Why, thank you, kind Sir.
Remember December?
Ye Gods that bastard was infuriating. I fully suspected him of actually being part of the disinformation apparatus.
I do. He wasn’t alone in supporting what was perceived to be the best outcome for Israel.
IIRC, it was the “mobile chemical weapons labs” that convinced me they were making stuff up. It seemed like such a far fetched idea, while at the same time seemed like exactly the kinda thing someone would come up with if they had claimed there were chemical weapons labs, and then had to come up with some BS reason why they couldn’t tell you where they actually were. “They…move around…all the time…yea, that’s it”.
After that, I bothered to find more in-depth reporting on the other sources of evidence for Saddam being a threat to the US and found that almost all of them were pretty flimsy. There was some a lot of pretty good critical reporting at the time, though it got drowned out by all the outlets more or less just reflecting the administrations line.
I was shocked yesterday to hear reported that only 60-some percent of Americans supported the invasion, because my wife and I SURE felt a lot lonelier than that! I would have put it at at least 80%.
I’m foggy on the exact chronology, but at one time I thought/(hoped?) our efforts in Afghanistan would be limited to a quick in-and-out - punish the Taliban supporters of 9/11, with no aims of sticking around. Don’t recall whether it was before or after we frolicked into Iraq that we became mired in the Afghan quag.
I always thought the evidence for Iraq as a threat to America, the UK etc was entirely manufactured, although I was surprised that Iraq had noWMDs whatsoever. I thought they’d keep a few around for national security reasons (just in case).
I predicted disastrous consequences for both wars.
I was right.
Just to clarify: no, I’m not talking about Afghanistan, aside from the throwaway line at the end. (Though hopefully it’s obvious to all by now that whatever we haven’t been able to accomplish in Afghanistan in 11.5 years there, we’re extremely unlikely to accomplish in whatever remaining time we choose to have a substantial presence there.)
This is about the difference between how Dopers reacted to the buildup to the Iraq war in early 2003, versus how other institutions (e.g. the pundit class) and the population generally felt about it.
I’m another one who took the correct position on the Iraq War at the start, but the incorrect position on the Afghanistan War. The lesson, to me, is that history matters. It is important that we teach our children about what really happened in the run-up to these wars and about how the public was mislead by the government and the major media outlets. It’s important that we and future generations understand that the government and major media outlets can be completely wrong. It’s important that we understand that when the so-called ‘experts’ insist that “everyone” agrees, they often actually mean that only politicians and the editorial pages of major newspapers agree, and that important information is being buried and more intelligent voices are being silenced. And it’s important to remember that the government-military-industrial-media complex will continue to insist that everything is going perfectly even when it factually is not, as they continued to insist that the Iraq War was going well for years after it had failed.
So…what are we debating? All I see are people putting up their resumes as opposition or admitting their misguided loyalty. Not much argument either way (unless it’s about the name of the war).
Did you?
I supported the invasion of Afghanistan and opposed the invasion of Iraq. I believe I was correct in both cases.
The fact that the war in Afghanistan was subsequently screwed up doesn’t mean there was not cause for war. Supporting the aim of reducing al-Qaida and capturing or killing Osama bin Laden does not imply support for strategic incompetence. In fact, I’d say now, and have said in the past, that one of the reasons the war in Iraq was wrong is because it drew moral and material strength and support away from the war in Afghanistan.
It should be noted Cecil took some stick for calling it a “damn fool war.”
Vindication is sweet.
I can’t even call what happened in Iraq a ‘war’ - a war is a war, this was a smash and grab occupation. It was the occupation that caused so many deaths.
As if invading a country was going to make them produce less terrorists, ever! Let’s blow up their homes and their sons and husbands and brothers and fathers. That will surely convince them not to take up arms against us.
What’s that you say? If we bomb them back to the Stone Age they won’t have the resources to go against us? Sure, you’re right! A desperate, starving population will never find some way to go against us, and they certainly wouldn’t raise the next generation to hate us and despise us.
Bollocks.
Anybody got a link to that particular thread/poll taken just before the start of the war? My cursory search didn’t turn it up.
I remember vividly posting that I opposed the war. I sure hope my memory was accurate.
FWIW, I was against it before you were against it.
I totally agree. It is not reasonable to expect every war to end with the total capitulation of the enemy and a big nice surrender ceremony. Afghanistan will not end that way, but that doesn’t mean the war was a mistake.
Let me back up: some people think Iraq was a mistake because there were no WMD. That is wrong. Even if Iraq had WMD, I believed at the time, and am certain now, that just because Saddam had chemical weapons did not mean that he was a serious threat to our national security. So going to war with a country that was a serious annoyance, and run by a terrible dictator, but one that was not a serious threat to our country, was the wrong thing to do. The cost in lives and treasure to remove a non-threat makes the war even more of a mistake.
Thirteen years ago, Al Qaida had the run of Afghanistan, and they had carried out multiple serious attacks on our country. Some may think we could have bombed Al Qaida leaders from the skies in retaliation for 9/11, and not sent troops in. Well, we tried that at Tora Bora and it didn’t work. The only way to eliminate that safe haven would be a real, boots-on-the-ground war. It’s been a long, frustrating war, but we did the right thing. And there’s zero doubt in my mind that Bin Laden and many other top Al Qaida leaders would be alive today if we had not invaded Afghanistan.
It’s time for that war to end, and that’s a good thing. The fact that Afghanistan is not a modern democracy, or that Al Qaida has fallen apart while other associated groups have risen in power, are not valid arguments against the fact that we had to invade to do what we did to those who plotted the 9/11 attacks.
My attitude at the time (although I can’t recall if I posted it here) was that Bush’s message was, essentially, “I have sources telling me that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction. I can not let you judge the veracity of these sources without compromising them. You will have to trust me.” I saw it as Bush staking his personal credibility on the WMD claims. I wanted someone to put his certainty to the test and ask him if he would resign the presidency if no weapons were found.
You are right-most of the Congress voted for the wars. Even SOS John Kerry “was for the wars before he was against them”.
Wow…that thread has the first post I made on this board in it. 
At least I didn’t bash Cecil for his position, nor was I a fervent pro-war fanatic. I can’t believe I got away with calling someone an idiot in GD though…where were the Mods??
There is no mention of Congress or John Kerry in my post.