Has anything about our war in Iraq been positive for Americans?

[Craig234]

Less Muslims.

That's offensive. It's not funny, and I don't think you seemed to have even meant it to be funny.

I don't care if you are saying to kill any Jews, blacks, whites, whatever, it's offensive to flippantly call for murdering people, especially when it's about actual killings.

I suspect a post saying you are glad minority neighborhoods have high violence because you like minorities killed would be below the forum standards, this is the same.

 

[Ackmed]

Killing people in a war, is not the same as murdering them. Good try though.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Killing people in war is murder if there is no reasoning behind said war. My hands run red with blood of murder , As I pay my tax dollars to feed a evil war machine . Without protest. Yes I am guility of murder . If your mind is free of these outragious injust wars . I am sad for all who feel justified in their ignorant sleep. When I meet my maker it will be with head held low and eyes cast aside. To follow blindlessly is sin . Even if you deny God its is sin against self and man and the denial of what we can be.

 

[Infohawk]

The positive? A lot of smart Americans had it hammered home that their fellow citizens are absolute morons who can't be trusted to understand anything about foreign relations and international security. Another positive: some of those morons even realized they were duped and hopefully learned something from it.

 

[sandorski]

I guess I could argue my brother wouldn't of met and married his wife if it wasn't for the Iraq war, but I can't really speak for him about it being positive.

You're Bro is on the hook for $Trillions then. Better be some awesome Kids!

 

[chucky2]

Has it done anything beneficial for America?

Not having to deal with Saddam and the eventual nuke he would have obtained is to me a positive (now, 10 years, 20 years, 30 years down the road, eventually he would have got one/more than one). So in that respect we're vastly ahead.

Getting rid of a brutal dictator, his brutal sons, that also is a positive, especially in light of us being responsible for him coming to power.

Whether our Iraq efforts, despite being very badly managed and the Iraqi's doing everything they possibly could/can to F their neighbor over which in the end means F'ing themselves and their future generations over, will be worth it......only time will tell.

Hopefully the bloodbath days were enough for them to get it out of their system and grow up...problem is, even if that's true for the average Iraqi, their Leadership needs to have had a 'come to Allah' experience as well. Given how corrupt they are over there, and with such F'd up value system...who knows really.

I think one good thing that should have come of this is that Iraq will serve as a good template for future POTUS's to apply to whatever conflict they ponder undertaking. Inputs such as dumbFness of the population, corruption of the population, standing military, willingness to riot instead of build, wealth, values, population density, etc. etc. etc. can be gamed for what we went through in Iraq an applied as best as possible to future scenarios so as to give the POTUS at that time some kind of idea on if 'going in' is going to even work or not. Prior to Iraq, the past real example we had to go with was Vietnam, which for many things, does not apply to current scenarios (but in many areas admittedly it does).

We'll see is the only real answer that can be given........

Chuck

 

[manimal]

Not having to deal with Saddam and the eventual nuke he would have obtained is to me a positive (now, 10 years, 20 years, 30 years down the road, eventually he would have got one/more than one). So in that respect we're vastly ahead.

Getting rid of a brutal dictator, his brutal sons, that also is a positive, especially in light of us being responsible for him coming to power.

Chuck

While both noble sentiments your justifications basically mean we would have to go to war with 20-30 different countries and attack a few others just in case....


You know chaves is a bad boom lets invade, you know pakistan has some nukes and what if they get into the wrong hands boom lets invade, you know nepal is being occupied by china boom lets invade, you know mexico has some scientists that could someday make a nuclear bomb boom lets invade, you know brazil has its own nuclear technology but they are moving to the left politically and have opposed the US boom lets invade.....

Saddam was a bad guy and killed many people, but did all the death and lies justify the crusade?

 

[Craig234]

Killing people in a war, is not the same as murdering them. Good try though.

Putting aside the issue for combatants, we're talking about largely civilians. Regardless, the statement that it's 'good' to kill like this is advocating genocide, is highly offensive.

 

[Zebo]

My BIL makes $25,000 a month working for triple canopy and can provide well for my sister. They even have a ranch paid for and brand new 4x4's in their 30's...when ordinarly he'd probably be pounding nails or be a cop with only HS ed and Ranger combat training. In a word the MIC.

 

[Orignal Earl]

Not having to deal with Saddam and the eventual nuke he would have obtained is to me a positive (now, 10 years, 20 years, 30 years down the road, eventually he would have got one/more than one). So in that respect we're vastly ahead.

Chuck

Meh..10 20 30 years down the road, the US could of been the ones to sell him his nuke

 

[Mursilis]

hands down the dumbest thing we ever did. But we knew we would end up doing dumb things with the leadership we had. I still remember seeing bush in front of Crawford Texas with a line of salty old crackers behind him and the media talking about his record fundraising. It was then that I knew we were doomed.

You're so right! Invading Iraq was a million times dumber than legally sanctioning human slavery for nearly 100 years!

 

[Pens1566]

Not having to deal with Saddam and the eventual nuke he would have obtained is to me a positive (now, 10 years, 20 years, 30 years down the road, eventually he would have got one/more than one). So in that respect we're vastly ahead.


... snip ...

Chuck

Someone should read the UN inspectors reports ...

 

[chucky2]

Someone should read the UN inspectors reports ...

Perputually having UN inspections where they're denied access to the facility they want to inspect for 5 hours and then magically let in...for as long as Saddam and his sons would have been in power....

...all the while hoping (not a good solution unless you're smoking the HopingandChangeium) that they don't acquire one via someplace you don't know about (whether through their own efforts or just OTC) is not a viable long term strategery. I know that's the easy thing to do, the current American thing to do (I can't see it, I don't have to hear or deal with it, so, it's all good), but it's not the correct thing to do.

So basically, depending on the UN, an organization that missed an industrial centrifuge that was burried in someone's front yard (and that they'd have never found had the person in the front yard been freed so he could report it, out of the goodness of his heart), is insane.

You could list almost any other reason not to go in....the UN is a non-starter. Them thinking they're awesome does not actually mean they're awesome...

Chuck

 

[chucky2]

While both noble sentiments your justifications basically mean we would have to go to war with 20-30 different countries and attack a few others just in case....


You know chaves is a bad boom lets invade, you know pakistan has some nukes and what if they get into the wrong hands boom lets invade, you know nepal is being occupied by china boom lets invade, you know mexico has some scientists that could someday make a nuclear bomb boom lets invade, you know brazil has its own nuclear technology but they are moving to the left politically and have opposed the US boom lets invade.....

Saddam was a bad guy and killed many people, but did all the death and lies justify the crusade?

Except none of those other countries is a strategic location and/or is easily able to be defeated militarily, and would require much more world support (since no one gives a F about Iraq in reality).

So given all that, they're different, not the same as Iraq.

Chuck

 

[Pens1566]

Uh, ok ...

You do know the Iraq Survey group spent a few years in a US controlled Iraq after the war don't you? Maybe see what they said about it instead of spouting a bunch of disconnected gibberish.

 

[chucky2]

Meh..10 20 30 years down the road, the US could of been the ones to sell him his nuke

Errr....No.

 

[chucky2]

Uh, ok ...

You do know the Iraq Survey group spent a few years in a US controlled Iraq after the war don't you? Maybe see what they said about it instead of spouting a bunch of disconnected gibberish.

That's nice....but that's post-invasion. What you're advocating is having let the UN just keep doing it's job indefinitely, all the while letting Saddam keep playing his games indefinitely. Then let his sons or whatever brutal nutjob/regime play their games indefinitely.

The Iraqi's literally have been given a chance to legitimately fail or succeed on their own, purchased in blood by them and us.

They can get with the program and succeed, or, fail....it's all on them at this point.

So, we'll see in 20-30 years how 'Bush&Co's decision pans out.

Chuck

 

[evident]

They didn't go in because they are pussies.

i'd rather be called a pussy then waste $700B on a BS war and have thousands of dead soldiers and hundreds of thousands of dead bystanders on my conscience..

 

[chucky2]

If you view it as a waste, then it's a waste. If you view it as a long term positive, it's a long term positive. Or, potential long term positive.

Unless you want to completely take the gloves off the military and let them essentially decimate entire countries ala WWII, this is what military victory is going to look like in the future.

Chuck

P.S. We didn't kill hundreds of thousands, they killed themselves. And No, I don't accept responsibility for them killing themselves, they knew what they were doing and the consequences of it, and they did it anyways, so they can accept killing themselves on themselves.

 

[JSt0rm]

i'd rather be called a pussy then waste $700B on a BS war and have thousands of dead soldiers and hundreds of thousands of dead bystanders on my conscience..

I keep thinking about his statement and how simple minded it is. Its shameful really.

 

[dahunan]

Killing people in a war, is not the same as murdering them. Good try though.

Unprovoked war. Aggressors... Invaders... Oppressor Occupiers etc.. I am sure if the Russians would have been able to come here and kill you and your family you would have proudly labeled your death "collateral damage"

Saddam has been the US defense industry boogie man for a long time.. He helped us build our Stealth bombers by being the boogie man back then so we sheeple would jump up and give more money blindly to our defense dept.

Same thing as now.. huge profits to go over there and have our soldiers killed for profits... Truth... iraq war almost feels like we are doing Israels bidding.

Why do people point to us having to be the ones who have to deal with Saddam if he got a nuke in the future etc.. Had he ever attacked the USA soil ever.. had he even ever attacked the US military (northern no fly zone where Schwarzkopf killed all the Kurds we paid to try and assassinate Saddam

Sad to live in the Greatest Country ever and be surrounded by people who are so arrogant and blind who will never hold their leaders accountable

 

[Eagle1969]

del

 

[Eagle1969]

Oil reserves in billions of barrels, place in the world:

1. Saudi Arabia - 264.1
2. Iran - 137,6
3. Iraq - 113
11. USA - 30,5

Benefits to you is - your car could go a few more years. Then you attack on Iran under the pretext of weapons of mass destruction, as it was in Iraq. Therefore, our scientists are now developing a substance that would mix a it into oil wells that would be bloody oil could not work inside the engine.

 

[JSt0rm]

umm. Iraq pumps less oil now then it did before.

 

[chucky2]

Put down the rage pipe. If the US becomes such a terrible regime the POTUS's son is having my wife pulled off the street, raped, and then sent back to me, or having the US Men's Olympic Basketball Team fed to lions because they didn't win, then Yes, having the Russians come in and overthrow the brutal regime I live under would be a positive. I'd try and understand that when they bomb the radar installation that is setup next to my house, that me and/or mine might be killed in the pursuit of overthrowing the regime they're trying to defeat.

The reason people point to us having to deal with any batf*ck crazy regime is because we're the ones that pay hundreds of Billions for our military to be, without any doubt, the best. How else do you think we were able to essentially go into Iraq and take it over basically without any problems? You think France is going to send its folks into a nuclear Iraq? Denmark? Sweden? China? Russia?

Keep dreaming. It'll be a "UN" operation, in which the US bears by far the largest brunt of the burden, along with some of our closest allies thrown in so they get to play too. We'll blow large amounts of money, our troops lives, and then get the added benefit of 'the rest of the world' whining that we're " Aggressors... Invaders... Oppressor Occupiers", but, surprise!, they'll be enjoying the benefits of us taking action.

Grow up...'the rest of the world' only matters when 'the rest of the world' matters. If you don't understand what that means, don't bother replying.

Chuck