For this guy-anything's better than going back to Iraq

[MrChristo]

Some think perhaps because they are both honest, reliable, and forthright. I however, had my suspicions about both parties.

.

Sounds to me like I'm not the only one on an "I told you so" roll

you fail to learn from history

But it seems we are SO much wiser after having meddled around in the Middle East for the last 50 years.
If history is going to tell you anything in any of this, it's that ****ing about with other countries 'politics' and telling them to become part of the west or else HAS NEVER WORKED AND WILL NEVER WORK!!

Now you're falling back on the 'we are there to help the people' routine??

Funnily enough, it has nothing to do with intellectual elitism....It's just not that hard to work out when you look at ALL the information, not just......
America Rules...We are the good guys

(btw...Did you hear that on Fox news )

 

[gardenweasel]

gentlemen......what should be done now?.....

about nuclear proliferation?....involving iran specifically.....

what should be done about the u.n.?....

if saddam had HAD nuclear/biological/chemical weapons..if he`d had them(and i`m not convinced that something wasn`t shipped into syria prior to the invasion) ...and we had followed the corrupt u.n.`s lead...had done what most of muslim influenced europe wanted us to do...turn our heads while everyone`s pockets were lined...including some of our own..and let saddam skate once again.....with the help of his u.n. bribed cronies....

because if we`d let him be....if nothing had been done....he`d have resumed his pursuit of wmd`s...lord knows,he`s been trying to procure them for over 2 decades...

what if he`d had them when he went into kuwait?..he was quoted as saying that "his biggest mistake was not having nuclear weapons before invading kuwait"....if he`d had them,he`d probably stilll have kuwait...


or.....

we`d probably have seen nuclear weapons thudding into israel instead of poorly guided scuds....forcing an arab/israeli conflict of proportions that are unimaginable.....and giving him what he`s wanted....a united arab front in a final war with israel...


why didn`t he have nukes,then,when he went into kuwait?.....

because,as we all know,...or should know...(a little history lesson)..... that with france`s help,he was well along in building his nuclear reactor OSIRAK(french designed and provided....hot cells from germany) in the early 80`s until israel,in the interest of it`s own self preservation,bombed the thing out of existence before it went hot....probably saving thousands of iraqi lives...

not to mention maybe a million lives in israel.....when saddam hit an unprovoked israel during the gulf war....and let`s not forget the burning of the kuwaiti oil fields...an ecological disaster,the ramifications of which are still felt to this day...


that`s what saddam wanted...he wasn`t a nuisance....he`s been a threat for over 20 years...


saddam had referred to his having nuclear weapons circa 1980 as the "sword of
Nebuchadnezzar" to be used to destroy iraq's foes and restore the splendor of
Babylon to the arab world.....

i don`t know whether removing saddam and the occupation was a good idea....in hindsight,maybe not..certainly should have been prosecuted differently.....but the guy was a very dangerous psychopath with a history of wreaking havoc and was the lightening rod for middle eastern instability....



speaking of history repeating itself(lol),here comes iran......and i suspect that muslim influenced europe will pull another rope-a-dope while iran goes hot....

should nothing be done?....should israel be abandoned?......should nothing be done to try and preempt a possible full scale arab/israeli war that has the potential to destabilize the world`s main oil supply.....and make the iraqi war`s polarization of the west and radical islam look miniscule in comparison to the ramifications of an israeli/arab conflagration involving wmd`s....

beacuse if radical fundamentalist middle eastern countries start gaining a nuclear capability,how big of a stretch is it to presuppose that they may look to some surrogate terrorist entity to do their bidding in israel...or god forbid here in the states?....

can we count on the u.n. to do the right thing???????.........


lmao....

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

Mr Christo I would agree with you" if" all are true he would be in same boat as Mr Bill.

Bobby I disagree on pardons--throughout time Presidents have always pardoned political figures of there own party--however Clinton is only I know of to dip into criminal elements substantially.

--and how anyone can remotely compare

""I am pardoning him not just out of compassion or to spare a 75-year-old patriot the torment of lengthy and costly legal proceedings, but to make it possible for him to receive the honor he deserves for his extraordinary service to our country," Bush said in a proclamation granting executive clemency"

to a midnight pardon of top 10 Most Wanted Fugitive for cash with ""NO"" explaination.
What type of logic is that?

 

[BobbyBlueChip]

Dogs,

I guess George the Greater and you share a different definition of "patriot" and "public servant" than I do. Clinton did have excuses for the Rich pardon, they just weren't very good . . . just like George's.

 

[kosar]

Among Rich's crimes were oil deals with Iran during the hostage crisis and ties to arms smuggling.

Ummmmm...... :shrug:

 

[djv]

I just can't understand our great war planners for this war. Not expecting the war to be fought as it has. They been fighting this way for years. It just didn't start with us invading Iraq. It started back in the 80's with us. With Israel it's been that way for 40 years. Who really thought they would have a huge army just dig in and fight as they did in WW I, II & Korea. There been signs since befor 9/11. So we go in like WW II and it's now just as it has been for a long time. Hit and Run. They will keep doing it if were there or not.

 

[Eddie Haskell]

With regard to the "insurgents" blowing themselves up, why are some of you apparently outraged by Iraqi citizens killing Americans.
I mean one mans insurgent is another mans freedom fighter. After all the British press referred to our forefathers as "insurgents" 225 years ago. Why do we honor Washington and condemn King George? Was Benedict Arnold a traitor or a hero? As everything in life, it depends on your perspective. The old adage that the winner writes history is very true.

Put yourself in their shoes for a minute. A foreign country invades their land under the apparently mistaken belief that their countries leaders have weapons of mass destruction. None are found.

I guess they should just shrug their shoulders and say okay now lets elect a new leader. The comparison to our invasion of Iraq and the Japaneese attack on Pearl Harbor is eriely similar.

I can understand Iraqi's doing what there doing. I wonder how many of you would have fought against King George or with him? I think instead of neo-cons or conservatives labels I may want to borrow a label the revolutionary Americans applied to those residents of this country (after independence was declared) gave to those fighting with the British.

Loyalists.

Eddie

 

[kosar]

With regard to the "insurgents" blowing themselves up, why are some of you apparently outraged by Iraqi citizens killing Americans.
I mean one mans insurgent is another mans freedom fighter. After all the British press referred to our forefathers as "insurgents" 225 years ago. Why do we honor Washington and condemn King George? Was Benedict Arnold a traitor or a hero? As everything in life, it depends on your perspective. The old adage that the winner writes history is very true.

Put yourself in their shoes for a minute. A foreign country invades their land under the apparently mistaken belief that their countries leaders have weapons of mass destruction. None are found.

I guess they should just shrug their shoulders and say okay now lets elect a new leader. The comparison to our invasion of Iraq and the Japaneese attack on Pearl Harbor is eriely similar.

I can understand Iraqi's doing what there doing. I wonder how many of you would have fought against King George or with him? I think instead of neo-cons or conservatives labels I may want to borrow a label the revolutionary Americans applied to those residents of this country (after independence was declared) gave to those fighting with the British.

Loyalists.

Eddie

Most of these guys don't want to hear that, Eddie. It's beyond the capability of many (no offense to Freeze personally) to try to project themselves into citizens of another countrys situation.

I think if anybody asked himself, in an honest way, what we would do if we were them, the answer is obvious. We would fight.

As mentioned by someone (maybe DJV), this is nothing new for that region and certainly should not come as a surprise. The mighty USSR got run out of Afghanistan by a rag tag group employing the exact same methods. Like it or not, this is how they fight.

How Rummy, Wolfowitz, Perle and the rest of the geniuses responsible for this war 'plan' could have expected any different is baffling and incredible. There is/was thousands of years of precedence, but God told Dubya that it's possible to democracize Iraq, so here we are.

 

[gardenweasel]

the only thing you left out ,clownselor,is that this particular leader and his henchmen were a part of the minority that oppressed and murdered those of other religious and/or tribal factions.....

the opposition figures were persecuted, arrested, executed and even assassinated abroad....iraq became a police-state ruled by fear and brutality.
the dictator of iraq was running fake elections where he was ‘re-elected’ as president with 99.99% of the votes for consecutive terms until he was overthrown in april 2003....

in addition to regular persecution, mass military operations were carried against iraqis who opposed the regime. In 1987 the baath regime killed thousands of kurds in northern iraq using chemical weapons. In 1992 the regime massacred thousands of opposition shaiis in southern iraq and thousands of kurds in northern iraq destroying whole cities and villages.



many of these "freedom fighters" aren`t even iraqi`s...some are islamofascist terrorists funneled in through baathist run syria....most are old hardline baathists left over from the republican guard....


it`s hardly the broad national insurgency that you make it out to be....with civilians fighting house to house to free their homeland from the "invaders"...

if you really think the majority of kurds and shiia want saddam back,you are deluded,to say the least....

it`s not the revolutionary war.....it`s the remnants of the old saddam hardline baathists,along with some imported islamofascists fighting to regain their brutal stanglehold on the country......

whom,i suspect,will go on an unprecedented binge of mass murder to derail any chance the iraqi`s have at trying to hold any sort of "real"elections......

with much help from assad and the syrians...who basically rule their country much in the manner of saddam...

i agree,though,that this war was prosecuted badly....the aftermath was botched horribly...

but,your repesentation of these hardline baathists and terrorists as freedom fighters is ridiculously flawed....using the word "freedom" to describe the oppressors who only want to again assume their control and resume the oppression is silly....

 

[kosar]

GW,

Semantics aside, I don't think it really matters what term one wants to use to describe these people that are fighting. The bottom line is that it's not only the Sunni's causing the problems. Election or no election, when we leave, civil war will ensue.

Maybe we can assume that about 60% of the country is happy that Saddam is gone. That's the same 60% that will almost certainly take over right where Saddam left off. Same deal, just different players. I guess one difference will probably be that the new regime will run Iraq just like Iran is run. Ruled by Islamic Fundamentalists.

Saddam was bad, but let's wait and see what emerges in his place and then determine whether the new regime is more of a threat to us than Saddam ever was. That won't be difficult to determine since Saddam was no threat at all.

Meanwhile we'll continue to read about 2 dead troops here, 12 wounded troops there. Iraqi civilians being blown up 50 at a time.

But we're staying the course.

 

[gardenweasel]

well.....i can`t say that i`m enthused or optimistic about iraq`s chances at having some sort of representative government with saddam gone....

after years of tribalism,oppression and unrest....and considering that some of iraq`s neighbors will never cease trying to undermine any attempt at anything other than some sort of totalitarian society...be it religious or secular....

i agree...



but to paint these people as "the good guys"....and that`s what eddie was doing...trying once again to paint these people as being oppressed by the removal of saddam and the american occupation,is ludicrous...

do you really think that our goal is to oppress the iraqis?...or was it to remove a real threat and try to leave something behind that might be a little better than what was there....

i believe saddam was a real threat...was the occupation and physical removal of saddam smart....i don`t know....time will tell...

but,to say that a guy that:

tried terribly hard to procure multiple types of wmd`s(documented)....

resisted u.n. efforts at verifying the status of his wmd programs...and the destruction of his chemical stockpiles...

invaded his neighbors...

murdered his own people

lobbed scuds into israel after invading kuwait..scuds that may well have been nukes had his french built reactor not been bombed out of existence by the israeli`s......

burned the kuwaiti oil fields

tried to hatch a plot to assasinate george bush sr.....

is no threat?....what`s threatening,then?...

no threat to middle eastern stability?...to israel?......to the most oil rich region in the world that our entire economy...that a large part of the world`s economy hinges on?.....

just beacuse europe never gives a damn...as they didn`t in the lead up to ww2.....that they`re just as happy turning their heads if bribed properly....doesn`t mean that we have to be just as irresponsible....

how many times do you have to revisit saddam and his antics before you decide enough is enough?....

do not forget that practically everyone believed that saddam had wmd`s.....or was going to resume the pursuit of same as soon as he was able....and that he resisited attempts at verification of same....and never did provide proof that he disposed of his chemical stockpiles.....

do you really want to sit by...depending on the u.n. to police some of these rogue dictator`s pursuit of wmd`s in the volatile middle east?....

knowing that they could easily use these terrorist groups as surrogates to destroy israel and plunge the region into mass chaos?.....or hit our country....again....

how should this be handled?...

just throw up our hands and say,"the cat`s out of the bag?"......"we can`t unring this bell?".....

and just walk away now...before elections...leaving the country in utter chaos....abandoning those there that want change...because i believe that the majority wants change...it was the majority that was oppressed,murdered and terrorized for the better part of 2 decades...

while again,the minority attempts to undermine this attempt...and assume their control...

is the message that you want to send that this country will cut and run based on it`s casualty count?....

i don`t mean to be callous about the brave young men that have sacrificed...but,that`s what these tyrants are counting on.....

get these elections done...train the iraqi`s to be as self sufficient as possible,and get out as soon as is humanly possible...

then history will be the judge...

 

[kosar]

No, I don't think we should walk away before the elections. I do think we should start withdrawing shortly after, though.

Bottom line, to me, is that he was contained. We had just been attacked by another entity that had nothing to do with Iraq. The timing for this abortion was horrible and the implementation 10x worse.

 

[gardenweasel]

the post war occupation was horribly planned and the resistance was totally miscalculated........

i can`t argue that....

but representing saddam as some minor nuisance in the most important region in the world is to ignore history,imo...

 

[MrChristo]

I don't think Eddie was making them out as 'good guys' gw, but (as kosar said) he is trying to point out that there are two sides to this.
(As I've been trying to do for months, but keep getting the old Anti-American tag!)
Whether you or I like it, they believe they are right! They believe they have a cause. No-one blows themselves up for fun!! They have strong beliefs, and are quite willing to use extreme methods to defend their beliefs.

As a few of us are saying.... Why does this come as a surprise to anyone???

the dictator of iraq was running fake elections where he was ?re-elected? as president with 99.99% of the votes

I was wondering why all those Iraqi's were lining up to vote in Florida!!

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

"With regard to the "insurgents" blowing themselves up, why are some of you apparently outraged by Iraqi citizens killing Americans."

I think their killing more Iraqi's than U.S. millitary if I'm not mistaken I think you (inadvertantly)forgot to mention the beheading and assasinations of civilians.

---and on your
"I guess they should just shrug their shoulders and say okay now lets elect a new leader. The comparison to our invasion of Iraq and the Japaneese attack on Pearl Harbor is eriely similar."
---I can't think of one similarity--could you elaborate???

Matt: Good one

Quote:
Originally Posted by DOGS THAT BARK
Among Rich's crimes were oil deals with Iran during the hostage crisis and ties to arms smuggling.


Ummmmm......

 

[gardenweasel]

the really interesting aspect of how the iraqi situation plays out will be the struggle for power if our efforts fail......

interesting...like watching a train wreck is interesting.......

who will succeed in gaining their stranglehold on the country?....who will be the new tyrant on the block?..

the old saddam sunni baathists.....and their totalitarian,more secularly leaning ilk.....or the islamofascist terrorists that have come into the country to fight any non-islamic westerners....or to just blow up and decapitate anyone that disagrees with their hardline islamist beliefs...

you`ll have the syrian baathists on one border....probably leaning and supporting their sunni brethren...even though they are reportedly currently assisting the terrorists entering iraq over their border....

in the other corner,you have hardline islamist iran,who would like nothing better than seeing their neighbor become another islamic theocracy.....

or...the country could be fractured into 3 entities...the kurds.....the sunni`s and the shiia....

this isn`t likely because the country almost solely depends on it`s oil production as it`s underpinning.....and there`s no way that they would ever agree on a plan to split up it`s oil fields and production capacity...with some of the major resources falling along the borders of the 3 factions....

and throw in the turks...who would seriously frown on an independent kurdistan...that could destabilize kurdish-majority southeastern turkey, rekindling the violence in which 30,000 turks and kurds died during the 1990s........

we should all pray...that regardless of our political leanings,that somehow,some way,this longshot comes in....

 

[kosar]

Good post, GW.

Whatever happens will not be pretty, just as the Saddam regime wasn't pretty.

I think in the end we'll find that we just traded dollars, as far as the Iraqi quality of life goes. With absolutely no benefit to America.

Of course, that doesn't speak to the thousands of American lives lost and the tens of thousands wounded.

It doesn't speak to the vulnerability that we have right now, militarily.

If Kim Jong-il ever intends to attack South Korea, this is the time.

And this is all for nothing.

The legitimate points that DTB makes about Libya, and to a certain extent Pakistan cooperating in some ways (although 'pardoning' their scientist that helped rogue nations develop nukes isn't exactly that promising) are mitigated by the fact that these things could have been accomplished without this Iraq debacle.

As i've said before, that reactor that Israel destroyed in a 3 hour raid did more for the worlds security than our 18 months of occupation, billions of dollars, thousands of lives destroyed or ended with no end anywhere in sight. This is the best that we could come up with? Sad.

 

[gardenweasel]

we`ll have to disagree on saddam`s level of threat....i laid it out...obviously you dismiss his track record...

you have any plans or concerns about nuclear proliferation in the middle east?...and how to stop it?...

or should we just take shots at the administration...that won`t make it all go away....complaining...

forget playing politics...

how could we confirm that saddam was clean?...

how will we verify that iran isn`t going hot?

the u.n. is useless...that`s a fact...and it`s dirty...

what`s the alternative plan?

millions of lives may depend on it...not a thousand......

what`s the plan?...

 

[djv]

G W no plan that's the problem. We just react. If there was a plan Korea would be no threat. Watch Russia close. There slipping back toward the cold war doctrine. Again no plan. Iran there is a plan. Same as plan was for Iraq. We Can only hope it's done better. They do have people in Iran that really do hope we come and help them.

 

[dr. freeze]

so whats your plan? how would you have made sure Hussein was not a nuclear threat?

how would you have enforced the cease fire treaty?

how would you have restored the US credibility after 10 years of inaction?

lets hear what our other options were instead of this nauseating criticism

and what in the world does all this accomplish now? NOTHING BUT DEMORALIZE OUR ARMY

there was no plan for Europe reconstruction when we went to WWII, nor was there for Europe reconstruction when we went to WWI, nor was there a plan for post war Iraq in the Gulf war, blah blah blah

get that into your thick head you dont go to war with an exit strategy....you have to adjust as you go....so far we have done a poor job adjusting....now what can we do to make it better?

lets get some solutions!!!!