Do you have adblock enabled?
 
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.

(Gallup)   On the 10th anniversary of the Iraq war, 53% of Americans say the war was a mistake. The other 47% are still deciding between disaster, debacle or catastrophe   (gallup.com ) divider line
    More: Obvious, Iraq, Americans, United States, Iraq War, attitude change, the leaner, double coverage, John McCain  
•       •       •

1336 clicks; posted to Main » on 21 Mar 2013 at 8:13 AM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



174 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2013-03-21 07:00:07 AM  
I fail to see how anyone cannot regard this adventure as a mistake. We went to find WMDs, we didn't find any. That is a mistake.

The only real question, if there is one, is what kind of mistake was it? Was a intelligence mistake, a diplomatic mistake, or a political mistake.
 
2013-03-21 07:33:14 AM  

EvilEgg: I fail to see how anyone cannot regard this adventure as a mistake. We went to find WMDs, we didn't find any. That is a mistake.

The only real question, if there is one, is what kind of mistake was it? Was a intelligence mistake, a diplomatic mistake, or a political mistake.


It wasn't a mistake. It was completely intentional and the administration knew what it was doing. The administration misled Congress and the general population intentionally. I think they even lied to themselves at various stages. The question that remains is "why?"
 
2013-03-21 07:39:58 AM  
47% thats how many people voted for Rmoney.
 
2013-03-21 08:15:09 AM  
Got rid of Saddam, and gave them a chance to have a country governed in whatever way the people want.  Awful.
 
gja
2013-03-21 08:15:26 AM  

dr_blasto: The question that remains is "why?"


Three words:
Follow......the........money.
 
2013-03-21 08:15:30 AM  

EvilEgg: I fail to see how anyone cannot regard this adventure as a mistake. We went to find WMDs, we didn't find any. That is a mistake.

The only real question, if there is one, is what kind of mistake was it? Was a intelligence mistake, a diplomatic mistake, or a political mistake.


I've honestly been wondering if the reason we were so certain he had them, was because we sold them to him, and knew they should've been there.
 
2013-03-21 08:16:31 AM  

The Muthaship: Got rid of Saddam, and gave them a chance to have a country governed in whatever way the people want.  Awful.


And are you also the kind of person who blames Obama for the current budget crisis?
 
2013-03-21 08:17:08 AM  

The Muthaship: Got rid of Saddam, and gave them a chance to have a country governed in whatever way the people want.  Awful.


Which likely would have happened by itself without the cost of BILLIONS of dollars and THOUSANDS of lives.

Yes, it was awful.
 
2013-03-21 08:17:14 AM  
Or voted for Romney
 
2013-03-21 08:17:23 AM  
Shouldn't that be 53% of "Americans", because they sound like socialists to me.
 
2013-03-21 08:17:27 AM  
I wish we'd stop using the word "anniversary", as it connotes something you should celebrate.
 
2013-03-21 08:18:28 AM  
amazing how liberals have been proven wrong in almost everything they get their skirts up about after a little time passes...........just a sad group of proven losers.......almost funny
 
2013-03-21 08:19:14 AM  
We've fallen for this crap twice in my lifetime. We'll do it again within the next ten years or so.
 
2013-03-21 08:19:34 AM  
If we didn't learn our lesson from Vietnam, we never will. Rome made it over a thousand years before the arrogance of empire brought them down, but history moves faster these days. I doubt we'll make it to 300.
 
2013-03-21 08:19:39 AM  
I was passing through the security checkpoint at McCarran when alarms went off and the area was put under lockdown. I was with my wife and kid and we were looking for some place to sit down to wait it out. There was a bench with a large white lady taking up two and a half spaces. Next to her was her low-intelligence son, mouth agape, playing his portable Nintendo game.

Some other woman starts biatching about having to wait, having to stand around when there was obviously no threat. Why couldn't we just get on the tram and get moving?

DON'T YOU REMEMBER IRAQ? was the reply from the large woman. DON'T YOU REMEMBER WHAT OSAMA DID TO US? THAT'S WHY. MY SON IS IN THE ARMY DEFENDING THIS COUNTRY, THE LEAST YOU COULD DO IS SHUT UP AND LET THEM DO THEIR JOB.

It turned out someone had brought a knife through security in another part of the airport. After a couple more minutes we were all cleared to go and we got on the tram a little more enlightened about what kind of people make up the intricate social fabric of our country.
 
2013-03-21 08:20:14 AM  
Philip Morris doesn't sit around hoping more people start smoking, they do every dirty trick in the book to increase their client base.  The military-industrial crowd is the exact same way, if people aren't using weapons on each other, then they aren't buying more weapons.  The US is the world's biggest arms dealer.  These guys love war and promote it every chance they get, peace is bad for business.
 
2013-03-21 08:21:01 AM  

dr_blasto: The question that remains is "why?"


1) Destroy country
2) Get the company you were CEO and major shareholder of a no bid contract to fix country
3) Profit
 
2013-03-21 08:22:29 AM  

EvilEgg: I fail to see how anyone cannot regard this adventure as a mistake. We went to find WMDs, we didn't find any. That is a mistake.

The only real question, if there is one, is what kind of mistake was it? Was a intelligence mistake, a diplomatic mistake, or a political mistake.


bullshiat and twaddle
we went in to remove saddam and fark with Iran
mission accomplished

the WMD shiat was bullshiat in 1990, old tricks best tricks.
 
2013-03-21 08:22:49 AM  

rjkline: amazing how liberals have been proven wrong in almost everything they get their skirts up about after a little time passes...........just a sad group of proven losers.......almost funny


i18.photobucket.com
Black-Nosed Buddha

A nun who was searching for enlightenment made a statue of Buddha and covered it with gold leaf. Wherever she went she carried this golden Buddha with her.
Years passed and, still carrying her Buddha, the nun came to live in a small temple in a country where there were many Buddhas, each one with its own particular shrine.
The nun wished to burn incense before her golden Buddha. Not liking the idea of the perfume straying to the others, she devised a funnel through which the smoke would ascend only to her statue. This blackened the nose of the golden Buddha, making it especially ugly.
 
2013-03-21 08:23:31 AM  

EvilEgg: I fail to see how anyone cannot regard this adventure as a mistake. We went to find WMDs, we didn't find any. That is a mistake.

The only real question, if there is one, is what kind of mistake was it? Was a intelligence mistake, a diplomatic mistake, or a political mistake.


It was "we let our collective selves be lied to" mistake.
 
2013-03-21 08:23:38 AM  

rjkline: amazing how liberals have been proven wrong in almost everything they get their skirts up about after a little time passes...........just a sad group of proven losers.......almost funny


So you think invading Iraq was a good idea? I've heard that people like you existed, I just never caught a glimpse of one in the wild,
 
2013-03-21 08:23:57 AM  
Was it a mistake to send them?  Maybe, maybe not.  Was everything afterwards a mistake?  Hell yeah.  The survey is not asking the latter question.
 
2013-03-21 08:24:30 AM  
The only people in the US who benefited from the Iraq War were oil companies who enjoyed the price spikes and Haliburton shareholders who enjoyed numerous no bid contracts.  It's a good thing our leaders at the time didn't have ties to those industries or it might have looked a tad suspicious.
 
2013-03-21 08:26:44 AM  
Those stats at the bottom:
sas-origin.onstreammedia.com
Its like there's space for some kinda conclusion regarding who is capable of 20/20 hindsight and who isn't.
 
2013-03-21 08:26:52 AM  

dr_blasto: EvilEgg: I fail to see how anyone cannot regard this adventure as a mistake. We went to find WMDs, we didn't find any. That is a mistake.

The only real question, if there is one, is what kind of mistake was it? Was a intelligence mistake, a diplomatic mistake, or a political mistake.

It wasn't a mistake. It was completely intentional and the administration knew what it was doing. The administration misled Congress and the general population intentionally. I think they even lied to themselves at various stages. The question that remains is "why?"


$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
 
2013-03-21 08:27:10 AM  

EvilEgg: I fail to see how anyone cannot regard this adventure as a mistake. We went to find WMDs,

Killed a couple of hundred thousand people, didn't find any. That is a mistake.

FIFY
 
2013-03-21 08:27:15 AM  
If it was a mistake then it was a mistake by all of America. No one that I personally know was against it when it started and it was all but lauded by the entire country, even hard core democrats in Washington. Now after 10 years...sure..hindsight says we could have done more good by spending that money and effort in Afghanistan, but at the time it seemed the right thing to do. Second guessing it now is nothing more than self destruction. The problem with Iraq was that once it was started then it had to be finished regardless of the right/wrong of the war. Some wars a re justifiable, some are not, but they can all be classified as mistakes if examined closely enough.
 
2013-03-21 08:28:23 AM  

rjkline: amazing how liberals have been proven wrong in almost everything they get their skirts up about after a little time passes...........just a sad group of proven losers.......almost funny


Try harder, and use punctuation. 2/10.
 
2013-03-21 08:28:30 AM  

tom baker's scarf: EvilEgg: I fail to see how anyone cannot regard this adventure as a mistake. We went to find WMDs, we didn't find any. That is a mistake.

The only real question, if there is one, is what kind of mistake was it? Was a intelligence mistake, a diplomatic mistake, or a political mistake.

It was "we let our collective selves be lied to" mistake.


Even if we found WMDs in Iraq, does that justify the invasion?

No intelligent American thinks invading Iraq for any reason at that time was justifiable.

There were (and are) plenty of morons who think going after Saddam and the WMDs was great, though.
 
2013-03-21 08:29:08 AM  
Found this interesting:
The same March survey finds 57% of Americans saying the Vietnam War -- which resulted in the most U.S. casualties of the three recent wars -- was a mistake, but that is down from 69% in Nov 2010.

Also, looking at the elderly opinions on war is interesting.  They seem to be the most pacifistic, probably because it has nothing to do with their lawn.
 
2013-03-21 08:30:48 AM  

Mugato: rjkline: amazing how liberals have been proven wrong in almost everything they get their skirts up about after a little time passes...........just a sad group of proven losers.......almost funny

So you think invading Iraq was a good idea? I've heard that people like you existed, I just never caught a glimpse of one in the wild,


Really, old buddy? Seriously? You are going to try to argue with that clown?
My granddad had an expression: "Wrestle with a turd, and, win or lose, you're going to get messed up."
 
2013-03-21 08:31:06 AM  
Welp, we've reached the point where ideological lenses have attained critical mass.  Welcome to the era when one's political loyalty supplants all critical analysis and reasoning.

Thanks, guys.  You're doing a heckuva job.
 
2013-03-21 08:31:53 AM  
I'm far to outraged over Ohitler wanting to give healthcare to everyone to worry about a little war that got 4,400+ americans killed with a 6 trillion dollar price tag.
 
2013-03-21 08:32:04 AM  

dr_blasto: EvilEgg: I fail to see how anyone cannot regard this adventure as a mistake. We went to find WMDs, we didn't find any. That is a mistake.

The only real question, if there is one, is what kind of mistake was it? Was a intelligence mistake, a diplomatic mistake, or a political mistake.

It wasn't a mistake. It was completely intentional and the administration knew what it was doing. The administration misled Congress and the general population intentionally. I think they even lied to themselves at various stages. The question that remains is "why?"


It's pretty well known that Rumsfeld and his cronies had drafted up a letter outlining their plans to go back into Iraq as far back as Bush I. The fact that Bush II appointed them and put them in key positions was a huge black mark for him, since after he already began moving against the Taliban/Al Qaeda they saw their opportunity to say "WEll, gee, boss, see, this guy your dad went after is also sponsoring terrorism, and you should totally go after him too, and there're WMDs, etc.", and he was willing to listen to his advisers push a plan.

Unfortunately, when you have people that control the sources of information, and feed bad intel to the president, the president isn't going to go out of his way to go around them and fact-check what his advisers are spouting. It's their job to, you know, get it right.

So you end up with a military spoiling for a fight, an easy win, a way to make the Generals who wanted to go all the way to Baghdad the last time look like heroes, and a bunch of guys who are in cabinet positions that have the ability and desire to scratch something off their bucket list who are all "Well, since we have a president who is already willing to fight a war, and we have a blank check from congress, what the fark why not?"

Then, when shiat doesn't go as easy as you think it will, since you have a president who, despite what many want to believe, has a conscience and decides "Well, gee, we went in and farked up this country, we can't just level the place and leave with people in abject poverty, all sources of income and their own farking dwellings blown to shiat, we gotta clean up this farking mess and make sure they get back on their feet in a democratic, free way", and so what was going to be a fun night out of blowing shiat up and shooting rag-heads turns into a clusterfark as you try to force a destructive organization into a humanitarian one.

The biggest difference between Obama and Bush, as near as I can tell, in this regard is that Obama's unwilling to do the heavy lifting in cases where a populace want a dictator gone. He's willing to tacitly support with air power and aid, but he's not going to send in troops to do the job.

On one hand, I applaud his efforts to force the people to make changes themselves. On the other, I must disagree with the tactic as it's incredibly naive to believe that untrained freedom fighters without sufficient armament can take on a vastly superior military force and have a meaningful victory without outside intervention.

Even in Iraq and Afghanistan, we roflstomped the shiat out of the Taliban and beat them in the numbers and might game. The only thing left is for them to fight the superior force with small cuts here and there, and a show of resistance which is not effective militarily, but in the long haul may be enough to make us think it's not worth continuing.
 
2013-03-21 08:32:56 AM  

Terrydatroll: If it was a mistake then it was a mistake by all of America. No one that I personally know was against it when it started and it was all but lauded by the entire country, even hard core democrats in Washington. Now after 10 years...sure..hindsight says we could have done more good by spending that money and effort in Afghanistan, but at the time it seemed the right thing to do. Second guessing it now is nothing more than self destruction. The problem with Iraq was that once it was started then it had to be finished regardless of the right/wrong of the war. Some wars a re justifiable, some are not, but they can all be classified as mistakes if examined closely enough.


I and others I knew at the time thought we shouldn't go into Iraq (though we supported going into Afghanistan). The general attitude at the time toward that opinion was "Shut the f*ck up." So no, I did not laud the war, and no, I was not in on the mistake.
 
2013-03-21 08:33:06 AM  
It's the obligation of free democratic people to band together to overthrow tyrants wherever it's feasible. Iraq was the right time and place, The mistake was electing an incompetent, self-serving administration of bunglers who couldn't even articulate the moral high ground of doing that without lying and spinning. The failure was in their hubris. The post war plan of discarding the whole existing civil structure was ludicrous. It should have been molded and redirected over a generation.

Heckava job there Brownie!
 
2013-03-21 08:33:11 AM  

gja: dr_blasto: The question that remains is "why?"

Three words:
Follow......the........money.


"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."
 
2013-03-21 08:33:14 AM  
i184.photobucket.com
 
2013-03-21 08:33:59 AM  

Terrydatroll: If it was a mistake then it was a mistake by all of America. No one that I personally know was against it when it started and it was all but lauded by the entire country, even hard core democrats in Washington. Now after 10 years...sure..hindsight says we could have done more good by spending that money and effort in Afghanistan, but at the time it seemed the right thing to do. Second guessing it now is nothing more than self destruction. The problem with Iraq was that once it was started then it had to be finished regardless of the right/wrong of the war. Some wars a re justifiable, some are not, but they can all be classified as mistakes if examined closely enough.


Sure, other than the dozens and dozens of anti-war protests for the several months between September and March in the run up to the invasion.

You personally knew some goddamn idiots.
 
2013-03-21 08:34:11 AM  

jso2897: If we didn't learn our lesson from Vietnam, we never will. Rome made it over a thousand years before the arrogance of empire brought them down, but history moves faster these days. I doubt we'll make it to 300.


I'm not sure the difference is that history moves faster these days. The Romans had 700 years relatively free from the corruption of Greek "ideals". As soon as the Greek values set in, it was a pretty quick fall. We, on the other hand, have been infected with a virulent strain of Greekitis from the get-go.
 
2013-03-21 08:34:52 AM  

EvilEgg: We went to find WMDs, we didn't find any. That is a mistake.


The revisionism on this started immediately after we invaded.
 
2013-03-21 08:35:12 AM  
I was against the entire thing. I knew what it was (a money grab/revenge/political bs), and had to defend myself 'cuz I was a commie'. Hell, even in liberal Seattle people were calling for the old "glass-parking-lot" bit. War is not a good idea, but it makes money for certain people. Who will never go to war.
 
2013-03-21 08:35:47 AM  

thecpt: Found this interesting:
The same March survey finds 57% of Americans saying the Vietnam War -- which resulted in the most U.S. casualties of the three recent wars -- was a mistake, but that is down from 69% in Nov 2010.

Also, looking at the elderly opinions on war is interesting.  They seem to be the most pacifistic, probably because it has nothing to do with their lawn.


Also, there's the direct knowledge factor - I , for instance, got drafted in 1968. Nobody will ever be able to fool me  that the Vietnam war was anything but a racket.
Young fools, on the other hand, can sometimes be convinced that it was a noble conflict that could have been "won" , if it wasn't for those darn "liberals".
But don't stop believing, sonny-boy. It's cute.
 
2013-03-21 08:36:07 AM  

Spanky_McFarksalot: I'm far to outraged over Ohitler wanting to give healthcare to everyone to worry about a little war that got 4,400+ americans killed with a 6 trillion dollar price tag.


Ohhh I know Ohitler, I think. Is his cousin the candy bar guy, ya know, whats-his-name?
blog.candy.com
 
2013-03-21 08:36:48 AM  

AverageAmericanGuy: tom baker's scarf: EvilEgg: I fail to see how anyone cannot regard this adventure as a mistake. We went to find WMDs, we didn't find any. That is a mistake.

The only real question, if there is one, is what kind of mistake was it? Was a intelligence mistake, a diplomatic mistake, or a political mistake.

It was "we let our collective selves be lied to" mistake.

Even if we found WMDs in Iraq, does that justify the invasion?

No intelligent American thinks invading Iraq for any reason at that time was justifiable.

There were (and are) plenty of morons who think going after Saddam and the WMDs was great, though.


So how does calling it a "mistake" and criticizing every aspect of it make it any better for you? What exactly is wrong with you that makes you want to classify everyone who disagrees with your opinion a moron? There are good and bad results achieved in all wars and the difficult part about it is that the war cannot be undone, so why would you look only at the negatives and call people morons who dwell on the positives of a thing that is done? It's like someone's house burning down and them finding joy and comfort in the fact that their dog was left alive. Are they morons as well?

Sure, mistakes were made and we should learn from them, but that doesn't mean that we cannot reflect upon the positives as well.
 
2013-03-21 08:37:39 AM  
It's obvious that they wanted to get rid of Saddam since the first Gulf War, they just had an opportunity finally after 9/11. Did he have WMDs? Maybe, probably not. Was he going to try to get them? Probably at some point. It's more obvious that we wanted free access to oil, which I kind of don't have a problem with as long as we're 1) honest about it and 2) the goddamn prices actually go down. Saddam was an issue though in that region and we eventually would have had to deal with him but we rushed it way too soon and without a proper plan.

I don't blame Bush, he's just a good ole boy. It's everyone around him that manipulated everything.
 
2013-03-21 08:38:10 AM  

bulldg4life: Terrydatroll: If it was a mistake then it was a mistake by all of America. No one that I personally know was against it when it started and it was all but lauded by the entire country, even hard core democrats in Washington. Now after 10 years...sure..hindsight says we could have done more good by spending that money and effort in Afghanistan, but at the time it seemed the right thing to do. Second guessing it now is nothing more than self destruction. The problem with Iraq was that once it was started then it had to be finished regardless of the right/wrong of the war. Some wars a re justifiable, some are not, but they can all be classified as mistakes if examined closely enough.

Sure, other than the dozens and dozens of anti-war protests for the several months between September and March in the run up to the invasion.

You personally knew some goddamn idiots.


Either that or you were surrounded by idiots. I think the latter.
 
2013-03-21 08:38:57 AM  

rumpelstiltskin: jso2897: If we didn't learn our lesson from Vietnam, we never will. Rome made it over a thousand years before the arrogance of empire brought them down, but history moves faster these days. I doubt we'll make it to 300.

I'm not sure the difference is that history moves faster these days. The Romans had 700 years relatively free from the corruption of Greek "ideals". As soon as the Greek values set in, it was a pretty quick fall. We, on the other hand, have been infected with a virulent strain of Greekitis from the get-go.


That is pretty abstract - it seems like it would require considerable explication before I knew what you were even really talking about - so I can't disagree.
 
2013-03-21 08:39:00 AM  
To quote from John Cole, since it sums me up as well:

I see that Andrew Sullivan was asked to list what he got wrong about Iraq for the five year anniversary of the invasion, and since I was as big a war booster as anyone, I thought I would list what I got wrong:

Everything.

And I don't say that to provide people with an easy way to beat up on me, but I do sort of have to face facts. I was wrong about everything.

I was wrong about the Doctrine of Pre-emptive warfare.
I was wrong about Iraq possessing WMD.
I was wrong about Scott Ritter and the inspections.
I was wrong about the UN involvement in weapons inspections.
I was wrong about the containment sanctions.
I was wrong about the broader impact of the war on the Middle East.
I was wrong about this making us more safe.
I was wrong about the number of troops needed to stabilize Iraq.
I was wrong when I stated this administration had a clear plan for the aftermath.
I was wrong about securing the ammunition dumps.
I was wrong about the ease of bringing democracy to the Middle East.
I was wrong about dissolving the Iraqi army.
I was wrong about the looting being unimportant.
I was wrong that Bush/Cheney were competent.
I was wrong that we would be greeted as liberators.
I was wrong to make fun of the anti-war protestors.
I was wrong not to trust the dirty smelly hippies.

I mean, I could go down the list and continue on, but you get the point. I was wrong about EVERY. GOD. DAMNED. THING. It is amazing I could tie my shoes in 2001-2004. If you took all the wrongness I generated, put it together and compacted it and processed it, there would be enough concentrated stupid to fuel three hundred years of Weekly Standard journals. I am not sure how I snapped out of it, but I think Abu Ghraib and the negative impact of the insurgency did sober me up a bit.

War should always be an absolute last resort, not just another option. I will never make the same mistakes again.
 
2013-03-21 08:39:45 AM  

Close2TheEdge: The Muthaship: Got rid of Saddam, and gave them a chance to have a country governed in whatever way the people want.  Awful.

Which likely would have happened by itself without the cost of BILLIONS of dollars and THOUSANDS of lives.

Yes, it was awful.


You misspelled TRILLIONS
 
2013-03-21 08:40:14 AM  
Mistake is the wrong term.  How about lie or manipulation?  The fear mongering terms like WMD's and Al Qaeda were nothing put lies spewed forth to justify invading a country that Bush didn't like.  The decision to invade Iraq came first....then the evidence to justify was manufactured later.  Anybody who questions Bush's rational was immediately discredited and hung out to dry.
 
2013-03-21 08:41:31 AM  

InfrasonicTom: Close2TheEdge: The Muthaship: Got rid of Saddam, and gave them a chance to have a country governed in whatever way the people want.  Awful.

Which likely would have happened by itself without the cost of BILLIONS of dollars and THOUSANDS of lives.

Yes, it was awful.

You misspelled TRILLIONS


This still pisses me off. This was from Nicholas Kristoff's pre-war column, and he was relatively against the war:

But Mr. Bush has not overcome some practical concerns about an invasion. These concerns, which we need to focus on in the coming months, include:

...

4. Is the Iraqi desert the best place to spend $55 billion? Fighting a war will cost perhaps $35 billion, and it will take $20 billion more to rebuild Iraq. That's more than the federal government spends in a year on elementary and secondary education and health research combined.
 
2013-03-21 08:43:02 AM  

jso2897: Also, there's the direct knowledge factor - I , for instance, got drafted in 1968. Nobody will ever be able to fool me  that the Vietnam war was anything but a racket.


So what's skewing the numbers over time is that your generation is becoming fewer.  I can't believe how low the number of people who think it was a mistake is, should be twice that if mathematically possible.

/you never explained your history of Vietnam from the last thread :(
 
2013-03-21 08:45:03 AM  
Liberals are basically the same pathetic outcasts they were back in high school. They watch the football team from afar as they wonder why they have no date to the prom. After years of hatred towards those who succeed they end up falling into a lifetime of trying to tear down their popular counterparts. It's so funny watching a rattletrap car with an Obama sticker spew smoke as it goes down the road being driven by a hog chainsmoking cigarettes while three or four shirtless kids fight in the back seat on the way to pick up their government cheese........Keep screaming and fighting the good fight, but trash will always be trash and the successful will remain that way despite how much you try to take their wealth. I know deep inside you want to be successful but sorry.....it's not in your DNA.
 
2013-03-21 08:46:21 AM  
So we're back to popular opinion on major policy issues being important? Because after ObamaCare, you could have fooled me in to thinking that no matter what popular opinion was, it could be damned.

Mistakes were certainly made during the process and thankfully we didn't listen to Obama on the troop surge, but it's cool that he takes credit now for the victory the surge delivered. 25 million people are free and the world is a better place.
 
2013-03-21 08:49:19 AM  

Tat'dGreaser: Saddam was an issue though in that region and we eventually would have had to deal with him but we rushed it way too soon and without a proper plan.


Not true, Saddam was actually a very secular tyrant and was a force against Islamist extremists in the region, Chances are actually pretty high that once the Arab Spring rolled around, Iraq would have naturally taken care of itself. And who knows, with so many dominoes falling it could have lit something bigger in Iran and that would have taken care of itself naturally.
 
2013-03-21 08:49:46 AM  

The Muthaship: Got rid of Saddam, and gave them a chance to have a country governed in whatever way the people want.  Awful.


The current civil war? Yeah, great stuff. And who are we to grant that anyway. Why not Saudi Arabia? Just as bad as Iraq. We're not Santa Claus or the world police.
 
2013-03-21 08:52:08 AM  

MyKingdomForYourHorse: Not true, Saddam was actually a very secular tyrant and was a force against Islamist extremists in the region, Chances are actually pretty high that once the Arab Spring rolled around, Iraq would have naturally taken care of itself. And who knows, with so many dominoes falling it could have lit something bigger in Iran and that would have taken care of itself naturally.


Well in the realm of Team America World Police, he was a problem. Frankly we should just let them all just go at it.
 
2013-03-21 08:52:25 AM  

thecpt: jso2897: Also, there's the direct knowledge factor - I , for instance, got drafted in 1968. Nobody will ever be able to fool me  that the Vietnam war was anything but a racket.

So what's skewing the numbers over time is that your generation is becoming fewer.  I can't believe how low the number of people who think it was a mistake is, should be twice that if mathematically possible.

/you never explained your history of Vietnam from the last thread :(


I don't tell war stories, and I never will. Sorry to disappoint you.
 
2013-03-21 08:52:42 AM  
What about quagmire? Remember how you were a traitor if you called it a quagmire? It was a textbook quagmire.

Remember Hans Blix was in pre-war Iraq looking for WMDs and wasn't finding any. But if your ideology says that the UN is a worthless organization, then it's only natural you would rather rely on intelligence from a carnival barker like Chilabi. The neocons wanted to go to take out Hussein long before 9-11. That's all there was to it.
 
2013-03-21 08:57:04 AM  

rjkline: Liberals are basically the same pathetic outcasts they were back in high school. They watch the football team from afar as they wonder why they have no date to the prom. After years of hatred towards those who succeed they end up falling into a lifetime of trying to tear down their popular counterparts. It's so funny watching a rattletrap car with an Obama sticker spew smoke as it goes down the road being driven by a hog chainsmoking cigarettes while three or four shirtless kids fight in the back seat on the way to pick up their government cheese........Keep screaming and fighting the good fight, but trash will always be trash and the successful will remain that way despite how much you try to take their wealth. I know deep inside you want to be successful but sorry.....it's not in your DNA.


i18.photobucket.com
No Water, No Moon

When the nun Chiyono studied Zen under Bukko of Engaku she was unable to attain the fruits of meditation for a long time.
At last one moonlit night she was carrying water in an old pail bound with bamboo. The bamboo broke and the bottom fell out of the pail, and at that moment Chiyono was set free!
In commemoration, she wrote a poem:
In this way and that I tried to save the old pail
Since the bamboo strip was weakening and about
   to break
Until at last the bottom fell out.
No more water in the pail!
No more moon in the water!
 
2013-03-21 08:58:36 AM  

rjkline: words which add nothing to the discussion


1/10 only because I responded solely to invalidate you.
 
2013-03-21 08:58:46 AM  

Bravo Two: Unfortunately, when you have people that control the sources of information, and feed bad intel to the president, the president isn't going to go out of his way to go around them and fact-check what his advisers are spouting. It's their job to, you know, get it right.


I recall that efforts to produce contradictory intelligence to the whole WMD thing were roundly dismissed by the administration. Was it Cheney or Bush that refused to see anything that showed Iraq to be a non-threat? Who really knows. In the end, between the WMD lie and the allusions to 9/11 support that were non-existent showed the administration was going in regardless of reason, logic or conscience. Tenet gets a medal for contributing to the fiasco, thousands of Americans die, tens of thousands have their lives destroyed and nearly one million Iraqis freed from their existence.

At this point, it would take a pretty big leap for me to believe Bush was fed bad intelligence and is this sort of child-like innocent in the fiasco. We went to war; we should not have--if it was because he was legitimately misinformed, that is still on him.
 
2013-03-21 08:59:03 AM  
"Results for this Gallup poll are based on telephone interviews conducted March 7-10, 2013, on the Gallup Daily tracking survey, with a random sample of 1,022 adults."

This is why I never believe anything claimed in a poll, 1,022 out of 314 million is hardly what I would call an accurate sampling.
 
2013-03-21 08:59:42 AM  

Terrydatroll: bulldg4life: Terrydatroll: If it was a mistake then it was a mistake by all of America. No one that I personally know was against it when it started and it was all but lauded by the entire country, even hard core democrats in Washington. Now after 10 years...sure..hindsight says we could have done more good by spending that money and effort in Afghanistan, but at the time it seemed the right thing to do. Second guessing it now is nothing more than self destruction. The problem with Iraq was that once it was started then it had to be finished regardless of the right/wrong of the war. Some wars a re justifiable, some are not, but they can all be classified as mistakes if examined closely enough.

Sure, other than the dozens and dozens of anti-war protests for the several months between September and March in the run up to the invasion.

You personally knew some goddamn idiots.

Either that or you were surrounded by idiots. I think the latter.


I wasn't surrounded by people that got swept up in jingoistic fervor and blindly believed the war was worth starting.
 
2013-03-21 09:00:28 AM  

verbaltoxin: rjkline: words which add nothing to the discussion

1/10 only because I responded solely to invalidate you.


Hey - he's just seeking enlightenment, in the only way he knows how. Help him out.
Koans are always good.
 
2013-03-21 09:02:40 AM  

ReapTheChaos: "Results for this Gallup poll are based on telephone interviews conducted March 7-10, 2013, on the Gallup Daily tracking survey, with a random sample of 1,022 adults."

This is why I never believe anything claimed in a poll, 1,022 out of 314 million is hardly what I would call an accurate sampling.


Study statistics.
 
2013-03-21 09:03:13 AM  

ReapTheChaos: "Results for this Gallup poll are based on telephone interviews conducted March 7-10, 2013, on the Gallup Daily tracking survey, with a random sample of 1,022 adults."

This is why I never believe anything claimed in a poll, 1,022 out of 314 million is hardly what I would call an accurate sampling.


Samples in statistics have to be chosen well to be valid. The key word here is "telephone," which means these were likely landline phones, meaning older Americans mostly responded.

I'll remind everyone one that Gallup was one of those pollsters calling it a horse race and even skewed towards Romney approaching Election Day. Gallup fully nullified itself this past fall.
 
2013-03-21 09:05:40 AM  

rjkline: Liberals are basically the same pathetic outcasts they were back in high school. They watch the football team from afar as they wonder why they have no date to the prom. After years of hatred towards those who succeed they end up falling into a lifetime of trying to tear down their popular counterparts. It's so funny watching a rattletrap car with an Obama sticker spew smoke as it goes down the road being driven by a hog chainsmoking cigarettes while three or four shirtless kids fight in the back seat on the way to pick up their government cheese........Keep screaming and fighting the good fight, but trash will always be trash and the successful will remain that way despite how much you try to take their wealth. I know deep inside you want to be successful but sorry.....it's not in your DNA.


There is no way this guy is actually a conservative. Which one of us 'liberals' created an alt?
 
2013-03-21 09:05:41 AM  

rjkline: amazing how liberals have been proven wrong in almost everything they get their skirts up about after a little time passes...........just a sad group of proven losers.......almost funny


Best part...
 
2013-03-21 09:05:59 AM  

Terrydatroll: Sure, mistakes were made and we should learn from them, but that doesn't mean that we cannot reflect upon the positives as well.


Yes, I'm happy we didn't kill everyone and that some of our troops made it out physically and emotionally intact.
 
2013-03-21 09:06:02 AM  

rjkline: Liberals are basically the same pathetic outcasts they were back in high school. They watch the football team from afar as they wonder why they have no date to the prom. After years of hatred towards those who succeed they end up falling into a lifetime of trying to tear down their popular counterparts. It's so funny watching a rattletrap car with an Obama sticker spew smoke as it goes down the road being driven by a hog chainsmoking cigarettes while three or four shirtless kids fight in the back seat on the way to pick up their government cheese........Keep screaming and fighting the good fight, but trash will always be trash and the successful will remain that way despite how much you try to take their wealth. I know deep inside you want to be successful but sorry.....it's not in your DNA.


You're a goddamn troll and you deserve to live a sad, lonely life being ignored by those you desperately want to provoke a reaction out of. You got that from me today, never again.

/Or till you register under a different username
//How sad IS you life, btw, that you have to resort to this?
///favorited!
 
2013-03-21 09:06:46 AM  
I love all the talk about the cost of the war.  Here's a blast from the past.  Notice that Iraq and Afghanistan weren't included...

But yeah, Obama is ruining the economy.
 
2013-03-21 09:08:04 AM  

Egoy3k: There is no way this guy is actually a conservative. Which one of us 'liberals' created an alt?


Sadly, if this one is who I think he is, he's the only right-wing moron on Fark who's not a troll or an alt. The good news is he's also the only one who actually gets banned for his threadshiatting (over and over and over again).
 
2013-03-21 09:08:34 AM  

Thats No Moose: rjkline: Liberals are basically the same pathetic outcasts they were back in high school. They watch the football team from afar as they wonder why they have no date to the prom. After years of hatred towards those who succeed they end up falling into a lifetime of trying to tear down their popular counterparts. It's so funny watching a rattletrap car with an Obama sticker spew smoke as it goes down the road being driven by a hog chainsmoking cigarettes while three or four shirtless kids fight in the back seat on the way to pick up their government cheese........Keep screaming and fighting the good fight, but trash will always be trash and the successful will remain that way despite how much you try to take their wealth. I know deep inside you want to be successful but sorry.....it's not in your DNA.

You're a goddamn troll and you deserve to live a sad, lonely life being ignored by those you desperately want to provoke a reaction out of. You got that from me today, never again.

/Or till you register under a different username
//How sad IS you life, btw, that you have to resort to this?
///favorited!


i18.photobucket.com

You're not very bright, are you?
 
2013-03-21 09:08:38 AM  

randomjsa: 25 million people are free now live under the fear of an Islamic government that is backed by Iran and the world is a better Middle East is an even more unstable place.


Fixed for accuracy.
 
2013-03-21 09:10:08 AM  
Some right-wing jackass in the Boston Globe today wrote an editorial stating that the war in Iraq was totally worth it.
 
2013-03-21 09:11:16 AM  

jso2897: I don't tell war stories, and I never will. Sorry to disappoint you.


definitely not asking for war stories, just why you don't think it was to stop the spread of communism.  (seriously, every history book tries to say that.  not saying you're wrong, just asking what kind of racket you think it was)
 
2013-03-21 09:12:19 AM  

lilbjorn: Some right-wing jackass in the Boston Globe today wrote an editorial stating that the war in Iraq was totally worth it.


Well, to HIM, I'm sure it was.
 
2013-03-21 09:12:58 AM  

DamnYankees: InfrasonicTom: Close2TheEdge: The Muthaship: Got rid of Saddam, and gave them a chance to have a country governed in whatever way the people want.  Awful.

Which likely would have happened by itself without the cost of BILLIONS of dollars and THOUSANDS of lives.

Yes, it was awful.

You misspelled TRILLIONS

This still pisses me off. This was from Nicholas Kristoff's pre-war column, and he was relatively against the war:

But Mr. Bush has not overcome some practical concerns about an invasion. These concerns, which we need to focus on in the coming months, include:

...

4. Is the Iraqi desert the best place to spend $55 billion? Fighting a war will cost perhaps $35 billion, and it will take $20 billion more to rebuild Iraq. That's more than the federal government spends in a year on elementary and secondary education and health research combined.


The other thing. These shiatheads that supported the nonsense in the first place, those think-tankers, opinionators and the like are still employed and considered serious people in the beltway. The ones that have issued their mea culpas? They've been sidelined and are now no longer in the club.

Lesson learned: eat the bullshiat and spew it forth without any critical thought. When said bullshiat is proved to be nothing more than the bullshiat it is, double down and stay in the club. If you admit you ate the mouthful of shiat and it was, indeed, shiat, you are a failure.
 
2013-03-21 09:14:40 AM  

lilbjorn: Some right-wing jackass in the Boston Globe today wrote an editorial stating that the war in Iraq was totally worth it.


Must of had stock in Haliburton
 
2013-03-21 09:15:16 AM  
It wasn't a mistake, it was a crime.
 
2013-03-21 09:16:01 AM  
News: Poll numbers suddenly mean more than the facts. Poll numbers become what history chooses to regard as true facts instead of verifiable facts. Especially when the only released information to the public is a psy-op intended on letting everyone believe the RUSSIAN WMDs that were trucked out of Iraq (11 trucks to be exact) into Syria never happened. Either the Psy-op gets planted there were no RUSSIAN WMDs or we have end game of a thermo-nuclear war with Russia.
 
2013-03-21 09:16:01 AM  
 
2013-03-21 09:18:16 AM  
randomjsa (farkied: "Holy fnck you're an idiot." - Nina_Hartley's_Ass): 25 million people are free and the world is a better place.

I've got some ocean front property in Tikrit Province that I've been looking to sell.
 
2013-03-21 09:28:07 AM  
The invasion of Iraq was the single worst decision any president ever made, in this nations history.
Alright, maybe second worst.
 
2013-03-21 09:29:46 AM  
I piss my pants when I laugh to hard by mistake. I don't tell hundreds of lies over the course of a year and build a coalition of states to invade a country and get 10s of thousands of people killed by mistake. If you think that was a mistake, you are retarded and letting Bush off easy
 
2013-03-21 09:34:50 AM  

thecpt: jso2897: I don't tell war stories, and I never will. Sorry to disappoint you.

definitely not asking for war stories, just why you don't think it was to stop the spread of communism.  (seriously, every history book tries to say that.  not saying you're wrong, just asking what kind of racket you think it was)


You seem to have very poor reading comprehension. I thought I made it clear that I perceive you as a troll, who is trying to draw me into a conversation that had already bored me to tears by the late 1960s.
If you really believe in the veracity of meaningless strings of bullshiat like "stop the spread of communism", you are beyond any intellectual help I can provide you. I can recommend two things to you:
1. Read "War is a Racket" by Major General Smedley Butler.
2. Kindly have the good manners to f**k off, and leave me alone, as I have already made it clear that I wish you to do. I'm an old man who is tired of wars, and the lies that are told to trick people into them. Go pester somebody else.
 
2013-03-21 09:37:52 AM  

The Muthaship: Got rid of Saddam, and gave them a chance to have a country governed in whatever way the people want Iran wants.  Awful.


FTFY
 
2013-03-21 09:38:27 AM  
Hitler didn't attack us either. Maybe we should have not gotten involved.

Liberals, imagine them in charge during WWII? Fark would be rallying behind Hitler, after all, he didn't like Jews either.
 
2013-03-21 09:38:43 AM  
Not to be a grammar Nazi, but isn't the correct title "The Iraq"?
 
2013-03-21 09:41:16 AM  

Thunderpipes: Hitler didn't attack us either. Maybe we should have not gotten involved.

Liberals, imagine them in charge during WWII? Fark would be rallying behind Hitler, after all, he didn't like Jews either.


Aye, good thing we had that very conservative icon of the right, Franklin D. Roosevelt as a President during that time in our history. Dodged a bullet there, we did.
 
2013-03-21 09:43:27 AM  
Depends what you mean by "mistake." They were certainly aware of what they were doing.
 
2013-03-21 09:43:50 AM  

Thunderpipes: Hitler didn't attack us either. Maybe we should have not gotten involved.

Liberals, imagine them in charge during WWII? Fark would be rallying behind Hitler, after all, he didn't like Jews either.


WWII was kind of like the mafia in New York back in the Twenties - sometimes the racket get s so big you can't stay out of it. Doesn't justify buying into it when you can avoid it. Has nothing to do with "liberals" or "conservatives" - actually, it was the right that wanted to sit out WWII.
 
2013-03-21 09:44:18 AM  

Thunderpipes: Hitler didn't attack us either. Maybe we should have not gotten involved.

Liberals, imagine them in charge during WWII? Fark would be rallying behind Hitler, after all, he didn't like Jews either.


And the income tax rate was over 90% for the highest earners. And the government took over industry. And FDR was president. A real win for conservative ideals that one was.
 
2013-03-21 09:48:28 AM  

Thunderpipes: Hitler didn't attack us either. Maybe we should have not gotten involved.

Liberals, imagine them in charge during WWII? Fark would be rallying behind Hitler, after all, he didn't like Jews either.


You really don't know your history.  FDR did everything he could to get involved...and I'm pretty sure he's among the most hated of the libby libs that libbed theri liberal way into the White House.
 
2013-03-21 09:49:08 AM  
Damned f5...
 
2013-03-21 09:50:32 AM  
Both political parties and the media are culpable in making the poor decision to invade Iraq.

I also believe that many intelligence agencies wanted to buy into Saddam's bluff that he was heading for nuclear and biological weapons.  Many forces were pushing into a perfect storm and the train couldn't be stopped.

Hopefully, we have learned some lessons from the war, but our past history leads me to believe that this will happen over and over. Caesar needed a war for fame and fortune.  There was no war, so he made one with the barbarian tribes in the north.

I also hope that there will be some benefit from the war.  Arab spring?  Counter to Iran?  I know it will never be a wash and my heart goes out to the families directly impacted by the war.  War is hell.
 
2013-03-21 09:53:38 AM  

Ned Stark: It wasn't a mistake, it was a crime.


THIS^^^
 
2013-03-21 09:54:10 AM  

Thunderpipes: Hitler didn't attack us either. Maybe we should have not gotten involved.

Liberals, imagine them in charge during WWII? Fark would be rallying behind Hitler, after all, he didn't like Jews either.


Germany declared war against the united states in WW2. Not the other way round.
 
2013-03-21 09:54:17 AM  
What are al-Qaeda up to these days? Haven't heard much from them, certainly not a 9/11.

How many Scuds has Iraq lobbed at Israel lately? It seems they've shut down their WMD program for good this time, instead of re-starting it every decade. Wonder how that happened.

How much funding do terrorists get from Iraq these days? I see... they seem underfunded of late. Maybe there's a connection.
 
2013-03-21 09:54:43 AM  

jso2897: "stop the spread of communism", you are beyond any intellectual help I can provide you.

well they seem to do stupid fanatical shiat back in the day.  See McCarthyism.

jso2897: 1. Read "War is a Racket" by Major General Smedley Butler.


thank you.  I don't know how it relates to Vietnam yet, but it could.

jso2897: I'm an old man who is tired of wars, and the lies that are told to trick people into them. Go pester somebody else.


funny you keep coming to these threads to say your opinion, then don't try to explain it.  I hope you see how silly and ironic that is for someone who's too old and tired of wars.  If you have wisdom, impart it.  You want to yell at clouds, and expect us to not ask why?  Well then you can fark off too.
 
2013-03-21 09:56:38 AM  

DamnYankees: I mean, I could go down the list and continue on, but you get the point. I was wrong about EVERY. GOD. DAMNED. THING. It is amazing I could tie my shoes in 2001-2004. If you took all the wrongness I generated, put it together and compacted it and processed it, there would be enough concentrated stupid to fuel three hundred years of Weekly Standard journals. I am not sure how I snapped out of it, but I think Abu Ghraib and the negative impact of the insurgency did sober me up a bit.

War should always be an absolute last resort, not just another option. I will never make the same mistakes again.


Let's face facts.  We, the American People, were conned by our government.  We were lied to by our government.  In the wake of 9/11, we were living in fear that something like that could happen again, and it opened us up for the lies.  I admit I bought into them.  I was wrong to do so.

I know many people have pointed out that the Democrats were in on this, that they also believed the WMDs existed well before Bush got into power.  The difference is they didn't throw American lives and trillions of dollars down the toilet to force the regime change.

There has been enough evidence presented that Bush II had his sights set on Saddam when he took office, and that 9/11 and Afghanistan were distractions to that goal.  And believe me, is the world a better place without Saddam Hussein and his sons in power?  Yes.  Was the price we paid and continue to pay worth that?  I don't believe so.

We can't fall for this again.

And despite John McCain insisting that this has all been properly investigating, we need to fully investigate the intelligence failures that led us into this war.  Enough with the Benghazi dog whistle already.
 
2013-03-21 09:57:41 AM  

Tat'dGreaser: It's obvious that they wanted to get rid of Saddam since the first Gulf War, they just had an opportunity finally after 9/11. Did he have WMDs? Maybe, probably not. Was he going to try to get them? Probably at some point. It's more obvious that we wanted free access to oil, which I kind of don't have a problem with as long as we're 1) honest about it and 2) the goddamn prices actually go down. Saddam was an issue though in that region and we eventually would have had to deal with him but we rushed it way too soon and without a proper plan.


I once read an article about the build up to the Iraq war. I think it was in Newsweek or some other US news magazine. They talked about how Saddam was in a really weird position. I mean he kept having to tell most of the world that he didn't have WMD's as to not piss off the US, as well as the UN and their weapons inspectors. But he was also still neighbors with Iran, and they weren't really on peaceful terms so as far as that goes, so with respect to them he kind of had to play up the fact that he did have WMD's.
 
2013-03-21 10:04:47 AM  
53% of Americans are right 100% of the time.
 
2013-03-21 10:05:59 AM  

thecpt: jso2897: "stop the spread of communism", you are beyond any intellectual help I can provide you.

well they seem to do stupid fanatical shiat back in the day.  See McCarthyism.

jso2897: 1. Read "War is a Racket" by Major General Smedley Butler.

thank you.  I don't know how it relates to Vietnam yet, but it could.

jso2897: I'm an old man who is tired of wars, and the lies that are told to trick people into them. Go pester somebody else.

funny you keep coming to these threads to say your opinion, then don't try to explain it.  I hope you see how silly and ironic that is for someone who's too old and tired of wars.  If you have wisdom, impart it.  You want to yell at clouds, and expect us to not ask why?  Well then you can fark off too.


Thank you for finally listening - and since I wouldn't wipe my ass with your opinion, whatever you want to say about me is fine by me.
 
2013-03-21 10:08:22 AM  
I'm leaning heavily towards debacle.
 
2013-03-21 10:09:20 AM  

jso2897: thecpt: jso2897: I don't tell war stories, and I never will. Sorry to disappoint you.

definitely not asking for war stories, just why you don't think it was to stop the spread of communism.  (seriously, every history book tries to say that.  not saying you're wrong, just asking what kind of racket you think it was)

You seem to have very poor reading comprehension. I thought I made it clear that I perceive you as a troll, who is trying to draw me into a conversation that had already bored me to tears by the late 1960s.
If you really believe in the veracity of meaningless strings of bullshiat like "stop the spread of communism", you are beyond any intellectual help I can provide you. I can recommend two things to you:
1. Read "War is a Racket" by Major General Smedley Butler.
2. Kindly have the good manners to f**k off, and leave me alone, as I have already made it clear that I wish you to do. I'm an old man who is tired of wars, and the lies that are told to trick people into them. Go pester somebody else.


When Gen Butler earned the two Medals of Honor, it was for fighting in Veracruz Mexico and Haiti. I wonder how many people alive today even knew we had troops fighting in those areas?
 
2013-03-21 10:10:13 AM  

EvilEgg: I fail to see how anyone cannot regard this adventure as a mistake. We went to find WMDs, we didn't find any. That is a mistake.

The only real question, if there is one, is what kind of mistake was it? Was a intelligence mistake, a diplomatic mistake, or a political mistake.


Yes.

It was an intelligence mistake: we built a war on shaky, poorly sourced intelligence.

It was a diplomatic mistake: we completely threw out diplomacy in a mad rush to war.

It was a political mistake: The Shrub wanted to prove he was better than daddy and actually get Hussein, and wanted to bang the war drums and be the Wartime President. . .never mind we were already fighting in Afghanistan.

It was a goddamn trillion dollar mistake.  If we'd taken that trillion dollars and spent it on other things we could have had a farking moonbase, men on Mars, a vastly updated and upgraded transportation and communications infrastructure, totally overhauled and upgraded public schools, and the best healthcare system on the planet. . .instead we got debt, a looted war-torn crater where Iraq was, defense contractors lining their pockets, and thousands upon thousands of bodies.
 
2013-03-21 10:14:49 AM  
"Fiasco?"

"No, it isn't really a fiasco until someone has been set on fire..."

"Uh, I think probably a few people have been set on fire here..."

(Sorry, PA applies to everything...)
 
2013-03-21 10:16:28 AM  

The Muthaship: Got rid of Saddam, and gave them a chance to have a country governed in whatever way the people want.  Awful.


Yes, so far it has turned out to be pretty awful.  Saddam wouldn't let the shiates kill the Sunis and vice versa, or let both of them kill the Christians.  Now, there is nothing stopping them.  The oldest Christian community in the world is gone, and far more Iraqis have been killed since Saddam was removed from power than he ever managed to kill.  I don't know if the Kurds are doing better or not--so far as I know, neither the shiates nor the Sunis are fond of them, either.
 
2013-03-21 10:17:24 AM  

purdeyisa10: jso2897: thecpt: jso2897: I don't tell war stories, and I never will. Sorry to disappoint you.

definitely not asking for war stories, just why you don't think it was to stop the spread of communism.  (seriously, every history book tries to say that.  not saying you're wrong, just asking what kind of racket you think it was)

You seem to have very poor reading comprehension. I thought I made it clear that I perceive you as a troll, who is trying to draw me into a conversation that had already bored me to tears by the late 1960s.
If you really believe in the veracity of meaningless strings of bullshiat like "stop the spread of communism", you are beyond any intellectual help I can provide you. I can recommend two things to you:
1. Read "War is a Racket" by Major General Smedley Butler.
2. Kindly have the good manners to f**k off, and leave me alone, as I have already made it clear that I wish you to do. I'm an old man who is tired of wars, and the lies that are told to trick people into them. Go pester somebody else.

When Gen Butler earned the two Medals of Honor, it was for fighting in Veracruz Mexico and Haiti. I wonder how many people alive today even knew we had troops fighting in those areas?


Anyway - if these comic-book-reading little snotnoses want to learn - they should go fight in a war themselves - there'll always be one.
The "stop the spread of communism" hustle is old and busted, as is the "yellow peril". The new one is the "war on Terror". I mean, who wouldn't want to join up for the "War on Terror", right? I mean, "terror" is bad, right?
There will always be another generation of young, stupid assholes willing to go bleed and die for whatever horseshiat some preacher or politician sells them. It's Darwin's way.
 
2013-03-21 10:18:05 AM  

jso2897: Also, there's the direct knowledge factor - I , for instance, got drafted in 1968. Nobody will ever be able to fool me that the Vietnam war was anything but a racket.


Thing is, the Vietnamese snookered everyone.

1941 -- Vietnam is an unhappy colony of Vichy France, and is dealing with the Japanese occupation. Annam (north) is more unhappy than Cochinchina (south). Supported by US, USSR, and "China".

It all rolls back to WWII, where the Viet Minh were part of the French Resistance, staying loyal to the Allies, such as it was, and fighting the Vichy government and the Japanese. They win, more or less, although it's a deferred win brokered by a phase-in treaty with France, Nationalist China, and Vietnam. Vietnam gets the French back, at least temporarily, but kicks the Chinese out.

1945 - Japanese out, Nationalist Chinese in.
1946 - French back in, Nationalist Chinese out.

Come 1946, de Gaulle and the "macquis" want to hear none of it, and decide to reimpose colonial government. This worked about as well in Vietnam as it did everywhere else outside of France -- this is to say, poorly. Vietnam eventually wins the 1st Indochina War, after getting the support of newly communist China. This results in the temporary state of a communist North Vietnam and a nominally imperial South Korea.

1954 - French out; communist Chinese have influence; USA in in South.

Now things get sticky. WWII has begotten the Cold War, and the various regional disputes about communism versus democracy. As poorly run as the South is, the North has just conducted a purge (as communisms were prone to do), and the Viet Minh are in tatters.

The US sees this as encroaching Russo-Chinese communism. As such, they back the South Vietnamese. Somewhat unappreciated is that the Soviets and the Chinese don't much care for each other. The US is involved in a low-level war of various heats from 1955 to 1975. Vietnam is primarily supported by the Russians, which the Chinese do not appreciate.

1975; US out, North Vietnam seizes and purges South Vietnam; communist Chinese out; Soviets have influence.

1978: Vietnam invades Cambodia, kicks out Chinese-backed Khmer Rouge. This precipitates the Sino-Vietnamese war. Both sides claim victory. End result: Chinese out, Russians out, Vietnam remains independent, China and Russia nearly at state of war.

Basically, the Vietnam war did end up breaking communism, but only indirectly and accidentally, and it required the deaths and repudiations of both Stalin and Mao.

What everyone missed is that Vietnam saw all of these as colonial wars -- they fought against both Frances, the US, Cambodia, and China. They kicked out both the Kuomintang and the communist Chinese. They remained allies with the USSR because Russia didn't want a colony -- Russia wanted an asian Cuba. Unlike the others, Vietnam wasn't fighting ideological wars, it was fighting a very long war for independence. But no one really appreciated that until 1980.
 
2013-03-21 10:21:30 AM  

This text is now purple: What everyone missed is that Vietnam saw all of these as colonial wars -- they fought against both Frances, the US, Cambodia, and China. They kicked out both the Kuomintang and the communist Chinese. They remained allies with the USSR because Russia didn't want a colony -- Russia wanted an asian Cuba. Unlike the others, Vietnam wasn't fighting ideological wars, it was fighting a very long war for independence. But no one really appreciated that until 1980.


Exactly - my basic take on it was simple - they hated us, and wanted us gone, just like we would want foreign occupiers gone if they were in America. They found out that if they said some Marxist crap, the Russkis would give them guns - and not send troops. And believe me - man, woman, and child they hated us, and wanted us gone.
 
2013-03-21 10:24:30 AM  

sodomizer: What are al-Qaeda up to these days? Haven't heard much from them, certainly not a 9/11.


What does that have to do with Iraq?  There was no Al-Qaeda in Iraq until we invaded, and they took advantage of the recruiting opportunity we created.

How many Scuds has Iraq lobbed at Israel lately? It seems they've shut down their WMD program for good this time, instead of re-starting it every decade. Wonder how that happened.

Were they lobbing and Scuds at Israel at any time other than when we were fighting a war with them?

How much funding do terrorists get from Iraq these days? I see... they seem underfunded of late. Maybe there's a connection.

The big funding was coming from Saudi Arabia, our alleged ally.
 
2013-03-21 10:28:22 AM  
Meh, everybody is looking back and saying "How could we have been so stupid, well we won't do that again.", just like they said after Vietnam. Guess what, in another 20-30 years the US will probably be stupid and make exactly the same mistake again, it is inevitable.

The problem is we are the biggest baddest military force on the planet and the urge to use that force to accomplish goals set by politicians who don't have to pay the price is irresistible.  So, sure you farkers are saying now that it was a mistake and we won't do that again, but just like after Vietnam you will forget, you will think you can win, and will continue to spend this countries blood and resources in third world shiat holes. It is inevitable.
 
2013-03-21 10:29:51 AM  

DamnYankees: To quote from John Cole, since it sums me up as well:

I see that Andrew Sullivan was asked to list what he got wrong about Iraq for the five year anniversary of the invasion, and since I was as big a war booster as anyone, I thought I would list what I got wrong:

Everything.

And I don't say that to provide people with an easy way to beat up on me, but I do sort of have to face facts. I was wrong about everything.

I was wrong about the Doctrine of Pre-emptive warfare.
I was wrong about Iraq possessing WMD.
I was wrong about Scott Ritter and the inspections.
I was wrong about the UN involvement in weapons inspections.
I was wrong about the containment sanctions.
I was wrong about the broader impact of the war on the Middle East.
I was wrong about this making us more safe.
I was wrong about the number of troops needed to stabilize Iraq.
I was wrong when I stated this administration had a clear plan for the aftermath.
I was wrong about securing the ammunition dumps.
I was wrong about the ease of bringing democracy to the Middle East.
I was wrong about dissolving the Iraqi army.
I was wrong about the looting being unimportant.
I was wrong that Bush/Cheney were competent.
I was wrong that we would be greeted as liberators.
I was wrong to make fun of the anti-war protestors.
I was wrong not to trust the dirty smelly hippies.

I mean, I could go down the list and continue on, but you get the point. I was wrong about EVERY. GOD. DAMNED. THING. It is amazing I could tie my shoes in 2001-2004. If you took all the wrongness I generated, put it together and compacted it and processed it, there would be enough concentrated stupid to fuel three hundred years of Weekly Standard journals. I am not sure how I snapped out of it, but I think Abu Ghraib and the negative impact of the insurgency did sober me up a bit.

War should always be an absolute last resort, not just another option. I will never make the same mistakes again.


Don't worry about, you and 90% of the US were wrong. Don't beat your self up about it, because in 20-30 years we will have forgotten the lesson of Iraq, just like we forgot the lesson of Vietnam and we will do this shiat all over again.
 
2013-03-21 10:29:57 AM  

Silverstaff: EvilEgg: I fail to see how anyone cannot regard this adventure as a mistake. We went to find WMDs, we didn't find any. That is a mistake.

The only real question, if there is one, is what kind of mistake was it? Was a intelligence mistake, a diplomatic mistake, or a political mistake.

Yes.

It was an intelligence mistake: we built a war on shaky, poorly sourced intelligence.

It was a diplomatic mistake: we completely threw out diplomacy in a mad rush to war.

It was a political mistake: The Shrub wanted to prove he was better than daddy and actually get Hussein, and wanted to bang the war drums and be the Wartime President. . .never mind we were already fighting in Afghanistan.

It was a goddamn trillion dollar mistake.  If we'd taken that trillion dollars and spent it on other things we could have had a farking moonbase, men on Mars, a vastly updated and upgraded transportation and communications infrastructure, totally overhauled and upgraded public schools, and the best healthcare system on the planet. . .instead we got debt, a looted war-torn crater where Iraq was, defense contractors lining their pockets, and thousands upon thousands of bodies.


Ahh, you miss the "good news" Shrub and his loose cannon frat bros PROFITED in the $Billions.
Farkin' week ass GOP and McCain had their lunch stolen and all we got in return is the poison pill, Palin.
 
2013-03-21 10:33:10 AM  

Slaves2Darkness: Meh, everybody is looking back and saying "How could we have been so stupid, well we won't do that again.", just like they said after Vietnam. Guess what, in another 20-30 years the US will probably be stupid and make exactly the same mistake again, it is inevitable.

The problem is we are the biggest baddest military force on the planet and the urge to use that force to accomplish goals set by politicians who don't have to pay the price is irresistible.  So, sure you farkers are saying now that it was a mistake and we won't do that again, but just like after Vietnam you will forget, you will think you can win, and will continue to spend this countries blood and resources in third world shiat holes. It is inevitable.


USA, the best war machine money can buy.

/for rent, highest bidder, oil, opium, pipelines, gold, what you need?
 
2013-03-21 10:34:04 AM  

dr_blasto: Bravo Two: Unfortunately, when you have people that control the sources of information, and feed bad intel to the president, the president isn't going to go out of his way to go around them and fact-check what his advisers are spouting. It's their job to, you know, get it right.

I recall that efforts to produce contradictory intelligence to the whole WMD thing were roundly dismissed by the administration. Was it Cheney or Bush that refused to see anything that showed Iraq to be a non-threat? Who really knows. In the end, between the WMD lie and the allusions to 9/11 support that were non-existent showed the administration was going in regardless of reason, logic or conscience. Tenet gets a medal for contributing to the fiasco, thousands of Americans die, tens of thousands have their lives destroyed and nearly one million Iraqis freed from their existence.

At this point, it would take a pretty big leap for me to believe Bush was fed bad intelligence and is this sort of child-like innocent in the fiasco. We went to war; we should not have--if it was because he was legitimately misinformed, that is still on him.


I don't doubt that Bush wanted to show the world he had balls bigger than his father, and thought it was the right thing to do, despite whatever reasons it was pushed in the first place.

I guess my point is that the whole thing was a cluster from the top down, and no one, except maybe bush, was really honest about wanting to go to war, even if doing so was the wrong thing.
 
2013-03-21 10:34:35 AM  

Silverstaff: It was a goddamn trillion dollar mistake.  If we'd taken that trillion dollars and spent it on other things we could have had a farking moonbase, men on Mars, a vastly updated and upgraded transportation and communications infrastructure, totally overhauled and upgraded public schools, and the best healthcare system on the planet. . .instead we got debt, a looted war-torn crater where Iraq was, defense contractors lining their pockets, and thousands upon thousands of bodies.


SIX trillion, by the time it's all totted up, according to a new study.

so yeah - there's education, universal healthcare, infrastructure (and the jobs that go with it) all down the farking tubes. no republican should EVER be allowed to speak on an economic issue again after this war.
 
2013-03-21 10:36:18 AM  

gja: dr_blasto: The question that remains is "why?"

Three words:
Follow......the........money.


Three letters:
O....I.....L
 
2013-03-21 10:41:14 AM  
What's wrong with some people? Iraq and Afghanistan have sucked the life blood out of our economy and worn down our military. What have we gained from it? We killed Bin Laden I guess, but thousands of American lives for this on guy, how good a deal was that?
 
2013-03-21 10:43:10 AM  
It's funny how the Republicans had their big nominating convention and their most recent two term President was nowhere to be seen, and was never mentioned.  He's a pariah in the party now.  I think they're afraid to put him in front of a crowd with an open mike, he might break down crying, or worse, start telling the truth.  I'd LOVE to hear GWB go off on a thirty minute rant about his time in office, with no one able to interrupt him.
 
2013-03-21 10:44:33 AM  

cirrhosis_and_halitosis: Three letters:
O....I.....L


This phrase is a useful trigger for determining who in the thread is part of the derp brigade.

What country do you think trades internationally for Iraqi oil the most?
 
2013-03-21 10:45:18 AM  

Incontinent_dog_and_monkey_rodeo: I'd LOVE to hear GWB go off on a thirty minute rant about his time in office, with no one able to interrupt him.


There's always this:

3.bp.blogspot.com
 
2013-03-21 10:47:40 AM  
purdeyisa10:

When Gen Butler earned the two Medals of Honor, it was for fighting in Veracruz Mexico and Haiti. I wonder how many people alive today even knew we had troops fighting in those areas?

Hell, I just found out the other day we had U.S. troops in Siberia during the Bolshevik Revolution.
 
2013-03-21 10:54:32 AM  

Close2TheEdge: The Muthaship: Got rid of Saddam, and gave them a chance to have a country governed in whatever way the people want.  Awful.

Which likely would have happened by itself without the cost of BILLIONS TRILLIONS of dollars and THOUSANDS more soldiers have come home to commit suicide than were killed in battle of lives.

Yes, it was awful


Fixed that for everyone
 
2013-03-21 10:57:16 AM  

FlashHarry: Silverstaff: It was a goddamn trillion dollar mistake.  If we'd taken that trillion dollars and spent it on other things we could have had a farking moonbase, men on Mars, a vastly updated and upgraded transportation and communications infrastructure, totally overhauled and upgraded public schools, and the best healthcare system on the planet. . .instead we got debt, a looted war-torn crater where Iraq was, defense contractors lining their pockets, and thousands upon thousands of bodies.

SIX trillion, by the time it's all totted up, according to a new study.

so yeah - there's education, universal healthcare, infrastructure (and the jobs that go with it) all down the farking tubes. no republican should EVER be allowed to speak on an economic issue again after this war.


You still call Bush a Republican?
I think not.
He and Rove did give us a lesson on how to steal the whole shiateree, so there is that.
I do not buy into the crap about you only have the two choices.
It can be beaten.
 
2013-03-21 10:57:31 AM  
By the way - it is not to say that America could have avoided every single war we've ever gotten into. I have trouble seeing any way we could have avoided the two wars against British occupation. The Civil War, tragically, seems like it would have been nearly impossible to avoid, the way things went down. And I can even give us a pass for getting into WWII - the world was on fire, and our house was going to burn one way or the other.
But that's about it. I can't think of any other wars we've fought that were anything but rackets to enrich and empower a wealthy and powerful few. And we never, ever,ever seem to learn.
 
2013-03-21 11:00:37 AM  

whyRpeoplesostupid: Close2TheEdge: The Muthaship: Got rid of Saddam, and gave them a chance to have a country governed in whatever way the people want.  Awful.

Which likely would have happened by itself without the cost of BILLIONS TRILLIONS of dollars and THOUSANDS more soldiers have come home to commit suicide than were killed in battle of lives.

Yes, it was awful

Fixed that for everyone


Thank you, but you forgot to point out that the Bush administration gutted veterans benefits to pay for the war and the Obama administration has not increased funding enough. I know we are in hard financial times but our soldiers deserve to be taken care of and if that means we have to raise tax to do it then by GOD it is our Patriotic duty to raise taxes.
 
2013-03-21 11:04:45 AM  

The Irresponsible Captain: What's wrong with some people? Iraq and Afghanistan have sucked the life blood out of our economy and worn down our military. What have we gained from it? We killed Bin Laden I guess, but thousands of American lives for this on guy, how good a deal was that?


Except Bin Laden was killed for relatively little money (no idea how much that kind of thing costs, but other than some wear-and-tear on equipment, the only big ticket item would be 1 trashed helicopter, right?) by a few people and some good old-fashioned intelligence work. It had nothing to do with Iraq whatsoever. Also, it was done under Obama.
 
2013-03-21 11:10:19 AM  
Thousands of Americans volunteered to go kill the men who murdered thousands of Americans on 9-11. Instead they were sent by oil men to fight an oil war.

I'd call that a crime. And America let those rich oil men do it. I'd call that a crime, too.
 
2013-03-21 11:18:25 AM  
I was raised a Republican and both I and my very conservative father thinks it was a mistake.
 
2013-03-21 11:20:51 AM  
That's why they sent our guys over there under equipped, with out enough body armor or plating and other supplies.  Because not utilizing the military industrial complex supply store draws attention away from the conspiracy.
 
2013-03-21 11:22:47 AM  

Slaves2Darkness: Thank you, but you forgot to point out that the Bush administration gutted veterans benefits to pay for the war and the Obama administration has not increased funding enough. I know we are in hard financial times but our soldiers deserve to be taken care of and if that means we have to raise tax to do it then by GOD it is our Patriotic duty to raise taxes.


I agree we need to raise taxes, and I agree we need to take better care of our returning veterans.

But Obama can't just snap his fingers and increase funds.  We need Congress to do that and the GOP-led House doesn't give a damn about increasing this funding.
 
2013-03-21 11:24:08 AM  

TheShavingofOccam123: Thousands of Americans volunteered to go kill the men who murdered thousands of Americans on 9-11. Instead they were sent by oil men to fight an oil war.

I'd call that a crime. And America let those rich oil men do it. I'd call that a crime, too.


It's always been a double lie. Back in me and my dad's day, the bosses told us that the Russians were coming to get us, and if we didn't get our asses shot off in irrelevant shiatholes like Korea and Vietnam, they'd be marching up Fifth Avenue and Wilshire Blvd. any day now. meanwhile, the same lying asshole were telling poor, starving Ivan that all he had to do was starve, live under the threat of nuclear annihilation , and get HIS ass shot off in some shiathole like Afghanistan (while meanwhile trying to scratch a living out of his shabby beet-patch) and the capitalist running dogs would be defeated forever, and the Worker's Paradise would come to be. And all those bums, in Washington, Moscow and Wall street lved high, while poor men died and got crippled for their wealth, power, and comfort.
Today, we convince poor dumb Cletus. Trayvonne, and Ricardo that they need to go fight "terrorism" in some other shiathole on the other side of the planet, unless they want to wake up living under Sharia law tomorrow, and have Taylor Swift put into some Imam's harem and forced to wear a veil (probably not a bad idea, but that's for the "Entertainment" tab).Meanwhile, of course, poor broke, unlaid Achmed is being preached to by some smelly Mulah that all he has to do is strap some dynamite on and blow himself to hell enough times,and the infidel dogs and the modernism they represent will magically vanish from the world, and Allah's eternal paradise will be ushered in. And the liars get rich and powerful, and the little assholes die.
So it goes, and so it WILL go until we all wise the f**k up.
 
2013-03-21 11:24:15 AM  

This text is now purple: cirrhosis_and_halitosis: Three letters:
O....I.....L

This phrase is a useful trigger for determining who in the thread is part of the derp brigade.

What country do you think trades internationally for Iraqi oil the most?


The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq were a means for establishing more military bases in the Middle East  to secure the area for western oil companies.  Just as old British Empire military adventures were a means of opening and securing areas for their corporate interests so it is in the age of American Empire.

Do you think that the US would give a flying Fark about the Middle East if they didn't have large oil reserves?  Have you also noticed that the only African countries that our government has taken an interest in also coincidentally have large undeveloped oil reserves?

Our economy is entirely based on oil, and it will be obtained by any means necessary...
 
2013-03-21 11:27:37 AM  
I was opposed from the start enough to write to both my senators and congressman. I still have their lame assed replies.
 
2013-03-21 11:39:17 AM  

dr_blasto: EvilEgg: I fail to see how anyone cannot regard this adventure as a mistake. We went to find WMDs, we didn't find any. That is a mistake.

The only real question, if there is one, is what kind of mistake was it? Was a intelligence mistake, a diplomatic mistake, or a political mistake.

It wasn't a mistake. It was completely intentional and the administration knew what it was doing. The administration misled Congress and the general population intentionally. I think they even lied to themselves at various stages. The question that remains is "why?"


Was arguing about Iraq on another forum; one of the Freepers there said that the invasion was a just cause to free the Iraqi people, and that Saddam really had chemical weapons that he covertly shipped to Syria so we couldn't find them. Then he went on to say that the war was a failure because Obama and the 'leftist Democrats' withdrew the troops and let the US be a failure in front of the world.

I replied that whatever he's smoking must be good quality.
 
2013-03-21 11:41:06 AM  
It's only a mistake if you didn't profit from it.
 
2013-03-21 12:05:56 PM  

Cloudchaser Sakonige the Red Wolf: I was raised a Republican and both I and my very conservative father thinks it was a mistake.


Unquestioning allegiance is a big mistake.
'Course, It took 30-40 years to figure that out myself.
Took my Dad 50-60, so I take that as progress.

The second big mistake is not prosecuting the falsifiers, like a rabid dog, hunt and destroy.
 
2013-03-21 12:23:15 PM  
Here is a great article, from CNN no less, detailing the entire Iraq farce.

I must also expose myself to inevitable ridicule by stating that I am a 9/11 truther.  It took me a lot of reading, watching, and wrestling with my conscience to finally be convinced but now there is no doubt in my mind that Cheney and cohorts got the ball rolling to enable their agenda.
 
2013-03-21 12:26:09 PM  
 
2013-03-21 12:33:10 PM  
Third time is the charm...
 
2013-03-21 12:33:11 PM  
Seemed appropriate for the helping select the right word.  Fiasco is still in the running.art.penny-arcade.com
 
2013-03-21 12:47:50 PM  
My college roommate once said he, "would probably be a liberal if [he] wasn't planning on making a lot of money." It's been awhile, but I believe that was the exact quote. Of course that required him to abandon everything that would have made him the least bit liberal. It was college and I guess he was figuring things out. Unfortunately it involved him running around laughing and cheering in the common room as my entire floor watched that first news coverage of war raging in the background. I'd never been so disgusted.
 
2013-03-21 01:09:53 PM  

cirrhosis_and_halitosis: This text is now purple: cirrhosis_and_halitosis: Three letters:
O....I.....L

This phrase is a useful trigger for determining who in the thread is part of the derp brigade.

What country do you think trades internationally for Iraqi oil the most?

The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq were a means for establishing more military bases in the Middle East  to secure the area for western oil companies.  Just as old British Empire military adventures were a means of opening and securing areas for their corporate interests so it is in the age of American Empire.

Do you think that the US would give a flying Fark about the Middle East if they didn't have large oil reserves?  Have you also noticed that the only African countries that our government has taken an interest in also coincidentally have large undeveloped oil reserves?

Our economy is entirely based on oil, and it will be obtained by any means necessary...


You're leaving out the war for oil in Libya.

It's no coincidence that Wikileaked State Department cables show that Gaddafi had been threatening to throw western oil firms out of his nation just before we invaded and forced a regime change.
 
2013-03-21 01:10:22 PM  

Terrydatroll: bulldg4life: Terrydatroll: If it was a mistake then it was a mistake by all of America. No one that I personally know was against it when it started and it was all but lauded by the entire country, even hard core democrats in Washington. Now after 10 years...sure..hindsight says we could have done more good by spending that money and effort in Afghanistan, but at the time it seemed the right thing to do. Second guessing it now is nothing more than self destruction. The problem with Iraq was that once it was started then it had to be finished regardless of the right/wrong of the war. Some wars a re justifiable, some are not, but they can all be classified as mistakes if examined closely enough.

Sure, other than the dozens and dozens of anti-war protests for the several months between September and March in the run up to the invasion.

You personally knew some goddamn idiots.

Either that or you were surrounded by idiots. I think the latter.


To be fair "scared idiot" was the order of the day. Scared of "the terr-wrists" scared of being called "unpatriotic" if you spoke out. There was plenty of idiocy to go around and it wasn't just the uneducated and war mongers.

We need to learn how to do things outside of spastically trying to stave off the fear du jour. we let fear drive us and that drives us to do some very idiotic things.
 
2013-03-21 01:28:42 PM  
OK, so what are we little folk gonna do about Mr Bush?
 
2013-03-21 01:32:34 PM  

johneee: Except Bin Laden was killed for relatively little money (no idea how much that kind of thing costs, but other than some wear-and-tear on equipment, the only big ticket item would be 1 trashed helicopter, right?)


You're forgetting the boots on the ground.  There is the cost of training them and the benefits they are entitled to for their service of course, but also the possibility of losing some of them on any operation like this.  There were no US casualties during Operation Neptune's Spear fortunately, but service people are lost on missions like this all the time.  Do you consider those deaths the cost of just that one mission, or do you "amortize" them over the missions those people completed before their number came up?
 
2013-03-21 01:46:46 PM  

Terrydatroll: If it was a mistake then it was a mistake by all of America. No one that I personally know was against it when it started and it was all but lauded by the entire country,


No one?  No one at all?

I had the reverse experience; no one in my social circle saw the action against Iraq as anything but a personal project of Bush and his handlers.  You are making the distinction between the invasion of Iraq and the action taken against Afghanistan, right?
 
2013-03-21 01:52:51 PM  

The Muthaship: Got rid of Saddam, and gave them a chance to have a country governed in whatever way the people want.  Awful.


A++++++. Thrilled by the quartz movement of the "Rolex". HIGHLY RECOMMENDED.
 
2013-03-21 02:25:19 PM  

The Muthaship: Got rid of Saddam, and gave them a chance to have a country governed in whatever way the people want.  Awful.


Yeah... what a clown.
 
2013-03-21 02:27:21 PM  

rjkline: amazing how liberals have been proven wrong in almost everything they get their skirts up about after a little time passes...........just a sad group of proven losers.......almost funny


I live with my mom - Too much, too soon.  If you slow your roll a bit and ramp up the ambiguity I think your next attempt should be a winner.
 
2013-03-21 02:29:48 PM  
Old poll (circa 2005), but I doubt attitudes have changed much. Even back then, these percentages are stunning:

64 percent believe that Saddam Hussein had strong links to Al Qaeda
47 percent believe that Saddam Hussein helped plan and support the hijackers who attacked the U.S. on September 11, 2001
44 percent actually believe that several of the hijackers who attacked the U.S. on September 11 were Iraqis

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/iraq-911-al-qaeda-and-w eapons- of-mass-destruction-what-the-public-believes-now-according-to-latest-h arris-poll-54105582.html

And in an informal poll (margin of error +/- potato):

100% of the people who believe Iraq had anything to do with 9/11 are idiots.

Was Saddam an a**hole?  Sure.  Is the world in general better off without him?  Probably.  But regardless of the outcome, the American public was deceived into going to war.

I have a rat in my house.  I call an exterminator.  He convinces me to spend a lot of money to tent the house because there "might" be more than one rat, but he doesn't even look around the house to confirm if he's right.  Worse, he makes up evidence to convince me my house is swarming with rats.  Well when all is said and done, the rat gets dead because of the tenting, but does that make what the exterminator did right?
 
2013-03-21 03:04:27 PM  
Why are people still posting Gallup polls like they're accurate?
 
2013-03-21 03:06:12 PM  

Lee Jackson Beauregard: randomjsa (farkied: "Holy fnck you're an idiot." - Nina_Hartley's_Ass): 25 million people are free and the world is a better place.

I've got some ocean front property in Tikrit Province that I've been looking to sell.


The Bush-Cheney war machine made Hell Flame Wars look competent and effective.

/obobscure: obscure
 
2013-03-21 03:10:28 PM  

Ned Stark: Thunderpipes: Hitler didn't attack us either. Maybe we should have not gotten involved.

Liberals, imagine them in charge during WWII? Fark would be rallying behind Hitler, after all, he didn't like Jews either.

Germany declared war against the united states in WW2. Not the other way round.


Thunderpipes gets a troll grade, on a scale of 1 to 10, of minus eleventy thousand.

When you're too lazy even to bother with getting the historical details correct, that's weak sauce.

www.justsaypictures.com
 
2013-03-21 03:45:48 PM  
i.imgur.com
 
2013-03-21 04:47:48 PM  

weltallica: [i.imgur.com image 504x351]


Since other than Colin Powell not a single member of the Bush cabinet served in combat at any point in their lives, that applies either way.

And considering that the Iraqis still live in daily fear of arrest and torture at the hands of the government, and random suicide bombings for a bonus, I'm not sure that cartoonist understands the definition of 'liberated'.
 
2013-03-21 05:02:58 PM  

weltallica: [i.imgur.com image 504x351]


Before, after, and during the war I was on active duty...and saw (still see) the people that opposed the invasion of Iraq as patriots.  Supporting the troops means not putting them in harms' way unnecessarily.

Iraqi liberation, huh?  I guess we really did free the shiat outta them.
 
2013-03-21 05:18:37 PM  
I have one point to make.

It is impossible to 'give' someone freedom, they MUST take it themselves, or it is meaningless. A dog on a long leash is not free.
 
2013-03-21 06:07:00 PM  

rjkline: amazing how liberals have been proven wrong in almost everything they get their skirts up about after a little time passes...........just a sad group of proven losers.......almost funny


A little time is all that revisionists like you need.

"The reason we do not learn from history is because
  We are not the same ones who learned the last time...."
 
2013-03-21 07:27:53 PM  
We woulda won if they had just let the B-52s go all in with carpet bombing on their major cities. They would have surrendered for sure.

USA USA USA!
 
2013-03-21 07:33:22 PM  

doyner: weltallica: [i.imgur.com image 504x351]

Before, after, and during the war I was on active duty...and saw (still see) the people that opposed the invasion of Iraq as patriots.  Supporting the troops means not putting them in harms' way unnecessarily.

Iraqi liberation, huh?  I guess we really did free the shiat outta them.


We freed hundreds of thousands of them from the pain of living.
 
2013-03-21 08:39:33 PM  

Thunderpipes: Hitler didn't attack us either. Maybe we should have not gotten involved.

Liberals, imagine them in charge during WWII? Fark would be rallying behind Hitler, after all, he didn't like Jews either.


i1024.photobucket.com

Can't believe you managed to bring so much stupid together in one post.
 
2013-03-21 10:16:38 PM  

EvilEgg: I fail to see how anyone cannot regard this adventure as a mistake. We went to find WMDs, we didn't find any. That is a mistake.

The only real question, if there is one, is what kind of mistake was it? Was a intelligence mistake, a diplomatic mistake, or a political mistake.


It was a decade long Christmas if you were an oil company, a security contractor or an arms dealer.
 
2013-03-22 05:11:19 PM  
I spent a 15 month deployment there in 2006-07 and it didn't take me long back then to realize that we had no real purpose for being there other than digging ourselves out of the shiathole we jumped into. That's why I never let my head get full of those grandoise ideas of being there to "protect our freedoms" and other bullshiat like that.
 
2013-03-22 09:22:23 PM  

Mr. Breeze: I spent a 15 month deployment there in 2006-07 and it didn't take me long back then to realize that we had no real purpose for being there other than digging ourselves out of the shiathole we jumped into. That's why I never let my head get full of those grandoise ideas of being there to "protect our freedoms" and other bullshiat like that.


Serious question. Did you sign up before or after the invasion of Iraq? The reason I ask is that I think it takes a special kind of blinders to have decided to join up after it became clear that the government was pushing the country into a war that it had no business waging and was clearly not in the interest of anybody except Bush for revenge and military suppliers for profits. He'll, it's not even clear it was for oil companies as no significant supply was secured for them.

On the other hand, I have lots of respect for those who signed up immediately after 9/11 and through the beginning stages of the Afghanistan war. Patriotism is not something I personally think much of, but I can respect the desire to protect and defend the country and to answer the call to arms when the country was clearly under attack.

So I wonder when you signed up. And if it was after the Iraq invasion, or even during the lead up to it, I am curious why. Especially considering that your blinders are off now, why do you think it took you a 15 month deployment to figure it out?
 
2013-03-24 06:52:51 PM  

AverageAmericanGuy: Mr. Breeze: I spent a 15 month deployment there in 2006-07 and it didn't take me long back then to realize that we had no real purpose for being there other than digging ourselves out of the shiathole we jumped into. That's why I never let my head get full of those grandoise ideas of being there to "protect our freedoms" and other bullshiat like that.

Serious question. Did you sign up before or after the invasion of Iraq? The reason I ask is that I think it takes a special kind of blinders to have decided to join up after it became clear that the government was pushing the country into a war that it had no business waging and was clearly not in the interest of anybody except Bush for revenge and military suppliers for profits. He'll, it's not even clear it was for oil companies as no significant supply was secured for them.

On the other hand, I have lots of respect for those who signed up immediately after 9/11 and through the beginning stages of the Afghanistan war. Patriotism is not something I personally think much of, but I can respect the desire to protect and defend the country and to answer the call to arms when the country was clearly under attack.

So I wonder when you signed up. And if it was after the Iraq invasion, or even during the lead up to it, I am curious why. Especially considering that your blinders are off now, why do you think it took you a 15 month deployment to figure it out?


July 19, 2001. I re-enlisted in 2006 and again in 2009 (which was post Iraq). Re-enlisted based on a desire to continue military service. I initially supported the invasion because of the same reason that most of Congress did. I never have or will buy into the "Bush revenge" argument, or the "war for oil" argument.

However, during that 15 month deployment I realized that we largely farked Iraq due to piss poor understanding of the culture and a lack of planning. That we were pissing away untold billions on what turned out largely to be a business venture for the defense industry. I also met people in that time Iraqi's, Indians, and other middle eastern people who changed my opinion of that corner of the world. A lot of people who have never left the "West" cannot understand it.

I don't have a problem with continued military service because in spite of the best efforts of politicians, we can do good things in the world. It is also a very stable way to support a family of 4, including two children with Cystic Fibrosis. I will re-enlist again next year because at this point in my life and given my position in the military, I can actually do some good while doing something tangible and useful for the country.
 
2013-03-24 08:11:28 PM  

Mr. Breeze: AverageAmericanGuy: Mr. Breeze: I spent a 15 month deployment there in 2006-07 and it didn't take me long back then to realize that we had no real purpose for being there other than digging ourselves out of the shiathole we jumped into. That's why I never let my head get full of those grandoise ideas of being there to "protect our freedoms" and other bullshiat like that.

Serious question. Did you sign up before or after the invasion of Iraq? The reason I ask is that I think it takes a special kind of blinders to have decided to join up after it became clear that the government was pushing the country into a war that it had no business waging and was clearly not in the interest of anybody except Bush for revenge and military suppliers for profits. He'll, it's not even clear it was for oil companies as no significant supply was secured for them.

On the other hand, I have lots of respect for those who signed up immediately after 9/11 and through the beginning stages of the Afghanistan war. Patriotism is not something I personally think much of, but I can respect the desire to protect and defend the country and to answer the call to arms when the country was clearly under attack.

So I wonder when you signed up. And if it was after the Iraq invasion, or even during the lead up to it, I am curious why. Especially considering that your blinders are off now, why do you think it took you a 15 month deployment to figure it out?

July 19, 2001. I re-enlisted in 2006 and again in 2009 (which was post Iraq). Re-enlisted based on a desire to continue military service. I initially supported the invasion because of the same reason that most of Congress did. I never have or will buy into the "Bush revenge" argument, or the "war for oil" argument.

However, during that 15 month deployment I realized that we largely farked Iraq due to piss poor understanding of the culture and a lack of planning. That we were pissing away untold billions on what turned out largely to be a business ...


Fair enough.
 
2013-03-24 09:52:24 PM  
i834.photobucket.com
 
2013-03-25 10:46:11 AM  

Mr. Breeze: AverageAmericanGuy: Mr. Breeze: I spent a 15 month deployment there in 2006-07 and it didn't take me long back then to realize that we had no real purpose for being there other than digging ourselves out of the shiathole we jumped into. That's why I never let my head get full of those grandoise ideas of being there to "protect our freedoms" and other bullshiat like that.

Serious question. Did you sign up before or after the invasion of Iraq? The reason I ask is that I think it takes a special kind of blinders to have decided to join up after it became clear that the government was pushing the country into a war that it had no business waging and was clearly not in the interest of anybody except Bush for revenge and military suppliers for profits. He'll, it's not even clear it was for oil companies as no significant supply was secured for them.

On the other hand, I have lots of respect for those who signed up immediately after 9/11 and through the beginning stages of the Afghanistan war. Patriotism is not something I personally think much of, but I can respect the desire to protect and defend the country and to answer the call to arms when the country was clearly under attack.

So I wonder when you signed up. And if it was after the Iraq invasion, or even during the lead up to it, I am curious why. Especially considering that your blinders are off now, why do you think it took you a 15 month deployment to figure it out?

July 19, 2001. I re-enlisted in 2006 and again in 2009 (which was post Iraq). Re-enlisted based on a desire to continue military service. I initially supported the invasion because of the same reason that most of Congress did. I never have or will buy into the "Bush revenge" argument, or the "war for oil" argument.

However, during that 15 month deployment I realized that we largely farked Iraq due to piss poor understanding of the culture and a lack of planning. That we were pissing away untold billions on what turned out largely to be a business ...


Thank You for your service.
 
Displayed 174 of 174 comments

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


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report