This war is a good thing

[ClakarEQ]

I'll apologize up front for my blatent words, that and for another damn "war" thread. So, I'm Sorry folks.

I'm doing this with a tinge of sarcasm but can't these lazy vets suck it up and get a fucking job?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17315490/site/newsweek/

What do they want, dollars on a platter handed to them, they sound like the inner city poor folks wanting handouts?

I could make an analogy of these vets, the 200,000 from *nam and the "unknown" number from the middle east, being similiar to civilians wanting "handouts".

I won't even bring up the medical fiasco going on where a two star just got canned ( http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17402872/ )

I can hardly wait for the 100k+ middle east vets that come back to find out how screwed over they are going to be.

By now you all should know, I'm all for the war... NOT.

I need to find that post from a few of you die hard "this war is good" folks from a couple years back. It was a great thread where the die-hards are saying shit like, we'll only be there through '08 and then only have about 10k of us there, and this war is "cake", and we'll win you'll see, this war is good for america.

I hope all you vets bend the fuck over because uncle sam has something special for a good percentage of you.

/rant ramble off

In truth I feel for every single one of these folks and the intent of my post is to further prove what a big mistake this war has been, that and to infuriate a few key folks here.
EDIT
I used folks too much, that last scentence folks=vets

[Jay]

[ClakarEQ]

http://namelesstavern.net/viewtopic.php ... 8&start=50

Well it was Lyion and I didn't intend to single him out, sorry :\

I guess I'm looking to a war lover to sell me this war again, sell it to me so I'll buy it, sell it in such a way that ANY aspect of this is good, ANY PART OF IT.

I want to think people aren't dieing in vein, pointlessly, someone help me find a light at the end of the tunnel.

In more thinking, did the military that died in Vietnam, were their deaths "pointless"? Did any death from that war make 1 grain of sand difference in the end? How did the all those dead folks change anything?

How are all the dead folks, are own, the iraqis, how will any of it make a difference in the middle east?

Sell it to me, I want to buy.

[Lyion]

No, it's quite ok to single me out, as long as you have points, which you do. This was my original post you are linking.

There won't be a draft, so it's all for naught. That'd be political suicide. The only ones promoting a draft are the Democrats, citing the thin state of our military which is a good tactic, but not realistic.

Next year we'll start withdrawing from Iraq and by 2008 I predict we'll be at less people in Iraq than we had permanently stationed in West Germany in the 80s.

I do take umbrage with you labeling me a warmonger. I'm also not trying to sell to anyone the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan are for the right reasons. People should make up their own minds.

Your main point is about the loss of life. On a given four year stretch, even without a war, we lose a good chunk of military people because the job is dangerous. Are those deaths meaningless, because they didn't happen in the field?

This post was merely a guess about what will happen in Iraq. Actually, we did draw down about 10% of our troops, going from 145,000 to 130,000, pre surge. However, the military has continued to run this as a DOD sanctioned force which is our big impediment to ending this conflict, in my opinion. Again, thoughts I've posted repeatedly, if you want to search this forum.

When I made that post, I had hoped the Iraqi Security forces would be doing much better than they are. I still see us largely drawing down next year.

In regards to the conflict, what some of us hope for are democracies as bastions of freedom in the Middle East, in a place other than Israel, with a goal of stability and longterm peace for our kids. I think we have a chance with both Afghanistan and Iraq.

Do you have any friends in the military, or anyone in your family who is or has served over there? I'd ask them the same questions, and see what they think.

In 2003, I thought the reasoning was sound, as obviously did the US Senate, Democrat and Republican who voted 95-0 to authorize force, I certainly have many issues with the way these conflicts were run. I've posted these over and over, but many don't care for rational discourse, and some try to blatantly hijack it.

Finally, are you interested in opinions, or are you just angry and want to lash out? I can't help you if it's the latter, but feel free to join the chorus of snarky comments.

I'll be glad to discuss why my viewpoints are what they are, as are many others, on both sides of the debate. What we don't need are any more angry types on this forum, though.

[Tossica]

Just say you were wrong Lyion. Say you were wrong for supporting Bush and you were wrong for supporting the war. Say it!

[Lyion]

You can't handle the truth!

Interesting tangent here..

WASHINGTON - Republican presidential contender John McCain a staunch backer of the Iraq war but critic of how President Bush has waged it, said U.S. lives had been "wasted" in the four-year-old conflict. Democrats demand the Arizona senator apologize for the comment

[Tossica]

Fuck McCain.

[Zanchief]

Just say you were wrong Lyion. Say you were wrong for supporting Bush and you were wrong for supporting the war. Say it!

[Lueyen]

I need to find that post from a few of you die hard "this war is good" folks from a couple years back. It was a great thread where the die-hards are saying shit like, we'll only be there through '08 and then only have about 10k of us there, and this war is "cake", and we'll win you'll see, this war is good for america.

I remember expressing that confrontation with Sadam's regime and the Iraqi military protecting it (specifically the elite republican guard) would be relatively easy and quick (which it was). I also remember discussing a conversation I had with a former Iraqi citizen who had relatives in Iraq at the onset where he compared Iraq to a sewer pipe which we were about to open, and when the shit started flowing out, fearing we wouldn't be able to shut the lid quickly enough. I'll also note that at the time very little attention was payed by both camps, to what the outcome would be after Sadam's government was removed.

[Arlos]

I think you can find posts from me back then stating that it would be a debacle, and that it would by no means be as easy as the neocons were claiming. Unfortunately, my predictions turned out all-too-accurate, despite the derision I received at the time from Lyion and his ilk.

Likewise, I can remember the same crowd's ABSOLUTE certainty that WMDs would be found rapidly upon entering the country, and when that didn't happen, they were just as convinced that we'd find them in a month or two. Funny how none of them have ever admitted how delusionally wrong they were...

-Arlos

[Markarado]

I don't see how that was delusional. The evidence pointed in that direction.

[Lyion]

I think you can find posts from me back then stating that it would be a debacle, and that it would by no means be as easy as the neocons were claiming. Unfortunately, my predictions turned out all-too-accurate, despite the derision I received at the time from Lyion and his ilk.

Nobody claimed it was easy. The invasion itself was actually too quick. As was the turnover and the idiotic disbanding of the Republican Guard.

Likewise, I can remember the same crowd's ABSOLUTE certainty that WMDs would be found rapidly upon entering the country, and when that didn't happen, they were just as convinced that we'd find them in a month or two. Funny how none of them have ever admitted how delusionally wrong they were...

The same group of us who were pissed that we had a 9 month buildup on Iraq's border giving him enough time to destroy, hide, or move his entire WMD stock 10 times over?

There was solid intel that he had them. Perhaps the Intel was old. Perhaps the almost one full year we give him notice for invasion was enough for him to be wise enough to move/remove/whatever. We won't know for a while, most likely, although there was no arguing he had them in the past.

The Senate authorized the war 95-0 based on this information. It's too bad instead of admitting we made mistakes by waiting, or the intel was bad, it becomes a partisan issue. Nobody cares about facts, it's all about the power grab now. I guess that's just how DC operates.

[Arlos]

Well, you can be assured that had I been a Senator at the time, it would have been 94-1. For Afghanistan, you bet I would've voted to go. Iraq, not a chance in hell.

As for the Intel, as has been learned and published since, 1) Almost all of it came from political refugees with axes to grind, 2) None of it was cross-verified, 3) outfits like the one in the pentagon were submitting intelligence reports that were completely at odds with reality, in order to feed the justification for war. (see: their backing of the niger story, the Atta in Prague story, etc. etc.) Remember, when our inspectors got done after the invasion, they said ther was NO evidence whatsoever that Saddam had even re-STARTED WMD production following the first gulf war, so the suggestion that he had gazillion tons of it and hid it all during that 9 months is disingenuous at best.

Further proof of the inadequacy of intel is shown by looking back at the pre-war briefings. Remember when the neocon brigade were quoting exact tonnages of substances they claimed Saddam had? When they showed photographs of things they claimed were WMD factories? Or the "mobile weapons labs" that turned out to be nothing of the sort? Had we a COMPETANT intelligence apperat, and one that was allowed to be independant, and not either pressured to provide data backing a specific viewpoint, or even if not pressured, forced to send their data to groups like the pentagon one that DID slant it to a specific viewpoint... Well, maybe we would have been certain of the real story, hmmm?

Ultimately, regardless of the state of intel or any other such consideration, I lay the debacle that is this war squarely at Bush's feet. He employed in key positiuons in his administration (including VP), neocons who had been openly advocating for invading Iraq for years. (See: PNAC's report, and its signatories, and how many of them were part of the initial Bush team). Furthermore, from the time immediately after 9/11 Bush was looking for excuses to go to war with Iraq. Policy was decided on in absentia of data, as shown in Clarke's book. Further proof can be seen by watching all of the speeches and statements from the administration (and their unofficial mouthpiece, Fox News), either outright stating there were links between 9/11 and Iraq, or strongly implying such links existed, when in fact there were no such links whatsoever.

The war in Iraq is not only an unnecessary war, it is one that has signifcantly and materially damaged the US in many ways. First, it creates vast numbers of terrorists, and will continue to do so, regardless of if the country spirals further into civil war. Second, the military buildup for Iraq prevented us from sending sufficient force to actually pacify Afghanistan, capture the Taliban and, you know, capture Osama, the one who DID attack us. Third, the threat of military action was far more viable when it wasn't demonstrably obvious that we are incapable of using more military force (beyond airstrikes) because not only is most of our military tied down in 1 spot, recruiting is vastly behind schedule, despite the fact they've significantly relaxed standards. Fourth, the diplomatic damage has been incalculable, and has been compounded by moronic decisions like Gitmo, and what should be the national shame of Abu Gharib, and the administration's obvious support for using torture. Fifth, oh, that minor subject of how many hundreds of billions of dollars spent that could have gone to far better things?

So, yes, I am still daily amazed when I see people continue to defend the war, despite what a debacle it has been from the outset. (beyond the purely military campaign to destroy the iraqi army) I, and others, were right from the very beginning in our predictions of this war, despite the outright derision of many here at the time. Well guess what, all of you were wrong. Laughably, tragically wrong.

-Arlos

[Markarado]

.... You're a funny guy Arlos... Very naive, but funny..

[Evermore]

:lol: .... You're a funny guy Arlos... Very naive, but funny..

Why do you say Arlos is naive? he is correct. Let me add this, no one is even considering the after-war costs that will keep piling up. For instance from the 1993 Desert Storm campain, we spend 2 billion a year taking care of the wounded. this is expected to go on from the time the war ended up to 45 years out. atm this war is now expected to cost the taxpayers 2 trillion dollars, this is not including the estimated 7 billion a year and rising costs of taking care of our own wounded/disabled. All this at a time when costs were expected to rise anyway due to the baby boomers reaching retirement.

[Agrajag]

The same group of us who were pissed that we had a 9 month buildup on Iraq's border giving him enough time to destroy, hide, or move his entire WMD stock 10 times over?

There was solid intel that he had them. Perhaps the Intel was old. Perhaps the almost one full year we give him notice for invasion was enough for him to be wise enough to move/remove/whatever. We won't know for a while, most likely, although there was no arguing he had them in the past.

I'm sure that when we do find some underground bunker somewhere in the middle of Iraq full of WMDs that everyone opposed to the war will say we planted them there. Just my prediction.

[ClakarEQ]

Hey guys, I tried posting from my home PC last night but it wouldn't let me log on even after several attempts at password resets.

Anyway, I'm not lashing out, I tend not to lash out towards anyone, that is why I apologized as my intent wasn't to target Lyion but was to have someone look me in my virtual face, and tell me, this war is good for america and the world as a whole.

I want someone to tell me that the lives lost are worth something, that the cause and effect is justified.

My cousin participated in both middle east wars, he was a career military man. Then he broke. One of the final straws was his dear john letter from his wife whom he had 3 childeren with. From that point he began a downward spiral where the military IMHO did not give a shit for him as a person. I won't bore you with all the details but I'll tell you this. He has suffered greatly from this war, and that ripple effects him and his kids for years to come, forever. He had all sorts of asperations, most / all of us do. The military killed those asperations using the attitude of "get over it", "put it behind you".

He works a home depot now, as a stock guy, has a hard time keeping his head on straight, struggles supporting his now 5 kids (got remarried and two other kids were "made").

I look back from when he and I were kids, playing "army" in the backyard. Watching us both grow up, seeing him with such pride and honor and then to see him squashed by our government.

He is in legal battles with them for his benefits because they (our wonderfull government) feel as though even with his 14 or so years of service, and that he officially "retired" from the military, they won't give him all the "benefits" they won't work with him on his PTSD (or whatever you call post tramatic stress disorder). I don't have all the details and this is just "one guy".

All I really want is for you "military boys", you guys that thought this was all good, was the right thing, that we will "win", to tell me that same thing NOW, today.

I want you to tell me Kaharts(sp) friend, Lyions friends, the mothers, brothers, dads, and sisters aren't dieing pointlessly. Tell me they have died for a cause worth dieing for.

Every time I put gas in my car I feel like I should be putting a gun to my head with one bullet in the pistol, spinning it every time, saying to myself, yes God, these people are dieing for me, and it is worth it, 'click'.

No I'm not suicidal LOL but I'm really trying to drive home the point.

I know there is a lot more I can do and I plan to try and do "something", write congress a letter, etc. But you and I both know, without money, you can't do shit in our country today. We have become what we've hated most. I'm not saying we are Nazi Germany, that type of event is impossible today. The game has changed along with how it is played, but I do think we are morphing into something we never wanted to be.

/ramble off

[Zanchief]

The same group of us who were pissed that we had a 9 month buildup on Iraq's border giving him enough time to destroy, hide, or move his entire WMD stock 10 times over?

There was solid intel that he had them. Perhaps the Intel was old. Perhaps the almost one full year we give him notice for invasion was enough for him to be wise enough to move/remove/whatever. We won't know for a while, most likely, although there was no arguing he had them in the past.

I'm sure that when we do find some underground bunker somewhere in the middle of Iraq full of WMDs that everyone opposed to the war will say we planted them there. Just my prediction.

So in the unlikely case that someone uproots some WMDs the reason for going to war is going to be shifted BACK to the whole UN sanction thingy?

Fair enough, doesn't change what the outcome was, which I predicted from the beginning. Go back dig up my posts from 4 years ago and you'll see I was very consistently saying that there is no way you are going to destroy a belief with guns and tanks. I was absolutely right. Bush is waging a war on a doctrine and he thinks people are going to be convinced of the generosity and greatness of the USA by killing as many Iraqis as he can find. His war obviously had the exact opposite effect.

For the record I thought Saddam had WMDs. But if he destroyed them in the months before the invasion, that would have been a really good reason to threaten invasion, and not actually do it.

[Evermore]

All I really want is for you "military boys", you guys that thought this was all good, was the right thing, that we will "win", to tell me that same thing NOW, today.

Clarke you know this isnt possible. there was no winning this from the inception.

[Xaiveir]

:lol: .... You're a funny guy Arlos... Very naive, but funny..

How the hell is he Naive? He was very spot on, on his points.


And your earlier post about the evidence led us to believe there was WMD there. What evidence? Has you, or anyone on the board actually seen any evidence? Outside of George (yeah i dont call him president anymore), and fun bois saying "there is WMD, trust us!" , "we have proof, we have proof, the proof is there, trust us!", have you ever seen anything at all?

No i have not, neither have you. They used our anger of the bombings of the towers, to fuel our feelings on Iraq. To keep that fury up, they made up lies about the WMD.

It is you who are Naive Mark, if you believe we have been lied to by the government about the war.

[Harrison]

For the record I thought Saddam had WMDs. But if he destroyed them in the months before the invasion, that would have been a really good reason to threaten invasion, and not actually do it.

I'm with you there. He had them, of that I doubt anyone will disagree with. Where they went is the question.

Buried in a bunker? Sent to another country? Destroyed?

They are most likely not there now, however. If they are, we suck ass for not finding them.

[Lyion]

And your earlier post about the evidence led us to believe there was WMD there. What evidence? Has you, or anyone on the board actually seen any evidence? Outside of George (yeah i dont call him president anymore), and fun bois saying "there is WMD, trust us!" , "we have proof, we have proof, the proof is there, trust us!", have you ever seen anything at all?

No i have not, neither have you. They used our anger of the bombings of the towers, to fuel our feelings on Iraq. To keep that fury up, they made up lies about the WMD.

Nobody made up lies. There was no jury rigging of intel. The only jury rigging we know of was a left wing Ambassador who abused his wife's position to get a fake trip that actually verified Iraq was trying to buy yellow cake, and then used his covertly supported fake trip to attack the administration via public NY Times article on a supposedly secret trip.

Most of the intel for the WMDs came from President's Clintons staff, and from non political appointees, as well as from foreign sources. Perhaps Sandy Berger was kind enough to shred the real proof in his housecleaning of top secret docs expedition.

Also, there is the small matter of Saddam actually gassing the Kurds, and his plants still being operational, and his snubbing his nose at the UN sanctions that were ridiculously hard to get passed, and generally ignored.

I can fully understand those who feel this war was wrongly fought. Based on the simple facts, we certainly don't have the validation for it. However, unfortunately I think it's one we would've ended up fighting eventually.

[Zanchief]

his snubbing his nose at the UN sanctions that were ridiculously hard to get passed, and generally ignored.

Is that the same UN that voted against the US invasion of Iraq thus making it a violation of international law?

Hrmm it's hard to hold the standards of the UN in such high regard when you completely ignore them.

[Burgy99]

I find it funny that the right wings are trying to say that the intel from WMDs came from Clinton's staff. You're meaning to tell me that Rumsfield allowed 3 years to go by, and starting a massive war with out verifying the information first? This sounds more like some one trying to dodge the bullit and not take responsibility for their massive fuck up.

[Gaazy]

what a never-ending arguement. I dont quite support the war, but I sure as hell support the troops, if that makes any sense.