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.
A TOTAL waste of human life. America should be ashamed of the liars who pushed this thing to begin with.
America should be ashamed of DEMOS that let those lyres to lie, soaked lies in, and let it happen. Isn't it democracy, or power of the PEOPLE? So who's here to blame - the ones that pushed their private interests through, or ones that endorsed them? And what the value to that "democracy" is then?
It was a horrible waste of lives, money, and national prestige.
It was a completely different case from the invasion of Afghanistan and the entire world knew it.
The United States' vital interests were not even remotely threatened in Iraq. Iraq was not promoting international terrorism. And the entire case for the WMD pretext was based on the wild stories of an Iraqi defector in the hands of the German government that American intelligence resources weren't even allowed to interview.
Now, that being said, I don't think the Bush Administration consciously lied to the American public. I think they only recognized whatever information fit their pre-existing views about Saddam Hussein and ignored the puzzle pieces that didn't fit that view. It's history's worst recorded case of confirmation bias.
It was just an awful mistake by the Bush Administration.
Around the time of the Second Gulf War. a book entitled The Pentagon's New Map, by Thomas Barnett, was being promoted. In it, it was argued that the spread of democratic institutions in such areas as Eastern Europe, parts of Latin America and South Africa, coupled with a slower, less-direct process in China, India and the former Soviet Union, called for an essentially non-partisan approach to foreign policy devolving around suppression of the remaining possible "trouble spots". Mr. Barnett personally described himself as "non-partisan", and a holdover from the State Department of a previous administration.
To summarize, the United States' acceptance of the role of "global policeman" was somewhat more readily acknowledged (and by both parties) at a time when the cost of a war of attrition in occupied territory was understated, due to the "artificial" success in the First Gulf War.
That viewpoint hardly conforms to the present day "pop wisdom" of attributing the entire action to a personal grudge. Remember, the action was heavily debated and sanctioned by Congressional actions before actual military engagement began, and the report of U N advisor Hans Blix would not have been possible without the oversight of Western observers and troops.
And that point is seldom acknowledged by people who wish to dismiss the entire action as a personal vendetta, and whose message is largely directed at people who were under the age of ten, or younger, at the time of the conflict.
To the question of the thread: unjustified. I think the likeliest purpose of the war was to "contain" Iran with US troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, nations with long Iranian borders. With respect to that purpose, the invasion backfired catastrophically, with Iran substantially increasing its regional influence. The invasion was sold to the public primarily through the threat of WMDs, which was based on flawed intelligence while contrary intelligence was ignored. War advocates also argued that Saddam Hussein was a brutal dictator, that the war will remake the Middle East as a democratic paradise, and other pie-in-the-sky justifications that do not actually justify invading a sovereign nation that is not threatening your country.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2nd trick op
We can't return to an isolationist stance; our prominence among the industrialized democracies, and the fact that there are some people who will condemn us no matter what we do (just as there are some people on either side of the nation's current polarization who will attack any Administration who can't meet their "litmus test") guarantees that unenviable position.
So exactly how do we determine which of the globe's malcontents are a threat, and which aren't? It's clear that we missed the mark with bin Laden (and that should not be a partisan issue), and the belief that we could not afford a "second guess" was far more prevalent in 2002-03 than it is at present, when hindsight is (as always) 20/20. But the is a large group of new participants at this site who were too young to form an opinion at that time, and it's clear that an oversimplified argument is being peddled to them.
There is a huge gulf between isolationism and unjustified military intervention. The evidence available clearly suggests that the Bush administration trumped up poor intelligence in the run-up to war and ignored intelligence that did not support its invasion plans. That was a problem of foresight, not hindsight, and its consequences haunt our nation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Memphis1979
The United States being the sole world power was needed to correct the invasion of Kuwait. I understand our place, we had a vast coalition force of many Arab countries supporting us.
Where we get into trouble is nation building or trying to play police within the borders of a nation where they have leadership and a government in place already. The second Iraq war was not justified. Its only justification was faulty intelligence at the central intelligence agency, and a executive administration who felt it better to either missed the counter information, or simply ignored it for their own reasons.
We don't need to nation build. I understand keeping the borders on the map the way they are today, but not to nation build.
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.
And Dick Chaney was on the board of Halliburton witch got the contract to rebuild the oilfields in Iraq, boy that was lucky of them.
in 1990 i said it was totally necessary to show them who boss, last ten years i feel it was totally wasted money and people. when we found saddm in the hole, we should of shot him between the eyes and then loaded up and came home, everybody, same weekend
in 1990 i said it was totally necessary to show them who boss, last ten years i feel it was totally wasted money and people. when we found saddm in the hole, we should of shot him between the eyes and then loaded up and came home, everybody, same weekend
And we're we're all those WMD? And why have gas prices remained high in America if we have all that Iraq oil. GW was told to finish what his daddy did not do.
A total sad waste of lives and money. Without the Iraq war, we would have run much, much smaller deficits, maybe even some surpluses and the country might have weathered the housing meltdown better. Some of that money would have either been used to improve things in this country or return money to the people.
The justification , the chemical stockpiles, didn't exist.
One good thing maybe came out of it. Americans will be much more skeptical of the government when it tells them it has proof of something, without actually showing the evidence. Hopefully people will demand to be shown the proof and not except the excuse that the people can't be shown things for national security reasons.
I am no Obama fanboy, quite the opposite. But blaming him the Iraq crisis now is idiotic. You can't force people to be free and democratic and assume that is what they want. Let's end this idea that everyone wants to be like us.
Finally, the war opened deep wounds among Americans themselves and led to a lot of unnecessary political hatred.
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.
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.
