posted
I hate that we are in Iraq. I hate that American soldiers are being used as bait to draw every wacko in five counties. I hate that we attacked, I believe the instability in Iraq has made it more dangerous now than it was before, I am highly suspicious of American resolve to truly stay to finish cleaning up the mess, and in attacking first for made-up reasons, we lost all moral authority.
I want the troops to succeed, stay, build, keep the peace, and for Iraq to turn into an excellent democracy because it is too late now - Pandora's box has been opened. I'm supporting the troops (i.e. want them to win, now that we're there), but expressing my displeasure in the entire mission at the voting booth. The war in Iraq was a travesty.
I DO NOT like the idea of "American soldiers are dying. Shut up and wave your flag."
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
Glad we got that straightened out. Tact is not my strong point and sometimes things come out all wrong, I realized they were at about the same time you posted.
After hearing Black Fox's side of things though I've definitely come down on the side of the recent reservist hoopla with the reservists being whiny crybabies. Nobody WANTS to go through difficult circumstances, but they signed up to draw the paycheck knowing they might. They aren't going through things nearly as bad as the non-reservists and the non-reservists want to go home every bit as much.
The reservists are basically leaving the regular forces to hang out to dry by saying "we're special so we get to go home" rather than saying let's all pull together so we can ALL go home that much sooner.
I am not in the least convinced that the reasons for invasiion were fabricated. It appears that there were mistakes made in the intelligence community (*there's* a news flash! ) but acting on poor intelligence is not the same as making things up.
It's very easy to go back after the fact, sort through the documents and find out why we should have known about 9-11 or should have known that there were flaws in the evidence (which, BTW, there *is* evidence-- to skim the round of reports you would think we found nothing) of Chemical Weapons programs in Iraq.
To clarify, we have certainly not found what we were looking for, but we have found facilities that could have been used for chemical weapons fabrication and we have also found a few people who have testified to being part of a chemical weapons production and deployment program. (This according to the article I read on the Kay report).
Of note was this:
quote:Officials in Kay's 1,400-member Iraq Survey Group have also concluded, based on documents found in Iraq and information provided by captured members of Saddam's regime, that Iraq did destroy some of its chemical and biological weapons stockpile as the regime claimed before the U.S.-led war.
Saddam apparently decided not to disclose the destruction of his chemical and biological weapons because he wanted potential enemies to think he still had them.
(from USA Today emphasis mine)
This doesn't indicate that the US fabricated their evidence, but that, again, the Hussein Regime failed to comply with the UN resolution which *required* them to *prove* they had disposed of these wepons. Just because the UN bailed on enforcing it's own resolution does not mean the US fabricated it's reasons for doing so unilaterally. That Hussein did not comply with the resolution is a matter of fact and of record.
Posts: 2112 | Registered: Sep 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
The same USA Today Article, while I am on my soapbox, states that the total number of chemical weapons we are looking for would fit into a residential swimming pool. The article itself couches this as a huge reduction in the amount of chemicals we expected to find.
1) that's not true. The estimate I saw back when we started this mess was in the multiple-thousand gallon range. My backyard pool is 40,000 gallons.
2) for anyone who thinks that we should have found it by now if they existed... well... what are the chances that the people who hid these things are still alive? Had Hussein been 1/8 as rutheless as he was made out to be, he would've easily, possibly happily, killed anyone who knew where these things were buried outside of a few loyal, trusted commanders, just to keep the US from getting their hands on them. How easy is it to find less than 200 (assuming 10,000 gallons of chemical weapons unaccounted for) 55 gallon drums buried and scattered over a country the size of Iraq?
3) for anyone who might think that is a trivial amount of chemical agent, be aware that chemical agents are stored in liquid form and used in gaseous form... consult your Chem textbook about the difference in volume between a substance in liquid vs. gaseous state.
4) If Bush and co. are so politically shrewd, why on earth would they commit themselves to a course of action so obviously difficult and controversial? the huge successes in Iraq and Afghanistan (and make no mistake, those wars were prosecuted with a competence and lack of collateral damage that couldn't have been dreamed of, even 10 years ago) have become an enormous political albatross, in fact, a suicide. Go back a few months and look at what I was posting then-- my concern was that everyone would think this is too easy, the expectations would be too high, and no one would have the patience to stick this out before the accusations flew and heads started rolling. If Bush is that stupid, then why is he so dangerous?
[ September 26, 2003, 04:58 PM: Message edited by: T. Analog Kid ]
Posts: 2112 | Registered: Sep 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Last night I saw a debate on tv between Democrats who are planning on running against Bush for the next election. Graham has some ideas that I think could be hopeful if he executes them properly. For example, he fully opposes the idea of our soldiers in Iraq and says "the first thing I would be sure to do is to get our people out of Iraq - leave everything else there, just get them out." He could be a promising leader, but we won't know unless he gets elected.
Posts: 667 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
That's what I want to know - what's the true, true reason Bush and Co. were so dedicated to invading Iraq, come what may, even if that have to make up intelligence to justify it?
Money? I don't believe it. Wag the dog stuff? Maybe. Pride? oh man, I hope not. Whatever the reason, I don't think we know it yet. I'd love to find out.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
I don't think it's as nefarious as that, but I do believe that he thought of it as a moral question, but one that outstripped the arguments of the Pope, the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury, and Christian leaders in this nation, those of men like John Glenn and the massive world-wide demonstrations against the war against Iraq. None of those arguments could move the mind of a man who believes he enjoys a special relationship with God, Osama bin Laden is similarly blessed.
I don't think it's pride, it's something sadder. It's the same thing that makes cops plant evidence when they know the criminal is guilty of something but can't prove it.
"A fanatic is a person who does what he think the Lord would do if He knew the facts of the case." -- Finley Peter Dunne
I think Bush was just helping the Lord along by not caring about the veracity the CIA's information.
I feel bad for Tony Blair, though. Bush is a Christian, but I don't think it keeps him up nights. I wouldn't be surprised if this were tearing Blair up, inside and out.
_______
With, Cheney, I think it's something else. I'm not convinced that man has a heart. It could be money, or just the abiding feeling that anyone who is a nuissance to him should be shot.
And with Rumsfeld, I wouldn't be surprised if it were pride.
posted
That could be it. I'm not sure, though. I'm not convinced that is it, either.
Did it just grow out of itself? Or did someone, somewhere have a history-making idea? Is there a reason this resonated so strongly with him and his team?
Irami is right just often enough to convince him he's never wrong. His theory could be it.
posted
My guess is the same thing that made every other US President want to bomb him... Hussein's not a reliable international player and he was sitting on important international resources. Some people will cite North Korea, here, but N Kor *is* pretty reliable, they can be counted on to be hostile, boastful, and blustery. That doesn't mean they might not act on it, but they are a fairly straight card.
The Hussein regime, by contrast was duplicitous and trying to play both sides of the fence-- a stellar example is (apparently) trying to comply with the UN Resolutions while being evasive about whether they actually had or not... as the article above points out, trying to leave the impression that they hadn't complied even where they had.
That type of thing is bad for a region already hugely unstable... like piling gasoline soaked rags in the corner of a fireworks factory. You want to know the real reason? that's likely it... and it's spelled out in that document that The Rabbit and others keep going on about. It's spelled out in other documents, too, from the last three administrations. It's long been the policy of the US that our best interest lies in finding a moe stable regime for Iraq.
9-11, Saddam's refusal to comply with UN Resolutions, and Saddam's public support for terrorists gave us the excuses, but the reasons were already in place...
But is that so bad? Eliot Ness is a national hero for getting Al Capone on Tax Evasion. When you are dealing with an organized criminal, don't you have to take what he gives you?
Posts: 2112 | Registered: Sep 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
TAK and Irami have wildly, wildly different justifications for what amounts to the same reason - one thinks it is warranted, and the other thinks it is horrifying.
Explanations for the true reason reveal more of the speculator than the speculated.
Is it possible? Sure. Do I think you're right? Not enough information.
There's not enough information. Something's missing here, and I wonder if we'll ever know.
posted
I don't trust one thing about the entire administration...it's agendas. Specifically, I don't trust that Bush would pick his own personal wants and plans over the good of the American people. I don't trust that, if worst came to worst, he'd be able to say 'Screw that, my country is more important'.
Posts: 3658 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
This is from my local talk radio. he was reading an article which quoted hillary clinton. She is quoted saying that the intelligence was the same with George Bush, Bill Clinton and George W. That Saddam had WMDs. Take that for what you will. I do not have time to find the source.
Let's remember that The last three presidents including George W. attacked Iraq, for not following UN directions, and only George Bush had "permission" from the UN.
The question remains if Diplomacy would have worked eventually or was time up?
Posts: 1244 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Black Fox, I just want to let you know that there are some Americans who support everything you do.
Posts: 3446 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Osama bin Laden told us that the reason he attacked the World Trade Center on September 11th was because we had troops in Saudi Arabia.
The troops were there because of Saddam Hussein. To get rid of the troops and prevent another attack, we had to get rid of Saddam.
Bush thought the war was the best way to do it.
Osama bin Laden, though, told Bush it wasn't good enough to just move the troops over the border into Iraq. He wants them gone. That's why there's all these "foreign terrorists" pouring into Iraq at Osama bin Laden's call. Notice that Bush didn't name them on TV -- they were "foreign", not "al-Qaeda". Why? Because if he said they were coming in, it meant that they were never there to begin with. Oops. Maybe Saddam didn't have al-Qaeda ties after all. (But wait, that would make too much sense, especially considering that bin Laden HATED Saddam Hussein because he wasn't a fundamentalist.)
Al-Qaeda and WMDs? Don't think so.
Posts: 1784 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't think we'll ever know if it was the right decision to invade Iraq. We may be able to make more educated guesses over time, but I think that the invasion of Iraq will forever be like our decision to use atomic weapons on Japan: we'll always wonder if it was really necessary.
I think Irami is right in suggesting that Bush probably isn't losing much sleep on the matter, but I disagree with Irami's reason. A member of the National Security Council spoke in one of my classes a few months ago, and she said that Bush went into Iraq because of the psychological effects 11 Sept. Bush is very ashamed that 11 Sept occured on his watch, and he is determined to keep anything similar from happening again while he is President. He can never afford to be passive about national security now, because he has seen the result. When it came time to assess the security implications of Iraq, Bush saw that it was a regime with the motive, means, and ability to conduct or sponsor unconventional warfare against the United States. So long as Saddam was in power, Iraq would be a Damoclean Sword hanging over America.
What if Saddam gave chemical weapons to a terrorist group, which they then used on the United States? (I'm not implying that it would be al-Qaeda; Bush has publicly said that we know of no link between al-Qaeda and the Baath regime.) As I said before, we'll never know if Iraq would have successfully sponored terrorism against the United States. Bush is determined to ensure that America is never again wounded because he is reticent to respond to threats. I respect that, and I think it's worth the cost.
Posts: 224 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Paul- You say that you feel like you're one of the only ones who tries to look deeply into what goes on in the world. I assure you that this is not as much the case as you might think. Even if you're right, keep in mind that the few who do pay attention to what is going on are the ones who make all the decisions.
I care, and I pay deep attention to what is going on. My friends care, and we've been equipped to make good decisions about your future. At least, that's what I tell myself. (Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.)
Also, ask yourself this: if people don't care, then why is there so much controvery? Apathy and silliness do not breed bitter debate. It's true that some are misguided, but that's no reason to reject your citizenship just yet.
Posts: 224 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oh Irami just so you know its us antiquated ground pounders that have basically been overseeing the development of Mosul Iraq, which has been pretty much to this point the most succesful coalition effort in Iraq.
Taberah you ask me how people can't care, that it creates so much controversy. There is a big difference between arguing about something and honestly caring a dime about it. I know dozens of people who you can fire up about things like Abortion and homosexuality, but its not like they do anything in their regular lives to promote it or demote it. Thats the thing, lots of talk about Iraq, no action. I hear about all these civil activities that are supposed to happen in Iraq, you know how many american civilians I've seen actually build anything around my area in mosul etc? NONE! Its all been done by Iraqis that we paid, of course we have to go out and guard them, heck for awhile there I had to shovel trash off the streets.
No my problem has more to do with America as a whole. One being that Americans talk so much but do so little. Perhaps thats good, we aren't galavanting around the glove conquering half the world and what not. No Americans simply go about and do the regular thing, I suppose in reality its not just Americans its everyone, but its starting to sicken me more and more. I see how lazy the people are over here, all because they are afraid to get shot at. Believe me when I say I've had it up to here with cowardice. You have no idea how hard it was for me to pat my buddy PFC.Vanleuavan on the back after he though he'd fragged me with a cluster bomb that he threw on accident. I didn't mind the pain, the fact that from then till now I have tooth aches all the time and it hurts to chew and to talk. No its the fact that he literally screamed like a little girl dived into his fighting position and just laid there muttering and quivering, sobbing and sniveling , apologizing for having killed me etc. etc. I've never been so disgusted in my life. If anything serious had happened my life would have been forfeit, thats okay, but the lives of all my buddies would have been lost.
See thats basically how I see it, Americans as a whole are cowards. Too afraid for the massive risk that helping and fixing the world might bring. We lay down and cry and shake when we mess up. Sure I say this a bit.. lol out there. Its not something I believe as a whole ,its something I believe as a society and a culture. The thing is Van should have been the first guy to me telling me I had blood running all over my face, instead I just chilled there covering my sector and yelled rather nonchalant " Hey no biggie, just a uxo." ::laughs:: my platoon got a pretty big kick out of it all. We should be the first to jump up, the first to react, the first there. Thats how I feel, I'm a proactive person like that. That and I don't want people making decisions for my future, like I stated previous I like to be involved in it all.
Anyhow to say I'm dissatisfied with my leadership and people in general is an understatement. But then I still love America more than any other nation out there. Though Germany kind of ticks ahead now and then. Where else to go?
Posts: 1753 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
And yes Irami in a way being the job that I am , if anything I am below the common man, because it is a thousand of my lives for one civilian, thats how I honestly feel. I'm a Specialist, I do not rate a sir or a Mr. I wish my job did not have to exist, believe me especially after what I've seen. Its brutal what artillery and explosives do to Men, women, children, even animals. Just all over people would ask us for medical attention and we couldn't give it to them because we were pushing ahead of everyone else. ::sighs:: I do not want respect for soldiers, I don't think we aught to need respect or anything for the job we do. We should simply do it on our own willpower, if you can't hack it that way well then you shouldn't be in the army gosh darn. I do not complain for my duty, I complain about what my nation seems to be like. What can I do to change it? Should it even be changed?
Posts: 1753 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, in light of your latest, I'll re-issue Dan's question: what would you like us to do? What can we, joe and jane american, do to make you feel like you aren't doing this all on your own?
Posts: 2112 | Registered: Sep 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Oh Irami just so you know its us antiquated ground pounders that have basically been overseeing the development of Mosul Iraq, which has been pretty much to this point the most succesful coalition effort in Iraq.
Is this supposed to make me feel better? If I were appointed a Professor of Theoretical Physics at MIT, I don't know how much faith I'd have in the future modern science. I get wary when I hear that too many grad students are teaching classes at my University, but yet I'm supposed to rest assured that Black Fox is developing a city?
No, you are right. I'm sure they covered this in basic training, and if they didn't, community building isn't that important, you all can just wing it.
quote:No my problem has more to do with America as a whole. One being that Americans talk so much but do so little. Perhaps thats good, we aren't galavanting around the glove conquering half the world and what not.
Just remember who wants to ship out an entire fleet of engineers and teachers. And I don't mind paying my fair share in tax dollars.
posted
Fox, you really ought to pay more attention to the people who DO do things here. But you never seem to notice them, if they're not in the military
Posts: 3493 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
he never gets to see them... the news pretty much ignores them and focuses on people talking about how what he's doing is wrong and how he works for a corrupt govt.
Posts: 2112 | Registered: Sep 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Paul, courage is your gift. All of us are given different gifts, so that we work best together in teams instead of alone. So that we have things to share with each other. You have no reluctance to accept the gifts given to you by others, which is great. Because of that you form bonds easily, and can become the center of the team. But you need to see and value those gifts more. You need to lose the obliviousness of youth and begin to understand and appreciate the gifts that each member brings to your team. For not to notice and cherish them means in the end to lose them. Do not lose faith, my friend, for God watches over you and sees everything you do. God is with you and will guide your every step with wisdom and with love.
Posts: 968 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Fox, I know you're hurting, but here's something to think about: compassion is every bit as much a virtue as courage is.
Posts: 4534 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
) but acting on poor intelligence is not the same as making things up.
