State of Iraq

Skybird · 02-10-11, 04:51 PM

I did not had to change my position on Iraq by one inch since 2003, so when I was saying in 2003 and 2004 that it was a big mistake, was caused not by need but by opportunistic desire, that it was about lies and intentional deception of the public, and was both badly prepared and badly carried out, then I still say so today. In fact I feel confirmed in my warnings by everything that has happened since the invasion started.

A very stupid adventure, from A to Z. The blood costs are payed by the Iraqi civilians.

Dowly · 02-10-11, 05:02 PM

Never should've gone there.

Saddam was a bad guy, but he kept things pretty much under control. The war and death of Saddam opened the door for terrorists and chaos. Gonna take a looong time for Iraq to get over this (if it ever will).

02-10-11, 05:06 PM

All the coilition did was exactly what the Iranians wanted, and probably more than they could have dreamed of.

Armistead · 02-10-11, 05:16 PM

Seems the US can't learn that you can't replace cultures with war. It's impossible to change a mindset that's been around 1000 years with war, it can't be done.

Bush Sr knew better, his son didn't. He lied, he is a criminal and should be charged as one, but we can't do that, somehow it would dishonor the servicemen, so it's just a lie we all live with.

Bubblehead1980 · 02-10-11, 05:30 PM

I am glad we went.I think the cause was just even though we did not find WMD's and tired of this crap about Bush lied etc.Believe they followed their intel and used the faulty intel.We do know Sadam had the WMD's at one time, perhaps while we were beating the war drum for months ahead and he had a deadline, he got rid of them or sent them elsewhere, very plausible scenario.

The war was mismanaged, going in fairly light with not enough troops for the shock and awe instead of a full scale war with the numbers they really needed.They tried to do it the easy way going on the assumption once Iraqi Army was gone there would be no real resistance.They failed to plan for an insurgency and it cost many more lives than it should have.

I believe one day Iraq will be the "shining city on the hill" in the middle east.The war was worth it, mismanaged most of the time, absolutely but the surge worked and things are better.Worth it? Absolutely.

02-10-11, 05:43 PM

Quote:

very plausible scenario

Ducimus, that politician you mentioned.
When he was selling that obvious bull that practicly got him laughed out the chamber didn't he describe it as the worst point of his career and the biggest stain on his reputation.
Do you think he would describe it as a "very plausible scenario"?

Quote:

The war was worth it, mismanaged most of the time, absolutely but the surge worked and things are better.Worth it? Absolutely.

Worth it? The recently installed government was finally put together after some of the most virulently anti-american terrorists in the region sat down together and agreed which Iranian backed group would take the key positions in government?
Absolutely???????
Worth it? yeah for Iran.

CaptainHaplo · 02-10-11, 06:37 PM

Never ceases to amaze me how people ignore the realities just because its not front page news.

Weapons of mass destruction didn't exist, huh?

Declassified docs as of 2006:
http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/...classified.pdf

enough Sarin and Mustard gas to kill about 7 Million. In a degraded state, figure about half that. 3.5 Million dead isn't mass destruction? What is then?

Don't like that example? Fair enough - how about the love of the left - wikileaks? Would you rather them tell you? Turns out that one recent dump discussed this very thing....

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2010...ising-results/

Not the quantity that was sold to the public by Bush, but thats an intelligence apparatus failure. The reality is they existed.

But wait - there is more... Everyone knows that Saddam wasn't after nukes, right? He had given up on all that, right? Of course, the 550 metric tons of yellow cake uranium he had - that even MSNBC calls " seed material for higher-grade nuclear enrichment " doesn't mean he actually had a nuclear program, right? I am sure he was just trying to figure out how to power the palace lights with the stuff so he could, uhm - you know - get off the grid.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25546334...east/n_africa/

Of course - this material was located at the Tuwaitha Special Weapons research / nuclear complex. The name might ring a bell, since it was the location of the Iraqi nuclear research programme when Israel bombed it. The IAEA wanted to inspect the material - but Saddam would not allow them to do so, in violation of treaty. In fact, this refusal to allow the IAEA to inspect the uranium was a major cause of war, since whether or not the uranium was being used to enrich fuel for a weapon or not, it created the APPEARANCE that it was.

Add in the 2004 actions of removing material sufficiently enriched as to be useful in the making of "dirty bombs", as reported by USA Today.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/i...-uranium_x.htm

1.6 tons of enriched uranium, 6.6 lbs of "low enriched" uranium and about 1000 "highly radioactive" items - where "highly radioactive" is defined as suitable for weapon use (but not weapons grade)- aka enriched to 20%.

@ Armistead - Bush lied? About what? Every intelligence report at the time, not only from the US but from multiple allies, indicated that WMD existed on a large scale under Saddam. Is a man a liar if he works from the best information he has?

As far as a criminal, I can only assume you are talking about Bush starting a "war of aggression". To that I can only state that there was nothing illegal about the war. Take WMD's entirely out of the equation - even without them, the war itself was legal due to the violation of the ceasefire by Iraq. Iraq, on multiple occasions, fired upon US and Allied aircraft and violated the ceasefire they agreed to. These acts were not precipitated by them being fired upon, but rather were acts of war by a belligerant in violation of the agreement in place. As such, the moment they fired the first time, any invasion by any signatory of the cease fire became legal.

I don't like Bush much. Its ok for you to not like him too. Did he mismanage the war? You bet he did. However, to call him a liar or a criminal over the war is untrue. WMD's existed that violated the notification and destruction clauses. A clandestine nuclear program MAY have existed (we will likely never know for certain to what extent it may or may not have). Intelligence from almost every source said major programs of NBC warfare existed. The government refused to allow inspections of materials that would support part of those programs - violating treaty. They violated a ceasefire by firing on forces engaged in legitimate, legally defined (and agreed to) patrols without provocation, throwing the cease fire in the trash.

The wars in both Afghanistan and Iraq have been horribly carried out. No argument here. But that was because we had no idea what to do after the regime's fell.

To be correct, we really should stop calling them wars - for they are not. They are conflict and construction zones. We got into nation building while we get shot at, because the people there don't want to do the heavy lifting.

Liberty and freedom come with a cost, and the biggest error that Bush made was that we cannot free a country. Liberty and freedom are bought with the blood of patriots - not foreigners. Iraq, Afghanistan, and many other places in the world will never have true reform until they pay the price for it themselves.

If only every leader of nations understood that.........

Ducimus · 02-10-11, 08:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bubblehead1980

I am glad we went.

Man, do you have any idea how hallow those words are?
I have to ask, Did you go Iraq? Did you serve in the military? Where you there when the **** was hitting the fan? Where where you stationed at?

Don't ever use the word, "We" in that context if you didn't participate in something like that. When it comes to Iraq or Afghanistan, *I* sure as hell won't be saying, "im glad we went". I have no right to.

There's ONE Thing that has really peeved me off with the general public every since i got out of the military. The whole, "We're gonna kick their ass!" or, "I'm glad we went!" mentality. REALLY?!!?? What do you mean, WE? Where where you again? Like the whole thing is a god damn football game, as they sit on their asses, watching CNN, and waving the American flag around like its a set of cheer leaders pom poms.

Another big FAD i always get a kick out of, is the "I support our troops" yellow ribbons some jerkoffs place next to their gas caps on their vehicles. You support our troops eh? REALLY? HOW? By buying a bumper sticker on amazon? Displaying your do nothing flag waving patrotism to assuage some guilt? Way to support the troops there......

You'll have to excuse me, I've had that sentiment bottled up in me for about 14 years now. As an aside, its my opinion that anyone who supports a war (any war) should be made to serve in it.

Armistead · 02-10-11, 08:49 PM

Cheny's worth in Haliburton went from $241,498 to over $8,000,000.

Mission accomplished.

Growler · 02-11-11, 12:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ducimus

You'll have to excuse me, I've had that sentiment bottled up in me for about 14 years now. As an aside, its my opinion that anyone who supports a war (any war) should be made to serve in it.

No excuse necessary. Your entire post is well said, and echoes my feelings as well.

My kid is looking at tour #4 in [a current zone of conflict] coming up [sometime in the future] - so I'm a little sore on the "yellow ribbon" pandering, too.

Bubblehead1980 · 02-11-11, 02:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ducimus

Man, do you have any idea how hallow those words are?
I have to ask, Did you go Iraq? Did you serve in the military? Where you there when the **** was hitting the fan? Where where you stationed at?

Don't ever use the word, "We" in that context if you didn't participate in something like that. When it comes to Iraq or Afghanistan, *I* sure as hell won't be saying, "im glad we went". I have no right to.

There's ONE Thing that has really peeved me off with the general public every since i got out of the military. The whole, "We're gonna kick their ass!" or, "I'm glad we went!" mentality. REALLY?!!?? What do you mean, WE? Where where you again? Like the whole thing is a god damn football game, as they sit on their asses, watching CNN, and waving the American flag around like its a set of cheer leaders pom poms.

Another big FAD i always get a kick out of, is the "I support our troops" yellow ribbons some jerkoffs place next to their gas caps on their vehicles. You support our troops eh? REALLY? HOW? By buying a bumper sticker on amazon? Displaying your do nothing flag waving patrotism to assuage some guilt? Way to support the troops there......

You'll have to excuse me, I've had that sentiment bottled up in me for about 14 years now. As an aside, its my opinion that anyone who supports a war (any war) should be made to serve in it.

Duci, I was not even out of high school when the war started and I went to college after graduation, so no I was not there.When I used "we" I meant our country.Yes the guys actually in the military are on the front lines but everyone has a stake in the war, some more than others but it's something that WE all must pay for, we all have a stake in the fight when we are at war.That is how and many others out there see it.I respect and understand your point of view, but disagree.

Platapus · 02-10-11, 09:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Armistead

Seems the US can't learn that you can't replace cultures with war. It's impossible to change a mindset that's been around 1000 years with war, it can't be done.

There is wisdom in these words.

August · 02-10-11, 11:52 PM

Well I for one am glad that we took out Saddam and his regime. The man was just waiting for a chance to stick it to us just as soon as we took our boot off his neck.

Armistead · 02-10-11, 11:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by August

Well I for one am glad that we took out Saddam and his regime. The man was just waiting for a chance to stick it to us just as soon as we took our boot off his neck.

Was he worth 4500 american soldiers?

joegrundman · 02-11-11, 04:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by August

Well I for one am glad that we took out Saddam and his regime. The man was just waiting for a chance to stick it to us just as soon as we took our boot off his neck.

out of curiosity - how do you imagine he was going to stick it to ze Americans after you took the boot off his neck? Invade kuwait again?

02-10-11, 04:51 PM	#1
Skybird Soaring Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: the mental asylum named Germany Posts: 42,663 Downloads: 10 Uploads: 0	I did not had to change my position on Iraq by one inch since 2003, so when I was saying in 2003 and 2004 that it was a big mistake, was caused not by need but by opportunistic desire, that it was about lies and intentional deception of the public, and was both badly prepared and badly carried out, then I still say so today. In fact I feel confirmed in my warnings by everything that has happened since the invasion started. A very stupid adventure, from A to Z. The blood costs are payed by the Iraqi civilians. __________________ If you feel nuts, consult an expert.

02-10-11, 06:37 PM	#7
CaptainHaplo Silent Hunter Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 4,404 Downloads: 29 Uploads: 0	Never ceases to amaze me how people ignore the realities just because its not front page news. Weapons of mass destruction didn't exist, huh? Declassified docs as of 2006: http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/...classified.pdf enough Sarin and Mustard gas to kill about 7 Million. In a degraded state, figure about half that. 3.5 Million dead isn't mass destruction? What is then? Don't like that example? Fair enough - how about the love of the left - wikileaks? Would you rather them tell you? Turns out that one recent dump discussed this very thing.... http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2010...ising-results/ Not the quantity that was sold to the public by Bush, but thats an intelligence apparatus failure. The reality is they existed. But wait - there is more... Everyone knows that Saddam wasn't after nukes, right? He had given up on all that, right? Of course, the 550 metric tons of yellow cake uranium he had - that even MSNBC calls " seed material for higher-grade nuclear enrichment " doesn't mean he actually had a nuclear program, right? I am sure he was just trying to figure out how to power the palace lights with the stuff so he could, uhm - you know - get off the grid. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25546334...east/n_africa/ Of course - this material was located at the Tuwaitha Special Weapons research / nuclear complex. The name might ring a bell, since it was the location of the Iraqi nuclear research programme when Israel bombed it. The IAEA wanted to inspect the material - but Saddam would not allow them to do so, in violation of treaty. In fact, this refusal to allow the IAEA to inspect the uranium was a major cause of war, since whether or not the uranium was being used to enrich fuel for a weapon or not, it created the APPEARANCE that it was. Add in the 2004 actions of removing material sufficiently enriched as to be useful in the making of "dirty bombs", as reported by USA Today. http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/i...-uranium_x.htm 1.6 tons of enriched uranium, 6.6 lbs of "low enriched" uranium and about 1000 "highly radioactive" items - where "highly radioactive" is defined as suitable for weapon use (but not weapons grade)- aka enriched to 20%. @ Armistead - Bush lied? About what? Every intelligence report at the time, not only from the US but from multiple allies, indicated that WMD existed on a large scale under Saddam. Is a man a liar if he works from the best information he has? As far as a criminal, I can only assume you are talking about Bush starting a "war of aggression". To that I can only state that there was nothing illegal about the war. Take WMD's entirely out of the equation - even without them, the war itself was legal due to the violation of the ceasefire by Iraq. Iraq, on multiple occasions, fired upon US and Allied aircraft and violated the ceasefire they agreed to. These acts were not precipitated by them being fired upon, but rather were acts of war by a belligerant in violation of the agreement in place. As such, the moment they fired the first time, any invasion by any signatory of the cease fire became legal. I don't like Bush much. Its ok for you to not like him too. Did he mismanage the war? You bet he did. However, to call him a liar or a criminal over the war is untrue. WMD's existed that violated the notification and destruction clauses. A clandestine nuclear program MAY have existed (we will likely never know for certain to what extent it may or may not have). Intelligence from almost every source said major programs of NBC warfare existed. The government refused to allow inspections of materials that would support part of those programs - violating treaty. They violated a ceasefire by firing on forces engaged in legitimate, legally defined (and agreed to) patrols without provocation, throwing the cease fire in the trash. The wars in both Afghanistan and Iraq have been horribly carried out. No argument here. But that was because we had no idea what to do after the regime's fell. To be correct, we really should stop calling them wars - for they are not. They are conflict and construction zones. We got into nation building while we get shot at, because the people there don't want to do the heavy lifting. Liberty and freedom come with a cost, and the biggest error that Bush made was that we cannot free a country. Liberty and freedom are bought with the blood of patriots - not foreigners. Iraq, Afghanistan, and many other places in the world will never have true reform until they pay the price for it themselves. If only every leader of nations understood that......... __________________ Good Hunting! Captain Haplo

02-10-11, 08:49 PM	#9
Armistead Rear Admiral Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: on the Dan Posts: 10,880 Downloads: 364 Uploads: 0	Cheny's worth in Haliburton went from $241,498 to over $8,000,000. Mission accomplished. Last edited by Armistead; 02-10-11 at 09:22 PM.

02-10-11, 11:52 PM	#13
August Wayfaring Stranger Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Massachusetts Posts: 23,216 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	Well I for one am glad that we took out Saddam and his regime. The man was just waiting for a chance to stick it to us just as soon as we took our boot off his neck. __________________ Flanked by life and the funeral pyre. Putting on a show for you to see.

02-10-11, 05:02 PM	#2
Dowly Lucky Jack Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Finland Posts: 25,054 Downloads: 32 Uploads: 0	Never should've gone there. Saddam was a bad guy, but he kept things pretty much under control. The war and death of Saddam opened the door for terrorists and chaos. Gonna take a looong time for Iraq to get over this (if it ever will).

02-10-11, 05:06 PM	#3
Tribesman Stowaway Posts: n/a Downloads: Uploads:	All the coilition did was exactly what the Iranians wanted, and probably more than they could have dreamed of.

02-10-11, 05:16 PM	#4
Armistead Rear Admiral Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: on the Dan Posts: 10,880 Downloads: 364 Uploads: 0	Seems the US can't learn that you can't replace cultures with war. It's impossible to change a mindset that's been around 1000 years with war, it can't be done. Bush Sr knew better, his son didn't. He lied, he is a criminal and should be charged as one, but we can't do that, somehow it would dishonor the servicemen, so it's just a lie we all live with.

02-10-11, 05:30 PM	#5
Bubblehead1980 Navy Seal Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Florida USA Posts: 7,121 Downloads: 605 Uploads: 44	I am glad we went.I think the cause was just even though we did not find WMD's and tired of this crap about Bush lied etc.Believe they followed their intel and used the faulty intel.We do know Sadam had the WMD's at one time, perhaps while we were beating the war drum for months ahead and he had a deadline, he got rid of them or sent them elsewhere, very plausible scenario. The war was mismanaged, going in fairly light with not enough troops for the shock and awe instead of a full scale war with the numbers they really needed.They tried to do it the easy way going on the assumption once Iraqi Army was gone there would be no real resistance.They failed to plan for an insurgency and it cost many more lives than it should have. I believe one day Iraq will be the "shining city on the hill" in the middle east.The war was worth it, mismanaged most of the time, absolutely but the surge worked and things are better.Worth it? Absolutely.