If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Reuters)   10 years ago today, the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq began and answers once and for all the age old question of "What could possibly go wrong?"   (reuters.com) divider line 182
    More: Fail, invasion of Iraq, Iraq, U.S., Said Ali al Farha, Maliki, ISI, Anbar, Shiites  
•       •       •

2034 clicks; posted to Main » on 19 Mar 2013 at 8:38 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



182 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-03-19 10:42:02 AM  

dukeblue219: i
I'm sorry on behalf of the morons who acted like that. A lot of us, myself included, supported the war. I wish I hadn't.

Come back and visit sometime... I hope things have changed a bit. We're still crazy, loud, and obnoxious, and we love to rag on Canada, but it's just in a little brother sort of way. I can't recall the last time I heard someone actually say something bad aboot you guys :)


THIS. Come on, buddy, we got a black POTUS now. Bet you didn't see that one coming! Come back and visit, guy. It's not so bad.

/haven't been to Canada since 2003 for completely unrelated reasons
//Toronto is awesome.
 
MFK
2013-03-19 10:46:15 AM  

Tatterdemalian: thecpt: From those posting the 2003 thread, I found this comment which speaks volumes (i didn't want to use the Farker's name):


All I have to say is after 9/11 Bush stated that after Afghanistan, that was not the end. We were fighting a war against terrorism and anyone that sponsored, funded, or participated in that would be handled. He also stated that this would be a long task and that even though most of the nation is for that now, the support would start to taper off. Also why is it that all I see on the news is Anti-war protests? We had a pro-america rally attended by 25,000 people here in Atlanta and a anti-war rally attended by 450 people. The only thing CNN showed was the anti-rally. So you tell me how we can depend on info from the media when they only show one side. There are as many pro-america rallies as anti yet you see none of those on tv...The media is all about what will make controversial news and nothing about fact. 71% of the nation support the war effort yet all you see on tv is the opposite. I don't like war and would love to avoid it. But does anyone else see the comparisons of Saddam and Hitler? Germany opposed military action against Hitler and look what he did to that country? But if Bush didn't call for this war and another 9/11 scenario happened they'd blame him for that too. He'll never win either way.

/NOT SAYING THAT POST PROVED ANYTHING.  I just found it to be extremely interesting and informative.

What you see in this thread is the political victors indulging in a Squealer-style rewriting of history, pretending their politically motivated naysaying was propelled by knowledge Hussein himself didn't have at the time.

/someday PsiChick will be proudly declaring that 9/11 was carried out in response to Dubya's invasion of Iraq
//hopefully there will still be someone left who values little details like "chronological order"


No, dickbag.

There are no "winners" here. We all lost. Some of us lost friends. Others lost relatives. In Iraq, everyone lost somebody and most people lost everything.

Do you think that Iraq is just something trumped up by the librul media to rub in Republican's faces and not an utterly avoidable catastrophe of the highest magnitude?

Go fark yourself.
 
2013-03-19 10:49:24 AM  
I never understood why we didn't just send in a team of Seals to get Saddam in the middle of the night. Why send a whole army when we mainly had a problem with one guy? If our aim was to scare evil middle eastern types from messing with the US, I think the silent overnight disappearance of a head of state would have done the trick.
 
2013-03-19 10:51:19 AM  

LDM90: I never understood why we didn't just send in a team of Seals to get Saddam in the middle of the night. Why send a whole army when we mainly had a problem with one guy? If our aim was to scare evil middle eastern types from messing with the US, I think the silent overnight disappearance of a head of state would have done the trick.


Assassination of the heads of other nations has been illegal in America for decades, at least.

That, and all that stuff about 'decoys', professional impersonators walking around, make it harder to get the right one.
 
2013-03-19 10:51:40 AM  
This has nothing to do with hindsight.  WE KNEW AT THE TIME THEY WERE LYING.  Those of us who were paying attention.  Those of you who weren't should be ashamed of yourselves.

 This has nothing to do with hindsight.  WE KNEW AT THE TIME THEY WERE LYING.  Those of us who were paying attention.  Those of you who weren't should be ashamed of yourselves.

 This has nothing to do with hindsight.  WE KNEW AT THE TIME THEY WERE LYING.  Those of us who were paying attention.  Those of you who weren't should be ashamed of yourselves.

 This has nothing to do with hindsight.  WE KNEW AT THE TIME THEY WERE LYING.  Those of us who were paying attention.  Those of you who weren't should be ashamed of yourselves.

 This has nothing to do with hindsight.  WE KNEW AT THE TIME THEY WERE LYING.  Those of us who were paying attention.  Those of you who weren't should be ashamed of yourselves.

 This has nothing to do with hindsight.  WE KNEW AT THE TIME THEY WERE LYING.  Those of us who were paying attention.  Those of you who weren't should be ashamed of yourselves.

 This has nothing to do with hindsight.  WE KNEW AT THE TIME THEY WERE LYING.  Those of us who were paying attention.  Those of you who weren't should be ashamed of yourselves.

 This has nothing to do with hindsight.  WE KNEW AT THE TIME THEY WERE LYING.  Those of us who were paying attention.  Those of you who weren't should be ashamed of yourselves.

 This has nothing to do with hindsight.  WE KNEW AT THE TIME THEY WERE LYING.  Those of us who were paying attention.  Those of you who weren't should be ashamed of yourselves.

 This has nothing to do with hindsight.  WE KNEW AT THE TIME THEY WERE LYING.  Those of us who were paying attention.  Those of you who weren't should be ashamed of yourselves.

 This has nothing to do with hindsight.  WE KNEW AT THE TIME THEY WERE LYING.  Those of us who were paying attention.  Those of you who weren't should be ashamed of yourselves.

 This has nothing to do with hindsight.  WE KNEW AT THE TIME THEY WERE LYING.  Those of us who were paying attention.  Those of you who weren't should be ashamed of yourselves.

 This has nothing to do with hindsight.  WE KNEW AT THE TIME THEY WERE LYING.  Those of us who were paying attention.  Those of you who weren't should be ashamed of yourselves.

 
2013-03-19 10:51:47 AM  

LDM90: I never understood why we didn't just send in a team of Seals to get Saddam in the middle of the night.


I don't think it's quite that easy, honestly. I remember that he used to sleep in a different palace every night. He was a target on that first night of the air war but they didn't find him. Took us 9 months to find him once we had the country occupied.
 
2013-03-19 10:53:27 AM  
Wolfowitz called for Saddam's overthrow during the 1991 Gulf War and advised GWBush, days after September 11, 2001, to seek regime change in Iraq. The Weapons of Mass Destruction ruse was always a lie. The real mission was to take out Saddam. Just because. There are plenty of Wolfowitz and Cheney statements showing their position before Bush went on television to explain his invasion. Nobody I know who watched GWBush explain the invasion and understood the NeoCon background believed for a moment he was telling the truth.

That same NeoCon attitude still guides the GOP today. Lies don't matter. Advancing the mission is more important. That attitude plays well to the low information voter. Then folks like Wolfowitz can admit they were wrong - in that they did not advocate for the correct implementation of the Iraq invasion - they will never admit the invasion was fraud and that they wrote the lies for GWBush to tell the American people.
 
2013-03-19 10:54:40 AM  

dukeblue219: LDM90: I never understood why we didn't just send in a team of Seals to get Saddam in the middle of the night.

I don't think it's quite that easy, honestly. I remember that he used to sleep in a different palace every night. He was a target on that first night of the air war but they didn't find him. Took us 9 months to find him once we had the country occupied.


Yeah, it took 10 years to get bin laden. Our military is the best in the world at taking out any target, but you do have to FIND the target first. A battalion of troops is easy enough to find, a single man is not.
 
2013-03-19 10:54:53 AM  

Fat-D: This has nothing to do with hindsight.  WE KNEW AT THE TIME THEY WERE LYING.  Those of us who were paying attention.  Those of you who weren't should be ashamed of yourselves.


For a great deal of us it IS hindsight. Look, feel good about yourself for being right all you want, but please quit the public, self-congratulatory nonsense that simply inflames the war supporters from ten years ago. There's a huge percentage of the country that cheered it on back in '03 and now really, really regrets it. Yeah, I am ashamed of the things I said in support back then. Doesn't make me a bad person, I don't think, so please stop rubbing it in my face.
 
2013-03-19 10:55:00 AM  

nekom: dukeblue219: i
I'm sorry on behalf of the morons who acted like that. A lot of us, myself included, supported the war. I wish I hadn't.

Come back and visit sometime... I hope things have changed a bit. We're still crazy, loud, and obnoxious, and we love to rag on Canada, but it's just in a little brother sort of way. I can't recall the last time I heard someone actually say something bad aboot you guys :)

THIS. Come on, buddy, we got a black POTUS now. Bet you didn't see that one coming! Come back and visit, guy. It's not so bad.

/haven't been to Canada since 2003 for completely unrelated reasons
//Toronto is awesome.


Thanks. That's appreciated. I'm not blaming everyone. We did support the invasion of Afghanistan, one of the reasons that Canada commited billions of dollars in combat support. Over 136 of our soldiers were killed in the 12 years we were there. My cousin was a M.A.S.H physician that treated American soldiers at some sort of hush hush (mirage, if I have that right) base in Dubai, where they were stabilized and then sent on to Germany for extensive surgery.
I miss North Carolina. Some nicest people I've met were from  Kentucky and North Carolina.
 
2013-03-19 10:55:16 AM  
thepoliticalcarnival.net
 
2013-03-19 11:00:27 AM  
 
2013-03-19 11:01:08 AM  

solitary: This has nothing to do with hindsight.  WE KNEW AT THE TIME THEY WERE LYING.  Those of us who were paying attention.  Those of you who weren't should be ashamed of yourselves.


Joseph Wilson.

Anyone paying attention should have known what was going on at the time...but when have American's ever been "tuned in" to current events or politics?  Look, American Idle is on...
 
2013-03-19 11:01:39 AM  

MFK: There are no "winners" here. We all lost. Some of us lost friends. Others lost relatives. In Iraq, everyone lost somebody and most people lost everything.

Do you think that Iraq is just something trumped up by the librul media to rub in Republican's faces and not an utterly avoidable catastrophe of the highest magnitude?


He phrased it pretty rudely, but it's something that deeply angers me.  I think it's fine to recognize now that it was in retrospect a bad decision, and the execution and lack of plan were even worse.  But up until that first bomb dropped the majority of America wanted a war, not that war but a war.  Their opinions, and what the media reported on Saddam's dealings drove pressure on the govt to do something, and now those same people don't recognize that their opinion at that time meant something and rescind how they felt.  They are all too willing to say the whole thing was a mistake without any personal guilt.  It of course isn't everybody and there was a portion of the population who didn't want the war (29%), but that is honestly a small portion when it comes to America's dealings.

I was a kid and it left an impression on me, and probably the best lesson for someone growing up:  people suck and don't like responsibility.

Anyways, the people learned a lesson that I hope serves well in dealing with Best Korea.
 
2013-03-19 11:02:00 AM  

Tatterdemalian: What you see in this thread is the political victors indulging in a Squealer-style rewriting of history, pretending their politically motivated naysaying was propelled by knowledge Hussein himself didn't have at the time.


You must've been deaf dumb and blind at the time, son, because it was obvious beginning in August of 2002 that the PR machine was pushing us away from Afghanistan and towards Iraq. Embarrassingly transparent machinations, but that's the deal with the emperor's new clothes, they're all transparent and still no one notices.

I supported Afghanistan, and I still think we could have done some good there. Except we shifted all the money and materiel that would have made a difference to a war of convenience that was nothing but a complete and total snowjob. So go have a nice bowl of dicks on me.
 
2013-03-19 11:03:39 AM  

people: Rhode refused to be interviewed for this story, saying cryptically, "Those who speak, pay."


What the fark.
 
2013-03-19 11:06:31 AM  

indarwinsshadow: Thanks. That's appreciated.


I will say this as an American Jays fan who goes to stadiums a couple times a year, you'll get the occasional d-bag who can't get over the fact that your country is different but don't take offense.  They give more guff to fans of other American teams.
 
2013-03-19 11:08:36 AM  

dukeblue219: Fat-D: This has nothing to do with hindsight.  WE KNEW AT THE TIME THEY WERE LYING.  Those of us who were paying attention.  Those of you who weren't should be ashamed of yourselves.

For a great deal of us it IS hindsight. Look, feel good about yourself for being right all you want, but please quit the public, self-congratulatory nonsense that simply inflames the war supporters from ten years ago. There's a huge percentage of the country that cheered it on back in '03 and now really, really regrets it. Yeah, I am ashamed of the things I said in support back then. Doesn't make me a bad person, I don't think, so please stop rubbing it in my face.


Basically this.
 
2013-03-19 11:09:44 AM  

nekom: There is one thing that I still haven't been able to figure out.  Saddam DID at one time have nerve gas, in fact he used it on the Kurds.  The USA wasn't the ONLY intelligence agency that said that he had them.  So what happened to them?  Obviously they were gone, I think they found some old shells with residue but that's about it.  People said they went to Syria, but with all that's going on there and the fact that they weren't deployed, that's obviously not the case.

So what really happened?  Did Saddam voluntarily get rid of them years ago?  Or did he think they still had them, perhaps his generals just lied to him and said they did?  It's said that near the tail end of WW2, Hitler was commanding imaginary armies, no one wanted to tell him the truth, perhaps that was the case there?  Obviously they are gone, just wondering what led from him having them to him not.


Even at the time, we had much larger threats than Saddam Hussein and Iraq.  I'm pretty sure every decent sized country has weapons of mass destruction.  At the time North Korea, Iran and Pakistan were MUCH larger threats than Iraq.  Iraq had no ability to hurt America or our citizens.

So even playing devil's advocate, that Saddam had WMD, it was still a bad decision to go to war.  But most of us who were paying attention (Joseph Wilson anyone? anyone?) knew that the march to war was on false pretenses.  The media did absolutely nothing to help with parsing facts either...they were a White House mouth piece at the time.  And still to this day, are more worried about entertainment than truth.
 
2013-03-19 11:10:43 AM  

dukeblue219: There's a huge percentage of the country that cheered it on back in '03 and now really, really regrets it. Yeah, I am ashamed of the things I said in support back then. Doesn't make me a bad person, I don't think, so please stop rubbing it in my face.


If you feel shame about your previous support, I'd genuinely like to hear why you supported it at the time.
 
2013-03-19 11:12:18 AM  
www.longwarjournal.org

Failed to carpet bomb it until it was a smoking crater, nothing left alive

(of you go to war - go to war)
(otherwise, stay home)
 
2013-03-19 11:13:46 AM  

CrazyCracka420: But most of us who were paying attention (Joseph Wilson anyone? anyone?) knew that the march to war was on false pretenses.


Please stop saying this. It' s not true. Whether or not you supported the war has no correlation to have much you were "paying attention".
 
2013-03-19 11:18:55 AM  

midigod: If you feel shame about your previous support, I'd genuinely like to hear why you supported it at the time.


Short answer: Because I was 17, living in a red state, and feeling the whole "America! Fark yeah!" thing.

We could talk about for hours over some beers I'm sure, but I don't feel like going into much further at the moment. I didn't believe that Saddam was connected to 9/11, but just that he was a "bad guy" and after 9/11 we needed to stand up for ourselves and punch some of these "bad guys" in the mouth before they came after us at home. I was too young to know that my complete faith in the leadership's ability to execute the war and plan for the aftermath might be mistaken.
 
2013-03-19 11:19:11 AM  

DamnYankees: There's just so much that's depressing about this anniversary. The biggest of which - to me - is that we haven't learned anything. All the people who were so utterly confident, mocked those who disagreed and were 100% wrong? Still in positions of power, no accountability, no reflection. All those who nailed it? Still mocked and marginalized. Correlation with reality still has no real weight in or influence in our politics.


fairly certain that many members of the bush administration cannot travel openly as they would stand trial for war crimes in several countries.. but yaknow, who gives a fark right? you know where i was when this shiat was going down? protesting in the streets. has my opinion changed on us interventionism? no. what do i rail against now? monetary policy. why? because it is a tool of war.

libya, irag, iran, syria, what do they have in common? overt moves to get out of the current global monetary regime which is controlled by the fed... (don't worry, russia and china just fark the numbers slowly, making love to the statistics, so we still got some time..)

it's cool though because the united states government is totally there to help out the poor and students and pensioners by backstopping horrible investments which lead to inoperable monopolies in insurance and finance, and violently destabilize foreign governments but yeah, pretty awesome.


i feel you though, there is no rational discourse in this farking country, apathy and ignorance are enforced policies, feel good smile time take your pills.
 
2013-03-19 11:20:08 AM  

CrazyCracka420: Even at the time, we had much larger threats than Saddam Hussein and Iraq.  I'm pretty sure every decent sized country has weapons of mass destruction.  At the time North Korea, Iran and Pakistan were MUCH larger threats than Iraq.  Iraq had no ability to hurt America or our citizens.


Another from that original thread (again, this proves nothing but it's something that Americans and even Farkers believed at the time):

It's a sad day when serving in the Armed forces is seen as something "succesful people" don't do, that it is just something that low-lives do. We have to remember that we have a volunteer Armed forces, we don't force anyone to serve. These people train for this and this is what they want to do.

Sadam is a threat to his own people and his neighbors. As a superpower, the United States has a responsibility to elimitate him. Furthermore, the Iraqi government has repeately ATTACKED patrols that were UN SANCTIONED just about everyday in the UN SPONSORED no-fly zone!!! What the hell?!?!

The next few days will prove, one way or another, who is right. I support this war, although I do not like Bush and will not vote for him next time around. This is something that should have been taken care of long ago. They've had 12 years to get their shiat together, Sadam has just been stalling and at least the US has the balls to stand up and enforce international law.

Peace sometimes must be made through war.

/I remember the build up of him being uncooperative with the UN, and him ordering the things needed for WMDs without actually having them.  The govt and its people believed he had things.
 
2013-03-19 11:20:11 AM  

dukeblue219: midigod: If you feel shame about your previous support, I'd genuinely like to hear why you supported it at the time.

Short answer: Because I was 17, living in a red state, and feeling the whole "America! Fark yeah!" thing.

We could talk about for hours over some beers I'm sure, but I don't feel like going into much further at the moment. I didn't believe that Saddam was connected to 9/11, but just that he was a "bad guy" and after 9/11 we needed to stand up for ourselves and punch some of these "bad guys" in the mouth before they came after us at home. I was too young to know that my complete faith in the leadership's ability to execute the war and plan for the aftermath might be mistaken.


Basically this. The same. All tribalism. That's why I supported it. I can tell you I never really thought about it very deeply, even though I was hip-deep in politics at the time.
 
2013-03-19 11:22:31 AM  

MFK: Flakeloaf: DamnYankees: \MFK: solitary: This has nothing to do with hindsight.  WE KNEW AT THE TIME THEY WERE LYING.  Those of us who were paying attention.  Those of you who weren't should be ashamed of yourselves.

Too easy. Do you really think a majority of Americans were knowingly complicit in a lie? Please.

When Colin Powell says he didn't know he wasn't telling the truth to the UNSC (even though he probably should have) there's no way a public who believes what FOX tells them could reasonably be expected to figure it out.

Bullshiat. This is a cop out of the highest order. It was glaringly obvious that the whole debacle was trumped up. Remember the million-strong protests in NYC and elsewhere? Millions of us knew it was lies. If you weren't paying attention at the time, that's not the fault of "the media", that's on you.


I was tucked away in a country that knew the war was wrong, decided not to go and then went right back to skating around and putting cheese on things. What American news reached us suggested the protests were sporadic and shouted down by jingos.
 
2013-03-19 11:26:26 AM  

midigod: Flakeloaf: When Colin Powell says he didn't know he wasn't telling the truth to the UNSC (even though he probably should have) there's no way a public who believes what FOX tells them could reasonably be expected to figure it out.

Assuming he was honest when he said that, that comment is what made me lose respect for Powell.  I watched him talk to the UN, and when he held up those pictures of the "chemical trucks," my honest-to-Cthulu reaction was "Please tell me that's not all you've got."  I knew it was complete bullshiat at the time, so I can't imagine how stupid he had to have been to not see it.


The tinfoil in me suggests he was either very well-compensated or influenced by dark and shady forces to beat that drum. Nobody is that stupid.
 
2013-03-19 11:31:04 AM  

DamnYankees: \MFK: solitary: This has nothing to do with hindsight.  WE KNEW AT THE TIME THEY WERE LYING.  Those of us who were paying attention.  Those of you who weren't should be ashamed of yourselves.

Too easy. Do you really think a majority of Americans were knowingly complicit in a lie? Please.


I don't know if complicit is the correct term. Lots of presidents lie. For most folks, Richard Nixon was always Tricky Dick and set the standard for lying, even in regards to war. Nixon told of his secret plan to end the Viet Nam war - to get re-elected. Although GWBush came to office after Clinton's lies about his blow job, that was Clinton's personal failing, and not advocacy for war. Not all presidential lies are created equal.

However, studies show Clinton's lies tilted enough voters away from Gore that it provided the opportunity for the Republican SCOTUS to decide the election. Initially, GWBush came off as a folksy kind of dumb guy incapable of Nixon's level of mendacity. For many in 2003, they did not understand that GWBush was to be a repeat of the Nixon era of constant lies.

"Bush's place in history...will depend not on whether he lied to the American people-every president, arguably, has succumbed to that temptation-but how he lied, what consequences his lying unleashed, and how he ultimately responded to them. Put bluntly, posterity will judge [GWBush] not so much by whether he told the truth but whether he recognized what the truth actually was." Carl M. Cannon
 
2013-03-19 11:37:55 AM  

Flakeloaf: The tinfoil in me suggests he was either very well-compensated or influenced by dark and shady forces to beat that drum. Nobody is that stupid.


He got beat in the dick-wagging contest with Rummy. My uncle was in the State Department, he was all set up in Kuwait in February of 2003 to go in and start rebuilding. Rummy pulled rank and sent in the Army to do nation-building. Powell was clownshoes.
 
2013-03-19 11:39:08 AM  

SeraphicSorcerer: Drone's cant make notches in their helmet?


Sure they can
www.crydev.net
 
2013-03-19 11:39:43 AM  

theorellior: My uncle was in the State Department


Please, fill us in with some stories of Scowcroft.
 
2013-03-19 11:43:44 AM  

CrazyCracka420:
So even playing devil's advocate, that Saddam had WMD, it was still a bad decision to go to war.  But most of us who were paying attention (Joseph Wilson anyone? anyone?) knew that the march to war was on false pretenses.  The media did absolutely nothing to help with parsing facts either...they were a White House mouth piece at the time.  And still to this day, are more worried about entertainment than truth.


Well, that much is true, especially regarding North Korea who actually DID develop and test several nuclear weapons. That's one of the less talked about blunders of the Bush administration. He said we would NOT tolerate a nuclear NK. NK tests a nuke. *crickets* That really cheapens our words, doesn't it?
 
2013-03-19 11:44:45 AM  
In my opinion the protests I participated in helped stop the UN approval of GWBush's Iraq war, an approval that the NeoCons desperately wanted. "You forgot Poland"
 
2013-03-19 11:52:06 AM  

people: Please, fill us in with some stories of Scowcroft.


I'd love to, but my uncle never really talked about his time there, and absolutely despised the Bush Administration for being a bunch of chucklefarks. You wanna talk about patronage jobs? Even State had Regent University appointments forced on it. Total clownshoes.
 
2013-03-19 11:56:14 AM  

theorellior: but my uncle never really talked about his time there


Dang
 
MFK
2013-03-19 11:59:04 AM  

DamnYankees: CrazyCracka420: But most of us who were paying attention (Joseph Wilson anyone? anyone?) knew that the march to war was on false pretenses.

Please stop saying this. It' s not true. Whether or not you supported the war has no correlation to have much you were "paying attention".


yes it absolutely did.

I was paying attention and to me it was so farking OBVIOUS. When Colin Powell went to the UN with "drawings" of mobile weapons labs instead of actual evidence, I knew it was bullshiat and so did a LOT of other people. We were not quiet about it either.
 
2013-03-19 11:59:17 AM  

DamnYankees: CrazyCracka420: But most of us who were paying attention (Joseph Wilson anyone? anyone?) knew that the march to war was on false pretenses.

Please stop saying this. It' s not true. Whether or not you supported the war has no correlation to have much you were "paying attention".


Why would you claim otherwise?
 
2013-03-19 12:04:33 PM  

Alphax: DamnYankees: CrazyCracka420: But most of us who were paying attention (Joseph Wilson anyone? anyone?) knew that the march to war was on false pretenses.

Please stop saying this. It' s not true. Whether or not you supported the war has no correlation to have much you were "paying attention".

Why would you claim otherwise?


Where's your evidence for thinking there is any correlation? I was very active in politics in 2003. So was, you know, Bill Clinton and Colin Powell and lots of people who voted for the war.

The reason people supported the war wasn't mostly due to a lack of 'attention', and thinking otherwise is extremely not illumination. It doesn't provide any roadmap for how to prevent it in the future.

MFK: I was paying attention and to me it was so farking OBVIOUS.


Congratulations on being very smart. I was paying attention and to me the opposite was obvious. So, what lesson can we draw from our two anecdotes?
 
2013-03-19 12:11:59 PM  
DamnYankees:
MFK: I was paying attention and to me it was so farking OBVIOUS.

Congratulations on being very smart. I was paying attention and to me the opposite was obvious. So, what lesson can we draw from our two anecdotes?


That your critical reasoning skills were quite lacking in 2003?
 
2013-03-19 12:14:10 PM  

CrazyCracka420: DamnYankees:
MFK: I was paying attention and to me it was so farking OBVIOUS.

Congratulations on being very smart. I was paying attention and to me the opposite was obvious. So, what lesson can we draw from our two anecdotes?

That your critical reasoning skills were quite lacking in 2003?


And how does that lesson help you confront this if it happens again in the future? Yell at people to think more? You think that's an effective strategy?
 
MFK
2013-03-19 12:15:22 PM  

CrazyCracka420: DamnYankees:
MFK: I was paying attention and to me it was so farking OBVIOUS.

Congratulations on being very smart. I was paying attention and to me the opposite was obvious. So, what lesson can we draw from our two anecdotes?

That your critical reasoning skills were quite lacking in 2003?


not to be a dick or anything, but really it's this. Your first clue should have been how if someone asked any sort of questions about what the administration was saying, they would be shouted down with "WHY DO YOU HATE AMERICA??"

"We have evidence but we can't show it to you" should have been laughed off the stage, but somehow enough people bought into it.
 
2013-03-19 12:16:13 PM  

DamnYankees: Alphax: DamnYankees: CrazyCracka420: But most of us who were paying attention (Joseph Wilson anyone? anyone?) knew that the march to war was on false pretenses.

Please stop saying this. It' s not true. Whether or not you supported the war has no correlation to have much you were "paying attention".

Why would you claim otherwise?

Where's your evidence for thinking there is any correlation? I was very active in politics in 2003. So was, you know, Bill Clinton and Colin Powell and lots of people who voted for the war.

The reason people supported the war wasn't mostly due to a lack of 'attention', and thinking otherwise is extremely not illumination. It doesn't provide any roadmap for how to prevent it in the future.

MFK: I was paying attention and to me it was so farking OBVIOUS.

Congratulations on being very smart. I was paying attention and to me the opposite was obvious. So, what lesson can we draw from our two anecdotes?


We'd been flying air patrols over Iraq for the past 10+ years.  Nothing could move in their air space without US permission.  And now they're a threat that must be attacked before they nuke us?  Not credible.
 
2013-03-19 12:17:41 PM  

Alphax: We'd been flying air patrols over Iraq for the past 10+ years.  Nothing could move in their air space without US permission.  And now they're a threat that must be attacked before they nuke us?  Not credible.


Once again - congratulations for thinking that in 2003. You were right and I was wrong. I readily admit it.

Now, how is this helpful in figuring out how to prevent this in the future?
 
2013-03-19 12:23:54 PM  

way south: Earl of Chives: Bladel: Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: solitary: WE KNEW AT THE TIME THEY WERE LYING.

I don't think that's 100% true, although I think the majority opposed to the war knew, for whatever their reasons, that the whole thing was a bad idea.

Ok, but the original point stands:  People spoke out at the time.  Not only were they ridiculed, their love of America was called to question.

This is the correct answer. Many people could see this was a horrific mistake from jump street.

Too many of the wrong people, too few of the ones that mattered.
Someone will always disagree with any decision and appear to be right in hindsight. But many of these views developed along partisan lines.   Those who thought they were seeing the evidence decided to go along with the war.

Fact is that wars never go smoothly.  You've got to adapt your goals to a changing situation.
We should be looking at the present situation and sorting out why its falling apart and how to fix it.
Instead we are looking to blame someone, because that's what politics is these days.

We didn't have a long term goal going in and we never developed one throughout a decade of debate.
Its going to end in a miserable pile of failure, but not just because of how it started. Its because of our habitual inability to construct and enforce a strait forward policy on foreign intervention.


Trouble is that if you don't have any real, self-interested reason to go to war to begin with, you will not be able to "develop" one later, unless you count one that consists of lies and propaganda.
Herr Goebbels explained this to us several generations ago - and nothing has changed.
As in Vietnam - there was never any "victory" there for us to "win" in the first place, and no way to "develop" one later that was going to fool anybody.
Sure - you can always convince the Wad that they should go to war, if you can distract them from American Idol and the sex lives of the Kardassians long enough - but history will not be kind, and the money and lives will be lost forever.
 
2013-03-19 12:25:58 PM  
http://www.wisebread.com/7-steps-to-improving-your-critical-thinking

www.criticalthinking.org/pages/critical-thinking-in-everyday-life-9- st rategies/512

Just trying to keep an open mind and trying to play devil's advocate will take you very far...using information to come to your own conclusions (rather than letting blowhards tell you what to think) is usually pretty important as well.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=improve+critical+thinking+skills
 
2013-03-19 12:27:04 PM  

jso2897: As in Vietnam - there was never any "victory" there for us to "win" in the first place, and no way to "develop" one later that was going to fool anybody.


the goal was to stop the spread of the red,no?  Sounds fun.

anyways I hope the people in power read charlie wilson's war before they withdrew from Iraq.
 
2013-03-19 12:27:27 PM  
Crazy. Ten years ago, I was in grad school doing a student teaching assignment. I remember seeing a lot of my students downtown protesting the war that day.

And what has changed since? Can we objectively say the US or Iraq is any safer now?
 
2013-03-19 12:29:53 PM  

CrazyCracka420: http://www.wisebread.com/7-steps-to-improving-your-critical-thinking

www.criticalthinking.org/pages/critical-thinking-in-everyday-life-9- st rategies/512

Just trying to keep an open mind and trying to play devil's advocate will take you very far...using information to come to your own conclusions (rather than letting blowhards tell you what to think) is usually pretty important as well.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=improve+critical+thinking+skills


the thing is I think the majority of the public can buy the excuse "we can't tell you how we know this" when it comes to military intelligence.  It definitely is a trust thing, but of course we keep getting burnt don't we.  I like DY's question of how can you prevent that.
 
2013-03-19 12:33:28 PM  

thecpt: jso2897: As in Vietnam - there was never any "victory" there for us to "win" in the first place, and no way to "develop" one later that was going to fool anybody.

the goal was to stop the spread of the red,no?  Sounds fun.

anyways I hope the people in power read charlie wilson's war before they withdrew from Iraq.


And I hope the people in power read Major General Smedley Butler's "War is a Racket" before we get into any more wars.
 
Displayed 50 of 182 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


Report