• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Did we win in Iraq? Does Bush get credit?

Unless Iraq flowers as a democracy, (unlikely), it was not worth a single cent of my money.
 
No, as per usual, despite their immense fire-power, the US lost.

BTW, what's all this talk about democracy etc? I thought we attacked Iraq because they helped demolish the Twin Towers and were going to nuke the UK for pudding?
 
Tricky said:
I don't think that's enough. I think to answer to the question is "Overall, were the interests of the US helped by our invasion of Iraq?" and I think the answer to that question if a pretty solid "no". What you are talking about is winning the battle, not the war.
Click to expand...


Call me an idealist, but in my opinion, "US interests" and freedom are one and the same. In the past "US interests" were often equated with US corporate interests, or US geopolitical influence. If our corporations could set up set up operations and be protected by planes flying from US airbases, we declared that "US interests" were served.

There are people now claiming that Iraq is a free and democratic country. Is that all hogwash? The impression I had of Iraq until recently was a nation where violence was endemic and where saying the wrong thing in the wrong place, or just being the wrong religion, wearing the wrong clothes, or speaking the wrong language, could get you blown up. If that's the case, I would say things weren't so good.
 
Too early to tell. Will Iraq be stable and more-or-less democratic ten, twenty, thirty years from now? If it is, will there be a "ripple effect" throughout the Muslim middle east?

Will Iraq be set upon by all its anti-democratic neighbors who see democracy in their midst as an intolerable threat? Europe's royalty was appalled by America's experiment with democracy, and even more appalled by the French revolution's experiment, seeing as how it was right in their back yard.

There are so many questions we can't possibly know the answers to yet.

If it works out well, Bush will get belated, perhaps even posthumous credit. But not if liberal talk radio gets its way. The left is still trying to convince people that the destruction of the Soviet Union had nothing to do with Ronald Reagan. From what MeadMaker says in the OP, it sounds like they're already laying the groundwork for making the case that Bush should get no credit if it all works out.

Of course, if it all goes to hell, they'll have no problem pinning every iota of blame on Bush.
 
BPSCG said:
Of course, if it all goes to hell, they'll have no problem pinning every iota of blame on Bush.
Click to expand...


Of course, if it all goes to hell, the other side will have no problem saying that the only reason it failed was that Obama pulled out the troops when we were on the verge of victory.

In my humble opinion, five years was enough time. If it succeeds, it will be because of Bush. If it fails, it will be because of Bush. That's slightly oversimplified, of course, but only slightly.
 
JihadJane said:
I'd call you tragically deluded.
Click to expand...

I'm curious about why you say that. Of course, the US hasn't always behaved that way. Let me revise my previous statement slightly.

In my opinion, "US interests" and freedom ought to be one and the same. Of course, that isn't always the case historically, but it should be. I believe that if we can advance the cause of freedom, we should do so, even if it means giving people the freedom to hate us. (For one thing, I don't think free people will hate us. They might resent our nation's power, and might try to prevent expansion of that power, but that's a different thing.)

If this be naivete, then let's make the most of it.
 
Meadmaker said:
In my opinion, "US interests" and freedom ought to be one and the same. Of course, that isn't always the case historically, but it should be. I believe that if we can advance the cause of freedom, we should do so, even if it means giving people the freedom to hate us. (For one thing, I don't think free people will hate us. They might resent our nation's power, and might try to prevent expansion of that power, but that's a different thing.)
Click to expand...
In practice such freedom includes a country's right to develop nuclear weapons, like Iran may or may not be doing.
And the freedom to interfere in other's country's internal politics, through overt or covert means, much as Russia did in Georgia.
The right to harbour training camps for militants, who could use such training for various purposes. Like happened in Afghanistan.

That's sovereignty. The freedom to, mostly within your own borders, and as long as it doesn't break ratified treaties with a functional penalty clause, do whatever you like. A hypothetical example is if the Iraqi electorate decides to offer pensions to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers. They have the freedom to do so, and if I recall, Saddam actually did.
 
Last edited:
Well, let's see. The effort was several orders of magnitude over budget, years overdue based on the projected timetable, and failed to meet several stated goals.

Bush better hope that history grades on a curve.
 
quarky said:
It doesn't seem right to kill that many people. There is no way this whole debacle should be seen as justifiable, regardless of the outcome. How can we know what might have happened had we not gone to war? Maybe worked some other angles?

I'd hate to think, that if Iraq becomes a model country of the world, it would strengthen our feelings about similar, future approaches to our problems.

Its great to see a rape victim overcome their trauma and create a good life for themselves...but the rapist shouldn't be proud to play a role.
Click to expand...

Brilliant analogy. Iraq was a victim of a sex crime perpetrated by the the country that walks softly but carries a big stick. You could probably win a Mother Jones free subscription using this in a letter to the editor.
 
Tricky said:
Bush gets no credit from Iraqis. The guy who threw the shoes at him is a national hero.
Click to expand...

The monument to their "national hero" lasted 1 day. Did you think it was coincidental that Muntadhir al-Zaidi's shoe monument found a home in the region of Tikrit, Saddams's birth place? I guess some in Iraq still consider Saddam a national hero as well. He is in good company.


http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/01/30/iraq.shoe.monument/
 
Last edited:
Cicero said:
The monument to their "national hero" lasted 1 day. Did you think it was coincidental that Muntadhir al-Zaidi's shoe monument found a home in the region of Tikrit, Saddams's birth place? I guess some in Iraq still consider Saddam a national hero as well. He is in good company.

http://edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/me...shoe.monument/
Click to expand...
Dead link. Got the CNN version of a 404 error...Page not there...
 
egslim said:
Are you actually referring to the US here? Because that country walks more like an oversized Godzilla.
Click to expand...


How could an "oversized Godzilla" have trouble crushing Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan? It seems it would just squash the entire country without a moment of hesitation.
 
Cicero said:
How could an "oversized Godzilla" have trouble crushing Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan? It seems it would just squash the entire country without a moment of hesitation.
Click to expand...
I said the US walks like an oversized Godzilla - lots of noise, earth trembling, etc.

But while the country has a big, and very expensive stick, it's by far not big enough to back all that noise up.

Actually the opposite of "walk softly, carry a big stick".
 
Cicero said:
Brilliant analogy. Iraq was a victim of a sex crime perpetrated by the the country that walks softly but carries a big stick. You could probably win a Mother Jones free subscription using this in a letter to the editor.
Click to expand...

Thanks.
I don't think we can ignore the number of people we killed and made homeless with this war. Its the main reason why we lost. Our own war deaths; public image; extreme debt, are icing on the cake. Its fair to blame Bush.
 
egslim said:
I said the US walks like an oversized Godzilla - lots of noise, earth trembling, etc.

But while the country has a big, and very expensive stick, it's by far not big enough to back all that noise up.

Actually the opposite of "walk softly, carry a big stick".
Click to expand...

You mean the U.S. isn't big enough to back up its foreign policy using conventional weapons? It sure wasn't big enough to make U.N. sanctions work.
 
quarky said:
Thanks.
I don't think we can ignore the number of people we killed and made homeless with this war. Its the main reason why we lost. Our own war deaths; public image; extreme debt, are icing on the cake. Its fair to blame Bush.
Click to expand...

We lost the Iraq War? When did this happen?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom