Those folks, and others I’ve read, seem to be saying that the economy should maybe get back up to where it was before hostilities. Which was down.
Many of these service people are going to be looking for jobs when the military downsizes.
At this point, I’m not really sure weapons of mass destruction are an issue any more.
By the time this war is over, it will be largely measured by two things - how many civilians are killed, and how many coalition forces are killed.
If this war ends quickly (say, within the next two or three weeks), and coalition casualties are under 1,000, and the Iraqis start dancing in the streets, then the war will have been popular no matter what WMDs are found. Especially if the end of the war causes the stock market to take off and we go into an election season with 4% growth and a Dow back over 10,000.
On the other hand, if this war bogs down and lasts for six months, and the coalition takes 50,000 casualties, and 100,000 civilians are killed, and the country drops back into a double-dip recession as a result, then Bush is probably doomed even if he comes up with an entire warehouse of anthax and Vx. About the only thing that would save him in that case would be evidence that Saddam was only months away from having the bomb and a plan for delivering it to New York.
Clearly, the administration believes Iraq has chemical weapons. The military is making its troops fight in chemical protection suits - a significant liability. They’ve got to be pretty convinced.
And the administration said that intelligence showed the Republican Guard being re-armed a couple of days ago - and decontamination trucks were present for the re-arming. That sounds rather ominous.
Given the importance that the existence of WOMD will have on world opinion, it’s a cinch that there are CIA teams all over Iraq right now, and at the opportune moment, WOMD will be planted so they can be “found” later. I’m sure some quite skillful work has already gone into making them look authentically Iraqi.
You can find a million tons of Anthrax in Iraq, and it still won’t change the fact that this war was started without the approval of the UN Security Council and on an unsupported claim that Iraq posed a threat to the United States.
Whatever else happens, the rest of the world won’t forget this. I wouldn’t be surprised if our regularly scheduled “war on terrorism” suddenly hits a few bumps in the road because we’re no longer getting international help from the various nations we pissed off on the way to Iraq.
Again I agree that rjung is onto the germ of this war. Bush’s administration has set new precedents in foreign policy. America no longer needs to ally with anyone, ever. If other states decide to join our cause (Britain, Spain, Australia) all the better, but the bottom line is we set the world agenda. And if you don’t like it we’ll call you funny names (France, Germany), buy you out (Turkey, Albania, etc.), or bomb you to rubble without provocation (Iraq).
Already Turkey has decided if the US can act unilaterally so can they. Despite the US’s objections thousands of Turkish troops headed into north Iraq, purportedly to prevent terrorism. The Turks have no love for the Kurds who happen to live in the north of Iraq though, so that should be an interesting dynamic.
Also, when is Bush going to comment on unrest outside of the Iraq? Hindus were slaughtered by terrorists in Kashmir prompting nuclear weapons testing by Pakistan and India. Not to mention Pakistan’s secular power base has been losing ground to radical Islamists due to Bush’s hard line. Likewise in Iran, the moderate, progressive youth is losing out to fundamentalist Jurists for the same reason. And North Korea isn’t any less of a threat. Palestinians are still agitating for change in Israel. Oh, and where the hell is Osama?
I guess Bush figures he’ll f–k up those world affairs after he’s done f–king this one up.
Yeah right whatever, cainxinth
:dubious:
speculate all you want, slant it anyway you wish, complain till youre blue, agitate all you like. Wont make them true.
Not true, eh? Where I come from them’s fighting words. Lets go over my post statement by statement shall we…
“Bush’s administration has set new precedents in foreign policy.”
“And North Korea isn’t any less of a threat.”
“Palestinians are still agitating for change in Israel.”
“Oh, and where the hell is Osama?”
Yeah, you caught me X, I was just blowing smoke up your ass. :rolleyes:
It took me all of ten minutes to find these recent stories with google. Are you even following the news, or do you pass over any story that doesn’t start with, “Bush heralded as humanitarian of the year, reported to have above average genitalia as well.” ? Here’s a good rule of thumb for now on, think first, post second.
It’s only 4:30 and already it’s been a long day…
Well, my compliments on your googling skills and linking abilities. So what? These are concerns, opinions and criticisms. Pundits predicting doom and gloom, opponents having their say. Gee, God Bless America and the First ammendment. So what now? Will the opinions of the majority of the world magically eradicate the oppresion of Saddam? IF we find WMD in Iraq, will people calling it a CIA plant, an afterthought, a moot point, change the fact that Saddam did not comply with UN resolution 1441?
Its all in the way you look at things. For Example:
a nice exercise of You-say-I-say. If everything they say in demostrations and protests came true, all of what they are saying now shouldve already happened because it is all the same things theyve said during the war in Afghanistan.
So your opinion now is aligned with the popular majority that is backed up by pundits and experts. This is America. The pundits and experts have spent a great deal of time and effort to get their status and their guess is just as good as anybody elses.
**
Oh we haven’t changed the policies that led to 9.11. We’ve expanded upon them. Before we used to have the CIA covertly do our dirty work. The new precedent is to publicly tell the world fuck you and do whatever the hell we please.
**
Here’s another newsflash, we are now living in a post-colonial world, where the conception of International Law is becoming more real every year. America would like to undermine that trend because it interferes with their ability to act independently of world opinion. Too bad for America, if they had become the leading hegemonist only 75 years ago they could shit on whoever and whenever and no one could do a thing about it.
**
I’m gonna’ need a cite for that one.
**
Allow me to introduce you to the first sensible point you’ve made.
**
You’ve said it yourself, If Bush wants to play sheriff, he has to take responsibility for all the secondary effects of his policies. Whether he addresses them or not, history will hold him accountable.
The rest of your comments either skirted the issue in question, or misapprehended it completely, so I’ll just file those under I for…
and THAT my dear cainxinth is entirely and completely the whole point. History will be the judge here. Not the experts, not the opinion polls, not the news media and not even the all of the anti-war people of the world. The events that are happening are still in flux. Its only just beginning and people are already predicting the outcome. I skirted because there were no solid issues. Everything is all tied together and what unravels one binds the other. I am waiting for the dust to settle and the fat lady to sing.
These last few posts sound oddly familiar…
Priceless. 
That suspected WMD site at Najaf is still very much of interest.
From what I understand, the inspection teams have not seen what’s behind those doors yet.
Y’all can debate the US opinion. Global opinion is going to be real nasty if WoMD in strategic ready to use quantities are not found by a believeable source and verified by a believeable source. None of this dual purpose crap. No traces of something left over from sometime in the last 2 decades.
Nuu uhh, going to have to find the real smoking gun that is an real and credible immediate threat as seen through the eyes of the average joe around the world. Ignore global opinion at your peril.
As an aside, just imagine how American voters are going to feel if the US occupation forces keep getting sniped, bombed, ambushed and body bagged every week in the run up to election day.
Agreed, but if the US does find an active WMD program, how likely is that to change the world’s opinion?
**
I’ve often thought that this was Bush’s reason for starting the war now, rather than waiting longer. Reason being that he hopes to get the war over and images of the war dead out of folks minds before the election starts.
If there is an active WoMD program that is “credible” and poses a “real” threat, then there will be a lot more acceptance of what the US has done. Not sure if that will make it right, but it will sure take the edge off of the vitrol and outright hatred.
Maybe that, but I think part of it is to hopefully get the war over before summer. Have any of you spent six hours at MOPP Level IV in 102 degree heat? I have. It sucks. There will be heat casualties galore if it comes to that.
Don’t know what MOPP Level IV is, but I surely know what 100+ temps is like.
I grew up in Bakersfield. 
It suck’s.
Contrary to popular belief, that kind of weather is just as hard on Iraqis as it is on the allies. Maybe more so, depending on water availability.
I thought I was more eloquent than that … in the end anyways 
If you’re referring to international opinion, I seriously doubt this. We’ve already lost the street in the Middle East. We won’t get that back for a long time. And of the sentiment outside of the region, it will rightfully be noted that of course we knew Saddam had WMDs, because we kept all of the receipts.
It takes a special type of myopia to think that antiwar sentiment is even peripherally about Iraq, WMD’s, or ousting a despicable tyrant. It’s about our stunningly arrogant POTUS and his cronies and their desire to ignore any kind of internationalist cooperation in lieu of imposing American power on the world.