[nmnita]

Originally Posted by GraniteStater

Why did the US choose to invade Iraq other than oil? We don't go on the warmongering spree to overthrow dictators in African countries! No WMDs were found and we spent nearly a trillion dollars of the taxpayer money in this wasteful conflict. The military-industrial complex $$$$$ should have flowed to the Afghanistam/Pakistan border where it was needed in order to combat and defeat Al Qaeda and Bin Laden.

hey, you don't know why, anymore than I do. All of us are just giving our opinions: that being said, all I was referring to is did or didn't Hussain have WMD? I happen to believe he did and we gave him time to dump them. Am I allowed to have an opinion here?

Nita

[GraniteStater]

Originally Posted by nmnita

hey, you don't know why, anymore than I do. All of us are just giving our opinions: that being said, all I was referring to is did or didn't Hussain have WMD? I happen to believe he did and we gave him time to dump them. Am I allowed to have an opinion here?

Nita

Yes, you are allowed to have an opinion I just happen to believe that the Iraq war was the largest waste of federal dollars in our history, and led to the largest budget defecit in US history. I think all of us taxpayers have been angered by various acts of fiscal mismanagement by those in charge.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._budget_deficit

[mattpoulsen]

The Iraq war, when calculated as a function of the GDP, is not as expensive as the Vietnam war. (see link below)

1) http://www.nationalreview.com/nrof_b...0601230854.asp

2) http://money.cnn.com/2008/01/10/news...tune/index.htm

The link is a few years old, but at the time the war costs were roughly at $250 billion. Even if you quadruple that # to roughly the current costs, it is still less than the Vietnam and Korean war (both wars that many would argue we shouldn't have been in).

That said, in pure dollars it is very expensive, but when inflation and the relative size of the U.S. economy are considered it is quite a bit smaller than many of this country's past massive failures. I just think the cost of the war needs to be put in the proper economic perspective.

I would also add that you have no idea if it is a waste. Hussein, who was a tyrant at the epicenter of the middle east mess, is now out of power. He was vastly different from the various dictators across the rest of the world simply because his influence (both cooperative and antagonistic) upon other nations in his region. Further, it is completely rewriting history to suggest that something didn't have to be done with him. He actively lead people to believe he had WMD's and he was a constant antagonizer of the U.S., the U.N., Israel, and his own people. Should we have invaded...probably not...but the idea that we toppled an innocent regime is a bastardization of history.

A democratic Iraq, if it succeeds, will do a great deal towards stabilizing the middle east.

So, will it ultimately be a waste? Maybe. But that is for history to judge.

[GraniteStater]

Originally Posted by mattpoulsen

The Iraq war, when calculated as a function of the GDP, is not as expensive as the Vietnam war. (see link below)

1) BuzzCharts: Jerry Bowyer on the Cost of War and the War in Iraq on NRO Financial

2) What Iraq will cost the U.S. - Jan. 11, 2008

The link is a few years old, but at the time the war costs were roughly at $250 billion. Even if you quadruple that # to roughly the current costs, it is still less than the Vietnam and Korean war (both wars that many would argue we shouldn't have been in).

That said, in pure dollars it is very expensive, but when inflation and the relative size of the U.S. economy are considered it is quite a bit smaller than many of this country's past massive failures. I just think the cost of the war needs to be put in the proper economic perspective.

I would also add that you have no idea if it is a waste. Hussein, who was a tyrant at the epicenter of the middle east mess, is now out of power. He was vastly different from the various dictators across the rest of the world simply because his influence (both cooperative and antagonistic) upon other nations in his region. Further, it is completely rewriting history to suggest that something didn't have to be done with him. He actively lead people to believe he had WMD's and he was a constant antagonizer of the U.S., the U.N., Israel, and his own people. Should we have invaded...probably not...but the idea that we toppled an innocent regime is a bastardization of history.

A democratic Iraq, if it succeeds, will do a great deal towards stabilizing the middle east.

So, will it ultimately be a waste? Maybe. But that is for history to judge.

Thank you for those links. It sure does put things in the proper perspective compared to the historical past.

I did not really get into the Saddam Hussein argument. I think most would agree that it was a good idea that we toppled the regime at that time. I still think another key reason was the securitization of the oil supplies there as well.However, the events after that and the corresponding intelligence associated with the occupation was a complete debacle for years afterward. The collaboration with the CIA, FBI, and NSA was not well executed. Read the book "The Shadow Factory" for more details on all of that. It seems like the US always has these grandiose schemes at properly executing the initial surge or invasion, but little thought toward the potential insuing conflicts with groups of insurgents as well as the eventual withdrawl. Of course, the most prominent supporters of the Iraq War are neoconservatives, and see nearly everything we do in the Middle East as a bulwark to protect the interests of Isarel. That is all fine and good. However, the neoconservatives also don't want to take responsiblity for some of the negative actions Israel has done against the Palestinans over the past few decades either. The major issue is that of the water supply via the aquifer. Israel has engaged in profligate wasteful irrigation diversion schemes out in the Negev Desert region in the southern portion of the country. This diversion scheme over time has depleted the aquifer that underlies both Israel, the West Bank, Gaza Strip, and Syria. This has meant less water flowing to the Palestinians which inevitably leads to conflict over a period of time since clean water is a basic human need.

I think most would agree that if Iraq becomes a Democratic nation then it would be a good stalwart example for others to potentially follow. However, it would come at a high cost to the US regardless.

This whole notion that the US must spread freedom to countries we engage in has not worked to well in the past. We never learn from the mistakes we have made in Korea and Vietnam. My uncle was a scholar of history in his time, and served in the Korean War. We still have military on the DMZ on the Korean Peninsula at the 38th parallel. (Vietnam) I will leave you to judge the historical thoughts and analyses there.

[michmoldman]

I cant believe the freaking idiots that run this country. The country is going to hell..and they are arguing like little kids! They are all a bunch of no good pathetic liars, that could never make it in the world we live in. They have no cares in the world because they have money, and do not have to worry about how they are going to feed their kids this week. They have absolutely no clue what they are doing, and how to even go about doing it. Those idiots would argue for months over what color crap is, while the country went to hell! The American people should run this country. Get rid of all those good for nothing losers and put the people in charge.

[pandorasbox]

A real President doesn't stage people with questions that he already know the answers..
A real president doen't promise things to people that he can't deliver...
A real president does not take from those who have to give to those who don't get off their ass to work for it themselves.
A real president don't put himself over the AMERICAN people.
A real President would not take away freedom from the country that is known for it.
A real President is President over AMERICA not just his party.
A real President should be saying :how STRONG AMERICA is that we will aways be strong, not weak and broken as he has said to TV
So Obama's been in for a couple of weeks and so far he is no real President!!!!!!!!!!!!

Originally Posted by smithy77

The question and answer period had no teleprompter. Did you even watch the press conference? I thought he handled himself brilliantly. He has a nimble mind and I thought he was very well informed. It's refreshing to have a president who can hold his own at a press conference or a at a town hall meeting. Our last president just strung a bunch of bumper sticker slogans together and kept repeating them. He mangled the English language and made up words that didn't exist (like 'misunderestimated', et. al.). Our last president's handlers demanded that all questions asked by the press be submitted ahead of time, so his staff could feed him the right bumper sticker slogans. Participants at our our last presidents' rallies were carefully chosen so as not to include anyone who disagreed with him or, god forbid, ask embarrassing questions. Dissent was virtually non-existent. In short, our last president lived in a very tightly controlled bubble.

In contrast, our new president hasn't surrounded himself with 'yes' men and women (three of the his Cabinet members are Republicans), and he seems to be open to listening to dissent. His recent question and answer periods at his rallies in both Indiana and Florida had several dissenting questions from the opposition. This is the way a president should conduct himself in public. This is how mature adults with real leadership skills operate. This is how real democracies work. Is he going to screw up from time to time? Sure, who doesn't.

[mattpoulsen]

Pandora,

Bush has done everything on that list. In fact, when I first read it that's who I thought you were trying to describe.

Obama hasn't had time to do any of those things!

For the record, I hate both sides of the spectrum...so don't presume I'm a "crazy liberal" (as I'm sure you'd like to put it).

You're condemning a guy who has been president for less than a month!!! That is simply idiotic and is exactly the ridiculous partisan politics that everyone on this board claims to hate so much.

Or is it you just hate the partisan politics that works against your party??

Like i said above...please just turn Rush off for 1 day!!

[FunkyMonk]

It is threads like this that make me want to stay out of the midwest.

How can you all possibly be critisizing Obama like this after what Bush did? Have you not seen what has happened for the past couple years?

I am not a cheerleader for Obama, but it will be REALLY hard for him to do any worse than Bush.

[FunkyMonk]

Originally Posted by pandorasbox

A real President doesn't stage people with questions that he already know the answers..
A real president doen't promise things to people that he can't deliver...
A real president does not take from those who have to give to those who don't get off their ass to work for it themselves.
A real president don't put himself over the AMERICAN people.
A real President would not take away freedom from the country that is known for it.
A real President is President over AMERICA not just his party.
A real President should be saying :how STRONG AMERICA is that we will aways be strong, not weak and broken as he has said to TV
So Obama's been in for a couple of weeks and so far he is no real President!!!!!!!!!!!!

So I guess Bush wasn't a real President then? He did all this and much, much worse.

[smithy77]

Originally Posted by pandorasbox

A real President doesn't stage people with questions that he already know the answers..
A real president doen't promise things to people that he can't deliver...
A real president does not take from those who have to give to those who don't get off their ass to work for it themselves.
A real president don't put himself over the AMERICAN people.
A real President would not take away freedom from the country that is known for it.
A real President is President over AMERICA not just his party.
A real President should be saying :how STRONG AMERICA is that we will aways be strong, not weak and broken as he has said to TV
So Obama's been in for a couple of weeks and so far he is no real President!!!!!!!!!!!!

Me too. I honestly thought you were talking about Obama until I got to the last line!