Quote:
Originally Posted by aceventura3
I don't know what you folks want from me. It is clear in my mind that there was the initial phase of the war, the invasion and then a second phase which I would broadly describe as the occupation. The first phase was well planned and a success. The occupation was not initially well planed.
|
Sorry to post so late into the thread, but I've been reading it attentively from a distance, and waiting to hear more from the gov't on what was actually being done.
But now we're talking about something that is not happening now, but has happened in the past. it is now part of recent, well document, broadly covered history, and to twist it is just not helpful.
How was the first phase of the Iraq war a success, exactly? Maybe the first part of bringing our soldiers into Iraq and beginning combat was, as in, they did that. But the outcome was a total failure.
It's a war that was started on false claims of WMDs and threats to America, and there shouldn't even need to be a debate on it.
The invasion was not "a mission", it didn't have a clear set of goals, or even a truthful reason to exist. It was not correctly justified, and ended in the worst possible way: the need for American and other troops from around the world to die for several years, get injured for life and often times handicapped, trillions spent, a distraction from larger threats such as Afghanistan, and especially lying to the people that this was about fighting back after 9-11.
I do not feel that America is safer after this still ongoing war, but it could have been if American efforts were focused in a more effective way on
real threats to the American people.
To call what started this a "Mission accomplished" is a joke, no matter what way you turn it.
As for the other things being discussed in this thread, I would like to talk about later, since this thread's about Obama's achievements (hopefully) and not Bush's terms in office.