Allright Bush you made your case for war against Iraq. I agreed with you. The majority of America agreed with you. The U.N. on the other hand did not.
You say fine U.N. if you don’t want to enforce your resolutions and let a Big Baddie stay in power we will take Saddam down. I agreed with you. The majority of America agreed with you. Alas again the U.N. did not.
You told us that it would take America’s time, money, sweat, and blood to rebuild Iraq. I realized it and supported the war despite the cost. The majority of America realized it and supported the war. The U.N. also realized it and thought “No way in hell we are cleaning up that mess”.
Now you are speaking to the U.N. about “duties” and “responsibilities” to rebuilding Iraq. I think that is by far the (note: this word pronounced like they for emphasis) stupidest thing I have ever heard. The majority of America realizes it and come November I think you will realize it too.
IIRC, Bush was saying that he believes his administration has done a lot to quell the problems in the Middle East. Since many of the countries in the U.N. will benefit from this, he thinks they should pitch in.
Yeah but this is only his opinion and an unproven one at that. The UN will not go along most likely because there is currently no proof showing that Bush’s plan will really do anything but make the Middle East worst off.
I disagree. I sincerely doubt a majority of America educated themselves on the potential costs of this war, nor do I think that the government did an adequate job of delivering that education; let alone present an accurate prediction of those costs.
Yep. The war was sold on some fantasy about being welcomed as liberators, all existing institutions except for the Saddam family remaining intact, democratic elections resulting in the compliant Mr. Chalabi’s anointment in a few months, and then Johnny comes marching home. Oh, and that would get the guy who was really responsible for 9/11 - that’s the one Big Lie that Bush is still holding onto, although in an indirect way that lets him weasel out of the charge.
Enough people wanted to believe that Beatles-Saving-Pepperland-from-the-Blue-Meanies stuff so badly that they really did believe it, and there are dead-enders even today. I sincerely doubt that the war and occupation would have had widespread public support if enough of us had believed it would turn out that way (and a large number of us did, that’s one of the many reasons we opposed it). Certainly (well, maybe something short of that) Congress would not have let themselves be strong-armed into writing a blank check.
This being the Pit, it’s fair to point out that Wolf Blitzer’s latest public opinion poll: “Should Congress approve $87 billion for efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan?” is running 12% yes, 88% No.
In other news, the pubbies seem to think that Gephardt’s labeling of Bush as “a miserable failure” is nothing short of hate speech. Apparently all REAL Americans should love and embrace the president’s failures. Rummy says that anything less amounts to giving giving aid and comfort to the terrorists.
I don’t have a lot to add to this, except that I want to quote my favorite paragraphs from Squink’s Washington Times link:
Way to court the religious vote there, Reverend! I never really thought I’d hear a Democratic candidate metaphorically call the entire Democratic party a Philanderer and his own interest group a hussy, but there’s a first time for everything.
You know, I strongly suspect the Iraqis are pretty glad we stopped Sadam from killing them. They seem to be pretty pleased with that.
Secondly, I say this is cheap at twice the price. This is a pretty comprehensive package, calling for more troops to keep security (an idea which Iraqis recently said saluted themselves!) and a lot of investment in rebuilding the infrastructure. A lot of other nations will be getting a lot of benefit from this, not that many of them will admit it.
This is a expense now, but hey, the future Iraq may repay us a hundred fold as a friend and partner. Aside from the y’know, humanitarian reasons.
I have a hard time understanding why all the “compassionate” liberals were so happy to let everyone else go hang why the “evil” conservatives wanted to stop the bloody tyrant.
Hypocrites, every last one of ya’.
Grantedm we seem to have been wrong about the WMD’s. On the other hand, Saddam had them in quantity just a few years ago (hell, he used them openly) and either acted as if they were still there. He implicitly threatened us with them at times. Nevertheless, he did support terrorism financially. And again, it may be cruel to send servicemen to fight Baathist assassins, but better that than to let Mr. Coffee over there freely give money to people to attack us. As a side benefit, all the terrorists who otherwise might have been scheming another attack now have big, bright, heavily armed and armored targets. Who shoot back.
Asking for some aid from other nations is simply a recognition that (a) a couple of them will be openly outed as the baldfaced liars and selfish bastards they are: France and Germany and (b) gives those who’ve been shocked by the atack on the UN, or simply wanted to sit the fence, a face-saving chance to sign up at little risk.
You wouldn’t happen to have the Evil one’s address would you wring? Ramadan’s coming up October 27th, and I’d like to be sure Saddam gets his card this year. He’s been having kindof a rough time.
of course I do, as a card carryin’ liberal it seems to be the assumption that I routinely have such luminaries as Saddam and Ossama over for wine and cheese parties. We play “pin the tailiban on the ass” and several other parlor games.
Well, we ARE helping them train up the beginnings of a new military, and perhaps in the future the Iraqis can join a multinational force which can help us rout a dangerous and unelected despot who has a lot of weapons of mass destruction.
Personally, I’d prefer we voted him out next fall.
IMO, Many countries CHOSE not to become involved in the Iraq debacle for some/all of the following:
they did not believe that there was good proof of WMD.
they did not buy into the US administrations not-so-subtle diversion of the “we’re going after the terrorists” ploy.
they actually still operate under the assumption that they are still allowed to run their own foreign policy.
they thought that it was not the correct time to take this action.
Now that the US has:
not found ANY evidence of WMD
clearly not formulated any kind of exit strategy
found out that it will actually cost them $$$
They want help. $$ please. Oh, help us exit this god-awful mess we created please. Take this problem off our hands please. Because we really did a good thing here didn’t we? The people of Iraq love us don’t they? (It’s great to hear that **smiling bandit ** “strongly suspects that the Iraqis are pretty glad we stopped Sadam from killing them.” Ya that’s right. They’re much better off being killed by terrorists, pissed off Baathists, escaped criminals, unexploded cluster bombs, and stressed out, nervous soldiers.
Ya, I’m sure that the world is going to “benefit” from this little action for years to come. I’m soooo fucking grateful!!
You know what?
Stick this request up your ass. The UN and many countries did not want this war. We told you it was an idiotic thing to do. We are not prepared to clean up because you did not listen to us.
You know… yesterday my 4 year old son was in a store, and he broke an ornament accidentally. We told him that we had to pay for it. He was quite upset, until we explained calmly that everyone has to be responsible for their own actions, and everyone must clean up their own messes. Too bad nobody had this same talk with little Georgie when he was 4 years old.
