We're only as good as our rationale for war

[patrickl]

Patrickl - What are you hiding over there? Do you have children in prisons being tortured? Do you murder people daily on a whim? Do you have long term plans to invade other countries? Have you developed a sophisticated WMD system to attack your own Moroccan population?

[fredster]

Patrickl,

It's a broad vision he has. If he succeeds, then we secure world peace for years to come.

People were dying in Iraq long before we got there.

How do we stop the terrorists? Help them take down Israel and convert us all to Muslims? Where's the endgame there?

Just sit and wait until the governments of the Middle East have all the power they need to rise up?

If they were okay before, why is everybody discussing what Iran can do now?  Did we know pre-war for sure that Iraq didn't have WMD?  Were we postive he didn't have it?

Bush was acting on Intel from the world over.  He had the power and the will to see the war through and remove this man from one of the most critical regions of the world.

You alude to that with this -

terrorists have found out that simply blowing up oil pipes is an easy and very effective way to slowly cripple our economies.

The vision is to keep these people who seek only to destroy away from the rest of is.  Keep them weak and unable to group in any force big enough to invade neighbors and destabalize the economies of the world.

If you don't believe that vision, I can understand.  But now if we can piece this thing back together into a workable and reliable region for freedom, then we all win. We win for generations.  It takes more than money, it takes the sacrafice of many to topple this culture and rebuild it.
 

but it sure looks like it will be an even bigger mess than that for years to come.

I hope you are wrong too. But we are all in this together aren't we?

[DrewKaree]

It's an op-ed piece. If you are comfortable supporting your stance w/ an op-ed, that's fine.

Support my stance? 

It doesn't answer any of your questions, it doesn't address any of your problems, it just states the rightness of the situation, according to my valid point of view.

You're right, it doesn't support my stance.  It states the rightness of the situation, according to my valid point of view.

[DrewKaree]

Terrorism is at an all time high and it seems to have established a very firm foothold in a much larger part of world than before. Apart from many people dying in Iraq (and other countries) due to the "end" of this war, terrorists have found out that simply blowing up oil pipes is an easy and very effective way to slowly cripple our economies. We really will be suffering for this war for years to come.

They also figured the best way to silence voices they disagree with is to kill them.  Even in peaceful countries which offers freedoms galore.  Like the Netherlands. 

I'd have thought that with as free a society as you enjoy that surely Muslim terrorists would understand that you're not fighting them and that you're more capable of dealing with people they disagree with. 

Or maybe they just killed that director because they didn't like the lighting techniques being used.


All we are saaaaaayyyyyyyiiiiiiiing
is give peace a chaaaaaaaaaannnnnnnnccccccccceeeeee.

Seems to work out swell when dealing with irrational people, no?

[patrickl]

How do we stop the terrorists?

That's indeed a difficult question to answer. On the other hand, it's pretty easy to see that starting wars in the region is the wrong answer.

[patrickl]

maybe they just killed that director because they didn't like the lighting techniques being used.

It would be my guess that they killed him because he called muslims "goat f*ckers" every time he was on TV.

[fredster]

maybe they just killed that director because they didn't like the lighting techniques being used.

It would be my guess that they killed him because he called muslims "goat f*ckers" every time he was on TV.

So he just needed killin' then huh? 

How do we stop the terrorists?

That's indeed a difficult question to answer. On the other hand, it's pretty easy to see that starting wars in the region is the wrong answer.

Nice No answer.  It's easy to critisize, you don't have to have an answer to complain.

[patrickl]

maybe they just killed that director because they didn't like the lighting techniques being used.

It would be my guess that they killed him because he called muslims "goat f*ckers" every time he was on TV.

So he just needed killin' then huh?

[mr.Curmudgeon]

Bush's last four years of failure aren't even cold yet, and it looks like the mea culpa's are starting already...

Last week, outgoing Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage said:

I'm disappointed that Iraq hasn't turned out better. And that we weren't able to move forward more meaningfully in the Middle East peace process."

Then, after a minute's pause, he adds a third regret: "The biggest regret is that we didn't stop 9/11. And then in the wake of 9/11, instead of redoubling what is our traditional export of hope and optimism we exported our fear and our anger. And presented a very intense and angry face to the world. I regret that a lot."

The blood of thousands of men, women and children is on his hands. I hope he "regrets" that too...

mrC

[mr.Curmudgeon]

Support my stance? 

Yeah, your mental posture, or point of view. Maybe I mistook you for having one. Sorry.

You're right, it doesn't support my stance.  It states the rightness of the situation, according to my valid point of view.

Any particular reason you responded to a quote from yourself? (I didn't make the above statement)

You're point of view may be valid, but that doesn't make the situation right. I've pointed to several things wrong with it, you, obviously, can continue to ignore that.

mrC

[mr.Curmudgeon]

Also, you *STILL* haven't answer my question...

Oh, and Armstrong Williams should be punished to the fullest extent of whatever laws apply to him, and I hope to see him not only lose everything his fame and notoriety got him, but that he's forced to take some "burger-flipping" job to support himself so that he never forgets the betrayal of the trust of American people in him.

It doesn't make the program wrong, it simply makes Williams a ---tallywhacker--- and an idiot for doing what he did.

Two part question:
1) What about the people who used our tax dollars to pay him? Same standards there? Or no?
2) Please tell me what you'd say if we found out that the Kerry camp paid Rather for Memogate?

mrC

[iwillfearnoevil]

Saddam Hussein paid the families of suicide bombers to kill Israelies.

I supported the war, and guess what. I am not officially wrong.

Killing jews has always been a sore spot with me.

yep. evil is just evil. and war is just war. well except when democrats wage war overseas as clinton did. it's all about hating bush.

[mr.Curmudgeon]

yep. evil is just evil. and war is just war. well except when democrats wage war overseas as clinton did. it's all about hating bush.

A Democrat never waged a "preemptive" war based on false allegations and faulty intelligence. A Democrat *did* however win WWII and Clinton later stablized the baltic region. He didn't need to lie to the public about his reasons for doing so either, and the war has been a success. Iraq on the other hand...

Bush's policy of preemption represents a fundamental shift in geopolitical fault-lines and should certainly remain open for debate.

I don't accept your attempt to deflect attention away from the issue, simply by writing it off as a partisan issue. We've gotten past that in this thread...

[Pacific Ripper]

I hate how the Shrub uses God's name to promote his causes. I wouldn't think there is anything godly about getting people killed.

[iwillfearnoevil]

[quote author=mr.Curmudgeon link=topic=30389.msg261984#msg261984
I don't accept your attempt to deflect attention away from the issue, simply by writing it off as a partisan issue. We've gotten past that in this thread...

by sticking heads in the sand and ignoring facts as usual. how easy it is for the democrats to forget about serbia. we heard all the same boat load of excuses. democrats use to care about women's rights, environment, ending slavery, democracy, etc but not if a republican uses force.

[mr.Curmudgeon]

by sticking heads in the sand and ignoring facts as usual.

*cough* Iraq *cough*

[Dexter]

by sticking heads in the sand and ignoring facts as usual.

*cough* Iraq *cough*

AMEN lol!

If you pre-emptively strike a nation and kill over 100,000 people in the process, and then its discovered that you manipulated intelligence to make that invasion happen in the first place, then you're a scumbag genocidal war criminal. Nothing more, nothing less. And to do so in Gods name is sick and perverted. These people sit in church of a Sunday while their little cash cow phoney war blows women and children to pieces. Vile.

[mr.Curmudgeon]

then you're a scumbag genocidal war criminal.

Or so the Germans would have you believe, and they should know! 

"Donald Rumsfeld had to call off a visit to Germany next month for the Munich Security Conference, because of the very real possiblity that he would be arrested and put on trial for war crimes."

Link: http://www.expatica.com/source/site_article.asp?subchannel_id=52&story_id=16014&name=Rumsfeld+scraps+Munich+visit+over+war+probe



mrC

[DrewKaree]

and then its discovered that you manipulated intelligence to make that invasion happen in the first place,

Please inform the world of the manipulation of British intelligence.  Please inform the world of the manipulation of Russian intelligence.  Please inform the world of the manipulation of every intelligence agency OTHER than the United States intelligence.

I ask about the other intelligence, because obviously you have  problem with U.S. intelligence, even though it was the same as everyone else's.  Perhaps your irrational reasoning is solely limited to the U.S., and you'll be able to understand the rest of the world's intelligence.

Please also give your source for the "manipulation" of U.S. intelligence, as your argument is now headed in another direction.

Numerous countries had intelligence that believed the exact (not close to, not maybe's, not "he might have's") same thing you are claiming is being manipulated.  What is your source for said "manipulation", and how NOW do you see this as "manipulation"?  Before, you were claiming it was a flat-out "LIE", meaning he wasn't even manipulating the intelligence, he was telling them flat-out FALSE information.  Now, you're claiming that he took the intelligence they had, twisted it, repackaged it, and sold that load of "manipulated" intelligence back to Congress. 

Let me guess.....he did both 

[iwillfearnoevil]

yep drew. some choose to be ignorant about the intelligence issue and still cling to the belief that bush planned 9-11. of course they find nothing wrong with delivering a baby 99% of the way, sticking scissors into their head, and sucking their brains down a sick. such sick people believe others are just as sick as them and would go to such lengths to push their agenda.

[mr.Curmudgeon]

yep drew. some choose to be ignorant about the intelligence issue and still cling to the belief that bush planned 9-11. of course they find nothing wrong with delivering a baby 99% of the way, sticking scissors into their head, and sucking their brains down a sick. such sick people believe others are just as sick as them and would go to such lengths to push their agenda.

What the hell is wrong with you Jened? You expect people, other than yourself, to take your arguments seriously? Don't look to Drew for brotherhood support either...he's made a point of trying to get you to tone down as well.

My advice...If your going to rant, try at least sticking to the topic at hand.

[Mameotron]

I know you will refuse to acknowledge it, but there are other reasons for going into Iraq besides WMD.

[patrickl]

and then its discovered that you manipulated intelligence to make that invasion happen in the first place,

Please inform the world of the manipulation of British intelligence.

[DrewKaree]

Mameotron, here's an article that should go along with your post.....well, not within, as it's sure to be pointed out that what you speak of are several thousand, versus what this story speaks of.  It's easy to ignore the fact that what you bring up aren't the only problems, and the numbers this story speak of compare pretty equally with Sadaam's, but you didn't give 'em all the info....somehow this story is also either our fault too, or somehow we should overlook what we're already doing, drop it, and go help these folks.

We should help these folks out.  After the U.N. commits the same number of troops we sent to Iraq.  This time, WE'LL be the backup force.  How 'bout it, gang?  Or did the French military get their arses handed to them on a platter and now they want to surrender watch everyone else fight again?

[Dexter]

We should help these folks out. After the U.N. commits the same number of troops we sent to Iraq.

[DrewKaree]

No seriously, I've got no problems with it......cuz it'll never happen.

It's like one of those things you wish for, but deep down in your heart, you know it'll never happen.....like skipping with you.....because of my "backdoor" policy 

I like Iraqnam!  That's a new one.  Did you think that up, or did you hear it somewhere?  Fess up and tell the truth, now! 

[Dexter]

http://www.wpherald.com/storyview.php?StoryID=20050126-045615-4690r

...the United States, backed by Israel, is deadly earnest about neutralizing Iran's nuclear weapons site. "The administration has determined that there is no diplomatic solution," said John Pike, president of the online think-tank globalsecurity.org."

Here we go again 

Worth a look. By the way Iraqnam is a word been bandied around for a VERY long time, that aptly describes the repeat performance of a military without an objective or an exit strategy..bogged down and with no end in sight, nam part 2, just as everybody warned.

[mr.Curmudgeon]

By the way Iraqnam  is a word been bandied around for a VERY long time...

Reminds me of my favorite joke, 

Q: What's the difference between Iraq and Vietnam?
A:  Bush had a plan for getting out of Vietnam.   

mrC

[mr.Curmudgeon]

No seriously, I've got no problems with it......cuz it'll never happen.

I wouldn't be so sure...

Lt Gen James Helmly, chief of the US Army Reserve.

In an internal memorandum, he described "the Army Reserve's inability under current policies, procedures and practices ... to meet mission requirements associated with Operation Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom. The Army Reserve is additionally in grave danger of being unable to meet other operational requirements and is rapidly degenerating into a broken force".

...

Re-enlistment is collapsing, by 30% last year.


mrC

[Dexter]

Reminds me of my favorite joke,

[iwillfearnoevil]

all this vietnam talk brings back the days of all the libs saying we would be suffering TENS of thousands of deaths in iraq. just wanted to say, 'you were wrong'.

[locash]

Who said "TENS of thousands of deaths"?  I remember some who were opposed to the war suggesting that it would a quagmire much like Vietnam, but I don't remember anyone suggesting a specific body count.

What's a 'lib'?

[fredster]

I think that started with Kennedy.  There were lots of anti-war people predicting large body counts because of the WMD....

They were afraid Saddam would use his nerve gas on our troops, and we shouldn't go in because of that.

[mr.Curmudgeon]

all this vietnam talk brings back the days of all the libs saying we would be suffering TENS of thousands of deaths in iraq. just wanted to say, 'you were wrong'.

I also remember the architects of the Iraqi war saying we would be greeted with flowers and candy! Just wanted to say, 'they were wrong'.

BTW, has the killing stopped in Iraq jened? 'Cuz last I heard YESTERDAY was the DEADLIEST DAY SINCE THE START OF THE WAR.

Also, by last count, we've 'liberated' at least 100,000 innocent civilians (mostly women and children) of their lives. But they don't count do they?


Peace out,
mrC

[DrewKaree]

I heard YESTERDAY was the DEADLIEST DAY SINCE THE START OF THE WAR.

Ya know what's odd?  When helicopters and planes have accidents and crash, killing their passengers when there ISN'T a war, I've noticed that they just report that they did such and such which caused this crash and the subsequent accidental deaths of the occupants.

The've never referred to THAT as "The deadliest day since the start of the month".

I wonder if they're trying to sell a certain angle with that quirky little catchphrase?

I wonder why an accident like this on the "deadliest day since the start of the war" wasn't pointed to as the useless deaths of American troops (since they didn't take out a few Iraqi women, children, and cute little puppy dogs), instead of reporting the accident as such.

The audience must be tuning out the insightful "journalism" going on....gotta throw those shiny keys across the room again to get our attention.

[mr.Curmudgeon]

I wonder if they're trying to sell a certain angle with that quirky little catchphrase?

I see what your getting at, and I'd have to say there definitely is a certain angle since ultimately those troops wouldn't have been in Iraq to crash were it not for Bush's War. I imagine some of the family members of those KIA in the crash don't view it as dumb luck that they just happen to be there at the wrong time. They will squarely lame the blame on Bush for putting them there, although I may be projecting on that last part.

We shall see...

[Mameotron]

MrC, I don't know why I even try....

Yesterday at Camp Lejeune, NC was the BEST day since the war started.

[Dexter]

all this vietnam talk brings back the days of all the libs saying we would be suffering TENS of thousands of deaths in iraq. just wanted to say, 'you were wrong'.

Anybody who thinks the figures released by the pentagon is an accurate representation of the number of US troops killed is an idiot. In vietnam, casualty reporting ran at 20-30% max-the real figures not being disclosed till well after the conflict ended. Educated calculations from military surgeons in the Ramstein base in Germany for this conflict estimate the US dead at 3-6000, with injured running at 24,000+

Unless you're naieve enough to think that the real casualty numbers would be released running up to an election