Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 69
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Indianapolis, IN
    Posts
    248
    vCash
    1500

    Most suucinct argument I have seen for why we went to war with Iraq

    I know this is ancient history, but I ran across this old quote from McCain on why we were right to go to Iraq. It is one of the clearest, most rational statements I have seen on the subject.

    "This is a guy who's used weapons of mass destructions. This is a guy who has destabilized the whole neighborhood. This is a guy who in a war with Iranians, over 800,000 people on both sides were killed. This is a guy who is an extreme danger to the world. And this is a guy who is in every way possible seeking weapons of mass destruction. That case, in and of itself, ought to be sufficient." ("Meet the Press," Aug. 4, 2002)

    What do you all think?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Des Moines IA
    Posts
    9,701
    vCash
    1500
    I won't be able to give you anything unbiased at all.

    I was against the war then and I'd still be against the war now. The war was run poorly by a group of people that really, in essence, had no idea what they were doing. And, instead of listening to the generals that were advising them they continued to execute a poorly drawn out plan.

    I do think that the Bush administration purposely manipulated the general public as to the reasons for the war, and when no evidence materialized it became Operation Iraqi Freedom ... as though that was our sole purpose for the endeavor.

    Sorry, I'm sure that's not what you want ... but it's what I've got.
    Когда́ де́ньги говоря́т, тогда́ пра́вда молчи́т

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    North Oakland, California
    Posts
    25,815
    vCash
    1500
    I think it all leads back to the false pretenses thing. If they had phrased it like that in the beginning, instead of saying "9/11" and "they already have WMDs," who knows if it would've been as "popular" at first, but it wouldn't be as unpopular as it is now.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    5,773
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by CubsGirl View Post
    I think it all leads back to the false pretenses thing. If they had phrased it like that in the beginning, instead of saying "9/11" and "they already have WMDs," who knows if it would've been as "popular" at first, but it wouldn't be as unpopular as it is now.
    Do you think that the administration lied about it or that everyone was going on bad intellegence reports? There were obviously a lot of dems that went along with the war based on the intellegence.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    North Oakland, California
    Posts
    25,815
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by b1e9a8r5s View Post
    Do you think that the administration lied about it or that everyone was going on bad intellegence reports? There were obviously a lot of dems that went along with the war based on the intellegence.
    If bad intelligence reports happened to be the case, the government could obviously see that, and as a whole didn't do much, if anything, to fix it. I think that's just as bad as lying outright. The only way it's different is that they were lying by deciding not to tell the truth (if that makes sense).

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    21,592
    vCash
    1500
    What do you all think?
    I think, at this point, why we went...is inconsequential.

    I think the conversation should be, what role should we maintain there, how long we should maintain it, what goals to set as "benchmarks", what consequences would we have if we left before those benchmarks.....etc. etc. Basically, what's the benefit of leaving right now vs. the cost of staying.

    But everyone wants to boil it down to "are you for the war, or against it" when really, I think it's a lot more complicated than that. Which is why anti war protesters piss me off.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Des Moines IA
    Posts
    9,701
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by b1e9a8r5s View Post
    Do you think that the administration lied about it or that everyone was going on bad intellegence reports? There were obviously a lot of dems that went along with the war based on the intellegence.
    Congressional members do not have access to the same amount of intel that the White House does.
    Когда́ де́ньги говоря́т, тогда́ пра́вда молчи́т

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Des Moines IA
    Posts
    9,701
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by gcoll View Post
    I think, at this point, why we went...is inconsequential.
    Agreed. We're there. Now we have to figure out how to safely, and justly, get out.
    Когда́ де́ньги говоря́т, тогда́ пра́вда молчи́т

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    5,773
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by SmthBluCitrus View Post
    Congressional members do not have access to the same amount of intel that the White House does.
    Ok, fine, but do you think they lied about what they knew? Or the intellegence was wrong?

    IMO, they overplayed the 9/11 thing for sure, but I don't think they out and out lied about WMD's. Seems to me that was the understanding that most had, and even the impression that Sadaam wanted to give (in hindsight).

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Des Moines IA
    Posts
    9,701
    vCash
    1500
    I don't think the intel was entirely accurate -- mostly because I don't want to believe that we were, flat-out, lied to.

    But, at the same time, I believe they manipulated facts and only gave us a partial truth. They certainly overplayed 9/11 -- and the connection between Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden/al-Qaeda.

    As far as WMDs go, I think the intel reports likely said that it was POSSIBLE that Saddam had - or was pursuing - them, because he had a history. But, not that he necessarily had them at that time.

    Don't get me wrong. I'm not sorry Saddam isn't the leader of Iraq anymore. But, I think we had alternate means of making that happen. We should have better utilized the lessons we learned in Afghanistan, made it less of an invasion and occupation, and actively supported a Kurd/Shia uprising to overthrow the Baathist government -- without completely disintegrating the Baathist structure.
    Когда́ де́ньги говоря́т, тогда́ пра́вда молчи́т

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    21,592
    vCash
    1500
    Ok, fine, but do you think they lied about what they knew? Or the intellegence was wrong?
    I think it's more likely that the intelligence was wrong.

    I don't think the Bush administration would have risked that much political capital, on something they knew wasn't there.

    Whether or not that's the reason they wanted to go to Iraq though, is a different story altogether.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    7,707
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by gcoll View Post
    I think it's more likely that the intelligence was wrong.

    I don't think the Bush administration would have risked that much political capital, on something they knew wasn't there.

    Whether or not that's the reason they wanted to go to Iraq though, is a different story altogether.
    You can say whatever you like but the entire reason for going into Iraq was Iran. If we would have been able to go in like we did in the first gulf war and get out as quick as we did leaving a strong democratic government in would have possibly been able to put pressure on the leaders of Iran. Granted we monumentally screwed up Iraq the Iranian people are very pro west. Though they are Muslim first and while we are stilled viewed as an occupying force we aren't able to reap any good will from them. The thought process i am guessing is go in overthrow a madman and let the Iranian people see how wonderful a democratic government is and hope they do the same in their own country.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    St. Louis, MO / SIUe
    Posts
    35,041
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by b1e9a8r5s View Post
    Ok, fine, but do you think they lied about what they knew? Or the intellegence was wrong?

    IMO, they overplayed the 9/11 thing for sure, but I don't think they out and out lied about WMD's. Seems to me that was the understanding that most had, and even the impression that Sadaam wanted to give (in hindsight).
    Speaking of which, anyone know the over/under on the number of 9/11's Rudy's going to say next week?
    Member of the Owlluminati

    Quote Originally Posted by James Madison
    "Knowledge will forever govern ignorance: And a people who mean to be their own Governors, must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives."
    2011 Knicks Salary Cap Information

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    cheese head land
    Posts
    4,088
    vCash
    1500
    Last RNC, and election in general, Bush used 9/11 to his advantage. It's almost as if that terrible day was the best thing to happen to his campaign.



  15. #15
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    7,707
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by OnWisconsin2007 View Post
    Last RNC, and election in general, Bush used 9/11 to his advantage. It's almost as if that terrible day was the best thing to happen to his campaign.
    I'd like to think that you don't believe this comment. But I would venture to guess that you actually do. It was what was prevalent to the day did you really expect him to not use it?

Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •