Still Think The War Was Unnecessary?

[cjboffoli]

JoB: C’mon, you can’t blame the US for making Saddam who he was. Saddam Hussein was like that friend you make during your first month of college. He seemed really cool at first and you seemed to have so much in common with him. You both hated the same guy who lived in the dorm suite next door. But then you spent some time with him and he started acting crazy, maybe drinking too much and doing too many hard drugs and until you realized that maybe it wasn’t such a good idea to be associating with that guy. And of course you went into it thinking you’d be BFF’s forever so you shared with him all of this cool stuff that later on you weren’t so happy to let him hang on to because it totally wasn’t worth asking for the crap back.

Share This

[Anonymous]

cjboffoli – I love your analogy! That was great.

I also liked what you said in your earlier post. I, too, am tired of everyone blaming Bush, when, basically, he was cleaning up the mess that was left for him.

In fact, when and IF Obama takes office, I cannot wait to blame him for our economy, our recession. It’s, supposedly, starting before his term isn’t it? It’s easy to jump on that bandwagon, though.

elgrego – Even though I thought we were flirting in another thread, I can see your disagreement with the link I posted. You have been there, on the front line. Who better to have an opinion. Thank you for sharing yours.

Btw, I’m not looking for sympathy. I’m just trying to educate myself. I love to see all the different angles and views (without the hatred, preferably).

Share This

[Anonymous]

Also, Ken, I wanted to let you know that I am reading the Intelligence report that you linked to.

I need a little time to go through it. It is 174 pages. But I will read it and I understand that this is considered “proof” that the points made by Feith are untrue.

It should be interesting to get a “conservative” opinion on the report, as I already have read points that substantiate the opinion that the Iraqi government had restarted its nuclear weapons program.

Share This

[JoB]

cjboffoli..

saddam wasn’t the cool friend. saddam was the useful friend.. and we turned a blind eye to everything he did until he wasn’t useful any more…

Share This

[RS]

Exactly JoB. We might not have made him what he was, but he got there with our support. We have a pretty ridiculous history of doing that- arming the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan when it suited our purpose against the Soviets, supporting Mobuto because he was staunchly anti-communist despite being a total despot, supporting the Khmer Rouge for years because they too were anti-Soviet, over-throwing the democratically elected Mossadegh and replacing him with the Shah, and then of course our illustrious history with the Contras in Nicaragua… and we wonder why people in other countries find our motives suspect when we “liberate” places like Iraq.

Share This

[Erik]

NewRes – For a pre-history to the current conflict you might google ‘Aqaba pipeline project’. This will take you back to 83′ when Rumsfeld went to Iraq (and during the iran/iraq conflict) to try and negotiate a pipeline deal from Iraq to Jordan with Saddam.

Share This

[add]

“I, too, am tired of everyone blaming Bush, when, basically, he was cleaning up the mess that was left for him.”

Um, no, I don’t think so. Not going to start listing facts & data, but that comment is just not right or fair!

Share This

[Anonymous]

But, add, putting EVERYTHING on Bush is not right either (or fair).

Take some time and read the 9/11 Commission Report, or even the Intelligence report that Ken linked to.

What I don’t understand is the hatred for America that is prevalent throughout this thread. Every post on this thread condemns our very own country.

Share This

[JimmyG]

Sweeping generalizations will get you in trouble NR.

Every post on this thread does NOT condemn our country. Mine in particular don’t, nor do several others.

And on the 4th of July I have to point out that discourse about “our very own country” is a good thing. We need to be able to critique, and yes, even criticize our elected officials and our government. That’s how advances are made.

Share This

[RS]

Knowing both the goods and the bads of our very own country’s history is vital to understanding the context of current events. I’ve spent a great deal of time overseas, and have been disturbed to realize that a lot of people outside of this country know our recent history better than we do. But I most certainly don’t hate America, and resent the implication that questioning some of our government’s foreign policy decisions somehow makes me less patriotic.

Share This

[JoB]

You can condemn American policies without condemning America…

Understanding those policies.. and how they were created to protect American business interests… often at the cost of the american people… is the first step to understanding what really needs to change.

I intend to celebrate being an American today.

It’s my country.. and i love it too much to leave it in the hands of those who are bent on destroying the very things that have made it a great country in the name of profit…

Share This

[charlabob]

Going along with everything America(sic) does is a reflection of true hatred, masked by lazy indifference. Of course, even claiming to going along is false — it is, in fact, going along with the corporatist systematic destruction of the United States by destroying what it used to stand for in the world.

As JoB and RS said, it is our country too and we will not be driven away by lies and hyperbole.

Share This

[JoB]

charlabob..

sometimes going along is a reflection of ignorance…

i know none of us think we are brainwashed.. but we all have been exposed to a lifetime (for some) of a media that has become little more than a sensation seeking mouthpiece for corporate interests…

I think it is impossible not to be affected by that..

The good news is that ignorance isn’t so difficult to change… once you get over the hump of defensiveness.

indifference takes personal hardship.. and sometimes even that is not enough.

Share This

[Anonymous]

It was incorrect to state that every post on this thread condemns America.

I should have said, almost every post condemns our Administration. Understandably. I “get” why people are upset with our President.

I believe that true “ignorance” is the inability to look at something for yourself and come to your OWN conclusion. I also think there is a lot of “going along” on BOTH party lines.

Happy 4th!

Share This

[RS]

NR, I was condemning some of the decisions of our administration… and those of previous administrations going back decades! I’m not just blindly condeming Bush. I’m really condeming the Root Doctrine… and outing myself as a total foreign policy nerd.

Looking at the facts and coming to your own conclusion IS a good idea, but you have to have all the facts. This thread struck a cord with me because I believe a lot of people in this country don’t have all the very basic who-did-what-when facts of our history, which impact what actions our government takes today and how the rest of the world perceives those actions.

Share This

[Anonymous]

RS – I agree. I actually printed out the Intelligence report that Ken linked to and think it is great reading on determining the who-did-what-when. It holds Bush and Cheney to what they have publicly stated. And goes into detail about when things were said, what was known at the time it was said, etc..

I highly recommend reading it. Thanks again, Ken!

Share This

[elgrego]

“What I don’t understand is the hatred for America that is prevalent throughout this thread. Every post on this thread condemns our very own country. “

First of all, NR, I’m sorry. I was unduly hostile to you before. Call it a bad day or whatever, but I was wrong to get pissy with you.

In regards to your above statement, I disagree. I don’t think there is any anti-Americanism displayed in this thread that I’ve seen.

I think a lot of people will agree with me that we’re just disappointed with where America has gone since 9/11.

I remember reading the headline of the French newspaper “Le Monde” that said “Today, we are all Americans” after 9/11. Even Castro sent his sympathies, as did Iran (IIRC). We had the world in the palm of our hand. We could have done great things.

Yes, the invasion of Afghanistan was justified. I think most people in the US and the world understood that, and still agree with us (which is why so many countries are there with us now). But instead of doing anything to promote the greater good in the US and the world as a whole, we turned around and invaded Iraq.

I don’t know about you, but I was raised with the belief that America is not an aggressive country. I realize now that I was a bit naive with this belief, even before Iraq, but the idea that we’d invade another country that did nothing to provoke us was beyond foul for me. Iraq wasn’t a threat. Yeah, Saddam was a dick, but a lot of people in the world are (Mugabe, Chavez, Kim Jong Il, etc.). He wasn’t a threat. I can’t say that enough.

I’m all for America being a defender of liberty and freedom around the world (be it individual freedom or protecting the sovereignty of other nations/states). I thought we did the right thing in ’90/’91. In Haiti. In Somalia (at least we tried). In Bosnia. Even Vietnam, I think, had some noble intent to it (which got screwed up in the process…). But my America doesn’t invade people. Nazi Germany does that. Imperial Japan does that.

I think what you perceive as anti-American sentiment in this thread is just people sharing my disappointment with what we’ve become, and the loss of what we could have been.

Share This

[Anonymous]

elgrego – Thank you.

That was an incredibly honest, eloquent and sentimental post.

I agree with a lot of what you just said.

Have fun celebrating our country today!!!!!!

Share This

[Anonymous]

Ken – I have finished reading through the very first report that you linked me to a couple days ago.

This report was in regards to whether the President’s, V.P’s, Secretary of State’s and other members of the current Administration’s statements were substantiated by current intelligence. In other words, what DID we know?

The final outcome, was that, yes, they were substantiated.

What we knew, to break it down, is this:

a.) There were intelligence community estimates that substantiated a possible Iraq nuclear weapons program.

b.) There was intelligence information that substantiated Iraq’s possession of biological agent, weapons, production capability and use of mobile biological laboratories.

c.) There was intelligence information that substantiated Iraq’s possession of chemical weapons.

d.) There was intelligence information substantiating Iraq’s possession of weapons of mass destruction.

e.) There was intelligence that substantiated that Iraq was developing unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) that could be used to deliver chemical or biological weapons.

f.) There was intelligence information substantiating Iraq’s support for terrorist groups other than al-Qa’ida.

g.) There was intelligence information that substantiated that Iraq provided safe haven for Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and other al-Qa’ida related terrorist members.

There is plenty more, but I’m pretty sure almost no one will even read what I have already provided.

You can read the report yourself, if you follow the link that Ken gave earlier in this thread.

Why aren’t more people aware of all of the information that we DID have? I found this fact of the report (in the final conclusion), extremely interesting:

“The Democratic majority, in the partisan way it attempted to suppress intelligence information and skew the historical record, is betting that the public and the media will not take the time to read those and other minority views that expose its hypocrisy.”

Share This

[JoB]

NewResident…

i commend you for reading all 172 pages of that report…

but what you cite comes mainly from the dissenting remarks at the end of the report… led by Orin Hatch… not the conclusions of the full committee.

I know because i took the time to go back and check this morning in spite of having read all 172 pages myself when the report originally came out.

I am not surprised that the dissenting remarks are what you chose to focus on…

but do need to point out that your conclusions and quote came from the dissenting remarks at the end of the report… from 3 members of that bipartisan committee (if i remember correctly)… and not from the conclusions of the report itself.

The conclusions of the entire committee were not the same as those of the 3 (?) Republican members who posted their dissent at the end.

Share This

[Anonymous]

JoB – Of course you are going to disregard a quote that is unfavorable to your party. That was expected.

However, I’d be interested in hearing why, given all the intelligence information that we had at that time, was it wrong to go into Iraq?

Share This

[JoB]

NewResident..

i didn’t discard the quote because it was unfavorable to my party..

i pointed out that the quote you used to characterize the report was not supported by the majority of the evidence in that report… and therefore wasn’t part of the majority opinion.

Go back and look at the list of committee members.. and then find out what party they belonged to.

There were Republicans who did not agree with the dissenting opinion.

In fact, your candidate for president was one who chose not to join in the dissenting opinion written by Orin Hatch.

The majority opinion was based on the evidence.. which you should know since you read the entire report..

the dissenting opinion was based on your quote..

it assumed any evidence which did not agree with it’s opinion was fabricated or politically manipulated…

if you assume that everything you believe is correct…. and that all evidence to the contrary is incorrect… you can call anything truth… whether it is supported by the evidence or not.

given the suspect nature of all the evidence we had at the time and the fact that Iraq had absolutely nothing to do with the incident that triggered our reactions (911)…

i’d say it was a bad idea.

but if reading that report didn’t convince you of that, nothing anyone can say will.

Share This

[Anonymous]

And, JoB, if you cannot see ALL the evidence that was available to the President at that time that substantiated Iraq as a threat to the US and other countries and, therefore, continue to blame our President for acting irrationally by going to war, nothing will convince you otherwise, and nothing anyone can say will.

The Republicans didn’t agree because it was a re-writing of history in an attempt to distort facts.

“Although we are troubled by by all of the issues we have outlined thus far – that the report that was released today was a waste of Committee time and resources that should have been spent overseeing the intelligence community, that the report is part of a partisan agenda, that the report cherry picked information and distorted policymakers’ statements and intelligence, and that the majority refused to offer those it is accusing the opportunity to be heard – we are most concerned about the damage that this report will do, and that the whole Phase II effort has done for the past several years, in creating the impression that policymakers should be bound to make policy based on only that which is published in intelligence assessments. This is not only wrong, it is dangerous and contrary to everything else this Committee has done since it published its first report on the Iraq intelligence failure. It has the effect of encouraging intelligence community analysts to become policymakers, and encouraging policymakers to adhere strictly to whatever analysts write, when we know that intelligence analysis can be dangerously inaccurate. Have we forgotten how wrong the intelligence judgments were in the October 2002 Iraq WMD NIE and how many other intelligence failures we had before that one? Intelligence is not incontestable truth and it is only one factor out of many that a policymaker must consider before making a policy decision.”

Obviously, there is much criticism of the report overall. Reading it, you get the idea that it is a waste of recourses and time (as stated) and just an “attempt” to prove our Administration wrong.

Share This

[Anonymous]

Obviously the quotes I share will be refuted, however, I feel that, definitely on this forum, they shed light on an opinion and conclusion that is important for people to be aware of.

Share This

[JoB]

NewResident…

pointing out that the quotes you chose to present as representative of that report were part of the dissenting opinion and not that of the committee itself is not refuting anything. It is simply identifying your source.

You read the report and chose to focus on the partisan criticism some Republicans made of the report instead of commenting on the actual evidence… or referring to the commission’s findings.

That is your choice…

You assume that there is more damaging evidence that will exonerate the President… if only we had access to it.

That is also your choice…

However, i would point out to you that this committee included senators who are supposed to have access to that kind of information.. if it exists.

Perhaps you don’t understand how the committee reports work.. the committee report is what the public sees after all of the partisan negotiation has already happened during committee meetings about what can and will be reported.

the dissenting opinion on the other hand is purely partisan.. not subject to any negotiation…

I would like to know what evidence the Republicans succeeded in having removed from this report…

i have more faith in the existence of that evidence than i do in the supposedly secret evidence that would contradict the conclusions of this commission.

i hope we learn some of those answers in my lifetime… tho i don’t expect that we will.

I know you choose to see the world through the prism of Republican politics… but seeing the world through the prism of democratic politics is not the only other alternative.

Share This

[Author]

Posts