Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

'Inside 9/11' and the Iraq War

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 3
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 3 template Next
  • #16
    Originally posted by mitch
    Thats amazing that you actually believe that we had to go into Iraq for that reason. You didn't believe in a war when one nation unjustly invaded another nation but you believe in this Iraq war just because we have a score to settle?

    edit: responding to DanS's post
    I don't view them as separate wars. We were constantly at war with Saddam for more than a decade.
    I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891

    Comment

    • #17
      Originally posted by Pekka
      So Dubya was forced to it? To settle the score?
      To put it another way, Dubya had to correct the mistakes of his father. Remember that most of the folks in Dubya's administration were the same ones who mistakenly didn't crush Saddam at the first go. It seems evident to me that they recognized that they had made a mistake. I agree with them that they made a big mistake the first time around.
      I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891

      Comment

      • #18
        Originally posted by DanS


        I don't view them as separate wars. We were constantly at war with Saddam for more than a decade.
        We can add your view of warfare the pantheon of funky "DanS views". Its like a revision-happy Nedaverse.
        If you don't like reality, change it! me
        "Oh no! I am bested!" Drake
        "it is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong" Voltaire
        "Patriotism is a pernecious, psychopathic form of idiocy" George Bernard Shaw

        Comment

        • #19
          Originally posted by Kuciwalker
          How did this turn into a serious thread?

          Comment

          • #20
            DanS, Right I agree they should have taken cared of it the first time around but.. I don't agree with the rest.

            But that's ok.

            sleep-o-time! G'night.
            In da butt.
            "Do not worry if others do not understand you. Instead worry if you do not understand others." - Confucius
            THE UNDEFEATED SUPERCITIZEN w:4 t:2 l:1 (DON'T ASK!)
            "God is dead" - Nietzsche. "Nietzsche is dead" - God.

            Comment

            • #21
              The only person on Poly who has responded to my position intelligently and at relative length has been Dinodoc. I wanted to see if anybody else had some good ideas. So far, not in this thread, but I'm a patient man.
              I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891

              Comment

              • #22
                I don't view them as separate wars. We were constantly at war with Saddam for more than a decade.
                Regardless of how you view them, they were seperate wars. We could have either waited for more intelligence about the WMDs (which would have eventually shown none) and we would not have gone to war at all because of no public support or we could have gone in all of a sudden like President Bush. Do you remember when the Iraq war started? It was like all of a sudden the whole adminstration made it their main focus. Terrorists weren't on the forefront anymore, Saddam was... and I'm still not exactly sure on the reasons.

                Iraq would have never gotten approval without 9/11. Do you believe that had 9/11 not occured that the United States still had to go in and 'finish the job' of the gulf war?

                Comment

                • #23
                  Originally posted by mitch
                  Regardless of how you view them, they were seperate wars. We could have either waited for more intelligence about the WMDs (which would have eventually shown none) and we would not have gone to war at all because of no public support or we could have gone in all of a sudden like President Bush. Do you remember when the Iraq war started? It was like all of a sudden the whole adminstration made it their main focus. Terrorists weren't on the forefront anymore, Saddam was... and I'm still not exactly sure on the reasons.
                  Why should I care about the exact nature in which Bush Sr's debt is paid? It needed to be paid, and the sooner the better. Preferably by an occupation of Iraq in 1992. Bush's choices were expensive, no doubt about it. He deferred payment.

                  The US has a list of scores that need settling in the ME for our account to be made good.
                  I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891

                  Comment

                  • #24
                    Why do you feel his debt had to be paid? Look at what cost we are paying this debt.... the lives, the money, the resources that could be spent on anti terror. Do you feel that this 'debt was that important?

                    Comment

                    • #25
                      Yes, I feel that repaying our debts in the ME is of uptmost importance. I feel that OBL has identified a perceived defect in the American national character. He thinks/thought that we are weak because we cut and ran in Iran, Beirut, Gulf War I, Somalia, Sudan, and Taliban Afghanistan (I'm probably missing a few). We don't finish what we start. We didn't punish fully those who stood openly against us. Every president since Carter has a black mark in this regard. Bush Jr has been scrambling trying to correct this perception, but indeed the perception might be true, unfortunately.
                      Last edited by DanS; August 22, 2005, 22:34.
                      I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891

                      Comment

                      • #26
                        Originally posted by DanS
                        Yes, I feel that repaying our debts is of uptmost importance. I feel that OBL has identified a perceived defect in the American national character. He thinks/thought that we are weak because we cut and ran in Iran, Beirut, Gulf War I, Somalia, Sudan, and Taliban Afghanistan (I'm probably missing a few). We don't finish what we start. Every president since Carter has a black mark in this regard. Bush Jr has been scrambling trying to correct this perception.
                        or perhaps bin Laden knows exactly what the US response would be and he wants the US to come to the MidEast and invade a country, not only to train terrorists as they practice attacks on US troops, but to gain a new generation of followers.

                        IMO, Bush is playing right into bin Laden's hands.

                        I just hope thousands more Americans don't have to die because of the ignorance and stupidity of the Republicans.

                        Seriously DanS... you are well aware of Bush's business career. Do you think a man who failed miserably at EVERY business venture in his entire life is qualified enough to lead a crusade to change the culture of hate in the MidEast? What at all about Bush gives you any shred of confidence that he could accomplish this?
                        To us, it is the BEAST.

                        Comment

                        • #27
                          What exactly was Carter supposed to do in Iran? Invade it to prop up the Pahlevi regime?
                          "Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
                          -Bokonon

                          Comment

                          • #28
                            Yes, I feel that repaying our debts in the ME is of uptmost importance. I feel that OBL has identified a perceived defect in the American national character. He thinks/thought that we are weak because we cut and ran in Iran, Beirut, Gulf War I, Somalia, Sudan, and Taliban Afghanistan (I'm probably missing a few). We don't finish what we start. We didn't punish fully those who stood openly against us. Every president since Carter has a black mark in this regard. Bush Jr has been scrambling trying to correct this perception, but indeed the perception might be true, unfortunately.
                            Well I have heard a lot of views supporting the invasion of Iraq but this is the first time I've heard this one(I am guessing that we agree, DanS, on keeping the troops in Iraq until it is stable). I know that you feel that OBL perceived this 'start but not finish' attitude of the US was a weakness, but regardless of what you feel, it astounds me that you think just because he regarded this is a weakness that we should have gone to war. I got news for you... OBL did not plan and execute 9/11 because he thought we "don't punish fully those who stood against." He wasn't sitting around thinking, "Oh looky, those americans didn't kill Saddam. Let me see if I can kill 3000 Americans on their soil and they might not do too much."

                            The Iraq war started after Afghanistan had been a success. We had accomplished the needed objectives and we could have shifted all of our focus on capturing OBL, his leadership, and systematically destroying terror bases around the world (especially the middle east). How do we identify these terror bases? How bout use all the intelligence and a fraction of the resources being used for the Iraq war right now? I guess you can say that you were right. We didn't finish the War on Terror.... instead we got sidetracked with the war in Iraq.

                            And what Sava said:
                            or perhaps bin Laden knows exactly what the US response would be and he wants the US to come to the MidEast and invade a country, not only to train terrorists as they practice attacks on US troops, but to gain a new generation of followers.
                            is exactly what they said during the 'Inside 9/11' miniseries. That Bin laden wanted the US to attack and invade so he could fight them on his own soil.
                            Last edited by mitch; August 22, 2005, 22:57.

                            Comment

                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Ramo
                              What exactly was Carter supposed to do in Iran? Invade it to prop up the Pahlevi regime?
                              Good question. I don't have all the answers, but can think of some possibilities, such as retaking the embassy in force and occupying the surrounding area. Failing that, perhaps we could have done a small invasion (much bigger than we did) to extract our diplomats. It would have looked weaker than the former response, I have to admit, but still a lot better for our prestige than what actually happened. Another possibility is that we take a small chunk of Iranian territory as payment in trust until we get our diplos and embassy back. For instance, a port area might have done nicely.
                              Last edited by DanS; August 23, 2005, 00:08.
                              I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891

                              Comment

                              • #30
                                mitch,

                                A well thought out summary, I agree with it 100%
                                We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution. - Abraham Lincoln

                                Comment

                                Previous 1 2 3 template Next
                                Working...
                                X