IRAQ WAS THE RIGHT CHOICE
The New York Times has leaked again. This time its using excerpts from the newly written National Intelligence Estimate or NIE. The Time’s premise is that the NIE states the war in Iraq was a mistake, has created more terrorists and made us less safe than we were before it happened.
President Bush is going to declassify the entire document and let us decide for ourself.
I have said before on several occasions, the war in Iraq was a brilliant strategic move in the overall war on terror. The problem we as conservatives face is that most liberals don’t think we are at war. If they did, maybe they would have some constructive arguments about how best to prosecute the war. You have to buy into the idea that we are in a war before you can have serious argument about Iraq. If we can agree that the war on terror is real, then lets talk about Iraq.
9/11 brought an ongoing war to our front yard. It was a wake up call to some that this was indeed a war and as history has shown time and time again, you cannot win a war by defending yourself. From the beginning of civilization to today, no war was ever won by defense. So after 9/11 we had to go on the offensive. But where?
The logical first step was Afghanistan. Which we did. We routed the Taliban and we’re helping to establish a democracy in a former state sponsor of terrorism. What next? Iraq.
The invasion of Iraq did two important things.
First, it moved the war out of our front yard, off our street and across town to another neighborhood. Our enemy, meaning the various terror groups and their state sponsors, are having to focus a greater share of their resources in Iraq than we are. If you want to know why we haven’t been attacked since 9/11 its because we’ve done a good job defending against attacks and we’ve gone on the offensive in Iraq and Afghanistan. Because of the nature of modern terrorism, Iraq is depleting the availability of resources to fight elsewhere.
Secondly, the war in Iraq is a planting a seed right were it needs to be planted. Iraq is right between Iran and Syria, the two biggest state sponsors of terror. The Syrian are ruled by a thug and the Iranian people are ruled by religious fanatics. A rising democracy in Iraq is a threat that Iran and Syrian cannot defeat. It will most surely mean the seed of democracy will start to spread and before long revolution in Syria and Iran will bring about an end to the harsh rule of its people.
We will never fully defeat terrorism because there will always be kooks with guns and bombs, but the modern Islamic-faciast terror movement can be weakened to the point that it can be best handled as a law enforcement issue. The problem with Democrats is they don’t want to do the hard work of war before that.
nutslikebush Says: October 4th, 2006 at 4:24 am
The notion that “most liberals don’t think we are at war” is just a straw man Buck. I am not sure where you get that from because it certainly is not originating from any liberals that I am aware of.
That being set aside, it appears to me that the real problem is that we are at warS. There are many very different sorts of wars going on all at the same time. The mistake is to try to understand them all as a single phenomenon. One war is on the Afghanistan-Pakistan border where al qaeda had its base of operations. We need to decisively win that one. Afghanistan was a good military target after (and before) 9/11 since that is actually where the enemy was. I think most liberals strongly support going after reasonable military targets. Unfortunately, there has been a re-talibanization of Afghanistan and apparently the Taliban and al qaeda all are welcome guests in Pakistan as well. I probably don’t need to remind you that Pakistan has nuclear weapons and periodically threatens to use them against neighbors (India).
Al Qaeda has received most of its support from Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. I would think that you would have preferred that we invade one of those countries since that is were most of the recruits and financial support for our enemies comes from. Those countries are ruled by ruthless people who we treat so gently that it is embarassing. Iran and Syria should be of relatively little concern relative to SA and UAE.
Another war is the war for the hearts and minds of people. That’s one that we are losing miserably. In war the only way to acheive victory is to break the will of your enemy and get them to do our will, right? I don’t see a lot of evidence of progress on that front.
No the war in Iraq is quite a different affair from the war against al qaeda. Iraq was a secular country that although ruled by a ruthless dictator, was not a threat to us. Rule number one is that no matter how much you don’t like another country or its leaders, it is wrong to invade a country that is not a threat. If you say that they are a threat, and they turn out not to be, then there must be accountability by the leadership who made the mistake. Second, when we say that we are “fighting them over there so that we don’t have to fight them here on our streets”, that self-absorbed and immoral. It’s like the Bloods in LA saying, we should fight the Cribs in Buck’s neighborhood so that we don’t have to fight them in our neighborhood. If we go to Buck’s hood, maybe we can draw a lot of the Cribs over there to come fight with us in Buck’s neighborhood instead of ours. So let’s go to Buck’s house and start a fight with him because we don’t like him anyway - and we could just say he was looking at us funny - so it is justified. Don’t you think that is pretty horrible for them to think that it’s ok to bring their fight to your neighborhood? If you answer yes, then you disagree with the let’s fight them over there logic put forth by your president. If I were an Iraqi, I sure would be pissed every time I heard an American say “I’d rather fight them over there in Iraq than here on our streets.” How obscene!
Furthermore, even though we apparently went over to Iraq to pick a fight with al qaeda, what has happened is that al qaeda has grown mostly outside of Iraq and they use our troops as targets just to polish their IED-making skills and AK-47 marksmanship. On top of that majority of the violence is Iraqi Suni vs Iraqi Shite (a civil war). Two ethnic (religious) groups are slitting each other’s throats by the 1000s in a desparate battle for power, each knowing that if the other wins then there will be an “ethnic cleansing” against their people.
Another problem with the Iraq war is that the Kurds are sponsoring terrorism against targets in Turkey. The Kurds have effectively abandoned Iraq and don’t even fly the Iraqi flag or call themselve Iraqi any more. They also are running a covert war against Turkey sending suicide bombers against Turkish targets. Turkey is starting to get very angry and is assembling troops along the Iraq-Turkey border. The US military is getting nervous about this situation (you should do some research on the PKK. The US media will have it on their radar screens until it is old news. US citizens are always the last to find out what is going on in the world).
As usual, there are many layers of complexity that cannot be captured by a simple, unidimensional view of the problem. Ironically, the US long used Iraq to hold Iran and Syria in check and keep them off balance. I never liked that strategy when Reagan was employing it. And I was horrified in 1988 when Saddam used gas against the Kurds during the Kurd uprising. Reagan, I thought in 1988, should have used his power to address the problem as it was unfolding. Rumsfeld visited Saddam in 1988 as an emissary for Reagan and did not speak against the gassings but instead offered the support of the US government. Saddam was a terrible and deserves the worst that life has to offer.
So I am happy that Saddam is on trial. But I don’t think that there is any reason to believe that GW Bush is now executing a strategy that he planned in advance. To use a sports metaphor, Bush is playing not to lose in Iraq. Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz promised Bush a quick, cheap, and easy victory that would help Rove set up the campaign for the 2004 elections. The evidence supporting this interpretation is plentiful and you can easily research it and read about it for yourself. They thought that just toppling Saddam would trigger a flowering of pro-american sentiments toward the US and a secure platform for our middle east operations. We certainly need one as Saudi Arabia is not viable any more and Kuwait is not sufficient. But the Bush administration’s theory was misinformed and their actions were ill-judged. They have brought significant harm to us and our interests in the middle east.
The worst possible outcome seem to be coming to pass. In my opinion, the worst thing that we could do would be to create the impression that the world’s most expensive military can’t secure Baghdad, much less the Al-Anbar province, against a disorganized and relatively small group of mischief makers. That would encourage our enemies and make the mighty Goliath look like it could be hamstrung by a gang (they are not even an army, they are just hoodlums in sandals). Even worse, what if the Iraqi police and politicians are collaborators with the hoodlums? Guess what? They are. The people we helped to put into power in Iraq are now more dangerous enemies to us and our interests than Saddam was.
It will be amusing to see how the far right attempts to turn the problems in Iraq into issues to use politically against the democrats.
The problem with the political rhetoric in this country is that it is an argument about who is right. It doesn’t really matter who is right though, does it? What matters is what is right.
If you really want to help your country, liberate yourself from all ideology and think.
SmokinMirror Says: October 5th, 2006 at 11:41 pm
Hitler wasn’t a threat the the United States in 1937, we said “its not our problem”.. 8 years later 13+ Million civilians alone were killed by the NAZIs let alone the dozens of millions that died otherwise. You can wait to be hurt as the Democrats have set us up to fail. Or you can do what Bush did and do the right thing no matter how many ignorant people say not to do so.
Just as Lincoln had almost no support to fight the south, look at the outcome now, look how many ignorant people he told to go f*k off so he could do the right thing.. A good man doesn’t make his decisions on what others want, a great Leader will make the right decision based on logic and the ability to foresee the positive and negative outcomes of both sides of the isle just as Bush has done. Bush could save a bus full of children and liberals would still bash him for how much he screwed up the situation. This sh*t isn’t even about what’s right and what’s wrong anymore, its about a bunch of miserable people trying to make the side that’s doing the right thing, to look like the failures. The country has really gone down hill because of liberals and its something that I hope changes before my kids are old enough to start school.
Too bad its not a law to live in reality we wouldn’t have any of these issues.
kolran Says: October 6th, 2006 at 3:11 am
Technically we aren’t at war (at least not in Afganastan). You are telling us to liberate ourselve, from what? From the law? From the freedom we love? Or from our political party? What is we aren’t part of a party? What if we have beliefs that we stand by? Should we liberate ourselves from those? Should we take to the street and break the law, because we are liberated? Should we all just watch someone kill someone else and just look the other way, saying, “well he felt like it”? I don’t think you care about freedom, I don’t think you care about law and order. All you care about is that you get everyone else to except sin and your idealism.
Buck Says: October 6th, 2006 at 3:42 pm
Hey NutLikeBush,
The war on terror has many fronts, many enemies and they are connected on different levels. The most basic level connecting these various terror organizations is oppression. All of this muslim radicalism stems from decades of oppression, from within the Muslim world and without, by western forces, including the United States. But the lack of freedom and democracy in the Muslim world is the catalyst that allows the oppression to continue. That is why taking the war on terror to Iraq was the right thing to do.
Some of the battles we are fighting are diplomtic and economic. You assume that we are not fighting the war on terror with Saudi Arabia and the UAE, but we are. You’ve got to pick you fights and your weapons wisely.
From day one, George Bush has said this is a different kind of war and that it will be a long, difficult struggle. He has never strayed from that message.
The problem with NutsLikeYou is that you don’t want to get your hands dirty. You offer no alternatives, only hindsight and critiques.
I agree that the war for hearts and minds is important and we are having a difficult time on that front because our biggest enemy is here at home, calling themselves patriots.
As for your Bloods and Crips analogy, you make my point perfectly. No I don’t want the fight at my house. I want it down the street. And if I can take the fight down the street, protecting my home, and at the same time free a bunch of people who are being held prisoner in the house down the street, they probably won’t mind if a break a few windows to do it.
Good Lord I hate analogies.
British_Nationalist Says: October 6th, 2006 at 9:06 pm
Before I say this, I would like to make it clear, Buck, that I have the utmost respect for your sticking to your stance, however misguided I believe it may be. You have voiced an opinion, and I appreciate the courage which you have shown by not allowing yourself to be dissuaded from what you believe to be right. You have shown more backbone than plenty of American liberals.
However, I believe it is time to be realistic. The campaign in Iraq is an unmitigated disaster. Iraq is engulfed in sectarian violence with the body count rising by the day. Many of these attacks are carried out by shiites, further alienating the sunni minority and making reconciliation even less likely. Insurgent attacks are at an all time high with over 3000 occuring in the last month alone. To me this does not suggest an insurgency on the brink of defeat. Baghdad is a warzone, and the powerless government cowers behind the high walls and fences of the so called greenzone. However much we may like to deceive ourselves otherwise, the Iraqi security forces are hopelessly unprepared, ill trained and vulnerable; almost two thousand five hundred have been killed during the war. Worse still, they are increasingly politically unreliable. Only this week, an entire brigade has had to be retrained for ‘political indoctrination’ over allegations of involvement in the ‘death squads’ roaming Iraq’s streets. Saddam’s trial is joke, I’ve seen more democracy in the People’s Courts of North Korea. Our own casualties while meager compared to the manifold sufferings of the Iraqis are steadily rising.
And the worst thing is that we are stuck there. Buck is right, in that there can be no retreat. We cannot pull out, because we owe it to the Iraqi people to give them so semblance of government rather than leave them to anarchy and civil war. We must stay, and the killing will go on. And it will, a recent US intelligence report [and there I was thinking that was an oxymoron] has estimated the fighting could grind on with no let up for ten years, as well as fuelling terrorism elsewhere.
This is not supposed to be an attack. It is meant to be a brutally honest and pragmatic assessment of the current situation in Iraq. From the dire situation we are in I can only see things getting worse. I sincerely hope I am proved wrong.
bella, horida bella
Wars, horrid wars - Virgil
oscarbelliar Says: October 8th, 2006 at 7:22 pm
look.. thats so one-sided it makes me sick. Here we have a president, hes very moral, and seems like a very likable guy. However, his approval rating is in the twenties, the lowest ever of any president. They attack on 9/11 was by the Taliban, not Iraq. We should either have gone into all the middle east Taliban hot spots, or stayed out all together. This is no longer about terroism. This is about rebuilding a nation we destroyed. As for the newspaper thing, what ever happend to the freedom of the press? Look, its our governments responsibility to keep those tender issues away from the press. Their just trying to sell newspapers. We need to be smarter, and make better decisions within our government.
The Other Side Says: July 14th, 2007 at 4:28 pm
seeing bush stand up arrogantly facing the journalists in his fancy new press room to discredit an al-queda report and use an altered iraq report card is getting really frustrating. How is he so smug and laid back when things are falling apart around him? He is starting to use fear again to try and supress america yet he trivializes a a gvernmental report showing a stronger al-queda. because we shifted our forces to iraq from afganistan, al-queda has grown. furthermore, the iraq report card was supposed to demonstrate if the iraqi government was passing or failing the benchmarks set for them but he changed it to how well they are passing.
his power isn’t only in misrepresenting iraq, he also has no regard for the law. his use of executive priviledge for issues not regarding grave issues of national security, what ep is for, is overreaching and prevents any needed oversight into his politically motivated actions. bush is covering up the political firing of prosecutors in the justice department and obstructing an investigation of the leak of a covert cia agent. he doesn’t care about justice or the constitution.
these examples along with torture, guantanamo, abu garab. nsa wiretapping, etc. provide great crimes against the nation. as a result, impeachment should not be off the table. people are beginning to talk about impeaching bush and cheney, and they aren’t just left-wing nuts. if the congress doesn’t stop this blatant abuse of power being demonstrated by the administration, future presidents will have a precedent to do what bush has done and use the increased power of the executive branch. that is getting into dangerous territory and stomps on checks and balances. without any threat of impeachment, bush can do whatever he wants and act like a monarch which is the opposite of what this country was founded on.
JACKSON Says: July 16th, 2007 at 2:11 am
We can’t pull out of Iraq because that would be a bigger blunder than going in in the first place. We can’t run away from Americas mistakes, Libs and Cons you, we are America and we can’t run away. We will only make it worse. This is what I think we could do to make the outcome in Iraq a little better.
1. As Americans we need to come to grips that the Iraq, Afghanistan are wars we as a nation are engaged in. And to simply
blame the president and run away from both conflicts would be very grave mistakes.
2. Train the Iraqi security force outside of Iraq so we will be better able to protect and train them. It will also be easier to weed out the terrorist infiltrators.
3. As a nation we need to be united because even our enemies find ways to unite to fight us. If we are united as a nation it will give positive hope to the Iraqis and U.S. supporters. Because really who would support someone who has a track record of running away when things got tough. example - lawyer tells you to testify against a mob boss, he said he would protect you but you heard this same lawyer never backed up the last witnesses and they were all found dead. Would you testify for this lawyers case. I think not. How do you think the Iraqis feel when the American nation wants to pul out and leave them for dead.
4. As a nation we need to stop judging our military on how it performs war - it’s a war people it’s not a basketball game. We need to let the military do it’s job they way it needs to. We seriously need to stop crying about our interigation SOP, if you had a choice terrorist interrogation or U.S. interrogation don’t tell me you’d prefer the terrorist one.
5. If you really care about this country and it’s people don’t complain but rather tell us what we could do to make it better. I really believe as human beings we will are able to unit on a truely good cause or idea. If all we have are complaints and negative attitudes nothing will be accomplished. “Liberal State of Mind”
6. If you really care about this country and it’s people as a nation we need come to grips that some wrong choices have been made and telling everyone it is ok is not going to cut it. “Cons State of Mind”
7. Lastly this situation isn’t a Lib or Con problem or mistake, it is a U.S. Citizen problem and that is exactly how our enimies see it…
I also don’t think I know everything, so if you have a better way or if you want to build upon my opinions please feel free. I would rather work a solution not argue for one.
nutslikebush Says: July 16th, 2007 at 12:10 pm
Jackson,
For quite some time more than 70% of Iraqis have wanted the US to pull our troops out of Iraq. They think that we are a major cause of the violence. They can handle al qaeda much better than we can because they know where they are and how to get them. The civil war, sunni vs shia, battle has been going on for 1500 years. Although Saddam successfully suppressed it during his tenure, it was a powder keg waiting for a spark, which the US invasion provided. That battle is so deeply rooted in their history and culture that it is going to play out unless another dictator like Saddam steps in and enforces Saddam-like control over Iraq. The US can’t do that because we are seen as an infidel occupying enemy of Islam. So according to Islamic holy teachings, all muslims are required to expel non-islamic occupiers from their “holy land.” We stepped into the middle of their mythology and they see us as some evil mythical beast that they must die heroically attempting to slay. Our logic (and christian mythology) and their logic (and islamic mythology) do not overlap in any way. We just use each other as place holders for the mythological “evil ones.” A major problem is that we have not understood the myth that is driving their behavior.
nutslikebush Says: July 16th, 2007 at 12:52 pm
the term “Islamic-fascist” (used in the starter article above) actually betrays a misunderstanding of the motivation of the Islamic militants. Unfortunately, those who coined that term don’t seem to understand the enemy. al Qaeda and similar groups are not fascists because they are not trying to establish a state that is ruled by people. They want a world that is ruled by God and that adheres to black and white religious principles precisely as they are dictated in their holy writings. They see themselves as bringing about a global religious redemption and saving souls from damnation. They think that western materialism is evil and corrupting. They see themselves as “sheep dogs” and the people in Muslim countries as sheep in need of protection from wolves (the West) who would destroy them and plunder their Holy Land.
Just 50 years ago the Arabs lived more or less as they had for more than 3000 years and worshiped as they have for 1500 years. Suddenly oil is discovered (by an American) in Saudi Arabia and many Arabs grow vastly wealthy - which some Arabs see as a reward from Allah for their centuries of devotion to Him. But their culture was shaken hard by the collision between the wealth that oil brought to the Arab world and their religion. Extremely devout Muslims like Qutb (the author who inspired the modern Islamist movement), al Zawahiri, and bin Laden reject the western influence and see it as Satan’s lure away from Allah. They want to fight us, but not on our terms. They approach fighting us the way Ali would fight Mike Tyson. Jab and move. Draw us into situations that are disadvantageous to us (urban warfare among an arab population in Iraq is ideal for them - the worst possible scenario for us). Let us make mistakes (e.g., torture Arabs) and get us to throw some wild swings (e.g., Iraq). When we punch ourselves out (e.g., deplete our military in Iraq and spend ourselves silly), they will move in and flick another jab. They can only jab though, they can’t hurt us badly enough to knock us out unless we do really stupid things. We had them in the first round (i.e., Afghanistan) and really could have polished them off if we hadn’t stopped prematurely, redeployed most of our special ops to Iraq, and let al Qaeda and the Talliban rebuild in Afghanistan/Pakistan. That was the biggest military blunder in US history, by the way! Bush and his administration simply didn’t understand the situation.
The Islamists (not ordinary Muslims) see this as an eternal cosmic battle. Ultimately it will be won in the realm of ideas and education of ordinary Muslims. Al Qaeda has nothing to offer them but death and ancient mythology that would keep them from enjoying the benefits and comforts of modern life. But we have to be patient, smart, and avoid punching ourselves out so quickly in upcoming rounds of this fight. We have to make sure that ordinary Muslims join us, not them. There are a few thousand Islamists, there are a billion Muslims who are not radical - yet. Win their hearts, win the war.
WhyNotObama? Says: July 16th, 2007 at 9:34 pm
he Neo-Con, Roman, Greek, and USSR Argument for War in the Middle East: “I know the future and our unprovoked wars in the Middle East will bring order, end terrorism, and create a Shangri La for the world to see.
The Liberal argument: What ever happened to out fight against terrorism? Where is Bin Laudin? Why are we helping Al Quida by giving them and Iran the entire country of IRAQ.
Logical fact based thinking: All major powers that have entered wars in the Middle East failed and depleted their much need resources resulting in the fall of their empire.
If you read the Fatwa that Bin Laudin released after 9/11 you will see that no one has been a greater ally of Al Quida than Bush. Bush followed Osama’s instructions completely. His efforts have helped recruit, train, and focus their mission.
God’s Argument: Love thy neighbor……You are damming your soul with every tax dollar that is spent on war on my son’s homeland. How many more of my children will you rape, crucify, and kill?
JACKSON Says: July 17th, 2007 at 12:44 am
I just want to clarify a couple of things, maybe it will help you understand the situation in Iraq a little better (the point we are at now in Iraq). This is a war, a war is not a game and cannot be fought like a game. You can’t predict or set a time for a war to end. There are no trophies and lives lost will not come back during half time. Rematches in war just means more people will die so try to accomplish your goals the first time. No citizen has the right in my book to tell someone who puts his/her life on the line to follow rules that put them in a disadvantage, especially when those said citizens have never fought in a war themselves or made such a sacrifice or who are oblivious to nature and brutality of war. No one likes war but if you send troops to fight a war as a nation we owe those troops the garauntee we will not hadicap them and we will support them fully.
1. We need to show them that we back them and give all the resources they need to accomplish their mission. Giving them deadlines is unfair, why don’t you try and fix a country with that deadline…
2. Realize that Americas torture SOP is candy land compared to our enemies. And don’t judge our soldiers for doing the dirty work. And don’t sit safe in your home and say I would never do that no matter what. Because if one prisoner could give you information to prevent many other deaths including saving your comrads and you didn’t act on it, then you are the real murderer. Our enemies commit suicide bombings killing hundreds daily you can’t extract information from these people buy playing tapes of Barny kid shows.
Wake up, this a war.
3. Everyone makes mistakes but how can this president make the corrections if at every corner everyone wants to tear him down even at the sacrifice of this great nation. You have to agree many of his opposition are doing it for personal gain let’s not be nieve to that fact. 99% of everyone in the government are on personal crusades.
4. We owe it to the Iraqis and the fallen soldiers to rebuild Iraq, that is Americas moral burden and it must be done or Americans will suffer. We can’t runaway from this war because it will follow us back to America. And yes I would prefer it fought somewhere else besides my front porch. Such a strong stanse to say otherwise but when a bomb blows up at the mall killing alot people you know,then the next day at your office building you will remember how nice it was in America when the war was in Iraq and the terrorists were putting all their resources there.
5. Everyone stop arguing and spitting at our government, think about the situation and lets try and come up with solutions not stir up more hate.
The Other Side Says: July 17th, 2007 at 5:32 am
jackson, there are solutions out there, but the real logical ones don’t seem to fit your mentality. you repeat the “support the troops” talking points perfectly. what we need is a strategy that fits our means, not some fantasy that relies on hundreds of thousands of hypothetical troops. people are talking about sending more troops if petreus wants more. thats unimaginable.
we are the united states of america and therefore are held at a higher standard than terrorists. we should never torture because that makes us as bad as the enemy. the information given by torture cannot be taken literally. what would any of us say to stop the fake drowning or embarassment?
don’t give bush a free pass. he has made mistakes, and then repeats them. he never listens to anyone besides cheney and look where that got us. your number 3 basically blames the democrats who criticize bush. he had a rubber stamp for the first three years of the war. saying bush cannot pass any legislation is blatantly false, in fact, democrats cannot pass anything because of bush and his obstructionalist republicans. bush can and has done whatever he wants and abused the executive branch’s power. the democrats cannot even see what he’s done.
what do we owe iraq? we invaded them. we assumed that they would latch onto democracy. we never thought of the extreme hatred between shiites and sunnies. we place benchmarks for another county and assume they can meet them. and then we blame the iraqis for being weak. how arrogant of a country do we think we are? what makes us think that we know better. i’m waiting for september 15 and then an immediate withdrawal.
nutslikebush Says: July 17th, 2007 at 10:43 pm
Jackson,
I understand you points but I disagree with most of them. The disadvantage that our troops have is that they are an occupying force and they can’t (and never will be able to) identify who the actual enemy is. This is not a tank battle (which we excel at). It is door to door (which is impossible for any military). That means that they have to kill (and torture) many innocents who just happened to be in a cross fire that wouldn’t exist if we had not made the mistake of invading Iraq (memo: Iraq had NOTHING to do with 9/11. Americans don’t know much about the world and just lump all Arabs into one category for convenience). Torture is not an effective way to get accurate, useful information. Virtually all interrogation experts insist that torture is counterproductive and nothing useful comes from it - only misleading or untrustworthy information. And it is bad for the torturer - people who torture become broken people ultimately. American has to be better than that or what else the hell is the point? I am critical of Bush not because he has made a few mistakes but because he just makes the same mistakes over and over. And they are some of the worst mistakes in our nation’s history! It is patently obvious that he is just the wrong man for the job and should have been fired in 2004. If we had a system that demanded that leaders be held accountable, he would have been gone a long time ago. He needs to hear it loud and clear from the citizens that he is doing a poor job or else how can he learn to do the job better? You are right about us owing our support to the Iraqis. We created their current problem and it will cost trillions of dollars to rebuild their country. But a major problem is that their politicians have completely failed to form a functional government. Their Parliament rarely meets, has achieved almost none of the important aims. And their military and police forces are overrun by corruption and infiltrators from the insurgencies. The “let’s fight them over there so we don’t have to fight them over here” argument has no legs. It makes no sense because al Qaeda in Mesopotamia is connected to the internation al Qaeda in name only. In truth, we should have been fighting the real al Qaeda on the Afghanistan/Pakistan border rather than wasting time, resources, and (most importantly) American lives in Iraq. Unfortunately, the occupation of Iraq does absolutely nothing to reduce the chances that we will be hit by a terrorist attack, at least according to our government’s own NIE report. We are not spitting at our government. I believe in our form of government. I have seen our government accomplish the most amazing things. It can work. It just isn’t working now and we need to work hard to fix it. I don’t believe that the dysfunctional state of our current government is permanent. For now we are stuck with Bush. So we must start by imploring the Bush administration to listen to wiser people and abandon the failed neocon theories that got us into this mess. I know that the Islamists are crazy, backward, anti-scientific, anti-modern, religious fanatics (they are even now distributing crazy creationist literature on college campuses, that’s how dark ages they are!). They are a brutal opponent. Even though they really can’t win this thing, the occupation of Iraq strengthens their position and weakens ours. It plays right into their hands and is unwise. I want to bet them decisively and I think that being in Iraq just delays that victory!
WhyNotObama? Says: July 17th, 2007 at 11:45 pm
Solution is simple: Leave Iraq and let the UN bring Peace keeping forces in. Initiate talks with all mideastern countries (Syria, Iran and Saudi Arabia especially).
Our presence in Iraq only spreads more hatred against Americans and as such will only increase the dangers of Terrorism.
Bush had 6 years with a GOP controlled congress and he still couldn’t win this war and he allowed torture….I am not willing to give him another second….he failed…like everything else he’s done (Katrina, No Child Left Behind, Osama, ect….)
Impeachment can also be done for gross negligence as well as failure of duties.
Are you so prideful that you can’t see that in order to find the best solution for Iraq we must remove the reason for its continuing failure…the Executive branch?
JACKSON…I fear you have more in common with our enemy than I am willing to have and much more than our founders (G.Washington especially) and our constitution allow. Please seek counseling.
JACKSON Says: July 19th, 2007 at 8:40 am
WHYNOTOBAMA, Why must you attack me like I am a low life form, I didn’t attack anyone and I made it clear I am open to everyones opinion, I have read nuts post and I respect that, I agree with some of what he said but not a 100%. But I am willing to hear his words so we may together figure out some solutions that are doable. We all have different pieaces of the pie so to speak and to attack each other will only make us less productive and we will simply turn the debate into a pissing match.
I don’t think we can simple leave Iraq and let the UN handle it, the UN doesn’t even have an Army to say the least. But I agree with Nuts on the woes with the Iraqi government. And I am not like our enemy because even though you curse me and disrespect me I will not kill you because I shed blood to make sure your rights to free speach is protected. Before you judge put yourself in that position because beings well say things like I would never eat trash out of a trashcan but you know well many do to simply survive. Survive is a key word. We soldiers are a family, like your family, you would do many things to make sure your family is safe. To a soldier, the soldier next to him is all he/she gots. Now you have to come to grips that U.S. torture really isn’t torture when you compare it to our enemy. And sleep deprivation, your nose in someones ass or doing a pyramid is way better then having someone drill your head with a drill or cutting your fingers off.
So nuts thanks for your comments I will take them into consideration, WhyNot take a deep breath and relax we will accomplish nothing calling each other names, and besides we will never really truely know each other so to start name calling will just kill this debate and turn it into a bunch of guys trying to punk each other on the internet, i know we are more mature than that.
nutslikebush Says: July 19th, 2007 at 6:06 pm
oops - I meant “beat them decisively”; not “bet (sic) them decisively.”
nutslikebush Says: July 19th, 2007 at 6:38 pm
Jackson,
If we are to have a government that is “of the people, for the people, and by the people” then we, the people, have to speak intelligently and forcefully to the government. Our elected officials work for us. They are in office to execute OUR will, not theirs. WE are the deciders!
WhyNotObama? Says: July 20th, 2007 at 11:00 pm
Jackson,
If you support any kind of torture you only prove yourself to be as bad as those we are fighting. George Washington when asked by his army if they could beat prisoners once said “Treat them with humanity, and let them have no reason to complain of our copying the brutal example of the British army in their treatment of our unfortunate brethren.”
If we truly want to spread freedom and democracy in the Middle East than any type of torture will work directly against our goals. It will only prove intentions of humiliation and exploitation. Something Iraq knows well enough from their previous dictator. WE need to show them what it is like to have rule by law that doesn’t engage in cruel and unusual punishment. Especially since some of our soldiers have already been found guilty a raping and murdering children (both in Abu Gareb and in other parts of Iraq).
Why Torture?
Torture produces fatly intelligence. In fact some of the fatly intelligence Bush used to get us in this war was obtained by individuals tortured in other “ally” countries. The real reason we torture is for our own sick gratification. Would you torture Bin Laudin? How about Timothy McVey? Why? Revenge serves no purpose except to allow their evils to become ours.
So yes, Jackson, you are making yourself a low life form…since you have less respect for human rights, you are in fact less than human. Your arguments are cannibalistic of global human rights. My American pride begins in the provisions of the Bill Of Rights, while legally only applying to Americans, we should use it as a standard to shine to the world. No one…regardless…should be subject to cruel and unusual punishment. Especially in a war we initiated based on lies we told the entire world.
I suggest you stop watching shows like “24” or “Over There” that desperately try to justify our torture. If you really are a soldier then I beg you never to follow orders of to personally engage in any type of torture regardless. The duty you feel for your fellow soldiers should be trumped by your duty to America and our Bill of Rights. Instead seek counseling or embrace a love for JESUS (who ironically died in the Middle East by some similar tortures from a foreign empire).
P.S. I’m sorry for not doing more to remove your idiot commander a chief.
The Other Side Says: July 21st, 2007 at 4:25 am
the war in iraq stirs up some pretty bitter emotions. bush went to war without any credible intelligence, screws up royally over and over and, even in the face of mounting criticism, won’t budge.
the new “wait until september” talking point isn’t credible anymore because even his commanders on the ground, the ones we’re supposed to listen to, say that we need to wait until november to have a reliable assessment. petreus says that nothing will change between now and september. republicans keep saying that we need to give the surge a chance because it just began but troops started deploying in late january. these talking points that republicans keep spewing to waste time are getting old and their unwavering support of bush is getting frustrating (the reason why Congress hasn’t done anything is because of the republicans’ obstructionist tactics).
now bush is even lying to america, testing our intelligence. he says al-queda in iraq attacked us during 9-11. except al-queda central, with bin laden, attacked us, and they’re in pakistan. al-queda in iraq share ideology with al-queda central, but aren’t the same people from 9-11.
i’m sorry if this debate is too aggresive, but this topic is so important and the “leave iraq” side hasn’t been able to do anything humanly possible to change course because of one man. every us casualty from this war is difficult to swallow knowing they are stuck with no winning strategy facing sectarian violence and al-queda. bush seems to care more about his place in history than righting a wrong and admitting his mistake.
nutslikebush Says: July 21st, 2007 at 7:09 pm
I think that one thing that we all agree on is that we (the US and the Western world in general) must defeat al Qaeda, Hamas, and other similar Islamist terrorists networks. We have to do what al Qaeda fears the most, win the hearts of the Muslim world. But al Qaeda will never stop trying to hurt us - they can’t beat us by any stretch of the imagination. But we need to penetrate their organizations and make sure that we are getting excellent intelligence from insiders. We need to make it impossible for them to trust each other. That means that we need to recruit and train lots of young arab spys who can get in there and disrupt them. A network of young Arab 007s who work for us and our cause - that is what we need.
JACKSON Says: July 22nd, 2007 at 10:49 pm
Sorry Whynot, but George Washington was a slave owner but he wouldn’t torture his white enemies but he’d make a black man fetch him a sandwhich. To me George Washington was cruel and unusual. Yes I am a soldier and my soldiers are my family and if one evil man can give me information to save my family then yes I am a low life for making that decision. I don’t think I could live with myself knowing I could have saved my soldiers who are here not for their own benifit but for our country, but because to be rightous, even though this man would have blown himself up in a market killing civillians. So you would not harm a captured suspect who’s group kidnapped your family and confirmed killed your wife. So they have your 2 kids hostage somewhere, but because you want to be ethical you would not harm this man to get information. I don’t mean kill him or beat him to death, I mean use truth drugs or make him uncomfortable. Have you lost anybody whynot, have you lost anybody who you where responsible for, has someone died in your arms by a bad person. Please don’t judge me. I am in a war, in a country were people kill each other because they put cucumbers and tomatoes side by side, were terrorist bomb markets and my soldiers die because of the flag on our shoulders. I have Jesus in my heart and yes many decisions made in wartime are very difficult but it isn’t as easy as right and wrong. Before you judge walk in these shoes.
JACKSON Says: July 22nd, 2007 at 11:03 pm
Nuts I agree with you to a certain extent about the how the people need to be the deciders of what our government do, but clarify is it the majority or minority that decides. How could we unite, we would have anarchy, everyone would want to be the deciding factor.
Nuts I give up, I am going to go back to my job and leave the debate to you guys. I hope you find a good solution to our government because there are rats on both sides of the fence. It’s a tough task but maybe if you have a good enough idea, you’ll make a differance. Good luck and God bless.
nutslikebush Says: July 23rd, 2007 at 2:48 pm
Jackson,
Never give up.
WhyNotObama? Says: July 23rd, 2007 at 11:41 pm
I’m not saying I wouldn’t torture some one who murdered or raped my family. I probably would but I know that allowing torture as policy or being administered by people who are supposed to represent my country in war is wrong.
Remember!!
WE ARE THE INVADERS AND WE BROUGHT THE TERRORIST TO IRAQ!!!
IT’S THEIR COUNTY….They know we are there for THEIR OIL. It is our fault for putting our soldiers (this means you Jackson) in their country. If they were occupying our country I’m sure you would do the same or much worse. The suicide bombs by Al Quida are only happening because WE BROUGHT AL QUIDA TO IRAQ!
“use truth drugs or make him uncomfortable”
You know that is BS. We Beat, We Water Board, We Humiliate, We ship POW’s to Secret Camps where we **********YOU WILL NEVER KNOW**************. In this war we have raped children!!! I am guilty….you are guilty…..we must end this now and ask for forgiveness.
Bush’s latest Executive order to comply with the Geneva Convention is late in coming and, much like all his ideas, reactionary to problems he created due to his administrations poor planning, poor implementation, and poor judgment on all of our policies related to IRAQ. I also wonder if soldiers (like you JACKSON) will follow them.
The common good of global human rights out weight you or your fellow soldiers (and terrorists) need or want to wage war.
P.S. I don’t need to have friends or family die in my arms to know how it would make me think diferently. Every victim our our torture has family too.
The Other Side Says: July 24th, 2007 at 1:54 am
this debate is going to be pointless if there isn’t a conservative voice.
and just to clarify, the minority is deciding what policies are being passed. there is always the threat of a bush veto, but the republicans are filibustering almost every bill that the democrats are trying to pass. the democrats cannot find sixty votes to vote for cloture and stop the filibuster so they are helpless to the republican obstructionism. congress is at a lower rating than bush because of their apparent lack of progress and people seem to blame the democrats. that says more about the petty republicans than the democratic majority.
SPC. Blakely Says: July 27th, 2007 at 7:44 pm
Nuts, Al qaeda is a dead orginization. After Afghanistan their orginization was fractured splintered and broken. It still is. Most of Al Qaeda right now is just a bunch of loosly tied orginizations from around the world, united basicly only by osama.
I’ve screamed this at my commanders before, especially when I was in Afghanistan, Killing Bin Laden is the final nail in AQ’s cofffin, without him, they will fracture, in fighting will consume them, and they’ll eventually end up killing eachother like they do in Iraq.
simular to whats happening to the Taliban right now, after mullah dadullah dies, many taliban commanders started speaking with the government. theres more to that that I can’t talk about, but trust me if whats happening to the Taliban happens to AQ, it’ll wither up and die like the snake it is.
as for the arabian 007 idea, trust me if it happens very very few people will know about it, IE the only people that will know of it’s existance would be the president, the chiefs of staff, those directly involved, and the only people that would know their identities would be those directly involved, it’s a level of TS WAY out of our league
The Other Side Says: July 28th, 2007 at 3:29 pm
so spc. blakely is more credible than the intelligence report saying that al-queda is stronger now than they have been since 9/11? how can you say that al-queda is weak? america diverted forces from fighting al-queda in afghanistan to iraq which provided a window for al-queda to regroup and grow. furthermore, america’s invasion of iraq gave al-queda the perfect recruiting tool for their perverted ideology. al-queda is using iraq to show perspective jihadists that america invades muslim countries to take their resources and oppress their people.
our military is doing a great job of stopping the attacks but are not equip at changing the hearts and minds of the middle east. thats what diplomacy and the middle eastern governments are for. but we’re not doing that.
bush’s connection between al-queda in iraq and al-queda central is misleading, but trivializing al-queda central’s strength is dangerous. they have shown that they have the capabilities to attack america. we have killed terrorist leaders before, but that hasn’t stopped the ideology. just killing bin laden isn’t enough to break up al-queda. it isn’t that simple. people are pissed at america, for real and fake reasons. killing one man isn’t going to change mindsets, it may make it worse.
SPC. Blakely Says: July 31st, 2007 at 9:50 pm
Logisticly they are stronger.
if youbother to read more than the damn headline, you’d know what I mean. their money is stronger, they have more people, and weapons, but what good is that if none of the cells are communicating with eachother, and theirs only about 3 or 4 guys holding you together and keeping you from killing other cells.
they aren’t the great intertwined network they were before the invasion, now they’re nothing more than just a bunch of different groups loosly tied together by a fractured ideology.