Iraq war worth the cost?

Fast Eddie B said:
If Iraq degenerates into civil war and ethnic violence, which I see as likely, then what long term difference did our sacrifice of blood and treasure really make? If it was just to postpone the inevitable, I'd say it was a tragic waste.
Click to expand...
On that we agree. Problem is that, because the Iraqi people were not themselves ready to make the transition, it is the most likely result.

Strategicly, it was just plain stupid, and anybody with any grasp of military science should have seen it.

Too bad for America that we had such a worthless schlub for a Seretary of Defense at the time.
 
Virus said:
Ask Saddam if it was worth it. Since he initiated hostilities between Iraq and the US that were never resolved by the ceasefire agreement.
Click to expand...

He did what, now? You're using a form of the word "initiated" that I'm not familiar with.
 
Fast Eddie B said:
I can empathize with the internal conflict which must arise when one must reconcile the fact that the aforementioned moronic shrub...

Graduated from both Harvard and Yale.

Learned the systems and procedures for a military jet and solo'd it.

Was elected governor of Texas.

Was elected president of the US.
Click to expand...

Ran his oil company into the ground.

Was elected governor of Texas - You mean like Rick Perry?

Was elected president initially in a stolen election.

Sat there looking like a deer caught in the headlights and kept reading a story to school children when he got news of 9/11.

Lied to the American people regarding Saddam Hussein developing nuclear weapons and having strong links to Al Qaeda to get us into a quagmire war with dubious results.

Failed to regulate banks, leading to a devastating recession.

Fast Eddie B said:
Still, it must nice to have someone to denigrate and insult and cast aspersions on and to feel superior to.

While one's own accomplishments pale by comparison.

Sigh.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I can live with my accomplishments paling in comparison.
 
Sat there looking like a deer caught in the headlights and kept reading a story to school children when he got news of 9/11.
Click to expand...


Not a fan of this line of thought. I didn't care for Bush one bit, but his reaction to the events of 9/11 shouldn't be judged. There is no way to prepare for news of that magnitude, and no way to placate the Monday Morning Quarterbacks on his response at hearing the news. No matter what he did it would be a failure.
 
NoahFence said:
There is no way to prepare for news of that magnitude, and no way to placate the Monday Morning Quarterbacks on his response at hearing the news. No matter what he did it would be a failure.
Click to expand...

So, he looked ineffectual. A lot of people would have. But then, this turd was supposed to have been the kind that was fit to be a fighter pilot. Whoa!

And then, as he got his stuff together, what he and his wrecking crew did in response was largely evil.

When you hand him a functioning country and he breaks it, nothing he has done in the past stands to preserve his honor.

He's a moron.
 
NoahFence said:
Not a fan of this line of thought. I didn't care for Bush one bit, but his reaction to the events of 9/11 shouldn't be judged. There is no way to prepare for news of that magnitude, and no way to placate the Monday Morning Quarterbacks on his response at hearing the news. No matter what he did it would be a failure.
Click to expand...

First of all, the President of United States should be a bit better at responding to emergencies than this. He could have said, "I'm sorry children, but we'll have to stop the story now. Something very important has come up. I have to leave."

Compare and contrast Bush's inaction with the response of Mayor Rudy Giuliani, who was hands-on all the way.
 
Virus said:
Ask Saddam if it was worth it. Since he initiated hostilities between Iraq and the US that were never resolved by the ceasefire agreement.
Click to expand...

Yes, remember when Saddam wouldn't surrender his tons and tons of chemical weapons, his mobile bio-labs or his nuclear weapons programs? And don't get me started on his use of armed UAV and ties to al Qaeda. Oh, and when he wouldn't let in those UN inspectors...

:dl:

Virus said:
Because they came from the other Arab countries to wage jihad.
Click to expand...

A very small percentage of foreign fighters, compared to the number of Iraqis who fought against us. Stunningly inefficient way to fight them. Not to mention your "strategy" of using US soldiers as a human bug-lights to attract jihadis is the very definition of callous.

It's almost as if you were making up the reasons after the fact.

Iraq is actually a US ally now.
Click to expand...

Which is why the US had to leave because Iraq wouldn't agree to not charge our troops with war crimes?

TimCallahan said:
First of all, the President of United States should be a bit better at responding to emergencies than this. He could have said, "I'm sorry children, but we'll have to stop the story now. Something very important has come up. I have to leave."

Compare and contrast Bush's inaction with the response of Mayor Rudy Giuliani, who was hands-on all the way.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure how much of the "Bush inaction" thing is reality vs. pure political PR nightmare. In the grand scheme of things, I can't say if there was anything he could have done to have made a difference in those eight looooooong minutes. Likewise, we don't know how long Giuliani pondered before he took action. He had the good luck not to be on camera.

Not saying it didn't look awful for Bush to sit there dumbfounded but even if he had surged into action what could he have done? The avalanche of events was already in irreversible motion. Of course the apologists' claim, "he didn't want to scare the kids" is particularly pathetic.
 
leftysergeant said:
So, he looked ineffectual. A lot of people would have. But then, this turd was supposed to have been the kind that was fit to be a fighter pilot. Whoa!

And then, as he got his stuff together, what he and his wrecking crew did in response was largely evil.

When you hand him a functioning country and he breaks it, nothing he has done in the past stands to preserve his honor.

He's a moron.
Click to expand...

He's not a moron.

He's an absolute moron. An all-encompasing pile of dung. If his stupidity was converted into raw energy, it could power a small town for a year.

BUT

I will never question his reaction to the news at that moment. Nobody can.
 
Robrob said:
I'm not sure how much of the "Bush inaction" thing is reality vs. pure political PR nightmare. In the grand scheme of things, I can't say if there was anything he could have done to have made a difference in those eight looooooong minutes. Likewise, we don't know how long Giuliani pondered before he took action. He had the good luck not to be on camera.

Not saying it didn't look awful for Bush to sit there dumbfounded but even if he had surged into action what could he have done? The avalanche of events was already in irreversible motion. Of course the apologists' claim, "he didn't want to scare the kids" is particularly pathetic.
Click to expand...

I have to agree with you - I am no Bush supporter, but he was definately between a rock and a hard place. As he sat with those kids, virtually everyone else in the country had a better idea what was going on than him. As a leader it was imperitive for him to stay calm, act as if in control, he knew virtually every news network was plugging into that broadcast to get his reaction.

His second, and in my mind, biggest issue were the short commings of Airforce One. No seemed to realise he could not broadcast to the nation, or keep any reliable contact with his own people during the crisis.

Your point about Giuliani is well made. In a very frank interview about that day he details the sort of emotional issues he was dealing with. He admits to being scared and confused. He even described the exact moment he decided as the mayor of the greatest city in the greatest nation, it was time to start acting like the leader people around him expected.
 
TimCallahan said:
First of all, the President of United States should be a bit better at responding to emergencies than this. He could have said, "I'm sorry children, but we'll have to stop the story now. Something very important has come up. I have to leave."

Compare and contrast Bush's inaction with the response of Mayor Rudy Giuliani, who was hands-on all the way.
Click to expand...

1) You've had 10+ years to come up with that strategy. Good for you!

2) Were cameras rolling to get Giuliani's first reaction?

This all seems kinda silly. I'm a flight instructor, and I can tell you that "deer in the headlights" is pretty much everyone's first reaction to an unexpected crisis. It takes a LOT of specific training in specific scenarios to overcome that. And I still see pilots frozen for several seconds in stressful situations.

We teach that there are very few emergencies that can't be made worse by rushing and doing the wrong thing. In most cases, a thoughtful delay to analyze the situation is a good thing.
 
Well, when it comes to Bush's reaction at the time of the actual crisis, perhaps I should be a bit more charitable. I still think his invasion of Iraq was bogus.

Here's another failure of the Bush Administration, from today's Huffington Post:

WASHINGTON -- After a filibuster and threats of obstruction by Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.), the Senate unanimously passed a bill on Wednesday that would provide health care for first responders to the 9/11 terrorist attack. Sens. Kirsten Gillibrand and Chuck Schumer reached a deal with Republican senators to support the bill earlier in the afternoon. (UPDATE: The House has also passed the legislation.)

So, we're just now getting around to dealing with the health problems of 9/11 first responders.
 
Last edited:
Apart from the pure financial cost of the Iraq war, the US has paid a significant price in other ways.

* Loss of international respect
* Loss of the ability to launch a large scale military action. Afghanistan is out of control, and getting worse, but there is no way more troops will be sent there. There are troops and military still available, but sending them anywhere will now be a major political problem.
* loss of the moral high ground. After starting the war under false pretences, the US was always going to have trouble justifying anything that came from it.
* Squandering the political capital it gained from beating the USSR at the Cold War. The PNAC dreams of glory have turned into dust.
 
leftysergeant said:
On that we agree. Problem is that, because the Iraqi people were not themselves ready to make the transition, it is the most likely result.

Strategicly, it was just plain stupid, and anybody with any grasp of military science should have seen it.

Too bad for America that we had such a worthless schlub for a Seretary of Defense at the time.
Click to expand...

Maybe you should learn how to spell before you criticize others.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom