The Iraq War in retrospect: Victory on almost all fronts

Great Debates
121

Aside from the horrible folly of the invasion, there is one niggling little thing that drives me nuts: the constant use of the simple declarative sentence.

“They hate our freedoms.”

“Mission accomplished.”

“The Taliban has been ousted.”

“The people of Iraq have elected a democratic government.”

Saying it doesn’t make it so. Of all the crimes against understanding that the Bush administration is guilty of, all the distortions and lies and hypocritical posturing, I think this is the one that shows most plainly what they are.

The real world is a complicated place full of complicated issues. These idiotic remarks, these assertions, are mind-numbingly, moronically simple and mean absolutely nothing.

122

[QUOTE=Weirddave]
You asked me how we would know victory has been achieved, and I answered. What’s not clear?
[/QUOTE]
The part where the United States spends a decade more in Iraq, losing trillions of dollars and who knows how many American and Iraqi lives, so that we finally end up exactly where we started from.

I know that can’t be what you’re really arguing, but I feel like I’m missing a step here. If your goal is an Iraq functionally identical to the Hussein regime, then why did you support the war to begin with?

ETA: Feel free to regard that last question as rhetorical, as it’s probably an unacceptably tangential digression. Still, that was the reason for my confusion.

123

[QUOTE=John Mace]
Got a new tin-foil cap for Christmas, did you?
[/QUOTE]

If you don’t keep it aligned with magnetic North, it doesn’t work. Trust me on this.

124

http://afamilyinbaghdad.blogspot.com/ Read from an Iraqi view and tell them about the success.

125

[QUOTE=Weirddave]
You asked me how we would know victory has been achieved, and I answered. What’s not clear?
[/QUOTE]
What is perfectly clear is that the conditions for victory, according to your definition, existed in Iraq before we invaded.

126

In that case, failure was not an option!

127

[QUOTE=John Mace]
Got a new tin-foil cap for Christmas, did you?
[/QUOTE]
Sadly, eyes wide open, thank you very much.

128

[QUOTE=mlees]
Why are my posts empty? I am really trying to say something…
[/QUOTE]

They’re not empty, but they are a bit…strange. When did you start calling yourself “Pazuzu”?

129

[QUOTE=elucidator]
They’re not empty, but they are a bit…strange. When did you start calling yourself “Pazuzu”?
[/QUOTE]

You whooshed me, sir. I insist you desist.

130

When you whoosh upon a star…

131

Does fiction belong in GD? 'cause judging by the OP’s title that’s what’s being ‘debated’ right?

Inquiring minds wanna know.

132

[QUOTE=Weirddave]
When there is a government stable enough to maintain order within it’s own borders and also to protect itself from outside invasion (with U.S. help would be OK, U.S. troops should not be involved in the day to day security of the nation).
[/QUOTE]

I share Wierd Dave’s confusion as to how the cost could be justified, to achieve such negligible if any improvement.

Well, in your opinion, was it worth it? I think not no. Back in 03, I had no clue that our country’s budget was such that it could readily assume an additional expenditure of - say - $100 billion a year. So, what should we have given up to pay for this war? Or, if it is merely a matter of massaging the numbers, why don’t we use the same accounting methods to fully fund if not double or triple every domestic spending program, etc.?

Sorry if I sound flip, but I’m truly trying to figure out your position on this. Going into it one of the many reasons I opposed the invasion was because of the unpredictability and costliness of war. IMO, overthrowing Saddam - with whatever results were reasonably likely (something short of being welcomed with flowers and the trops home in 3 months) - did not warrant spending so much more on this one area that could be spent on countless domestic areas. Energy research, schools, infrastructure, - you understand this list could easily be quite long.

Does it bother you at all that TPTB flat out denied any such timescale prior to the invasion?

133

[QUOTE=Terrifel]
The part where the United States spends a decade more in Iraq, losing trillions of dollars and who knows how many American and Iraqi lives, so that we finally end up exactly where we started from.

I know that can’t be what you’re really arguing, but I feel like I’m missing a step here. If your goal is an Iraq functionally identical to the Hussein regime, then why did you support the war to begin with?

ETA: Feel free to regard that last question as rhetorical, as it’s probably an unacceptably tangential digression. Still, that was the reason for my confusion.
[/QUOTE]

I’ll answer your question, but it’s not a short answer and I don’t have time to type it out now.

134

[QUOTE=Baldwin]
Careful; I just got a mild reprimand for doing that.
[/QUOTE]

I don’t think it’s the same. The poster was proposing a conspiracy theory (and I pretty wild one, at that), and “tin-foil hat” is a standard way to describe such theories around here.

135

Now the press is being accused of causing losses on Fallujah.

Wow. I never thought it’d get to this point.

136

Dude? Instapundit? Fuhgeddaboutit!

137

[QUOTE=elucidator]
Dude? Instapundit? Fuhgeddaboutit!
[/QUOTE]

Maybe so, but it’s based off a Washington Times article that basically says the same thing.

I don’t know what the Time’s political reputation is, but I have a feeling it’s read by a lot more folks than that website. I only included the Instapundit bit to show the context in which this article was being displayed.

138

[QUOTE=Chouan]
You’re so cute when you make your sweeping moral judgments. Of course the Iraqis are better off (and more free) than they were under Saddam. If you denounced Saddam during his rule, you were dead. Today, you can criticize the Iraqi government, and you won’t be killed.
[/QUOTE]

It depends on the neighborhood you live in.

[QUOTE=Chouan]
If he didn’t have the tools to make WMDs, then how did he kill all those Kurds with poison gas in Halabja? or chemical weapons against Kurds in Al-Anfal? And if Saddam was so opposed to terrorists, then why did he provide financial aid to widows of Hamas and Islamic Jihad “martyrs”?.
[/QUOTE]

Geopolitics? Anyone remember what the point of the scuds launched against Israel in 1991 were about?

[QUOTE=Chouan]
Please show me a citation proving that these actions by Americans were part of our policy–as opposed to a few misguided soldiers acting without authorization. In contrast, such actions were Saddam’s official policy.
[/QUOTE]

“Simply because you don’t have evidence that something does exist does not mean that you have evidence that something doesn’t exist…Well what I’m sayin’ is that there are known knowns and that there are known unknowns but there’s also unknown unknowns. Things we don’t know that we don’t know.” -Gin Rummy, Ep. 5 Boondocks

[QUOTE=Chouan]
and what about Zarqawi? In the field of war, sure, the enemy can engage with American soldiers (and other members of the coalition)… but they typically take the route of unlawful combatants, rather than facing us openly in battle. They’re one step up from the chickenshit terrorists, if you ask me.
[/QUOTE]

And bombing them from 60,000 ft makes you a brave warrior? Who you calling chicken? I dare you to go on foot patrol in Sadr city…go on, you know want to.

[QUOTE=Chouan]
You call hired security personnel scum, but you praise the actions of terrorists and unlawful combatants? Interesting.
[/QUOTE]

They’re all scum. You should distinguish between legitimate perceived resistance fighters and terrorists. Maybe they not all terrorists be. Interesting, huh?

[QUOTE=Chouan]
Lt. Col. Dan Wilson said that Fallujah was “the bright ember in the ash pit of the insurgency, and we needed to douse it.” And douse it they did–violence is down and the local security forces have stabilized the entire region. I’d call that a victory.
[/QUOTE]

Yes, it’s a pity almost no one lives there anymore.

[QUOTE=Chouan]
Iraq saw an almost 80% turnout for the 2005 elections. If that’s not a democracy, then what is the US with its 42.45% turnout in the 2004 presidenial elections?
[/QUOTE]

Yes, we should all follow the role model provided. The greater the turnout, the greater the free civic spirit on display.

[QUOTE=Chouan]
As for Bush being a monster, I’d like to know what you would do to secure America in the wake of 9/11.
[/QUOTE]

He is our best friend. Incidentally, could you not convince another relative of his to run for election? We are all convinced (from our cave) that he would continue in the noble tradition of Bush Sr. Shock and awe is a most beautiful vision for the future. If I may so humbly add, gentle sir, to enhance our global struggle, please send some boots on the ground in Pakistan, the moment is quite ripe. And we will gladly welcome boots on the ground in Lebanon to provide a new magnet and recruitment advertisement. If you must, go to Iran as well, but while you’re at it, please do some regime changing in Turkey. I am sure this will greatly help in our recruitment and promote the most noble virtues of Jihad.

:smack: I almost forgot, not to give undue influence to Santa’s to-do list, but could you pass on the message to the CIA outstation in Karachi that the latest batch of condensed milk of nestle wasn’t top quality and next time to add some more sweeteners? you see, some in our ranks have started following Jane Fonda’s exercise routine and wish to discontinue their intake to sugar. The kids these days, they really have their priorities mixed up.

139

[QUOTE=John Mace]
I don’t think it’s the same. The poster was proposing a conspiracy theory (and I pretty wild one, at that), and “tin-foil hat” is a standard way to describe such theories around here.
[/QUOTE]
What’s so “wild” about it ? Corporations, churches and politicians do all sorts of similar propaganda campaigns all the time. I’d be rather surprised if the Bush ( and the majority of Congress for that matter ) weren’t doing what Cervaise suggested, and similar things.

140

[QUOTE=Der Trihs]
What’s so “wild” about it ? Corporations, churches and politicians do all sorts of similar propaganda campaigns all the time. I’d be rather surprised if the Bush ( and the majority of Congress for that matter ) weren’t doing what Cervaise suggested, and similar things.
[/QUOTE]

I rest my case.