War in Iraq...what was the intention?

Post Reply New Topic

Actually Iraq looks like a success story now thanks to the troop surge advocated by Senator John S. McCain. Afghanistan is the disaster area, Iraq is actually safer to live in than some cities in the US (like Chicago).

1. 101,906 - 111,369 deaths for a one term president <is this a good trade?>
2. As we have been talking about Bush was told repeatedly and all thinking people knew
there were NO NUKEs or WMDs
3. Bush is not a Texan he is a trust-fund cowboy from Yale.

1. Using the US Troops for personal vendettas?? Hang-able offense
2. Bush was either incompetent or lying <not and exclusive or>
3. Pretending to be a texan is not a hang-able offense <but should be>

1. I never said he was using US Troops for a personal vendetta, all I said is that Saddam shouldn't have waved a red flag in front of an angry bull. Bush was already angry with Saddam, so Saddam shouldn't have tried to play games and give Bush the run-around.

2. Actually, the fault would be that of the CIA, though two years is really too short of a time to expect them to be operating effectively (after having been gutted prior to Bush taking office).

3. He wasn't pretending to be a Texan, prior to being the President of the United States, he was the Governor of the State of Texas. He also lived much of his life in Texas. So he actually was a Texan.

I don't know. So all I can do is speculate. There was a clear disdain for the people at work within the Bush Administration. They did not care to explain themselves to us. The fact that we were lied to, is one of the reasons I was against the Iraq War. I never got any inkling that Bush could or would communicate. It is the great failing of the modern Republican Party. I agree with them on many policy issues but they don't know how to explain why they are right... which is almost as important as being right.

Does Chicago have suicide bombers, now?

post-pond the economic issues caused by the dot-com bubble, oh and oil.

Same as the Libyan war, just a different economic crisis.

I'm not saying there isn't bad things happening in Iraq, just if you look at Chicago, Illinois and some other cities here in the US, the violence is a heck of a lot worse.

Oil and Israel.

We get most of our oil from Canada surprisingly, if this were really about oil we would have installed a puppet dictator, instead we are trying to get it so Iraq is a functioning Constitutional Republic.

Considering Saddam was providing financial support for terrorists to attack a US ally, damn straight we had every right to intervene.


Oh and if we want to talk about oil, how about you look at the Oil for Food scam, which is why France and Germany were so adament in trying to keep us from going in.

We intended to install a puppet dictator, but Chalabi turned out to be an iranian double-agent.

Ever notice that Iran has been the only country to benefit from the invasion of Iraq?

About the rest - nobody argues that the baath party regime under saddam was not evil, brutal, etc.

What we argue is that invading iraq and taking him out was stupid and made the situation for iraqis and the region in general much worse.

No, I don't think Iran is benefitting from all of this, Iraq is turning into a Constitutional Republic, the Iranian people see that from their country and want that for themselves too.

I think Pat Buchanan had it right when he compared the relationship between George Bush Sr., and W to that of Philip of Macedonia and Alexander the Great. In both cases, you had a stormy father/son relationship, in which the son believed he had to prove himself by accomplishing greater deeds than his old man.
Bush Sr. had left Iraq in the hands of Saddam Hussein - a decision that had been criticized by many, even his son. W. had decided he was going to do what the old man had never been able to do - destroy Saddam. He used the tragedy of 9/11 to interweave with lies in order to attack Iraq, whether it was that Iraq and Al Qaeda were allies (a lie), or that Iraq had had weapons of mass destruction (actually all destroyed by his old man, and Bill Clinton). And he saw the U.S. armed forces as his personal plaything, and the American people as just sheep to lead to the slaughter, or to crush under false accusations of being Un-American if they questioned his pretext to war. For all his talk of democracy, W. never saw the American public as anything other than just pieces on a board, to be used without concern for their rights.
That's just my thought.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

True! You always should have an explanation to your actions , especially if your the president of the United states declaring war on Iraq. The basis for going into Iraq was my main issue .The truth of the invasion seemed covered in secrecy by congress. The Bush adminastration did not give a strong enough reasons to the public for invading . Hundreds of thousands of people died due to this invasion . Was the action a good action? weighing the outcome is hard ... hundreds of thousands had died due to Saddams actions in the Iran-Iraq war and his atrocities against the kurds , not to mention the gulf war so maybe it was something that should have been done.

My real agrovation was that the Bush adminastration seemed to act on poor information (Saddams real atrocities never seemed to be the reason of action, sure the US supplied both sides during the Iran-Iraq war so they probably tried to 'forget' the whole
incident) the reasons for invading did not seem strong, the citizens of the united states seemed to be kept in the dark about the information to an extent... the truth is always important...and North korea, always came across as a bigger threat to the world rather than an army that was in disarray after the gulf war (old iraqi army)

Oil, revenge, glory!

ruveyn

What happened to all that petroleum, anyway?

Is any of it being exported to the USA, so that we can fire up our SUVs?

I'm pretty sure it's on fire.