Thread: What are we doing in Iraq?

Blah blah. We are fighting a front in the WoT in Iraq. A stable, democratic, non-terror-supporting Iraq that, if not a friend, at least is not an enemy, will give us a nice inroad and stepping off point in a region of great national and strategic interest. Same reason we went in.

-dale

I think the rhetoric is that we are fighting terrorists in Iraq, so the terrorists don't come to the USA.

I'd like to know which Congressmen and Senators have a family member serving in Iraq.

I'm also curious what medications are given to Bush so he can sleep at night.

Originally Posted by FFE

I think the rhetoric is that we are fighting terrorists in Iraq, so the terrorists don't come to the USA.

I'd like to know which Congressmen and Senators have a family member serving in Iraq.

I'm also curious what medications are given to Bush so he can sleep at night.

I hear Ambien is good.

Originally Posted by gio

Looking back it's become apparent we were fooled by the Bush administration into going to war under false pretense.

Not even close.

If anything, BUSH was fooled by the intel agencies of 27 different nations, and that was HARDLY the only reason to go in anyway.

Originally Posted by gio

If at one time any of us backed the war it's understandable to have reservations, now.

Sure, we should be asking why the President allowed Cheyney and Rumsfeld to run the war on the cheap, thereby creating all the problems that've followed.

Originally Posted by gio

So, I ask, what is the purpose of American military presence in Iraq, today?

Because surrender is an extremely bad idea when you're facing a determined enemy with global reach that wishes to kill you.
Which is why it was SO UTTERLY STUPID when Clinton retreated from Somalia to begin with(OBL's stated 'epiphany event', when he says he 'realized the US could be beaten')

Originally Posted by gio

If there are no WMD, how can we justify being there, now?

Because it's impolite to leave the table before helping out with the mess you created.

Originally Posted by gio

If we intended to bring democracy and stability to the Iraqi people, as Iraq slides into civil war, it's time for a discussion on what our role is going to be.

The time for that was BEFORE the war even started....

Originally Posted by gio

It's a tough subject; but with the American electorate lining up aganist it more and more as polls are released it's no longer a subject politicans can ignore.

First, the truth is that the American electorate is composed of a bunch of me-first socialist IDIOTS.

Second, what we should be discussing is why is Rumsfeld still the SecDef, and why is Cheyney making national policy wrt how to fight a war, and why was State shut out of "Phase IV" ops by DoD....etc.

It is a total Cluster-fucck, for sure, but lets make sure we keep our eyes on what mistakes were actually made, as opposed to what mistakes the MSM and Left (and for that matter the neo-con right) want us to believe happened.

I don't know. Former CIA chief George Tenet told Bush it's a "slam dunk" to find WMD in Iraq. He should know what he was talking about. After all, he was at his post even before Bush took office. Bill Clinton appointed Tenet. The president that took credit for the greatest post-WW2 economic expansion couldn't possibly be wrong. If Tenet was good enough for Billy, he sure was good enough for Bush. We all know Bush is stupid and only hires yes-men. So he retained a Clinton appointee to serve as his eyes and ears around the world. Come on, a Clinton guy couldn't possibly lie to Bush. Clinton appointed him, for crying out loud.

The great Bill Clinton!!! America was loved the world over under Clinton. The first WTC bombing in 1993 was Bush's fault. Khobar tower bombing in 1996 was Bush's fault. The embassy bombings in Tanzania and Kenya in 1998 was Bush's fault. The USS Cole bombing in 2000 was also Bush's fault.

The islamonazis anticipated Bush taking office in 2001 so they pre-bombed us. Then the fit really hit the shan in 2001. No one hated us until Bush took office.

It's all Bush's fault!!!

Originally Posted by FFE

I think the rhetoric is that we are fighting terrorists in Iraq, so the terrorists don't come to the USA.

While that is an obvious attempt to deflect STUPID policy in Iraq, it is also almost entirely true.

Originally Posted by FFE

I'd like to know which Congressmen and Senators have a family member serving in Iraq.

There are some, but it's still UTTERLY IRRELEVANT.

The US military is a volunteer force, so no American is required to serve, and that includes Congresscritters kids too.

Originally Posted by gunnut

I don't know. Former CIA chief George Tenet told Bush it's a "slam dunk" to find WMD in Iraq. He should know what he was talking about. After all, he was at his post even before Bush took office. Bill Clinton appointed Tenet. The president that took credit for the greatest post-WW2 economic expansion couldn't possibly be wrong. If Tenet was good enough for Billy, he sure was good enough for Bush. We all know Bush is stupid and only hires yes-men. So he retained a Clinton appointee to serve as his eyes and ears around the world. Come on, a Clinton guy couldn't possibly lie to Bush. Clinton appointed him, for crying out loud.

The great Bill Clinton!!! America was loved the world over under Clinton. The first WTC bombing in 1993 was Bush's fault. Khobar tower bombing in 1996 was Bush's fault. The embassy bombings in Tanzania and Kenya in 1998 was Bush's fault. The USS Cole bombing in 2000 was also Bush's fault.

The islamonazis anticipated Bush taking office in 2001 so they pre-bombed us. Then the fit really hit the shan in 2001. No one hated us until Bush took office.

It's all Bush's fault!!!

What the f uc k are you talking about? Mind-less talking points don't distract from the orginal questions. Moron. Next time post something constructive instead of your mindless partisan bulls hit This country is tired of it.

Speaking of yes-men, here's a NYT article from today:

WASHINGTON, Aug. 29 — State Department investigators have concluded that Kenneth Y. Tomlinson, the head of the federal agency that oversees most government broadcasts to foreign countries, improperly hired a friend on the public payroll for nearly $250,000 over two and a half years, according to a summary of their report made public this afternoon by Democratic Congressional staff members.

Full Article: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/29/wa...rtner=homepage

The WoT and Freedom and Democracy is something that one may feel has moved from the sublime to the ridiculous.

But all that was actually smokescreen.

One has to read the Defence Policy Guidelines Cheney had initiated as the Secretary of Defence and one will realise what the game of Iraq is all about. It has nothing to do with high flauting morals, it is mere strategic compulsions.

Oil (he who controls Oil, control and manipulates the world economy and hence the world!), containing Russia, depleting the Russian influence both economic and political in the CAR, leaning onto China and having a base in the ME for quick reaction etc etc.

Originally Posted by Gio

What the f uc k are you talking about? Mind-less talking points don't distract from the orginal questions. Moron. Next time post something constructive instead of your mindless partisan bulls hit This country is tired of it.

I guess admins are allowed to call people names.

Too bad I'm not afforded the same coutesy.

You called me a moron and my point of view partisan bull crap. Am I allowed to call you that?

Your anger sounds typical for a frustrated leftists who can't figure out why people with different views are so stupid.

You said Bush lied. I'm telling you he told us what Tenet told him. That was the opening sentence of my rant. The topic sentence, if you will. If you didn't read the rest, at least you could have read the first sentence. Maybe in your anger you have lost sight of the topic.

I don't normally call people names (did it once, got a warning) and I don't appreciate being called names also. Please don't do it again. You are the admin. Act like one.

Gannut,

One cannot deny that WMD has not been found and no matter who said what.

Further, how does it matter who was appointed by whom. After all, they should be loyal to their country if they hold a govt post and not go by who appointed them.

In fact, with due respect to your views, it actually did not quite come to grips with the subject and instead meandered into the woolly political realm and was not substantial to the issue.

Originally Posted by Gio

What the f uc k are you talking about? Mind-less talking points don't distract from the orginal questions. Moron. Next time post something constructive instead of your mindless partisan bulls hit This country is tired of it.

He did make a lot of relevant points, iow....it was not Bush that got us into the mess to begin with.

However, it HAS been Bush(or rather his most trusted luitenants- men he emphatically supports and enables) that's ensured we STAY neck deep in it, with virtually no obvious progress to speak of.

This may bring the mess in Iraq into perspective a bit though, cause the news does way overhype the violence over there:
More likely to be shot in Philly than killed in Iraq

Originally Posted by FFE

Speaking of yes-men, here's a NYT article from today:

WASHINGTON, Aug. 29 — State Department investigators have concluded that Kenneth Y. Tomlinson, the head of the federal agency that oversees most government broadcasts to foreign countries, improperly hired a friend on the public payroll for nearly $250,000 over two and a half years, according to a summary of their report made public this afternoon by Democratic Congressional staff members.

Full Article: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/29/wa...rtner=homepage

Dude, charges of nepotism(LORD KNOWS THE LEFT WOULD NEVER DO THAT! LOLOLOLOL!!!!! Um...yeah, right, ever heard of Emporer Daley?) are UTTERLY IRRELEVANT to this discussion.

My point is Bush didn't lie about WMD. He told us what he knew. He thought it was a threat. He feared the possiblity of Saddam handing something to someone not friendly to US and has the ability to pull off an attack. It was a real threat in the post-911 world.

The liberals somehow can't see this point. They thought Bush lied about the war to get his oil buddies rich. Hence the prominant "false pretenses" refered to in Gio's post. That, was also a political talking point.

Bush was trying his best to protect America. So was Tenet. With the best information available at the time, the world believed Saddam had WMD and was an imminant threat. Bush sold the war on WMD and removed Saddam. We found circumstancial evidences of WMD, but never found something like a warehouse full of drums containing nerve agents.

Think about the opposite. What if he did have it, and a terror group did get it, and used it in Europe or America? What would the anti-Bush people say? He knew about it and didn't do anything? He allowed Americans to die because he didn't have the guts to act?

We were in Iraq to make sure the worst cast scenario doesn't happen. It didn't. So now we have a 2nd worst case scenario with a prolonged deployment in a hot zone of religious and ethnic strife. We will do our best to set up a stable government for the Iraqis and then get out. We don't want to be there. If we are real bastards we would have left long ago. But we're not. So we stay to help those people get a working government together.