Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

Thanks to Bush, bad could get worse


luckydevil

Recommended Posts

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ideas_opinions/story/361795p-308183c.html

Thanks to Bush,

bad could get worse

AMMAN, Jordan - The war in Iraq has hardly made the Mideast more stable. Assurances from the Bush administration must now be held to a new post-Iraq standard because just about everything Washington said was happening (WMD) and would happen (an easy occupation) has turned out to be utterly false.

Just take a look at the region, setting aside for a moment the stalled Israeli-Palestinian peace plan. In some respects, the war is not going badly here in Jordan. Emigrés from Iraq are buying real estate here, a lot of what the military needs there comes through here and the port of Aqaba is busier than ever.

But in Iraq, Iran has extended its influence, if not outright control, into the south, where Shiites are predominant and oil is found in abundance.

The north of Iraq is already a functional Kurdish republic, with oil. The Sunni middle around Baghdad has no oil but lots of aggrieved people - a vast recruiting ground for Al Qaeda.

Al Qaeda's influence may be growing in Saudi Arabia, and some recent terrorist attacks seemed to have been inside jobs. The Saudis, too, have a Shiite minority and they're right next to Iraq and Iran. The Saudis are not happy with how the war in Iraq has made their lives even more difficult.

In Syria, the dictator, Bashar Assad, is under great pressure to produce the killer or killers of Lebanon's former prime minister, Rafik Hariri. Trouble is, some of the culprits might be in Assad's own family - if not himself. It's hard to see the outcome to this mess - maybe sanctions imposed by the UN. Washington's primary concern is Assad's willingness to allow terrorists to cross into Iraq from his country.

The U.S. would love him to go, but he could be replaced by the radical Muslim Brotherhood. Going from a secular dictatorship to a radically religious one is not progress.

One could almost forgive Bush for waging war under false or mistaken pretenses had a better, more democratic Middle East come out of it. But just as the 1991 Gulf War introduced an element of instability in the region, so might this one do something similar. A Shiite arc is forming, Iraq is infested with terrorists and coming apart, Syria might be going from bad to worse, and Saudi Arabia is complaining loudly that the war's only winners are the Shiites and Iran. From here, it looks like a war that is already going badly for America could go even worse for much of the Middle East.

Mission Accomplished?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why do people keep bringing up the Mission Accomplished thing? The president was referring to the War with Iraq's Military. Not the Terrorists. So in essence, the Mission was accomplished. I tell you what, I wish that some people could have been with me as we were going into Baghdad, Seen the faces of the people that we were helping. The outpour of support that we were getting. It needed to be done, we did it. Now we are setting up a democratic government, where there has never been one. Hello, I guess the USA formed over night. :doh: Anyway as I continue my early hours rant (0245), The war that we are fighting now is not against the Iraqi's, It is against the Syrians, Saudis, Iranians, etc.. that are taking the opportunity to attack us away from the USA. If that is what it takes to keep them from attacking us on our own soil, killing our innocent wives, children, parents etc.. then so be it. But is it a coincidence that we have not had an attack on our homeland since 9/11 and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq? NOPE..

I have said this before, and I will continue to say this, If we withdraw from Iraq, we have not only let the enemy win, we have let the over 2,000 Soldiers, Airmen, Marines and Sailors that have died, die for nothing. We must continue the course and finish what we have started.

I know that I am going to catch flak for this post, I meant no disrespect towards anybody, I am just an ex-soldier that is speaking his mind while at work in the wee hours of the morning.

GOD Bless America and our troops that are in Harms way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have said this before, and I will continue to say this, If we withdraw from Iraq, we have not only let the enemy win, we have let the over 2,000 Soldiers, Airmen, Marines and Sailors that have died, die for nothing. We must continue the course and finish what we have started.

What exactly do we have to finish? Is liberal democracy still the goal?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What exactly do we have to finish? Is liberal democracy still the goal?

We have to ensure that the government is put into place and the military properly trained to sustain the security of the country. So far it looks like the first is coming around, but they both will take some time. Yes, we have trained thier military, however we have not trained nearly enough of them. The last thing we want to do is set a timetable for withdraw, and let the terrorist play possum. Then they take over the government and guess what, we now have an entire country that is run by terrorists. Kind of defeats the purpose..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then they take over the government and guess what, we now have an entire country that is run by terrorists.

agreed
The last thing we want to do is set a timetable for withdraw,

Unfortunately, I believe that's going to happen regardless on how long we stay there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Luckydevil, if someone handed you a million bucks, you'd probably complain about having to carry it.

You characterize our actions in Iraq as introducing an element of instability into the region, but (A) what we're introducing is change, and (B) the place was hardly stable to begin with. The military mission was accomplished. The mission of establishing an autonomous democratic Iraqi government was accomplished. The people there voted in elections that actually mattered for the first time in decades. Perhaps you don't remember the euphoria of Iraqis after Baghdad fell, where they were ripping up posters of Saddam or hitting it with their shoes. Perhaps you don't remember the euphoria of people dancing in the streets and proudly showing off their ink-stained fingers.

There is a lot of work yet to be done, and nobody ever said it was easy. As a matter of fact, President Bush said explicitly that it is going to take a long time. And we've made mistakes. But there has never been a mistake-free war -- and as wars go, the casualties in this one have been tremendously low. And those challenges mentioned in your post are just that -- challenges.

One other thing. I'm a Marine. Airborneskins, Sarge, NavyDave and myself share not only military service, but a common outlook on this war. We see it in a way that you refuse to see it, or are incapable of seeing it. And if all you can think about Bush is he lied, then you'll never see him as the President that liberated Iraq. (Go ahead, ask an Iraqi.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Luckydevil, if someone handed you a million bucks, you'd probably complain about having to carry it.

You characterize our actions in Iraq as introducing an element of instability into the region, but (A) what we're introducing is change, and (B) the place was hardly stable to begin with. The military mission was accomplished. The mission of establishing an autonomous democratic Iraqi government was accomplished. The people there voted in elections that actually mattered for the first time in decades. Perhaps you don't remember the euphoria of Iraqis after Baghdad fell, where they were ripping up posters of Saddam or hitting it with their shoes. Perhaps you don't remember the euphoria of people dancing in the streets and proudly showing off their ink-stained fingers.

There is a lot of work yet to be done, and nobody ever said it was easy. As a matter of fact, President Bush said explicitly that it is going to take a long time. And we've made mistakes. But there has never been a mistake-free war -- and as wars go, the casualties in this one have been tremendously low. And those challenges mentioned in your post are just that -- challenges.

One other thing. I'm a Marine. Airborneskins, Sarge, NavyDave and myself share not only military service, but a common outlook on this war. We see it in a way that you refuse to see it, or are incapable of seeing it. And if all you can think about Bush is he lied, then you'll never see him as the President that liberated Iraq. (Go ahead, ask an Iraqi.)

Define liberated. They are indeed free of Saddam Hussein, but under their new constitution, they will be living in a theocratic republic, where hard-line islam is law, which by the way is a lot harsher of a set of laws then before. So how is that "liberation" You are so fixated on Saddam Hussein, that you are willing to look past everything else because he doesn't happen to be in power anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wish that some people could have been with me as we were going into Baghdad, Seen the faces of the people that we were helping. The outpour of support that we were getting. It needed to be done, we did it. Now we are setting up a democratic government, where there has never been one. .

Be realistic. You came in with guns, grenades, tanks, and fighter jets. How genuine do you think "The outpour of support that we are getting." is? I favor the blue colar & military side of conservatism (as opposed to the yuppie, country club side of conservatism), but politically the military is completely indoctrinated at times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Define liberated. They are indeed free of Saddam Hussein, but under their new constitution, they will be living in a theocratic republic, where hard-line islam is law, which by the way is a lot harsher of a set of laws then before. So how is that "liberation" You are so fixated on Saddam Hussein, that you are willing to look past everything else because he doesn't happen to be in power anymore.

Liberated = being freed from the tyranny of dictatorship and all that went with it (rape, torture, murder) and being able to vote and have a say in how their country will be run.

You have no idea how their constitution is going to be manifested. It says a lot about you that you assume the worst. In case you hadn't noticed, over 70% of Iraqi voters approved that constitution, in a voter turnout that should make America blush. It's a constitution that was written by Iraqis and approved by Iraqis. Frankly, I don't think your opinion means much to them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You characterize our actions in Iraq as introducing an element of instability into the region, but (A) what we're introducing is change,

Change can mean instability. I am not down with the idea of change for the sake of change.

I believe a secular dictatorship is better than a Islamo-fascist regime( though not a much better one). The last thing I want in the region is Iran 2.0.

I also believe that there are more effective ways of undermining Islamic fundamentalism.

the place was hardly stable to begin with.

Agreed. However, I believe the war only exacerbated the problem.

There is a lot of work yet to be done, and nobody ever said it was easy. As a matter of fact, President Bush said explicitly that it is going to take a long time. And we've made mistakes. But there has never been a mistake-free war -- and as wars go, the casualties in this one have been tremendously low. And those challenges mentioned in your post are just that -- challenges.

Right

Agreed with everything you posted. However, I believe our efforts will ultimately be futile. I find nation-building to be rather utopian

Odd, how so many conservatives like you have embraced a Wilsonian foreign policy.

One other thing. I'm a Marine. Airborneskins, Sarge, NavyDave and myself share not only military service, but a common outlook on this war. We see it in a way that you refuse to see it, or are incapable of seeing it.

I can post numerous commenters who have and are serving in the military that opposed/oppose the war. However, you and I know that is a waste of time

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How genuine do you think "The outpour of support that we are getting." is?

How genuine the outpouring of support was would be directly related to the level of angst the people lived with daily under Saddam's regime. Do you think they loved that life? Then you would predict that their outpouring of support for American troops would be minimal, or not genuine. But if they couldn't stand that life, then the outpouring of support would be tremendous, enthusiastic and genuine.

Be realistic. You came in with guns, grenades, tanks, and fighter jets.

A population under the heel of a dictator does not have any guns of its own. We came in with arms they didn't have to fight a battle they couldn't fight. Another reason for their outpouring of support to be enthusiastic and genuine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BlueTalon,

Being a bleeding heart and all

Did you support the Kosovo war? Would you support intervention in places like Somalia?

Or in other words do you support humanitarian intervention?

If so, I can respect that. While I disagree with it, I'm sympathetic to that viewpoint.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was for the war in Iraq, but now I really don't know why we went after them, and not another more realistic threat?

Why not N. Korea, Syria, or Iran? If we wanted to make the world a more peaceful place.... why Iraq? I understand the whole world said they had WMD... but wasn't the other countries listed above more of a threat? I do not blame Bush for all the problems... I just question the choice of target. I think most of our effort should have been towards protecting the country "in-house" first.... getting illegals out, and closing our boarders.

I also think that no matter what happens terrorist will continue to do what they do best in the middle east.... Bomb their own people, as well as others. A U.S. presence makes no difference either way in their decisions.

I do believe we have to at least get everything in place before we can leave IRAQ.... otherwise... we are just asking for more trouble with the "world". We just need to keep the people over there in prayer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BlueTalon,

Being a bleeding heart and all

Did you support the Kosovo war? Would you support intervention in places like Somalia?

Or in other words do you support humanitarian intervention?

If so, I can respect that. While I disagree with it, I'm sympathetic to that viewpoint.

I do support humanitarian intervention, depending on how it's done. I think there wasn't as much justification for Kosovo as for Somalia or Iraq or Afghanistan -- in Kosovo there weren't nearly as many people killed as in Iraq, for example. And we fought that war in mindbogglingly strange way. We sided with the KLA, one of the biggest group of thugs and drugrunners in eastern Europe. We did airstrikes from 15,000 feet and higher, with basically no results until we started targeting civilian facilities. We had no troops on the ground at all (except for those two soldiers that got themselves captured on the border). But anyway...

In Somalia, Rwanda, and other places in Africa where there have been tribal genocides, I'd be all for going in and doing whatever is necessary to stop the genocide.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Be realistic. You came in with guns, grenades, tanks, and fighter jets. How genuine do you think "The outpour of support that we are getting." is? I favor the blue colar & military side of conservatism (as opposed to the yuppie, country club side of conservatism), but politically the military is completely indoctrinated at times.

Trust me man, the outpore of support was genuine. Especially in the South. I wish that you guys could have seen what Saddam put these people through. I am being realistic, Around Baghdad, especially in the Sunni Triangle, we obviously did not get much fan fare. But around the rest of the country we did.

I am not so sure what you are getting at with the "politically the military is completely indoctrinated at times." quote.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do support humanitarian intervention, depending on how it's done. I think there wasn't as much justification for Kosovo as for Somalia or Iraq or Afghanistan -- in Kosovo there weren't nearly as many people killed as in Iraq, for example.

To be clear

Your support for the Iraq war was based( or primarily motivated) on humanitarian grounds?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be clear

Your support for the Iraq war was based( or primarily motivated) on humanitarian grounds?

No. The humanitarian aspect was just one of many reasons for supporting the Iraq war. Saddam was a supporter of terrorism. Iraq had links to Al Qaeda (though not to 9/11). And to the best of our knowledge at the time, they had an active and ongoing WMD program.

In retrospect, the WMD intel was faulty. But the war had the additional benefit of exposing massive corruption at the UN and in several countries. If I'd known that was a possible outcome, I would have supported the war for that reason as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can I please read the same rehashed crap again please. The previous 32 times hasnt sunk in. There is OBVIOUSLY nothing going on in Iraq that is worth reporting.

_________________________________________________________________

For those of you int he media that don't think anything good is happening.. You are on the internet right now.. Go to google and type: Current Iraqi projects. You can steal other peoples articles and nobody would know.. cause they arnt being printed.

Contractors begin receiving payments in dinars instead of dollars

03 November 2005 (PortAl Iraq) -- Iraqi contractors supporting Operation Iraqi Freedom are now counting dinars instead of dollars on payday, according to Multi-National Force - Iraq (MNF-I).

Baghdad Real Estate Market is Booming Despite Escalating Violence

RISMEDIA, 31 October 2005 (Knight Ridder Newspapers) -- A five-bedroom river-view house sold three years ago for $45,000. Two years ago it sold again, this time for $80,000. It sold a third time in August. The latest price tag? $300,000.

Iraq receives more electricity, bus station and community center

23 October 2005 (PortAl Iraq) -- The Australian Army's Al Muthanna Task Group (AMTG) recently completed three civil military cooperation projects in Iraq.

Basrah fire station renovated

20 October 2005 (PortAl Iraq) -- The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Gulf Region South provided oversight for Central Fire Station of Basrah City renovations using Iraqi Reconstruction Funds. The work started in early May and was completed October 9.

WB UN Procurement - Iraq, Education

02 November 2005 (Asia Times) -- World Bank United Nations Development Business Service Procurements - October 2005

Challenges facing the Education Sector

31 October 2005 (Baghdad: Al Sabah newspaper) -- Dr. Abdul Falah AL Sudani, Minister of Education, disclosed that Iraq is in need of 5,000 new schools as a result of an increase in the population, this will rise to 6,000 in the next 3 years.

*** hmmm, i thought we bombed them all to death going by the media ****

Iraq ISX joins the Asian-European Stock Exchange Association

23 October 2005 (Baghdad: Al Sabah newspaper) -- Iraq has obtained membership of the Asian-European Stock Exchange Association, headquartered in Turkey, and includes 90 Asian and European countries.

Iraq confident of fresh hope for oil exports

01 November 2005 -- Iraq expects oil exports to rise by about 300,000 barrels per day (bpd) daily by January, when a new government is elected with authority to decide on foreign involvement in the sector, the head of Iraq's Energy Council said recently.

New contracts for the import of sugar signed by the Ministry of Trade

23 October 2005 (Baghdad: Al Sabah newspaper) -- The Ministry of Trade has signed new contracts with foreign companies to import 400,000 tons of sugar. The increasing demand for this product and the chronic shortage being faced by consumers is raising the price of this important commodity.

Japan is heavily involved in the reconstruction of Iraq's health sector

29 October 2005 (Baghdad: Al Sabah newspaper) -- The Ministry of Health obtained a grant plus a loan of $6 billion from Japan to improve the deteriorating health sector in Iraq.

There, todays forgotten good stories.. please continue with the:

Is it worth it.

It will only get worse.

The Sudan and Bosnia and Afghanistan yes.. Iraq no.

Bush misspelled Iraq it should have been an N.

Haliburton

Breeding ground for Alqaeda (they were shrinking before the war) LOL!

70% showed up to vote.. Much less the the 100% that voted FOR Saddam (at gunpoint).

ugh!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The outpouring was genuine and not a result of bowing to the conquerer. I say this because I'm friends with an embedded Brittish journalist who's been in Iraq. He was there before the war, during the war, and following it. The internal hatred, by many, of Sadam was very real. The gratitude for ousting him was equally real. However, that gratitude can be quickly spent. Remember how quickly we went from having the world's sympathy after 9/11 to being the most "hated" nation in the world? The gratitude and pro-American fervor has subsided inside Iraq from what I've been told. Perhaps that is due to cynicism, perhaps it's due to unrealistic hopes for change, or perhaps it's because in real terms things are not better yet. In fact, in terms of personal safety, one can argue that it is even worse today and more random than it was before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Define liberated. They are indeed free of Saddam Hussein, but under their new constitution, they will be living in a theocratic republic, where hard-line islam is law, which by the way is a lot harsher of a set of laws then before. So how is that "liberation" You are so fixated on Saddam Hussein, that you are willing to look past everything else because he doesn't happen to be in power anymore.

No way would I ever want to live under Sharia, or any other form of Islamic-law code. But I'm neither a Muslim nor an Iraqi, for which reasons I don't get a vote and my opinion means nothing. Other than insisting that a basic standard of human rights is mantained, I don't see how it's the job of the U.S. to dictate the final form of the Iraqi Constitution or government. The idea here was to allow them the freedom that democracy affords for the people of Iraq to rule themselves, not to be ruled by proxy from the U.S. I find it funny that the folks most likely to accuse Bush of wanting to take over, colonize, etc. Iraq are also the first ones to complain when he doesn't do just that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why do people keep bringing up the Mission Accomplished thing?

Because it illustrates an administration who's plan for the war ended with a successfull "sale" of the war.

It conjures up an image in which the plan for the war makes it's way to the securing of Baghdad, and then when the Colonel in charge on the ground turns to the next page, it's blank.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the place was hardly stable to begin with.

Now that's just not true.

Iraq under Saddam may not have been a good place, but it was really stable. Few political things are more stable than a really brutal dictatorship. About the only way they change is when the dictator dies. (And the dictator knows it, which is why they work really hard to make sure they eliminate all potential replacements.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No. The humanitarian aspect was just one of many reasons for supporting the Iraq war. Saddam was a supporter of terrorism. Iraq had links to Al Qaeda (though not to 9/11).

Define "links", because EVERY SINGLE COUNTRY in the Middle East had "links" to Al-Qaeda. If anything, Iraq was the LEAST LIKELY to side with Hussen out of everying in the ME except for the House of Saud.

And to the best of our knowledge at the time, they had an active and ongoing WMD program.

Not true. That is what our president told us, and it is what our politicians have stated, but it is not what the weapons inspectors deduced. In fact, once the weapons inspectors were allowed back into Iraq, the rationale for war was eliminated. Saddam was contained, and he was nowhere NEAR the threat our government told us he was.

In retrospect, the WMD intel was faulty.

It wasn't that the WMD intel was faulty, but they didn't OBJECTIVELY process the information. They only took information from one side, and used leaks to the press based on known false reports to fear the American public into thinking Iraq was a threat to our livelyhood. because of the Plame investegation, we now know this.

There was a direct link from the VP's office to the New York Times, and his thoughts were placed on the front page of the paper through various propagandized means. They misrepresented the intel as fact, and neglected to even mention that some of the intel had completely differing opinions as to the factual evidence. Hell, Bush told America Saddam was building a nuclear weapon, and that he was going to give one to Al Qaeda so they could attack us. Not only was this an outrageous lie, but it lacked even a basic truth.

But the war had the additional benefit of exposing massive corruption at the UN and in several countries. If I'd known that was a possible outcome, I would have supported the war for that reason as well.

Huh??? The war was good because it exposed the Oil for Food program??? You can't be serious :doh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...