Hell Freezes over. Glenn Beck admits: Liberals got Iraq right

[Genx87]

Considering the epidemic of torture, executions, and attacks on protesters that were occurring while he controlled those restive areas I think the very likely outcome of Gaddafi's repression of that rebellion was mass death in those areas resisting him. Hell, his forces were firing on paramedics trying to treat protesters they had already shot.

With that in mind, what was a third option?

We don't have to stick our noses anywhere; do you think we should have stood by and done nothing while mass slaughter took place?

Yes

 

[fskimospy]

Yes

So back to the initial argument, you believe stability + mass slaughter is preferable to instability without slaughter.

That's your opinion to hold of course, but surely you can see why others might disagree.

 

[Pneumothorax]

Many backwater Muslim countries seems to only achieve relative stability either by A. Very oppressive highly religious Sharia government or B. Very oppressive militaristic dictatorship.

Iraq, Libya, and Egypt were prime examples of B and were much better for US when they were kept that way.

Culturally these people don't like democracy as they seem to vote people in who are A/B anyway.

So back to the initial argument, you believe stability + mass slaughter is preferable to instability without slaughter.

That's your opinion to hold of course, but surely you can see why others might disagree.

How can you have instability in these countries without the inevitable mass slaughter?

 

[Genx87]

So back to the initial argument, you believe stability + mass slaughter is preferable to instability without slaughter.

That's your opinion to hold of course, but surely you can see why others might disagree.

My opinion is we don't need to intervene in another country even if they are killing their own people. You are framing the argument if we don't intervene then we are fine with killing people wanton. I'd prefer nobody dies. But that is an impossibility. And we as a nation need to realize that while stopping mass killings is a noble act. Often times our actions ends with many deaths and instability. This thread is about Iraq, a great example. We toppled a murderous regime that was worse than Gaddafi's. 11 years later and over 100,000 civilian deaths the result is a group worse than AQ is pushing through the western part of the country. I'm sure those people dead from the instability we created will thank us from the grave.

 

[hal2kilo]

Damn, what does it say about the far right when Glenn Beck has to be the voice of reason?




The answer, the same thing that can always be said about the far right ... nothing good.

Why does that ass hats opinion matter about anything. He the last person I want to hold up as a repudiation of Bushes policy.

Could care less. He still has a following?

 

[Vic]

Libertarian policy would always be to oppose the Neocons. This is nothing new for them.

Beck is no more a libertarian than a turd is an ounce of gold.

 

[waggy]

beck still has a show?

 

[Newell Steamer]

The country is going liberal. Pot is being legalized. More white women are banging black men. And now Glenn Beck is sucking liberal cock.

It's over guys.

 

[Vic]

It was never about oil.

It was about military and defense jobs, which is the same thing it's about now too.
The "small government" crowd needs their government jobs, so off to war we go.. again.

 

[glenn1]

My opinion is we don't need to intervene in another country even if they are killing their own people. You are framing the argument if we don't intervene then we are fine with killing people wanton. I'd prefer nobody dies. But that is an impossibility. And we as a nation need to realize that while stopping mass killings is a noble act. Often times our actions ends with many deaths and instability. This thread is about Iraq, a great example. We toppled a murderous regime that was worse than Gaddafi's. 11 years later and over 100,000 civilian deaths the result is a group worse than AQ is pushing through the western part of the country. I'm sure those people dead from the instability we created will thank us from the grave.

Iraq for the left is kinda like what Obamacare is for the right - something that they fought almost to the death on political grounds without having any truly better alternative in mind or even caring about the aftermath if they got their way. As if things would have been all sunshine and puppies if we had left Saddam in power and ignoring what the alternative 10+ years would have been like. After all, we had just enjoyed the prior 10 years with him remaining in power and the slow drip of uncertainty about WMD, continued ethnic violence against the Kurds and Shiites, and other delights.

 

[hal2kilo]

Iraq for the left is kinda like what Obamacare is for the right - something that they fought almost to the death on political grounds without having any truly better alternative in mind or even caring about the aftermath if they got their way. As if things would have been all sunshine and puppies if we had left Saddam in power and ignoring what the alternative 10+ years would have been like. After all, we had just enjoyed the prior 10 years with him remaining in power and the slow drip of uncertainty about WMD, continued ethnic violence against the Kurds and Shiites, and other delights.

Man, now there's a real Clingon.

Edit: spelling intentional

 

[fskimospy]

Iraq for the left is kinda like what Obamacare is for the right - something that they fought almost to the death on political grounds without having any truly better alternative in mind or even caring about the aftermath if they got their way. As if things would have been all sunshine and puppies if we had left Saddam in power and ignoring what the alternative 10+ years would have been like. After all, we had just enjoyed the prior 10 years with him remaining in power and the slow drip of uncertainty about WMD, continued ethnic violence against the Kurds and Shiites, and other delights.

It's quite difficult to see how leaving Saddam in power would have cost us anything even remotely close to the same damage or would have caused anywhere close to the same amount of death and destruction in Iraq. Not a good comparison.

 

[Sonikku]

Well that does it. Beck has gone full RINO.

 

[bshole]

Considering the epidemic of torture, executions, and attacks on protesters that were occurring while he controlled those restive areas I think the very likely outcome of Gaddafi's repression of that rebellion was mass death in those areas resisting him. Hell, his forces were firing on paramedics trying to treat protesters they had already shot.

With that in mind, what was a third option?

We don't have to stick our noses anywhere; do you think we should have stood by and done nothing while mass slaughter took place?

Absolutely postively resoundingly fuck yes. If NO AMERICAN interest is involved, don't you dare ask your fellow Americans to risk their LIFE and their HEALTH for something that in the end does nothing to protect American interests (and many times actively HARMS American interests - like Iraq), and without that, what the hell do they care if somebody else's kid gets maimed or killed.

It should be written into American law that any politician voting for military intervention must (by statute) have a blood relative in the theater of conflict AND in the line of fire. They never have real skin in the game (except Cheney, who made billions on the phoney war in Iraq).

 

[brycejones]

The world supported going into Afghanistan. We just went half-assed once Bush & Co. decided Iraq was more important.

Bingo.....

 

[K1052]

Iraq for the left is kinda like what Obamacare is for the right - something that they fought almost to the death on political grounds without having any truly better alternative in mind or even caring about the aftermath if they got their way. As if things would have been all sunshine and puppies if we had left Saddam in power and ignoring what the alternative 10+ years would have been like. After all, we had just enjoyed the prior 10 years with him remaining in power and the slow drip of uncertainty about WMD, continued ethnic violence against the Kurds and Shiites, and other delights.

So saving peoples lives and slowing the growth of healthcare cost for many US citizens is about the same as invading another country, killing thousands of people, wasting 2 trillion dollars (upwards of $6T in long term liabilities), and getting thousands of servicemen killed. I wish to visit the land where these two things are comparable and see what manner of odd creatures frolic there.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

So saving peoples lives and slowing the growth of healthcare cost for many US citizens is about the same as invading another country, killing thousands of people, wasting 2 trillion dollars (upwards of $6T in long term liabilities), and getting thousands of servicemen killed. I wish to visit the land where these two things are comparable and see what manner of odd creatures frolic there.

In one sense it is very much the same. When concerns or criticisms were raised supporters treated questioners as una american and enemy sympathizers. You bought into the whole thing or you were the enemy.

 

[dainthomas]

It wouldn't have mattered in Afghanistan if we didnt divert our attention. We cant have a foreign policy where we bomb people into freedom.

Worked on Germany. The argument could be made we didn't bomb enough once our attention got diverted.

 

[K1052]

In one sense it is very much the same. When concerns or criticisms were raised supporters treated questioners as una american and enemy sympathizers. You bought into the whole thing or you were the enemy.

But in all other senses they aren't the same. The value of the comparison is less than what I scooped out of the cat box this morning.

 

[DucatiMonster696]

http://www.politico.com/story/2014/06/glenn-beck-iraq-liberals-right-107981.html?ml=la

I guess Beck probably won't get an invitation back to host a Fox News show any time soon

Except liberals were not the only ones who said we shouldn't invade or nation build. There were other conservative voices such as Ron Paul, Pat Buchanan, etc who bucked at the neoconservative lead foreign policy agenda that was steering us into Iraq. An agenda that is surprisingly supported by many "Mainstream" democrats.

 

[Phokus]

Except liberals were not the only ones who said we shouldn't invade or nation build. There were other conservative voices such as Ron Paul, Pat Buchanan, etc who bucked at the neoconservative lead foreign policy agenda that was steering us into Iraq. An agenda that is surprisingly supported by many "Mainstream" democrats.

I wouldn't call many elected democrats liberals, many are right of center. And besides that, we're talking about the country as a whole. Congratulations on the 10 conservatives in America who were against the war though (p.s. most libertarians will vociferously deny they are conservative btw).

 

[DucatiMonster696]

You're assuming that the "instability" option doesn't result in mass slaughter as well. Often "instability" also results in the mass slaughter of people (just like we're seeing now), so either way a lot of innocent people get killed.

Iraq was always a no-win. You leave a tyrant in place who kills his own people and violently oppresses them, or you topple the tyrant and create a power vacuum that gets filled by extremists, which ends up in another really bad outcome.

That said, I think it was a huge ideologically driven mistake, and I've always been completely opposed to our involvement based on false premises. Unlike Beck I haven't changed my mind based on what we're seeing now, I've always been 100% opposed to our involvement.

+1 Any argument you can come up with to justify an action in Libya can also be used to justify our action in Iraq where .::GASP::. Saddam was gassing his own people, repressing his own people, etc.

However the real question is whether or not we should be playing world policeman or not and what the consequences of us doing so ends up being in regions like the Middle-East where the notion of individual rights, and supporting an elected representative government, and standing behind a firm Constitution that places limits on government and protects the rights of the individual instead of choosing to support religious, ethnic and tribal loyalties and agendas first is practically non-existent.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Seriously, do you people never get tired of being toeing the partisan line?

I believe both wars were wrong...is that called toeing the party line in your world?

 

[DucatiMonster696]

I wouldn't call many elected democrats liberals, many are right of center. And besides that, we're talking about the country as a whole. Congratulations on the 10 conservatives in America who were against the war though (p.s. most libertarians will vociferously deny they are conservative btw).

Yet that same "majority" which was against the Iraq intervention was all but silent during our action in Libya where things are not looking rosy either.

 

[Jaskalas]

Beck is no more a libertarian than a turd is an ounce of gold.

Glenn Beck on Empire, "We Need to Mind Our Own Business"