(some astronomically high percentage) of Marines are in favor of shooting the enemy in any situation”.

38

I once did support the war. I thought that Bush had access to intel denied the public.

This support ended when our tanks rolled into Bagdhad, and Saddam did not use nuclear, nor chemical, nor biological weapons on them.

At the last, desparate moment, he would have gladly done so, if he had them.

At that instant, I knew it was a wash.

I do not support the war.

39

This Washington Post-ABC News poll from 2004 is interesting:

40

I suppose studying political science has lead me to glare with a suspicious eye at these polls- particularly ones that don’t outline their methods particularly well (though there is an ok summation there at the end). There are about a million flaws that can be found within a Washington Post-ABC News poll and how it is perhaps administered- likely in a less than proper, scientific way (if there even is such a possible thing as a completely properly done poll). Namely, what sticks out to me is that we don’t have the particular questions nor the context in which they were asked- if clarification was given on the choices, the circumstances, etc. and so forth.

That said, assuming that the poll is a fair representation (which in reality isn’t something I’m necessarily going to agree with-- but I’ll go along with it since I don’t have a proper poll or cite handy), I suppose it wouldn’t be a stretch to say that the results of that poll can be fairly extended to the general population of soldiers as well. But since that poll is of the American population as a whole, would we say that the deaths of any Americans- on our own soil, perhaps- would now be “for the betterment of humanity” if the cause was even indirectly the war?