Quote:
|
Originally Posted by The_Jazz
So the WMD are going to magically appear someday?
|
No
Quote:
|
Even if I temporarily conceed that they did exist and were spirited away to Syria, they're never going to materialize. That was the majority of the arguement for our invasion in the first place.
|
Other reasons were given as well.
Quote:
|
Our goals then shifted to making Iraq "safe for democracy", etc. but I don't see how anyone can consider us closer to those goals now.
|
In war, conditions change. We are in war with an enemy that adapts to changing conditions they develop plans and strategies just as we do. We have unrealistic expectaions involving wars today.
Quote:
|
I don't think that I was clear enough with my description of the email, but there was a definite tone linking Iraq to Al Qaida.
|
The Germans had nothing to do with Peril Harbor. We declared war on Germany and Japan. The two were linked. Sadaam and Al Qaida had a common enemy, it was us.
Quote:
|
However, I think that what I highlighted in your statement is the gist of my arguement - the war won't end.
|
it will end when we win.
Quote:
|
I think it's important to note that the war won't end if we stay either.
|
We will have a military presence in the Middle East for decades into the future. Regardless of which party has control of the White House.
Quote:
|
The big problem is that there's no real way to quantify sucess in this conflict.
|
No civilian casualties due to terrorists attacks in our borders.
Quote:
|
The only positives are lack of negatives. Given that there are lots of negatives, it appears (whether it's true or not) that we're losing.
|
Not in my view. My biggest concern is that we don't have the will to finish the job and we will leave it for future generations to fight.
Quote:
|
I can't accept this statement in any fashion. If this were a war about defending our freedoms, we would have done better to focus on real threats to our freedom, such as the Chinese who seized an American military plane operating in internation airspace months before the Iraq war. Or we could have faced off against the North Koreans who I think I can easily catagorize as the loudest saber rattler in the world. If it were about getting the terrorists, why didn't we go after the head of the snake in the Saudi and Egyptian citizens that finance Al Qaida et al? Make no bones about it, the Bush administration chose to prosecute this war in the face of diplomacy. We chose the time and place for it and followed through on our threats.
|
If you disagree on strategy that is one thing, but I am not sure you agree with the threat to our freedom. If that is true why are you concerned about North Korea, etc, etc.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mixedmedia
So he was not an Islamic extremist, yet it was fitting to wage an all-out war against Iraq in the fight against Islamic extremism? Why does this make sense to you?
|
I understand the confusion but the two are seperate issues. If 9/11 never happened and there were no Islamic extremist wanting to kill us, Sadaam would have still been a problem. At some point there would have been a confrontation. I am relived it happened when he was in a weakened state with no weapons of mass destruction or chemical weapons, aren't you? Don't you agree, that Sadaam was a problem, that he wanted to re-build his military, that he wanted to control the Middle East and cause great harm to the US?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mixedmedia
Absolutely. But getting Bush loyalists to admit that we were lied to...even while espousing their own various ad hoc reasons for us going to war...is like pulling teeth. I'm not sure why it's so difficult to admit when faced with the obvious.
|
O.k. you were lied to. Bush tried to sugar coat the fact that we wanted to use Iraq as the global front in the war on terror. Removing Sadaam was a secondary benefit. But, wait - he actually said that, he just did not put enough emphsis on it, so you are still right you were lied to.
Also, he lied because he left some with the impression the threat was more imminent than it actually was. I think we are splitting hairs. I think it all depends on how you define imminent, as Bill would say.