# Iraq and WMDs **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 17, 2006, 9:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-and-wmds/348816 "2006-03-17T21:47:13Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 13\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Revenant\_Threshold](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f1d935/32.png) [@Revenant\_Threshold](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revenant_Threshold)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2006, 8:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-and-wmds/348816/61 "2006-03-20T20:21:55Z")
> [@EEMan](#): > > No need to worry about offending me, you aren’t nor will you. > > I would argue, yes he is defending the earth; at least as well as he understands. Which is all any of us can be asked. Well, the bigger problem starts if our insane person believe the aliens are adopting human form - and thus defends earth by killing the humans he suspects to be alien. Now, is he defending the U.S.? Yes, in his mind, but in reality, he himself is the cause of the danger. That’s similar to what is occurring here - i’m convinced that Bush et al. are convinced they are defending the U.S., when in reality they’re just causing more problems. I don’t hold the U.S. (or coalition) forces to this as singularily because while i’m sure they too are causing problems, they are also doing some good (for example, in the case of your friend) by being there presently. > [@](#): > > That aside, do you believe the insurgents to be enemies of the US? If so, doesn’t that alone complete your criteria? I believe them to be the enemies of the U.S. armed forces in Iraq. I’ve not seen them attack the U.S. in any way other than against the armed forces, and as I said, it isn’t defending if the forces are merely defending _themselves_. On the other hand, Bin Laden and al Qaida _have_ attacked the U.S., and are present enemies, so an operation to capture/kill them would be a defense, if a very active one. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2006, 8:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-and-wmds/348816/62 "2006-03-20T20:22:50Z")
> [@EEMan](#): > > Sure, but would you agree it was helping? I don’t know. Short of holding back a wave of attackers on the border, I don’t know of a universal acceptible criteria for defending the country. Give me your definition and I shall try to relate an example. Pretty much everyone in this country, and most throughout the world, considered invading Afghanistan and expelling the Taliban a direct and justifiable defense of the US. > [@](#): > > Which is a moot point (if we are talking about Bush), he won re-election; and going to Iraq was not illegal (and thus can not be used to kick him out). Rumsfeld, as is becoming more apparent, did not provide adequate troops for the job, did not supply troops adequately, and actively discouraged opposing opinions from his generals. Yet he is still in his position. Lincoln fired screw-ups - how do you think the situation there will improve unless something changes at the top? And why would you think Bush would kick Rumsfeld out unless Bush acknowledges the mistakes? That’s why examination of the mistakes made at the beginning of the war are so important. ---
**Author:** ![Revenant\_Threshold](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f1d935/32.png) [@Revenant\_Threshold](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revenant_Threshold)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2006, 8:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-and-wmds/348816/63 "2006-03-20T20:23:22Z")
> [@Revenant Threshold](#): > > …i’m convinced that Bush et al. are convinced… We’re all very convinced, you know. :smack: ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2006, 8:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-and-wmds/348816/64 "2006-03-20T20:26:20Z")
> [@EEMan](#): > > Motivation for service is important (just as motivation for going into the war in the first place was also important); and this is one of those ‘belief’s’ that can’t be proven. They are fighting enemies of the US (not sure them being enemies of the US can be debated, as their IED’s are set up to do as much US damage as possible). The belief that they are also keeping them off American soil isn’t what makes them enemies, but it is a motivation. But it’s false. Iraqi insurgents are not going to invade the United States. Fighting men and women are motivated by a multitude of things, the primary one in combat being helping their buddies. That, not questions of geopolitical policy, is, has always been, and always will be the main motivation of the soldier; helping his buddies. Whether they also believe Iraqi insurgents will somehow invade North Dakota (which I don’t think all US soldiers believe) is really a secondary matter. It seems to me there is a relatively quick way to help the troops; bring them home right away. ---
**Author:** ![EEMan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/a6a055/32.png) [@EEMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EEMan)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2006, 8:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-and-wmds/348816/65 "2006-03-20T20:33:20Z")
**RT** - then you believe that Bush (and party) are doing what they believe is best, and are simply wrong. I don’t know how to fix that, but is an intersting thought. **Voyager** - I’m not sure any amount of pointing out mistakes, will get Rummy sent packing. Bush is very ‘loyal’; to a fault even, I don’t see anything changing that dynamic. I could be wrong. **RickJay** - What I was attempting to describe was their feelings about being in Iraq; not about what motivates them to continue fighting (at which point I would agree, the guy next to you is the most important thing in the world). That said, I don’t know if we can just leave. We made the mess, we should at least stick around long enough to help clean up. Leaving now would be the worst thing possible for the Iraqi people (much like failing to back up those who would have overthrown Sadaam); and certainly would earn us no friends. It is a case of ‘too late’ in some sense, we need to stay long enough to help the Iraqi’s stand up (to what extent is really the question in my mind). ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2006, 10:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-and-wmds/348816/66 "2006-03-20T22:06:43Z")
> [@EEMan](#): > > **RickJay** - What I was attempting to describe was their feelings about being in Iraq; not about what motivates them to continue fighting (at which point I would agree, the guy next to you is the most important thing in the world). That said, I don’t know if we can just leave. We made the mess, we should at least stick around long enough to help clean up. Leaving now would be the worst thing possible for the Iraqi people (much like failing to back up those who would have overthrown Sadaam); and certainly would earn us no friends. > . All the evidence suggests that the American presence isn’t helping, on balance. I would agree, everything else being equal, that the United States has a responsibility to a country that is for all practical purposes a vassal state. But there’s no point in maintaining a large military presence unless there’s some reason to believe that military presence has some positive effect, and I just don’t see that as being the case; it appears the military presence is fuelling the insurgency. Iraq’s government, such as it is, is either going to survive, or it’s not. The unspoken assumption in Washington is that the government as it currently exists must survive, and that American military occupation will allow it to strengthen over time. The former assumption is a value judgment, so we’ll leave that, but the latter assumption is really, really doubtful. We’ve been hearing for a long time now about how the Iraqis are training more troops, how they have so many quality troops, etc. etc., but 1. It never seem to get any better, 2. Experience suggests that the longer the U.S. military is there, the MORE dependent the Iraqi government will become on U.S. muscle, not less, and 3. There’s something intrinsically wrong with the notion that this is a government whose survival is dependent upon the ability to fight its own people with military force. I hate to dredge up the Vietnam comparison again, but in this limited sense, it’s a valid comparison; a client state being assisted in a civil war by the United States. South Vietnam’s own willingness and ability to fight degraded over time because they became dependent on the USA. I expect Iraq’s to go the same way. To be honest, EEMan, I’m inclined to think that it simply does not matter if the USA stays for three months or three decades. The Iraqi government can never be truly legitimate in the eys of the critical majority of its people as long as it’s being propped up by the USA. Far too many Iraqis believe that the government is simply a puppet extension for the Americans. And to be honest that’s true, at least in part. As long as the USA is there, that perception will persist, and it will only be proven wrong or right when the Americans pack up and go home. ---
**Author:** ![EEMan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/a6a055/32.png) [@EEMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EEMan)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2006, 10:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-and-wmds/348816/67 "2006-03-20T22:22:03Z")
I don’t want to argue opinions, but I hope you don’t mind some observations. > [@RickJay](#): > > We’ve been hearing for a long time now about how the Iraqis are training more troops, how they have so many quality troops, etc. etc.,\ We have trained a lot of forces, but it has been a pretty short time span; esp when we consider all of the former leadership is at least suspect (amoung their own forces as well as by us), and we basically had to rebuild the police forces (not military I know, but the former police forces were vassals (excuse me for using the term, just after you did, but it fits so well) of the party or Sadaam > [@](#): > > 1. It never seem to get any better, I think it has gotten much better, we have gone from open combat to roadside bombs and secret killings. While that might not sound like an improvment, it means the country is more or less under the control of the government/US forces (which ever you prefer; and yes there are some really terrible incidents of crime but it isn’t the same as not controlling the country. If that makes sense). > [@](#): > > 1. Experience suggests that the longer the U.S. military is there, the MORE dependent the Iraqi government will become on U.S. muscle, not less, and Depending on what model you use, that is a very fair statement; though I’m not sure the current situation is ready to be thrown to the wolves (but as you suggest, there is no way to tell when/if that will ever occur). > [@](#): > > 1. There’s something intrinsically wrong with the notion that this is a government whose survival is dependent upon the ability to fight its own people with military force. I agree, and I truely wonder what percentage of the insurgents are Iraqi (the higher the percentage the more uneasy I get). > [@](#): > > I hate to dredge up the Vietnam comparison again, but in this limited sense, it’s a valid comparison; a client state being assisted in a civil war by the United States. South Vietnam’s own willingness and ability to fight degraded over time because they became dependent on the USA. I expect Iraq’s to go the same way. I can see the compraison, though I think it is more like trying to rebuild the government of Japan. We did win the war, now there is a fundimental change in the system. > [@](#): > > To be honest, EEMan, I’m inclined to think that it simply does not matter if the USA stays for three months or three decades. The Iraqi government can never be truly legitimate in the eys of the critical majority of its people as long as it’s being propped up by the USA. I agree, though i’m not sure it is quite time to throw this baby out with the bath water. > [@](#): > > Far too many Iraqis believe that the government is simply a puppet extension for the Americans. I wonder how true that is, outside of the big cities (all 4 of them); I wonder how much thought anyone gives to the US being there at all. I simply do not know. > [@](#): > > And to be honest that’s true, at least in part. As long as the USA is there, that perception will persist, and it will only be proven wrong or right when the Americans pack up and go home. Very true ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2006, 10:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-and-wmds/348816/68 "2006-03-20T22:51:36Z")
> [@EEMan](#): > > **Voyager** - I’m not sure any amount of pointing out mistakes, will get Rummy sent packing. Bush is very ‘loyal’; to a fault even, I don’t see anything changing that dynamic. I could be wrong. > > **RickJay** - What I was attempting to describe was their feelings about being in Iraq; not about what motivates them to continue fighting (at which point I would agree, the guy next to you is the most important thing in the world). That said, I don’t know if we can just leave. We made the mess, we should at least stick around long enough to help clean up. Leaving now would be the worst thing possible for the Iraqi people (much like failing to back up those who would have overthrown Sadaam); and certainly would earn us no friends. You’re saying in other words that Bush would rather sacrifice our soldiers rather than be “disloyal.” I agree. But there is no reason to think things will get better with an incompetent in charge. (And if you think things are better, I recommend you look at some of the year against year summaries printed for the anniversary.) It seems to me that if Republican supporters of the war started telling Bush that he’s not going to get funding unless Rumsfeld goes, Rumsfeld will go. If you think he’s the best man for the job, fine, but if you don’t then it behooves supporters of the war to get him the hell out of command. Those against the war still want soldiers to be properly equipped and supported, but we know Bush won’t listen to us. ---
**Author:** ![Merijeek](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f05b48/32.png) [@Merijeek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Merijeek)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2006, 11:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-and-wmds/348816/69 "2006-03-20T23:17:13Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > Was this intended to _encourage_ intelligent discourse? I suspect it might not be the correct tactic. Was the OP? -Joe ---
**Author:** ![Merijeek](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f05b48/32.png) [@Merijeek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Merijeek)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2006, 11:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-and-wmds/348816/70 "2006-03-20T23:19:44Z")
> [@EEMan](#): > > The questions to why we went don’t matter any more, we went; nothing can change that fact. The question is what do we do now. [Please find a new tactic.](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=7212266&postcount=15) Thanks -Joe ---
**Author:** ![Zoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/a4c791/32.png) [@Zoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zoe)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2006, 3:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-and-wmds/348816/71 "2006-03-21T03:42:17Z")
> [@](#): > > **PatriotX** : Even if a task is daunting, it doesn’t relieve us of our obligations to undertake it. I think of it as a civic and patriotic duty. Meanwhile, back along the Gulf Coast of **America** … ---
**Author:** ![EEMan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/a6a055/32.png) [@EEMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EEMan)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2006, 4:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-and-wmds/348816/72 "2006-03-21T16:51:02Z")
> [@Voyager](#): > > You’re saying in other words that Bush would rather sacrifice our soldiers rather than be “disloyal.” Honestly? I don’t think he sees it that way. > [@](#): > > It seems to me that if Republican supporters of the war started telling Bush that he’s not going to get funding unless Rumsfeld goes, Rumsfeld will go. I don’t think anyone can threaten to cut off spending, and keep their seats (can’t not (double negitive purposeful) support the troops already in country; nor cut any other ‘program’ funding without getting lots of enemies); and I think keeping their seats are more important to most of them than anything else. > [@](#): > > If you think he’s the best man for the job, fine, but if you don’t then it behooves supporters of the war to get him the hell out of command. Those against the war still want soldiers to be properly equipped and supported, but we know Bush won’t listen to us. I don’t believe he is the best man for the job, then again I’m not sure you could come to universal agreement as to whom that might be. I don’t like Rumsfeld, I believe there a number of people better suited than him to be in his position, but again I’m not sure Bush sees it that way. I don’t mind getting rid (or the effort to get rid) of someone mishandling the current situation (in fact that is the RIGHT thing to do); but I would rather that take precidence over pointing fingers over why things happened 3 years ago. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2006, 6:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-and-wmds/348816/73 "2006-03-21T18:02:19Z")
> [@EEMan](#): > > Honestly? I don’t think he sees it that way. Only Og knows what the guy thinks any more. But things that lead to greater casualties in the field certainly don’t seem to get his attention. I doubt that he actively thinks “screw you, soldier” but I suspect he is “protected” from seeing too much bad news. > [@](#): > > I don’t think anyone can threaten to cut off spending, and keep their seats (can’t not (double negitive purposeful) support the troops already in country; nor cut any other ‘program’ funding without getting lots of enemies); and I think keeping their seats are more important to most of them than anything else. Nonsense - that trick is used all the time. Given the poll numbers, threatening to cut funding enough to force troops to be withdrawn unless Rummy resigns would go over well at home also. If enough Republicans, not even the leaders, decided to do this they could build a majority and meeting privately with Bush about it. I haven’t seen poll numbers for Rumsfeld, but they can’t be very good. Do you really think the American people would rise up to keep Rummy’s job? > [@](#): > > I don’t believe he is the best man for the job, then again I’m not sure you could come to universal agreement as to whom that might be. Doesn’t matter - the best is the enemy of the good. Anyone good wouldn’t be a neocon, which would get our real Fearless Leader (Cheney) panties in a knot. > [@](#): > > I don’t like Rumsfeld, I believe there a number of people better suited than him to be in his position, but again I’m not sure Bush sees it that way. No doubt. More evidence of his incompetence as a leader. Any manager knows you need to rate subordinates by their accomplishments, not on friendship. > [@](#): > > I don’t mind getting rid (or the effort to get rid) of someone mishandling the current situation (in fact that is the RIGHT thing to do); but I would rather that take precidence over pointing fingers over why things happened 3 years ago. Problem is, we’re not doing either. If you think what happened three years ago was just dandy, no reason to get rid of the guy. Only making it very clear that the screwup post-invasion was his fault will cause movement. If Republicans are not part of the solution they’re part of the problem. and they shouldn’t complain if Democrats lay full credit for this fiasco on their doorstep. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-and-wmds/348816.md?page=3)