• We should now be fully online following an overnight outage. Apologies for any inconvenience, we do not expect there to be any further issues.

That did not take long.

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Nebor

Lifer
Jun 24, 2003
29,582
12
76
Yeah sure, but the trouble is that installing and maintaining democracy there is the only reason we were there to begin with. Or at least, that was the only quasi legitimate reason given. There were no WMD's. So we spend a trillion dollars and thousands of American lives only to have it return to dictatorship that it was before? Fine, don't give a shit, but that only proves Bush's mission a 100% total failure.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunk_costs
 
Sep 12, 2004
16,852
59
86
Yeah sure, but the trouble is that installing and maintaining democracy there is the only reason we were there to begin with. Or at least, that was the only quasi legitimate reason given. There were no WMD's. So we spend a trillion dollars and thousands of American lives only to have it return to dictatorship that it was before? Fine, don't give a shit, but that only proves Bush's mission a 100% total failure.
Democracy isn't anywhere near dead yet in Iraq. Some on the left would love to pronounce it so because they seem so thoroughly butthurt that Iraq didn't completely fail and become a quagmire under Bush despite their insistent proclamations all along the way that it would happen. So now they are quick on the trigger to proclaim that Iraq is in the midst of failure whenever any news comes along that they feel might validate their viewpoint.

This is simply another hickup in the Iraqi Democratic process. It's not the first crisis that Iraq has faced (and that LL has WRONGLY claimed will be their downfall) and it won't be the last. They will overcome the problems and move on. It's all part of the process.
 

JTsyo

Lifer
Nov 18, 2007
12,035
1,134
126
Instead of keeping the country together, the US should have just divided it into smaller countries. That way if one goes bonkers, it won't have much power available to effect neighboring countries.
 

Oyeve

Lifer
Oct 18, 1999
22,066
883
126
Instead of keeping the country together, the US should have just divided it into smaller countries. That way if one goes bonkers, it won't have much power available to effect neighboring countries.

Why should the US have done anything? Shit, we didnt need to be there is the first place.
 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
174
106
Amazing how fast this seems to be going down the crapper. We're not out of the country for 24 hrs and the poop starts hitting the fan.

Whether or not we ever should have been there in the first place is one thing. But once we've spent all that blood and treasure that former question is just so much water under the bridge.

Unfinished jobs come back to bite you on the butt, more so when it involved military action. If this thing keeps degrading we may, unavoidably, find ourselves (along with other nations) compelled to go back in. The breakout of sectarian bloodshed will likely produce a lot refugees (Kurds and Sunni's) that will affect surrounding countries. They'll be requesting help to stop it. Likewise if Iran starts moving in.

Looks like we really needed that S.o.F.A.

I remember when a timetable for withdrawal was first brought up. Many opposed it saying AQ etc would just lay low until we left following our announced deadline. Right now it's looking like they were right.

Fern
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,589
5
0
I do not think that this is AQ but inter-faith revenge again bubbling to the surface.
 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
174
106
I do not think that this is AQ but inter-faith revenge again bubbling to the surface.

1st report I heard said AQ was suspected in the 14 bombings. That's why I added them.

I haven't checked the news lately. I suppose that's changed?

Fern
 

JSt0rm

Lifer
Sep 5, 2000
27,399
3,948
126
The place needs to be 3 countries. Let them sort it out, no matter how painful it is. We fucked it all up and we cant put it together again. Classic humpty dumpty.
 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
174
106
The place needs to be 3 countries. Let them sort it out, no matter how painful it is. We fucked it all up and we cant put it together again. Classic humpty dumpty.

Geographically, the Kurdish part seems easy since they're basically already segregated. However, I bet Turkey has an awful lot to say about that.

But do you propose to do about the Sunni? They're mixed in with the Shia. Friction between those seems the bigger problem atm.

Fern
 

JSt0rm

Lifer
Sep 5, 2000
27,399
3,948
126
Geographically, the Kurdish part seems easy since they're basically already segregated. However, I bet Turkey has an awful lot to say about that.

But do you propose to do about the Sunni? They're mixed in with the Shia. Friction between those seems the bigger problem atm.

Fern

I propose nothing. Its not my problem. Let them figure it out. Our politicians have done enough "speculation on how to fix Iraq" for 10 life times. Its up to those people to do what they want.
 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
174
106
I propose nothing. Its not my problem. Let them figure it out. Our politicians have done enough "speculation on how to fix Iraq" for 10 life times. Its up to those people to do what they want.

Was that your position on the Libyan violence?

Fern
 

JSt0rm

Lifer
Sep 5, 2000
27,399
3,948
126
oh and I still find it laughable you fucks think there is a comparison.
 

Nebor

Lifer
Jun 24, 2003
29,582
12
76
oh and I still find it laughable you fucks think there is a comparison.

They were the exact same situation. An evil despot was murdering his people and the United States stepped up to the plate, alone and unafraid, and kicked the snot out of the despot over the objections of liberals & the international community, bringing democracy to a place that hasn't seen it in decades. Oh, and they both have oil.
 

JSt0rm

Lifer
Sep 5, 2000
27,399
3,948
126
They were the exact same situation. An evil despot was murdering his people and the United States stepped up to the plate, alone and unafraid, and kicked the snot out of the despot over the objections of liberals & the international community, bringing democracy to a place that hasn't seen it in decades. Oh, and they both have oil.

No they wernt. The libyan people stood up and began to fight them. The ball was already rolling we just pushed it along a bit.

What bush jr did was try to push a boulder up a hill. there was no "arab spring" moveing against Saddam. We tried to create something and ended up being hated.

No they are completely different and you are brutally honest enough, you should admit it.
 

Nebor

Lifer
Jun 24, 2003
29,582
12
76
No they wernt. The libyan people stood up and began to fight them. The ball was already rolling we just pushed it along a bit.

What bush jr did was try to push a boulder up a hill. there was no "arab spring" moveing against Saddam. We tried to create something and ended up being hated.

No they are completely different and you are brutally honest enough, you should admit it.

There was an uprising against Saddam similar to the Arab Spring (in 1991 IIRC,) it just took us a little while to pull together the support the Iraqi people were asking for.
 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
174
106
No.

If you dont know the difference between the 2 conflicts then I dont know what to tell you.

You're confused.

I'm not talking about going into Iraq in the 1st place.

I was talking about what we're gonna do if sectarian violence breaks out now.

When the violence broke out in Libya you guys said we had to intervene for humanitarian purposes. You appear to be saying if it does break out in Iraq then we shouldn't do anything.

Please reconcile that.

Fern
 

JSt0rm

Lifer
Sep 5, 2000
27,399
3,948
126
You're confused.

I'm not talking about going into Iraq in the 1st place.

I was talking about what we're gonna do if sectarian violence breaks out now.

When the violence broke out in Libya you guys said we had to intervene for humanitarian purposes. You appear to be saying if it does break out in Iraq then we shouldn't do anything.

Please reconcile that.

Fern

I never said we should intervene for humanitarian reasons. It was smart STRATEGY to intervene and help the opposing force during what was a civil war. A smart move. Iraq was idiocy from day one.
 

JSt0rm

Lifer
Sep 5, 2000
27,399
3,948
126
There was an uprising against Saddam similar to the Arab Spring (in 1991 IIRC,) it just took us a little while to pull together the support the Iraqi people were asking for.

Thats a lie. we went in and then pulled out. 10 years later if the people began a uprising THEN maybe then we should provide air support and weapon support to help remove who we deem a threat. We didnt do that though. We did what war profiteers wanted. A long drawn out war with no end in sight.
 

JSt0rm

Lifer
Sep 5, 2000
27,399
3,948
126
and thats all there is.

As much as you repugs want to give obama a fuck up like katrina or iraq it isnt so. You do this to try and feel better about voting for such a fuck up as bush but it wont change that fact. Nothing will. Its going to go down in the history books as one of If not the worst presidency ever and you voted for it. What does that say about your abilities to make judgements?
 

Nebor

Lifer
Jun 24, 2003
29,582
12
76
Thats a lie. we went in and then pulled out. 10 years later if the people began a uprising THEN maybe then we should provide air support and weapon support to help remove who we deem a threat. We didnt do that though. We did what war profiteers wanted. A long drawn out war with no end in sight.

Really? The uprising of 1991 is a lie? Tell that to the tens of thousands of Iraqis that were killed by Sadam's army during that fictional uprising.

We wanted to help them, but our military was tuckered out from chasing Saddam out of Kuwait. So we were gathering our strength to help them out, but then there were some huge military cuts in the mid-90s, that was a huge set back. Finally we got the military back up to fighting strength and went in to help the Iraqi uprising in 2003, but we were dismayed to realize that it had ended almost a decade prior to our arrival. Nevertheless, we brought them the democracy that they so dearly desired.
 

JSt0rm

Lifer
Sep 5, 2000
27,399
3,948
126
Also if this was the reason to return to Iraq why wasn't this proposed to the un?

Face it. You are trying to revise history
 

Nebor

Lifer
Jun 24, 2003
29,582
12
76
Also if this was the reason to return to Iraq why wasn't this proposed to the un?

Face it. You are trying to revise history

Face it, I'm just messing with you. We didn't have any business in Iraq, or Libya. And we shouldn't still be occupying Afghanistan.