Anxious and Weary of War, G.I.'s Face a New Iraq Mission

[UltraQuiet]

There you go again. At least you're predictable. Let's run down your list of digs and distortions:

(UQ)That's your opinion. Thankfully it doesn't mean much.
It means just as much as yours.

Never said it did.

(sMiLeYz)There are no weapons of mass destruction, no links to al qaeda -- (UQ)Prove it.
We don't have to prove anything. We didn't start a war by making unsupported claims.

You can't prove anyone started a war by making unsupported claims, if you want to be accurate in your posts, you must prove it.

(UQ)Some do and some don't but to say "the people don't want us there" is certainly inaccurate.
Prove it. Oops, I meant, the proportion of people who want us there is speculation. sMiLeYz's statement is a reasonable assessment of what we've seen; it is as accurate as many of your claims.

No actually it isn't. "the people" indicates a totality. That is not even close to being accurate. Sorry

(UQ)Some of the world resents us and always has. We shouldn't really care and it should never stop us from doing what needs to be done.
Speaking of accuracy, here's a case in point. It is undeniable that most of the world was opposed to our invasion of Iraq. It is equally undeniable that the level of resentment towards the U.S. has skyrocketed since Bush-lite saddled up. He has been a complete disaster to our image in the world.

Again I say "so what." Maybe you live your life based on what others might think of you. Other's are content to do what they think is right.

(UQ)They didn't really want to go to begin with and they always b!tch about coming back. If deployments were driven by the moaning and bitching of the junior enlisted/officers nobody would ever go anywhere. Well, except maybe Thailand.
Not always true. In WWII, for example, many young men were eager to go to war, even lying about their age so they could serve. Why? Because our cause was right and noble and just. We had real bad guys who were invading other countries, and we were gallantly rushing to their defense. Having a just cause makes all the difference in the world. As far as I can remember, the only similar war since then was the first Gulf War, when Iraq invaded Kuwait. I wonder how the "moaning and bitching" then compared to now.

There were also plenty of people who didn't want to go. There was also ZERO response from the people of this country after 9/11 wrt military service. As far as comparing this GW to the last, the bitching looks to be about the same with the exception of during this war there doesn't seem to be as many people refusing to go.

(sMiLeYz)Real men and women from the US and Iraq died because of a lie by our great leader. - (UQ)Yes they did, that's what happens in war. When you can prove the lie, then we'll have an issue.
Really?!?! You agree that our troops "died because of a lie by our great leader"? Enlightenment at last!

OK, probably not.

Definitley not

The fact is that these men and women did not have to die. They were put in harm's way based on lies. You can quibble all you want about whether Bush knew he was lying, or whether he was an incompetent dupe, but either way, these people died for a lie.

As far as proving the lie, we don't have to. This isn't a court of law. This is the court of public opinion, where verdicts are rendered based on the persuasiveness of the evidence. The evidence is overwhelming, and it keeps getting worse. Bush killed almost two hundred Americans, and killed and maimed thousands of Iraqi's based on false claims. More Americans (and Iraqis) are dying every day. Sooner or later, Bush will have to account for this deception.

Well I couldn't care less about the court of public opinion, a court that is so easily manipulated that it makes it all but irrelevant. I am waiting, and will continue to wait for "real" evidence. Anyone who has such evidence, please step forward. Anyone else is cordially invited to keep their ballwasher in the "shut" position.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: burnedout
No Americans die in either Bosnia or Kosovo each day. We have been at both locations longer than 11 weeks and some form of order has been established.

Great news, happy to hear that.

And by the way, who has conclusively proven that there were lies used getting us into Iraq?

Next, you state: "We're losing fathers, sons, and brothers every day because Bush & Co created a mess without a viable exit strategy. It didn't have to be this way." Neither should Bosnia-Herzogovina "have to be this way"...........for 8 straight years.

Additionally, if one looks on the USEUCOM website, the so-called "exit strategy" is laid out in black and white. Simply put, there is none. Face it, all U.S. Presidents, with the exception of old lamer Jimmy, have employed U.S. forces, in one capacity or another, in operations outside the United States since the days of FDR. Whether each action was fully justified is another matter of discussion.

That is exactly the point of this thread. The invasion of Iraq was NOT justified. Our fathers and sons and brothers are dying as a result of a lie.


Re. this incessant noise about "proof", let me quote myself:

Originally posted by: Bowfinger
The fact is that these men and women did not have to die. They were put in harm's way based on lies. You can quibble all you want about whether Bush knew he was lying, or whether he was an incompetent dupe, but either way, these people died for a lie.

As far as proving the lie, we don't have to. This isn't a court of law. This is the court of public opinion, where verdicts are rendered based on the persuasiveness of the evidence. The evidence is overwhelming, and it keeps getting worse. Bush killed almost two hundred Americans, and killed and maimed thousands of Iraqi's based on false claims. More Americans (and Iraqis) are dying every day. Sooner or later, Bush will have to account for this deception.

From a political perspective, it is up to Bush to prove he wasn't lying, not the other way around.

 

[UltraQuiet]

Re. this incessant noise about "proof", let me quote myself:

Which translated means - - I don't have any proof but that isn't going to keep me from continually running my mouth about things I am ignorant of and cannot prove.

All you have to do is prove it and I'll be "enlightened" and posting the same things you are. Otherwise the invitation I extended to you and everyone else in my last post still stands.

 

[burnedout]

That is exactly the point of this thread. The invasion of Iraq was NOT justified. Our fathers and sons and brothers are dying as a result of a lie.

In your own mind, the invasion of Iraq was NOT justified. In your own mind, men are dying as a result of a lie. Such rhetoric is however immaterial. No one has yet proven or disproven "the lie". At anyrate, neither you nor I nor anyone else on this board can accurately judge at this point in time whether or not Dubya's decision was in the best interests of the country or not.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: Ultra Quiet
Well I couldn't care less about the court of public opinion, a court that is so easily manipulated that it makes it all but irrelevant.

Something we can agree on. For example, just look at how easily public opinion was manipulated into supporting the illegal and unjust invasion of Iraq. In another thread, look at how easily it's been manipulated into believing there is an Iraqi connection to 9/11, that we have found WMDs in Iraq, that Iraq used WMDs against us in the Iraqi invasion.

Unfortunately for the rabid right, Bush doesn't get the luxury of ignoring public opinion. He faces an election in about 17 months, and this Iraq debacle is ready to blow up in his face.

I am waiting, and will continue to wait for "real" evidence.

I'll put aside the sparring for a moment and ask you a sincere question. What would constitute "real" evidence in your opinion? From my perspective, the evidence is overwhelming: no weapons found, forged documents, unsupported interpretations (e.g., the infamous aluminum tubes), suppression of contrary evidence, intelligence officials complaining that they were pressured to slant evidence, other officials conceding that they slanted the story to make it sell better, etc. On the spectrum between the evidence we have now, and a confession by Bush that he lied, where does your standard for "real" evidence fall? This isn't a troll, I am really curious.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: burnedout
In your own mind, the invasion of Iraq was NOT justified. In your own mind, men are dying as a result of a lie. Such rhetoric is however immaterial. No one has yet proven or disproven "the lie". At anyrate, neither you nor I nor anyone else on this board can accurately judge at this point in time whether or not Dubya's decision was in the best interests of the country or not.

Fair enough. I don't agree that these discussions are immaterial, but I won't quibble the point here. You and I will have to agree to disagree.

However, I will extend to you the same invitation I gave etech (a post or two above this one): what would constitute valid evidence to you? What level of "proof" are you looking for? I am sincerely curious.

 

[burnedout]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: burnedout
In your own mind, the invasion of Iraq was NOT justified. In your own mind, men are dying as a result of a lie. Such rhetoric is however immaterial. No one has yet proven or disproven "the lie". At anyrate, neither you nor I nor anyone else on this board can accurately judge at this point in time whether or not Dubya's decision was in the best interests of the country or not.

Fair enough. I don't agree that these discussions are immaterial, but I won't quibble the point here. You and I will have to agree to disagree.

However, I will extend to you the same invitation I gave etech (a post or two above this one): what would constitute valid evidence to you? What level of "proof" are you looking for? I am sincerely curious.

If I told you that I voted for Gore, neither you nor anyone else on this board would believe me - at this point in time.

Valid evidence? Documentation, coupled with commentary/testimony from inside officials (Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Rice, Powell) would be enough substantiating evidence, in my opinion. With the exception of occasional snivelling to the press about how bad the ate-up situation in Iraq might seem, the military brass won't sell out.

To make a comparison, it wasn't until years after the Vietnam conflict ended could we, the citizens of this country, actually fully analyze the complete ramifications of what had transpired. Personally, until otherwise proven wrong, I'll remain convinced that the war in Vietnam was the worst event involving deception this country has yet endured.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: burnedout
If I told you that I voted for Gore, neither you nor anyone else on this board would believe me - at this point in time.

Valid evidence? Documentation, coupled with commentary/testimony from inside officials (Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Rice, Powell) would be enough substantiating evidence, in my opinion. With the exception of occasional snivelling to the press about how bad the ate-up situation in Iraq might seem, the military brass won't sell out.

To make a comparison, it wasn't until years after the Vietnam conflict ended could we, the citizens of this country, actually fully analyze the complete ramifications of what had transpired. Personally, until otherwise proven wrong, I'll remain convinced that the war in Vietnam was the worst event involving deception this country has yet endured.

Thank you. I appreciate your response.

 

[UltraQuiet]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: Ultra Quiet
Well I couldn't care less about the court of public opinion, a court that is so easily manipulated that it makes it all but irrelevant.

Something we can agree on. For example, just look at how easily public opinion was manipulated into supporting the illegal and unjust invasion of Iraq. In another thread, look at how easily it's been manipulated into believing there is an Iraqi connection to 9/11, that we have found WMDs in Iraq, that Iraq used WMDs against us in the Iraqi invasion.

Unfortunately for the rabid right, Bush doesn't get the luxury of ignoring public opinion. He faces an election in about 17 months, and this Iraq debacle is ready to blow up in his face.

I am waiting, and will continue to wait for "real" evidence.

I'll put aside the sparring for a moment and ask you a sincere question. What would constitute "real" evidence in your opinion? From my perspective, the evidence is overwhelming: no weapons found, forged documents, unsupported interpretations (e.g., the infamous aluminum tubes), suppression of contrary evidence, intelligence officials complaining that they were pressured to slant evidence, other officials conceding that they slanted the story to make it sell better, etc. On the spectrum between the evidence we have now, and a confession by Bush that he lied, where does your standard for "real" evidence fall? This isn't a troll, I am really curious.

From another thread a week or so ago:

"Then lets round up all these "unnamed sources", "former intelligence analysts", " senior intel officials" , "senior gov't officials" and the various other supposed experts, the guys from the CIA, DIA, NSA, etc., get 'em in front of Congress, put 'em under oath and lets find out what the fsck happened. If we have to close part because of classification, fine. If we need to appoint a special prosecutor, let's do it. If we were wrong, then we need to unfsck ourselves. If we lied, then somebody(s) needs their guts stomped out. If there were honest differences of opinion about what certain intel meant, then that's something altogether different. The constant quoting of newspaper articles as undeniable proof and certain posters claiming they know for certain what happened is growing tiresome. The news media, more often than not, is exaggerating what they know in order to sell commercial time and up circulaltion. The posters here who "know" what happened are as ignorant as everyone else. There is a process to get to the truth and we need to avail ourselves to it. All I am asking for is the same "proof" that is required in every court in the land. Nothing more and nothing less."

Maybe I should put it in my sig.

Dave

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: Ultra Quiet
From another thread a week or so ago:

"Then lets round up all these "unnamed sources", "former intelligence analysts", " senior intel officials" , "senior gov't officials" and the various other supposed experts, the guys from the CIA, DIA, NSA, etc., get 'em in front of Congress, put 'em under oath and lets find out what the fsck happened. If we have to close part because of classification, fine. If we need to appoint a special prosecutor, let's do it. If we were wrong, then we need to unfsck ourselves. If we lied, then somebody(s) needs their guts stomped out. If there were honest differences of opinion about what certain intel meant, then that's something altogether different. The constant quoting of newspaper articles as undeniable proof and certain posters claiming they know for certain what happened is growing tiresome. The news media, more often than not, is exaggerating what they know in order to sell commercial time and up circulaltion. The posters here who "know" what happened are as ignorant as everyone else. There is a process to get to the truth and we need to avail ourselves to it. All I am asking for is the same "proof" that is required in every court in the land. Nothing more and nothing less."

Maybe I should put it in my sig.

Dave

Thank you as well.

 

[Dari]

Bowfinger, prove that this war was a lie and I'll show you a fool.

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: Dari
Bowfinger, prove that this war was a lie and I'll show you a fool.

Don't ya think the perpetrators of the war need to present to the American people the justification... it seems a bit much to have the people proove to the administration anything. Our function is to ask the questions their job is to answer them. Remember They represent us not us them.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: HJD1

Originally posted by: Dari
Bowfinger, prove that this war was a lie and I'll show you a fool.

Don't ya think the perpetrators of the war need to present to the American people the justification... it seems a bit much to have the people proove to the administration anything. Our function is to ask the questions their job is to answer them. Remember They represent us not us them.

Well said.