Conservative answers Iraq criticism

[mrmitchell]

One of Iraq's neighbours was weak and vulnerable (Kuwait), the rest were not. Iran, Turkey and Saudi Arabia could have easily defeated Iraq.

Yes...if Iraq started it, I would gladly support a war against the little bastards despite my general rule of "stay out of it"...the Middle East, much as we hate the thought, is terribly concerning for the United States.

But we started it under some "pre emptive" bull****, so now it's turning into a quagmire where we're losing millions of dollars a day and so far more than a hundred soldiers IIRC...

[mrmitchell]

Then he could have easily proved that.

Wasn't there videos of his weapons being dismantled? IIRC there was some kind of proof that was tossed aside...well, of course, it's obvious now that they're all gone.

[The diplomat]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Conservative answers Iraq criticism

Originally posted by Cruddy
So why doesn't the US spend the money on buying all the WMDs so there aren't any for sale?

Are you serious? Many of the WMDs are not for sale. Do you really think that North Korea is going to sale every nuke it makes to us. Of course not! The whole reason, they are making nukes is to have them as a deterrent against the US. They are not going to sale them to us.

Defend it from who? Your bombast is meaningless.

Most countries are not powerful enough to defend themselves against global threats.

For example, Nazi Germany and Japan were a global threat. The other countries did not have the power to stop them. If the US had not acted, then the whole world would have become Nazi. The US had to act.

Same thing with the Soviet Union. The world did not have the means to stop Communism from overtaking the whole world. The US had to act, or the whole world would have become totalitarian.

Ditto Al Queda. Is there any country or group of countries (excluding the US) that have the military, financial or political means to fight Al Queda? The answer is a resounding NO.

[mrmitchell]

warning: communist != totalitarian

[mrmitchell]

Ditto Al Queda. Is there any country or group of countries (excluding the US) that have the military, financial or political means to fight Al Queda? The answer is a resounding NO.

So you're saying the US should go on some kind of world tour to eliminate al Quida or something? Dude, we're talking about a bunch of unshaven guys living in their apartments or caves with a few connections.

(Oh and by the way, wasn't al-Queda in AFGHANISTAN, not Iraq? At the least Iraq was an attempt to blur out the relative failure we've had in Afghanistan.)

[Sandman]

Ditto Al Queda. Is there any country or group of countries (excluding the US) that have the military, financial or political means to fight Al Queda?

Every developed country, and many developing countries as well.

[Cruddy]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Conservative answers Iraq criticism

Originally posted by The diplomat


Are you serious? Many of the WMDs are not for sale. Do you really think that North Korea is going to sale every nuke it makes to us. Of course not! The whole reason, they are making nukes is to have them as a deterrent against the US. They are not going to sale them to us.

Are you serious? Bribery and corruption make the world go round. Even teenagers know that much (at least judging teenage behaviour).

A damn sight cheaper than prolonging the arms race, except of course doing that keeps the military corporations well fed.

I'm not dissing the military here - I'm dissing the obscene amounts of money "invested" in the corporations to supply their needs.

Originally posted by The diplomat
Most countries are not powerful enough to defend themselves against global threats.

For example, Nazi Germany and Japan were a global threat. The other countries did not have the power to stop them. If the US had not acted, then the whole world would have become Nazi. The US had to act.

That's a terrible example. The US never declared war on the Axis, it was the other way round.

Originally posted by The diplomat

Same thing with the Soviet Union. The world did not have the means to stop Communism from overtaking the whole world. The US had to act, or the whole world would have become totalitarian.

Review your history books. Learn how often US intervention prevented a Communist takeover in a country by military means.

Answer: with the exception of South Korea (by no means a solo US effort); nil.

Sure, the US used plenty of other means to prevent and suppress Communist takeovers, but direct military intervention was almost never used - and was never used successfully.

Originally posted by The diplomat
Ditto Al Queda. Is there any country or group of countries (excluding the US) that have the military, financial or political means to fight Al Queda? The answer is a resounding NO.

Same as the Axis - they delclared war on us (meaning both US and UK) primarily because of military foreces in Saudi Arabia. Withdrawal means some at least of their recruiting argument goes out the window.
You cannot effectively use conventional military forces to defeat irregulars. For that, you need your own irregular non-frontline outfits.

[mrmitchell]

" In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the militaryindustrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist."
-President Dwight D. Eisenhower; slightly out of context but a stirring quote nonetheless. (And somewhat relevant to the discussion, at least with the "fat boys staying fat in the arms industry" context.)

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by mrmitchell
Wasn't there videos of his weapons being dismantled? IIRC there was some kind of proof that was tossed aside...well, of course, it's obvious now that they're all gone.

If you seriously think the weapons the UN listed as still unaccounted for leave no physical trace of their destruction, I can not help you.

[Solly]

Buying WoMD and nukes would merely serve to create even bigger incentives for trying to produce them.

[TCO]

Originally posted by Sandman


One of Iraq's neighbours was weak and vulnerable (Kuwait), the rest were not. Iran, Turkey and Saudi Arabia could have easily defeated Iraq.

Not Saudi Arabia. and the part of the country that matters is right next to Kuwait.

[TCO]

Re: Re: Conservative answers Iraq criticism

Originally posted by Cruddy


This is bit I consider complete bull****.

If the Cold War is over, why is the US spending the same amount?

Could it be - to keep the defence corporations the rich fat bastards that they are?

Why does it chap your ass? this is not a Civ game. If we waste money here. The Euros waste it on their farmers. Oops we do that too,

Seriously, who cares. Does it make your schwantz any smaller?

[Sava]

Seriously, who cares. Does it make your schwantz any smaller?

State sponsored corporations... sounds like a Commie police state to me!

Personally, I don't like the idea of 20% of my income going to subsidize defense contractors with no clear purpose. Perhaps YOU like the government taking your money in order to make some corporate fatcat rich... but I don't.

[TCO]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Conservative answers Iraq criticism

Originally posted by Cruddy


So why doesn't the US spend the money on buying all the WMDs so there aren't any for sale? A lot cheaper - but of course, US industrialists would lose out. Can't have those shareholders reduced to their last sports car, can we?



Defend it from who? Your bombast is meaningless.

If we all defend our own bits, doesn't that make the US defence budgets pointless, except for keeeping the aforementioned fat bastards fat?

1. Why don't you. EU has economy the size of US. Get busy. "You don't spend it on defense so money should be avialable for this shceme.

2. Get this in your head. We take direction from our populace. The rest of the world which likes to caterwaul at our internal dsciusions is irrelevant. You are NOT citizens.

[Sandman]

Not Saudi Arabia. and the part of the country that matters is right next to Kuwait.

They've got your weapons and a huge pile of money. The Iraqis wouldn't have stood a chance.