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.
I have a question for conservatives here. I know you consider yourselves free thinkers, and believe that liberals are not. You see yourselves as objective viewers of fact, putting information above emotion. But I read this statistic today: 61% of Republicans believe starting the Iraq War was the right decision. That's compared to 27% of Democrats.
This is after finding out that the intelligence about WMD was wrong, after Trump campaigned against the Iraq War, and after GWB, Colin Powell, and John McCain have said that it was a mistake.
How is it that self identified Republicans are so utterly susceptible to propaganda that 17 years after "Freedom Fries" and "With us or against us" and "Mission Accomplished" almost 2/3 of you still believe the war was the right thing to do?
Why do "free thinkers" support a war just because politicians wave a flag and use the buzzword "freedom", and continue to support the war 15 years later?
In hindsight. Not taking away that some good did come of it.. Saddam was removed. Of course.. He would be.. About 82 now, assuming he was still alive.
On the other hand, if he had passed while still in power, odds are his two sons would be in charge.. Who were pretty much even worse than him.
Him and his family being gone is the silver lining of all of it.
And, another lesson that nation building is not something we want to get involved in. Maybe that lesson sinks in this time.
Looking at the silver lining would be perfectly reasonable, except the bad far outweighs the good. 460,000 Iraqis died because of that war and over 4000 US service members. The aftermath of the war lead to the rise of ISIS and global terrorism far worse than before. It's not rational to say "At least Saddam is gone" while ignoring the real loss of real lives and significantly more violent Islamic extremism.
In hindsight. Not taking away that some good did come of it.. Saddam was removed. Of course.. He would be.. About 82 now, assuming he was still alive.
On the other hand, if he had passed while still in power, odds are his two sons would be in charge.. Who were pretty much even worse than him.
Him and his family being gone is the silver lining of all of it.
And, another lesson that nation building is not something we want to get involved in. Maybe that lesson sinks in this time.
Saddam being removed caused a lot of problems. He hated/feared the Taliban, so he kept them down. With him gone, they proliferated like crazy. As awful as he was, he was the balance.
Saddam being removed caused a lot of problems. He hated/feared the Taliban, so he kept them down. With him gone, they proliferated like crazy. As awful as he was, he was the balance.
Now the Shia Muslims are in power, the same ones that rule Iran.
Though, the Shia Muslims are much more tame than the Wahhabis that rule Saudi Arabia.
I knew it was wrong.... Never changed ... Some Republicans might consider it a humanitarian approach to remove a dictator... Venezuela comes up... I wonder how many Democrats are opposed to what we are doing to Venezuela...
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.
