• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

If we 'win" in Iraq does that excuse all the Bushies mistakes?

techs

techs

Lifer
Even if Iraq does have a relatively stable democratic government with tolerable human rights protections does that excuse all the Bush mistakes?
 
Originally posted by: techs
Even if Iraq does have a relatively stable democratic government with tolerable human rights protections does that excuse all the Bush mistakes?
Click to expand...

Mistakes?

Georgie doesn't make mistakes!

[braindead Republican mode off]
 
No, but at least for the troops and those that lost friends, it gives them some feeling that it wasn't all for naught.
 
No, as the mistakes were still mistakes, even if the situation is salvaged. Now our overall judgement of Bush should be based on his entire record, both good and bad, but the good doesn't make the bad cease to exist.
 
Originally posted by: techs
Even if Iraq does have a relatively stable democratic government with tolerable human rights protections does that excuse all the Bush mistakes?
Click to expand...

If he succeeds, yes. The liberal establishment will always bash him in the history books, though.
 
Originally posted by: Engineer
There is no winning in Iraq. A win on a lie is still that...a lie.
Click to expand...

Even if you think Bush lied don't you want to see a positive outcome in Iraq? Isn't a liberal democracy better than a country controlled by warlords or another brutal dictator?
 
Originally posted by: Taggart
Originally posted by: Engineer
There is no winning in Iraq. A win on a lie is still that...a lie.
Click to expand...

Even if you think Bush lied don't you want to see a positive outcome in Iraq? Isn't a liberal democracy better than a country controlled by warlords or another brutal dictator?
Click to expand...

I could care less about Iraq. It did nothing for us except cost of over 2,000 lives and hundreds of billions of dollars.... all for a lie.
 
Oh sure... I mean if I rob a bank and kill everyone inside, but in the end I use the money to pay for my kids education or donate the money to charity, everything's fine.

Mr. President is laughing at all of us.
 
I'd bet history would take a less harsh view of them if the reconstuction was a success. I still doubt that it will be all that kind or even attribute all that much significance to him over the long run.


Personally, I'd much rather hope for some positive outcome from all this than wish for failure out of some twisted need for vindication, regardless of how his mistakes are viewed.

 
Originally posted by: tommywishbone
Oh sure... I mean if I rob a bank and kill everyone inside, but in the end I use the money to pay for my kids education or donate the money to charity, everything's fine.

Mr. President is laughing at all of us.
Click to expand...

You are comparing the Iraq war to cold-blooded murder. It seems that you are saying that every US soldier serving in Iraq and the millions and millions of Americans that support the president are complicit in or support murder? I'm not trying to troll, just trying to understand your viewpoint.
 
Originally posted by: techs
Even if Iraq does have a relatively stable democratic government with tolerable human rights protections does that excuse all the Bush mistakes?
Click to expand...

I wonder if the Repubs realize that even if the above are fulfilled the country STILL may be hostile to the U.S.
 
Originally posted by: Taggart
Originally posted by: tommywishbone
Oh sure... I mean if I rob a bank and kill everyone inside, but in the end I use the money to pay for my kids education or donate the money to charity, everything's fine.

Mr. President is laughing at all of us.
Click to expand...

You are comparing the Iraq war to cold-blooded murder. It seems that you are saying that every US soldier serving in Iraq and the millions and millions of Americans that support the president are complicit in or support murder? I'm not trying to troll, just trying to understand your viewpoint.
Click to expand...

No, he's saying that the ends didn't justify the means.
 

"No, he's saying that the ends didn't justify the means."

It's really is just that simple. A lot of people have, what they believe, are good ideas in life, but you're not allowed to use violence and destruction to acheive those goals... in my opinion.
 
By the time Iraq is stable, at least two more Presidents will have come and gone, spending their terms cleaning up Bush's mistakes.
 
Originally posted by: jpeyton
By the time Iraq is stable, at least two more Presidents will have come and gone, spending their terms cleaning up Bush's mistakes.
Click to expand...


I'm not sure that's totally true. If the US/Iraqis managed to seal the borders and then literally flush the country through a brutal counterinsurgency . . . I think Iraq could break the back of the insurgency in less than 2 years.

A couple of hundred thousand border guards, a couple of hundred thousand member Army, several hundred thousand police, and at least a hundred thousand "secret police" could then secure the country.

Obviously, the "brutal" part would be carried out by Iraqis.

The country will indeed fall apart but even a temporary "success" would be enough for Bushophiles to claim victory. If the shyte hits the fan afterwards, Bush Leaguers will just blame it on terrorists, Democrats, Liberals, Iran, Syria, and Castro.
 
A coupld of old clichés come to mind:

The ends don't justify the means. and The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Saddam was not an immediate threat to the U.S., and every lame excuse Bushwhacko offered as an attempt to justify this war has proven to be false.

There re plenty of reasons to believe a number of members of the administration cooked the books and forced the intelligence community to provide a stream of "information" that only supported their predetermined decision to go to war and to reject any info that argued against it.

Even putting the best face on it, and assuming you believe him when he says it was just acting in good faith on bad intelligence, it's pretty obvious he knew, or should have known that it was bogus. There has been plenty of documenatation showing he was warned that the info he on which he relied to base his decisions was, at best, questionable.

I don't care whether he thought his intentions were good or noble. War is bad enough when it's really necessary. Squandering thousands of lives and trillions of dollars on lies is criminal.

Even assuming this war was justifiable, there is other documentation showing that the administration failed to plan beyond the invasion to deal with the foreseeable problems we would face, and are now facing, once the original invasion was complete. I don't know if criminal charges would apply for that, but I sure hope so.

When this is over, I hope Bush and his cohorts are tried and convicted for what they've done. At a minimum, Bush may go down as the worst president in U.S. history. :|
 
Originally posted by: Harvey
A coupld of old clichés come to mind:

The ends don't justify the means. and The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Saddam was not an immediate threat to the U.S., and every lame excuse Bushwhacko offered as an attempt to justify this war has proven to be false.

There re plenty of reasons to believe a number of members of the administration cooked the books and forced the intelligence community to provide a stream of "information" that only supported their predetermined decision to go to war and to reject any info that argued against it.

Even putting the best face on it, and assuming you believe him when he says it was just acting in good faith on bad intelligence, it's pretty obvious he knew, or should have known that it was bogus. There has been plenty of documenatation showing he was warned that the info he on which he relied to base his decisions was, at best, questionable.

I don't care whether he thought his intentions were good or noble. War is bad enough when it's really necessary. Squandering thousands of lives and trillions of dollars on lies is criminal.

Even assuming this war was justifiable, there is other documentation showing that the administration failed to plan beyond the invasion to deal with the foreseeable problems we would face, and are now facing, once the original invasion was complete. I don't know if criminal charges would apply for that, but I sure hope so.

When this is over, I hope Bush and his cohorts are tried and convicted for what they've done. At a minimum, Bush may go down as the worst president in U.S. history. :|
Click to expand...

Don't worry, God has a special place in hell for a lot of people.

 
Originally posted by: techs
Even if Iraq does have a relatively stable democratic government with tolerable human rights protections does that excuse all the Bush mistakes?
Click to expand...

Mistakes are mistakes. The real question is, how stupid are the Dim leaders going to look if we win. My theory is that some of them need failure in Iraq to save their political futures. If we cut and run, they will never be shown for what they are. A straw, but they grasp!

 
Originally posted by: Harvey

he says it was just acting in good faith on bad intelligence, it's pretty obvious he knew, or should have known that it was bogus.
Click to expand...

The Dems had the same intelligence. In fact, Dick Morris has said that he talked w/ Clinton on a regular basis while he was president about Saddam and the threat of his WMD's.

There has been plenty of documenatation showing he was warned that the info he on which he relied to base his decisions was, at best, questionable.

I don't care whether he thought his intentions were good or noble. War is bad enough when it's really necessary. Squandering thousands of lives and trillions of dollars on lies is criminal.
Click to expand...

Then John Kerry, Hillary Clinton, etc. are all criminals using your analysis as well.


When this is over, I hope Bush and his cohorts are tried and convicted for what they've done. At a minimum, Bush may go down as the worst president in U.S. history. :|
Click to expand...

Statements like this show you to be part of a tiny (though vocal) left wing fringe that I am grateful has little influence in this country.
 
Originally posted by: Taggart
Originally posted by: Harvey

he says it was just acting in good faith on bad intelligence, it's pretty obvious he knew, or should have known that it was bogus.
Click to expand...

The Dems had the same intelligence. In fact, Dick Morris has said that he talked w/ Clinton on a regular basis while he was president about Saddam and the threat of his WMD's.

There has been plenty of documenatation showing he was warned that the info he on which he relied to base his decisions was, at best, questionable.

I don't care whether he thought his intentions were good or noble. War is bad enough when it's really necessary. Squandering thousands of lives and trillions of dollars on lies is criminal.
Click to expand...

Then John Kerry, Hillary Clinton, etc. are all criminals using your analysis as well.


When this is over, I hope Bush and his cohorts are tried and convicted for what they've done. At a minimum, Bush may go down as the worst president in U.S. history. :|
Click to expand...

Statements like this show you to be part of a tiny (though vocal) left wing fringe that I am grateful has little influence in this country.
Click to expand...

Is that all you guys have left? deflection? oh lets deflect to the Dems, that way we can avoid accountability. You drag up the Clinton administration, but lets not forget the Clinton admin didn't spend 100s of billions on our dollars in a ME war, he didnt send troops to die, he didn't unleash the NSA to spy on Americans...shall I go on?

how pathetic. And I don't even know where to start with all your half-ass insinuations, half-ass truths, and misrepresentations. You Bush boys are a sad group. And it isn't the left "fringe" Harvey represents, he represents people with a brain, and I for one can't wait for someone with a brain to get back into the oval office.


 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top