U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-21-2014, 11:23 PM
 
Location: Tucson for awhile longer
8,874 posts, read 12,917,566 times
Reputation: 28957

Advertisements

Totally unjustified, based on lies, and a benefit only to people and companies already very rich. A terrible, terrible mistake.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-22-2014, 12:04 AM
 
Location: Someplace Wonderful
5,170 posts, read 3,726,329 times
Reputation: 2546
The Iraq war was based almost entirely upon bad intelligence.

We were told that we had intelligence that Saddam had WMD's and was actively seeking yellowcake for the making of nukes.

Turns out that the intelligence, which the Brits confirmed, was based entirely upon CURVEBALL

It's a good article. You'll enjoy learning about how we were deceived by group think.

PS I'm a right winger who supported the Iraq invasion with all my heart. Funny how easy it is to fool people. And before you left wingers gloat, remember that your elected so called representatives were all part of the error.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-22-2014, 01:37 AM
 
Location: Dallas, Texas
8,856 posts, read 10,312,965 times
Reputation: 9267
Unnecessary, bordering on moronic. It took our attention, and resources, away from the actual people who attacked us and were a real threat. Anyone who simply thought taking down Saddam would be any kind of answer (or even partly) to issues in the Middle East (or just Iraq) is either terribly ignorant or an imbecile. Look at that country now. What's happening now was easily predicted by many whom can see past our own little American backyards.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-22-2014, 02:14 AM
 
Location: Washington State
15,355 posts, read 8,025,596 times
Reputation: 13158
It was a complete waste and not justifiable because Iraq had nothing to do with 911. We did have to punish those responsible for the 911 murders but picked the wrong target. We now need to let the Muslim world know that they will be held responsible for the attacks carried out in the name of Islam...including letting them know Mecca may be destroyed if they persist in and support this type attack.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-22-2014, 05:23 AM
 
Location: Caverns measureless to man...
6,704 posts, read 4,165,907 times
Reputation: 14935
Quote:
Originally Posted by chuckmann View Post

The Iraq war was based almost entirely upon bad intelligence.
Well... that's the revisionist spin, at any rate. If by "bad" you mean cherrypicked, exaggerated, and coerced, I suppose you'd be right.

20 Lies About The Iraq War




Quote:
Originally Posted by chuckmann View Post
We were told that we had intelligence that Saddam had WMD's and was actively seeking yellowcake for the making of nukes.

Turns out that the intelligence, which the Brits confirmed, was based entirely upon CURVEBALL

It's a good article. You'll enjoy learning about how we were deceived by group think.
Who's "we"? Do you mean the American public, the American government, or the world as a whole? Because if you mean the world at large, that particular "we" was never fooled at all. The vast majority of people in the world never believed the Bush Administration, and saw through the lies right from the beginning and every single step of the way.

So that leaves the American public, and the American and British governments. The American and British governments were never fooled at all, and the investigations conducted after the war confirmed that. They knew exactly what they were doing. The British intelligence service warned both Bush and Blair repeatedly that "Curveball" (a taxi driver named Rafid Ahmed Alwan) was a complete fraud who had apparently never even been a part of Saddam's biological weapons program, much less been in charge of it as he claimed. The same warnings were also given by the German intelligence service (which was the first to debrief Alwan) and the sections of the CIA which knew Alwan best.

George Bush and the American government were never fooled at all. They lied through their teeth every step of the way - according to this article by CNN, the White House made 935 false statements in the public relations campaign that led to the Iraq war, 232 of those coming from Bush himself. Tony Blair was forced out of office for lying to the British people about the non-existent Iraqi weapons programs. No, Chuckmann - the principal governments were not fooled at all. They knew exactly what they were doing.

So, the only "we" left is the American people, and those of us who were actually paying attention were never fooled for a minute. Deceived? Oh, yes, we were deceived by our government. But fooled? Not at all. It was blindingly obvious every single inch of the way.



Quote:
Originally Posted by chuckmann View Post
PS I'm a right winger who supported the Iraq invasion with all my heart. Funny how easy it is to fool people.
Especially when they want so badly to be fooled in the first place. Those of us who paid attention, asked the obvious questions from the beginning (without ever once getting the answers) were never fooled. And we're not going to be fooled today by the revisionist spin trying to convince us that we didn't see what we saw every single day of that time on our evening news.




Quote:
Originally Posted by chuckmann View Post
And before you left wingers gloat, remember that your elected so called representatives were all part of the error.
"Error"? There was no error. It was a deliberate lie from the very beginning; there was never anything erroneous about it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-22-2014, 05:28 AM
 
20,979 posts, read 15,614,915 times
Reputation: 10270
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregW View Post
The Iraq war was completely justified if you were an oil company (particularly British Petroleum) investor. It was worth every dime you did not spend and every death you did not suffer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peggy Anne View Post
A TOTAL waste of human life. America should be ashamed of the liars who pushed this thing to begin with.
Quote:
Originally Posted by John F S View Post
NO - It was NOT necessary.
It was waged on wrong information - at best - or lies - at worst.
Yea.....THESE people:

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
--President Bill Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
--President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
--Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
--Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by:
-- Democratic Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others, Oct. 9, 1998

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
-Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
-- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999

"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by:
-- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), and others, Dec 5, 2001

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and th! e means of delivering them."
-- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
-- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
-- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
-- Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force -- if necessary -- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
-- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do"
-- Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
-- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..."
-- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003

Last edited by Oldhag1; 07-22-2014 at 06:26 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-22-2014, 05:31 AM
 
5,466 posts, read 2,310,732 times
Reputation: 6745
I never bought the argument of WMD. Bush was going to war come Moderator cut: language or high water. I remember the run up to the war, where Bush and his cronies kept changing the raisin d'Ítre for going to war. When one argument failed to catch on with the public, they tried another. WMD worked. The public bought the lie. The lie along with smear campaigns against those that opposed the war and scare tactics, gave them the public support they wanted.

Last edited by Oldhag1; 07-22-2014 at 06:28 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-22-2014, 05:41 AM
 
5,466 posts, read 2,310,732 times
Reputation: 6745
Quote:
Originally Posted by alphamale View Post
Yea, like this!

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
--President Bill Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
--President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
--Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
--Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by:
-- Democratic Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others, Oct. 9, 1998

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
-Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
-- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999

"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by:
-- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), and others, Dec 5, 2001

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and th! e means of delivering them."
-- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
-- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
-- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
-- Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force -- if necessary -- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
-- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do"
-- Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
-- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..."
-- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003
The Iraqi War was instigated and pursued by the Bush Administration. You are probably too young to remember the lead up to the War. Moderator cut: Against forum guidelines

Last edited by Oldhag1; 07-22-2014 at 06:31 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-22-2014, 06:38 AM
 
3,046 posts, read 2,635,817 times
Reputation: 2122
The war was for oil and oil only. Liquid gold isn't the oil fields the first thing the US secured entering Iraq. GW Bush and his whole family are Texas oil men and oil is power and wealth. Strange that no Iraq oil made its way to the USA even though American blood was spilled to get it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-22-2014, 08:44 AM
 
Location: Nescopeck, Penna.
11,362 posts, read 6,786,875 times
Reputation: 14412
Quote:
Originally Posted by Albert_The_Crocodile View Post
If our arguments are oversimplified, expose them.
Exhibit 'A':-conspiracy theories, oversimplifications, etc???

Quote:
Originally Posted by Opin_Yunated View Post
Justified.

The war in Iraq was started to protect the Petro-dollar, thus continuing to secure inelastic demand for the U.S. dollar.

Yes, it was built 100% on lies and treasonous actions. 9/11 was created by the Bush Administration (anyone with an engineering degree knows that a jet plane cannot topple a skyscraper) to push through the Patriot Act and "justify" military excursions into Iraq. Iraq decided not to sell oil in U.S. dollars. Every country that has done so has felt the taste of the U.S. military.
Conspiracy theories are tempting, but I find it very hard to believe that one of that magnitude could be concealed for very long, particularly given the enormous potential for the opposition, were it exposed. And as pointed out in Post #36, many prominent members of the opposition recognized the threat perceived by Saddam Hussein in the months immediately following 9/11. Further-radicalized elements of the Left should have been able to push this theory further, even with a relatively-limited supply of hard evidence, but why it didn't happen is beyond my understanding.

Finally, it needs to be recognized that while the nation's prominent place on the global stage and assumed role of "global policeman" (as explained in Post #1, I believe this is a role we cannot decline completely) assuming that role provides an opportunity for the development of a military-industrial complex. So we're faced with a hard choice that needs to be balanced very carefully via the fine art of statecraft.

The First Gulf War Left too many Americans with the impression that a second Iraqi invasion would be a cakewalk; people old enough to recall the pressures of the attrition strategy used in the Vietnam era should have known better. Yet as evidenced by some of the comments on a parallel thread regarding the possibility of "a new Civil War started by militias and 'Teabaggers' " (the fringe's choice of words to demonize, not mine) there is always a contingent of young men who watch too much Spike-TV, and can provide fodder for cannon, (or in this case, IED's).

With Armed Militias Growing Each Year In Numbers ~ Are We Headed For Another Civil War?

Last edited by 2nd trick op; 07-22-2014 at 09:16 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top