Reflections on the Iraq War

[Formaldehyde]

Well, one shouldn't do it at all to be honest. Only true sphincters engage in it on the forums and invariably make such errors themselves making them the worst of hypocrites.

His comment would have been better had it been expressed as a compound sentence;
not to mention the bad vocabulary use.

I actually do a lot of writing for my career, but I don't really take the time to write here as if i'm creating a techinical legal document. Nor should I (or anyone) be expected to. He's just being a douche as usual.

So you fully admit you scored yet another "goal" on yourself, while continuing to whine about non-existent "bad vocabulary"?

"'Cause" "your" "just being a" hypocritical "douche", as usual:

That's just....amazingly funny not to mention quite ironic.

 

[JollyRoger]

The reason for the obsession with Forma is some fear the one-lining pain inherent in changing targets.

 

[Borachio]

What does that mean? "the one-lining pain"? What pain in producing one-liners? And why should it be inherent in changing targets (presumably focusing on another poster)?

I'm losing my marbles, I fear.

 

[timtofly]

Perhaps it is the avatar?

 

[Antilogic]

What does that mean? "the one-lining pain"? What pain in producing one-liners? And why should it be inherent in changing targets (presumably focusing on another poster)?

I'm losing my marbles, I fear.

JollyRoger is unmatched in both the brevity of his posts and the stinging wit behind them.

 

[Borachio]

I don't deny it. But that one left me both baffled and unstung. Oh right, formic acid? I see a bit more. Still doesn't add up to much. Never mind. Did I mention I'm dull-witted?

 

[Cutlass]

"I'm comfortable with what I did."
-- George W. Bush, on the Iraq War, April 14, 2013

"He's been pretty immune to what people say."
-- Jim Francis, Bush fundraiser

"His conscience is clear."
-- Joe O'Neill, Bush childhood friend

 

[GhostWriter16]

"I'm comfortable with what I did."
-- George W. Bush, on the Iraq War, April 14, 2013

"He's been pretty immune to what people say."
-- Jim Francis, Bush fundraiser

"His conscience is clear."
-- Joe O'Neill, Bush childhood friend

I have to give it to you, Cutlass. You've hit the nail on the head with this one. George W. Bush is a despicable human being. Europe is completely justified in wanting him for crimes against humanity. My question is, how will you defend Obama for taking so darn long to pull out? Obama was apparently against the war the entire time, yet he waited three years to end the darn thing...

 

[classical_hero]

You say this yet you don't even pause to contemplate that under the flawed intelligence available at the time, the President may have actually thought he was acting to protect the American people from further terrorist attacks (with WMD's to boot). Sure, the intelligence was complete bunk but before you go all libertarian crusader you should at least address the very likely possibility that the President was doing exactly what you say he should do here.

Lets say that the intelligence was correct and nothing was done about it and then somewhere, someone was attacked with these weapons. I seriously doubt that anyone would say that we were right to invade. No one at the time had any reason to doubt the intelligence. Being wrong in this situation could have cost many more lives than it did. Sure hindsight is 20/20 but you have to go on what you have right then and there. Anything else is suicide.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

Lets say that the intelligence was correct and nothing was done about it and then somewhere, someone was attacked with these weapons. I seriously doubt that anyone would say that we were right to invade. No one at the time had any reason to doubt the intelligence. Being wrong in this situation could have cost many more lives than it did. Sure hindsight is 20/20 but you have to go on what you have right then and there. Anything else is suicide.

That's basically what I said, but worded differently. However, there were people with reason to doubt the intelligence at the time and they spoke up and were brushed aside. Just saying. Still, I agree with you and I'm curious if you misread my post and are trying to attack it or if you are actually agreeing with me...

Also, I think the bolded sentence was meant to say '....we were wrong to invade.' otherwise it doesn't make sense.

 

[GhostWriter16]

I'd still say we were wrong to invade. You still can't just attack and kill people because of what somebody might do. But the prospect of Iraq actually using nuclear weapons is laughable at best.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

I'd still say we were wrong to invade. You still can't just attack and kill people because of what somebody might do. But the prospect of Iraq actually using nuclear weapons is laughable at best.

Do you remember when you were like, 'ZOMG Only the EVIL AMERICAN EMPIRE used WMD's' and I posted a list of other countries that used them as well...yeah go look up that list again buddy. Iraq was on the list of nations that used WMD's both on the battlefield and to kill their own civilians. BTW - WMD's covers more than just nuclear weapons.

As for attacking a nation based on what they may do, you have a point, but it's the commander in chief's job to secure the safety of the American people. You may disagree with his call but to doubt the motives because EVIL AMERICAN EMPIRE is laugable at best, to borrow your phrase. Don't forget that we went down this road because you said

The lives and liberty of the American People is the President's concern, and that's it.

Then I pointed out that's exactly what he was doing and now you've got another contradictory nonsense answer that you didn't put 2 seconds of thought into before you spammed it. Congrats

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Lets say that the intelligence was correct and nothing was done about it and then somewhere, someone was attacked with these weapons. I seriously doubt that anyone would say that we were right to invade. No one at the time had any reason to doubt the intelligence. Being wrong in this situation could have cost many more lives than it did. Sure hindsight is 20/20 but you have to go on what you have right then and there. Anything else is suicide.

In other words, we shouldn't hold politicians accountable for their actions because it's so easy talking after the fact?

But this

No one at the time had any reason to doubt the intelligence

You don't think the consequence of going into war is a reason to doubt intelligence?

This isn't intelligent design we're talking about, this is a decision that had foreseeable severe consequences. That is reason enough to seriously doubt intelligence to make sure you get it right.

 

[Arwon]

Lets say that the intelligence was correct and nothing was done about it and then somewhere, someone was attacked with these weapons. I seriously doubt that anyone would say that we were right to invade. No one at the time had any reason to doubt the intelligence. Being wrong in this situation could have cost many more lives than it did. Sure hindsight is 20/20 but you have to go on what you have right then and there. Anything else is suicide.

The Australian intelligence community essentially outright told Howard it was wrong.

But what would they know.

 

[bathsheba666]

No one at the time had any reason to doubt the intelligence.

Wow, this is just ignorant.

The available intelligence had to be rewritten by the politicos around the globe to eliminate all of he considerable doubt.
The turd was well and truly buffed.

In the UK, someone even committed suicide after he was outed as the source of the information that the government were lying (or the dossier was 'sexed up' in the argot of the time )

This led to the hilarity of the Hutton report, where further games were played with the English language, and the assumption that Bliar - being a thoroughly good chap - should always be believed saw the light of day.

 

[GhostWriter16]

Do you remember when you were like, 'ZOMG Only the EVIL AMERICAN EMPIRE used WMD's' and I posted a list of other countries that used them as well...yeah go look up that list again buddy. Iraq was on the list of nations that used WMD's both on the battlefield and to kill their own civilians. BTW - WMD's covers more than just nuclear weapons.

As for attacking a nation based on what they may do, you have a point, but it's the commander in chief's job to secure the safety of the American people. You may disagree with his call but to doubt the motives because EVIL AMERICAN EMPIRE is laugable at best, to borrow your phrase. Don't forget that we went down this road because you said


Then I pointed out that's exactly what he was doing and now you've got another contradictory nonsense answer that you didn't put 2 seconds of thought into before you spammed it. Congrats

Fair point on nukes not being the be all end all of WMDs.

As for my line...

It isn't our job to protect anyone outside of this country. That means if Saddam is killing his own people, or North Korea is a repressive dictatorship that throws its own people into concentration camps, or Saudi Arabia kills gay people, or Christians, or if Germany, Austria, Britain, France, Russia, and other nations get into a massive war and start killing millions of people, its not our government's job to intervene in these things.

That doesn't give us the right to kill innocent people just because we shouldn't intervene when someone else does so.

 

[peter grimes]

Fair point on nukes not being the be all end all of WMDs.

As for my line...

It isn't our job to protect anyone outside of this country. That means if Saddam is killing his own people, or North Korea is a repressive dictatorship that throws its own people into concentration camps, or Saudi Arabia kills gay people, or Christians, or if Germany, Austria, Britain, France, Russia, and other nations get into a massive war and start killing millions of people, its not our government's job to intervene in these things.

That doesn't give us the right to kill innocent people just because we shouldn't intervene when someone else does so.

So why do you use your christianity to justify some actions of government but not others? Seems inconsistent to me.

 

[GhostWriter16]

So why do you use your christianity to justify some actions of government but not others? Seems inconsistent to me.

When did I use my Christianity to justify any of that?

 

[Borachio]

This MobBoss avatar thing keeps really throwing me!

 

[Patroklos]

I was just thinking that myself. Very annoying.