Comments on: Afghanistan and Iraq; Necessary and Choice?

By: Interested

Interested — Wed, 16 Jul 2008 00:53:21 +0000

Until then, I will know that it is only about getting cheap oil."

Prove what you "know"

Why? Because many right-wingers were drunk at the prospect of emulating some shiny, diffuse civilization-saving orgy of manliness from the past, and refused to see the evidence suggesting most of it was about oil. The rest of the US was frightened, or vindictive

Again prove, then take a history lesson and place your right-wingers in camp with the Left, for without the left, it could not have happened. And again - prove it. We’re not talking your petty little wanna-be’s

But the left-wingers are partisan idealist naifs who have no concern for civilians or future consequences and have no respect for the troops

Well you said one thing right. Whether you intended to or not.

By: Chuck Norton

Chuck Norton — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 23:57:21 +0000

Michael - if you read this report - http://www.fas.org/irp/eprint/iraqi/index.html

You will see that internal Iraqi documents show that Saddam supported any terrorists that shared similar enemies. Including giving training, shelter, materials, and financial support to terror groups that worked directly with bin-Laden. Iraqi intelligence watched bin-Laden closely to make sure that he did not turn against Saddam - and he never did. Saddam did not have control over the terror groups, or even have any operation influence outside of the training and material support but since they shared many of the same goals he didn’t have to.

By: utsu

utsu — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 23:23:36 +0000

"The chance to remove a hated dictator from a volatile region of the globe, to finish a war that had been started almost 13 years before, to plant democracy in a region dominated by autocracy"So get to work on some other countries as well. Until then, I will know that it is only about getting cheap oil."and to stem the growth of Islamic extremism."Post-invasion problem. The US should get out once ASAP - the only concern should be the liberty and environment of the average Iraqi, screw anything else."But we?ve achieved a considerable amount in Iraq even, if by Michael?s standards, it wasn?t a "necessity"."You could have acheived more if you hadn’t put your trust in your government while there was no reason to. US civilians failed the troops and the Iraqis horribly."However the left continues to try and justify the Afghanistan war to make themselves not appear to be weak and intimidated."Oh, you’ve read all our minds. Dash it, I guess the jig is up."The antiwar is opposed to both wars."For separate lists of reasons. You give the impression that you see these people as having some mental conditions or something."The two wedded and along with their insane energy policy that will destroy America in 4 years after Obama is elected"It took Bush 8 years to screw up the US indefinitely. I guess the democrats are better at destroying the US than republicans as well."The minute they are in power they will set their sights on pulling out of Afghanistan too."Well, that region is proper screwed up as well. The "long haul" approach has failed again and again - when will war supporters see that the onus is still on them?The wars were handled as if a strawman socialist had done it - idealistically, proudly, naively, unrealistically and with no concern for the future, the people on the ground or any long-term consequences. Why? Because many right-wingers were drunk at the prospect of emulating some shiny, diffuse civilization-saving orgy of manliness from the past, and refused to see the evidence suggesting most of it was about oil. The rest of the US was frightened, or vindictive.Then, when we realize they have screwed up three whole nations in different ways (the US, Iraq and Afghanistan), created a net increase in terrorism and also forced US troops to function as indefinite plugs against some bloodbath we want to end it ASAP. Obama lays out a detailed plan, talks with generals, visits Israel and even demands that Pakistan stops abusing US trust. But the left-wingers are partisan idealist naifs who have no concern for civilians or future consequences and have no respect for the troops. Also, they’re sly. So the media makes sure no one forgets some people actually discuss whether Obama’s a muslim or not (seriously, they STILL talk about it as if it isn’t the topic of people who drink paint thinner on public transportaion vehicles).I see very little today that suggests that the Afghanistan conflict is some temporary shield to whatever pathetic accusations of cowardice are levelled by the people who couldn’t bother to demand a functioning war effort. Or, for that matter, considered akin to the Iraq occupation by most left-wingers. The former is justified and executed with vicious incompetence, the latter is immoral, unjustified and handled with a carelessness that is titanic in scope.

By: Kevin H

Kevin H — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 20:54:43 +0000

#3 is a bit ridiculous. So you start a war to train people to fight a war that is already going on? Also, there is no reason that they couldn’t have learned counterinsurgency in Afghanistan the same way they learned it in Iraq: On the ground. The key here is the tactics that are finally being used, not where they learned them.

I think many liberals (myself included) would be willing to say that Iraq is NOW a war of necessity. If we were to simply redeploy to Afghanistan, many of those fighters would simply migrate into Iraq. However, it is clear that at the time the war began, this was not the case. We foolishly chose to open up another front in the war on terrorism, and our goal of irradiating or containing terrorism has been hurt because of it.

I think a clear seperation of past and present are needed by both liberals who are so angry at the mistakes of the past that they are blind to the nesscities of the present, and conservatives who are so focused on the present that they are unwilling to admit those past mistakes.

By: RRRocks

RRRocks — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 15:39:26 +0000

No war is ever justified. However the left continues to try and justify the Afghanistan war to make themselves not appear to be weak and intimidated.

The antiwar is opposed to both wars. The democrats are just opposed to Iraq. The two wedded and along with their insane energy policy that will destroy America in 4 years after Obama is elected……together they will bring us home from there as well.

Right now Afghanistan is a smoke screen for their inability to have the heart to fight a war. Just or not. The minute they are in power they will set their sights on pulling out of Afghanistan too.

Fine. I just wished they were honest about it, instead of using deflection and misdirection to decive the voters in order to gain power.

By: Connor

Connor — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 12:11:37 +0000

Perhaps there was no "necessity" to invade Iraq, although one wonders what else we would have done: Kept on intermittently and ineffectually bombing for years and years, our troops waiting on the border?

But you also need to look at the opportunity presented by Iraq, and not just the "necessity": The chance to remove a hated dictator from a volatile region of the globe, to finish a war that had been started almost 13 years before, to plant democracy in a region dominated by autocracy, and to stem the growth of Islamic extremism. Unfortunately that last goal has proven elusive, probably because the tricky security situation has been inhibiting potential missionaries.

But we’ve achieved a considerable amount in Iraq even, if by Michael’s standards, it wasn’t a "necessity".