Your Deep Thought for the 4th of July — the notion that Saddam Hussein was such a clear and present danger to the US that we needed to spend 3 trillion dollar and sacrifice 5000 soldiers to dispose him is insane. We should not be in Iraq. McCain, nice guy that he is, will continue this insane agenda.
11 thoughts on “Insanity”
I’m not apologizing for my choice of tense. To say that I lied is ridiculous. The price we are paying for what we are getting is way out of balance in Iraq. The cost is high and getting higher and the return is low and getting lower. It’s likely we’ll have another Iran in Iraq — an Islamic state that is not friendly to the US. Our best hope is another Saudi Arabia, where they hate us but are beat down by an ultra-rich plutocracy.
See next post…
most of “those people” don’t even live in their country anymore.
look what has happened to Christians since Saddams fall….(not that Saddam was good in anyway shape or form)…..currently the state of Christianity in Iraq is the worst it has been in 2000 years…
what about; the shopkeeper, the teacher, the professor, the non-fundamentalists….?
what about law inforcement, schools, hospitals, neighborhoods, not to mention the infrastructure (which you said yourself was messed up)
Millions and millions have fled Iraq. Millions are refugees to poor to leave the country.
To say that things are ‘better’ is an ignorant selfish statement. Yes, things are “better” for our Forces. Things are better concerning our “situation” on the ground.
Things are certainly not “better” for the average citizen……hopefully one day things will be better.
by whose account?
Iraq is busted. We are trying hard to fix it but it is far from ‘better’.
Sorry imagine, your just wrong about this. Yeah, there’s a bunch of fucked up infrastructure, that happens in war. There is one great big giant difference now, those people are free and no longer live under one of the worst tyrants the world has known. This is better, not worse.
I called you a liar because you lied. That is not self righteous OR condescending. You did not say in your post it was an estimate, you clearly stated that we had spent that amount. You still fail to address my point, that you seem to need to lie, obfuscate, inflate, etc. to try and make your point. If you have a solid case, you should make it by first telling the truth.
And yes, we not only could, but should be there for decades, just like S. Korea, just like Germany, just like Spain, etc. It keeps us, and the rest of the civilized world safer to have our military stationed throughout the world.
And I am not calling anybody Islamo-Nazi-Fascists except the Islamo-Nazi-Fascists, where do I call all Iranians that? I referring to the people who would just as soon cut off your head as look at you because you are an infidel, or kill you if you are gay, or send their own children into a crowded market with a bomb strapped to them. Those guys need to go and we are defeating them, like it or not.
And no, I do not think that we should kick the ass of everyone who doesn’t like us. That’s hyperbole meant to paint me as something I am not. I do however, think we should kick the ass of anyone who seeks to kill us before they kill me or mine.
Michael, I’m not stupid or evil, I disagree with you on how we should face this challenge. You think we can talk, negotiate, appease. I believe we cannot. This is an honest difference of opinion and I believe that if we followed your path, we would be worse off, not better. If we were not confronting this enemy in Iraq for the past 5 years, whos to say what may have happened. Maybe all these guys who we have now defeated in Iraq might have spread out around the world and caused all kinds of death and destruction. The fact is Michael is you can’t know that, and that very wel;l might have happened. And just because you say or think I am the one who is misguided, does not make it so.
Gentlemen; with all due respect, your argument is about the past. What is the future?
how long, how many, how much.
We have created a huge mess.
To say we are fighting terror over there so as not to have to fight it over here is propaganda.
Micadelic, I highly suggest you read your own posts. You are self-righteous and condescending as you call me a liar over and over. So please STFU about this “framing” bullshit.
I used a number that was an estimate of the total cost of the war. You said we’ve spent $600 billion so far. You also indicated we could be there for decades. So whose number is more accurate? Yours is out-of-date already, mine is a well-informed estimate of the total cost of the war.
You know (or you should know) that the neo-cons wanted to invade Iraq before 9/11 and that they used 9/11 to advance that agenda. As I’ve heard said, if Iraq is a hotbed of terrorism now it is only because we made it so by our inexpert destablization of the region. The notion that insurgents == terrorists is convenient if you support a US permanent occupation of the region. They are fighting back because of your retarded prescription for the region.
The fact that you use a phrase like “Islamo-Nazi-Fascists” reveals your ignorance and your pro-violence bias towards foreign policy in the Middle East. For example, Iranians like Americans. We could easily negotiate peace with Iran. But as soon as the “Islamo-Nazi-Fascists” label comes out, that becomes impossible. Just like the retarded notion of an “axis of evil”.
You continue to support the utter failure of foreign policy that Bush started because you think that America should kick the ass of everyone that doesn’t like us. You think nation building, occupation and military solutions are the right way to approach these problems. YOU, sir, are the problem.
I’m not a pacifist. I think there is a role for US military power in the world. This ain’t it. It’s a waste of money and a waste of lives and it is unbelievable that people that claim they support the military would continue to support it.
How did we decide this war was a war on terror? I thought we were liberators?, I thought there we were on the brink of having WMD’s rain down upon our heads?
The majority of the terrorists came from SA and we can’t kiss that royal ass enough.
Hindsite is 20-20 but if we would have waited (as many, many people begged us to do) about 18 months, Iraq would have had a coup of some kind. (Granted we could have ended up with a worse asshole than Saddam…but we still may end up with a worse asshole than Saddam.
My argument is more current. I don’t see any possible “win” in this mess. Iraq is a far worse shit hole right now than it was under Saddam. Any puppet we prop up will tumble unless they are a ruthless dictator….unless we stay there, I do not believe that democracy will replace theocracy…..
We fucked up on so many levels. We should have known what occupation would bring. We should have never disbanded the military and on and on…
How long do we stay? How many deaths? How much money?
Thank you, the 3 million dollars is an estimate. You stated in your post and I quote; “that we needed to spend 3 trillion dollar and sacrifice 5000 soldiers to dispose him is insane”. Please try to respond to what I posted, that you seem to need to distort the facts in order to make your point. If you have an argument, you should be able to forward it without distorting the facts.
We did start a fight with Saddam, and it was a fight that should have been over relatively quickly, but guess what? The Al-Qaeda losers decided to stream in like flies on stink and they decided to make it their battlefield too. So we gladly obliged them and by all accounts (including the Times of London) we’ve kicked their sorry asses. This is a good thing.
So Michael, how about if you debate, and not vilify? How about you challenge, but not ridicule? How about you admit that there just might be other arguments besides your own that may have merit? I actually believe your arguments have merit, and I’m glad you express them. I just wish you would “frame” your arguments more honestly and respectfully. I think we could have a better debate.
We both know we’ll never agree on this. The 3 trillion dollars is an estimate based on the total cost of the war. Using your number we’re still 1/5 of the way to 3 trillion and the number you quote does not account for the care and suffering of thousands of injured soldiers for the rest of their lives and about a thousand other factors.
Saddam Hussein was not nearly as capable or motivated as Hitler, by a long shot. So why do you constantly bring up WWII? No one would oppose this war if Hussein had done what Hitler had. When he did enter Kuwait we all gladly kicked him the hell back out. WWII is not a very good analogy for Iraq.
The thing you guys never take into account is that the “enemy” in this case is not Saddam Hussein anymore. We started fighting one enemy and we are now fighting another enemy. Do you think that is noteworthy? The enemy we are fighting now are people (in their view) defending their homeland from invaders and people who (rightly) hate our interference in the Middle East. We created this enemy. Our foreign policy in Iran, Iraq, Israel, etc. SUCKS and there is not a military solution. You are being tricked or you are not thinking clearly about this.
It’s amazing that after years of lying and rose-colored denial from Bush and these other incompetent neo-cons that you still defend this very, very, very bad idea.
I often say to folks on the left… if you have such a good point, why do you have to lie? Actually, I know the answer to that question, you guys know that if you repeat lies often enough, the stupid and ill-informed will believe it. I’ve got to give it to you though as that strategy does seem to work.
Lie #1 – 5,000 casualties.
To date, there have been 4,113 US soldiers killed in Iraq. Yes that is tragic but we lost 416,000 troops in WWII fighting an enemy that, I believe, is not as threatening to the US as the enemy we currently face. I hate the fact that 4,113 of our finest have died over there but the point I am making is you shouldn’t have to lie to bolster your argument.
Lie #2 – Insane agenda
Many, many, many people believed Saddam was a clear and present danger to the US. Not only GWB. Please don’t make me go back and get all the quotes by both Clintons and almost all of the current Democratic leadership. You may disagree with us getting involved, and with our continued presence, that is perfectly legitimate. But calling it an “insane agenda” is typical of the arrogance and self-righteousness of the left. Because we disagree, we are not evil, or insane, or stupid. We have a different world view and I understand we don’t agree.
Lie #3 – 3 Trillion dollars
To date the war in Iraq has cost less than 600 billion, which is undoubtedly a lot of money but it’s not 3 trillion. The 3 trillion figure the left likes to throw around is an estimate of what the war MIGHT cost by the time it’s all said and done. Again, why do you have to lie to make your point? You clearly state in your post that we’ve spent 3 trillion dollars in Iraq and that is just not factual.
So, if you want to make a point, and you’ve got such a great argument, try making it without lying, inflating, and demagoguing. That way you might actually have a chance of persuading someone who does not agree with you AND is well informed. Otherwise, you’re just stirring the pot and preaching to the choir, aren’t you?
And in case you haven’t noticed, we’re winning in Iraq, we have largely succeeded, even your Dem leaders acknowledge this. Out of the 18 stated benchmarks for Iraq, I believe 15 of them have now been met. I know you guys wanted us to lose so you could rub GWBs nose in it but guess what? We’re not losing and we clearly will not lose, despite the left’s best efforts to derail our success. I do not say that lightly or as hyperbole, I truly believe it. One way that you can really tell we’re winning is reports on Iraq have just about disappeared from the mainstream media. Good news in Iraq does not fit their agenda so they don’t report it. I can get you facts and figures on the amount of news stories about Iraq for the last 6 months compared to the number of stories a year ago, it’s truly amazing.
I’m glad we are fighting the Islamo-Nazi-Fascists in Iraq rather than wherever they may choose to pick a fight with us. It’s better to be on offense than on defense. We’re on offense and we are wiping them out. This is a good thing.
And Michael, how much longer should our troops stay in Germany, or Japan, or in most of Western Europe for that matter? I think we should have bases, and troops, in Iraq and other places in the Mideast for a long time to come. It protects our interests and it keeps us safe.
Not protecting our interests, and not being on the offensive against this enemy, and pulling our troops precipitously from Iraq is what would be insane.