Tony Blair: We blew it

[NightFox]

1. All of them except WMDs, and the Happy Ever After.

Again you cannot come up with specifics, did you think that nobody would notice that? your dodging skills need a lot of work.

2. Irrelevant comparisons. Lots of reasons for each one.

Of course you would claim it's irrelevant since it destroys your nonsensical attempt at a justification i.e. that "We freed the Iraqis from the Oppressor" .

3. Thank you for agreeing that their failures are not our fault.

No thank you for confirming my suspicions that even you realize how devoid of validity your own arguments are by making a weak attempt at a strawman. I don't agree with you on anything with respect to this question and that should be quite clear to any rational person.

4. If you are just scoring partisan political points, then you are, by your actions, actively retarding any learning of historical lessons. INdeed, it is obvious from Obama's actions in Egypt, Libya and Syria that he is still operating from the same belief system as Bush was, ie the Oppressed Arabs are yearning to breath free and all we have to do is remove the

I have no interest in "scoring partisan political points", that would be impossible since I don't support any political party, however I do find your attempts to deflect and obfuscate entertaining but I'm curious as to why you feel this urge to continue to dig yourself deeper into this hole when it's clear that you cannot defend your position with reason and evidence. It's clear that I and many others have learned from history on this question unfortunately you appear to be unable to demonstrate that you have.

 

[sealybobo]

A true liberal progressive sees both sides of every argument. Only problem is our opponents don't.

Liberals have been shown to be the WORST at understanding people different than themselves in an peer reviewed academic study.

Would you like a link?

Will you accept my peer reviewed academic studies on global warming evolution and the big bang?

Then yes I would love a link.

 

[gipper]

So you disagreed with the rationals for the war. Got it.

Nope, those reasons were fine.

What was your point again?

Do you have short term memory issues? here let me help you out

Iraq was justified for numerous other reasons, and, it the Iraqis had their act together at all, should have ended up much better than under Saddam.

I asked you for the specifics of those "numerous other reasons", either you still buy the bullshit that the was being peddled to justify the war in the first place or you just wandered off into a fairy tale land of shoulda, woulda, coulda and attempted to blame all the negative consequences on the Iraqi people, which is it?

I do however respect the fact that you don't want to even attempt to back up your statement since apparently you've realized that it's an impossible position to defend.

The fact that you disagreed with those reasons doesn't mean they didn't exist or were not real.

Really? which specific reasons turned out to be real?

We freed the Iraqis from their oppressor.

And you think that justifies all the costs? If that's the case why aren't we freeing the North Koreans from their oppressors who are far worse than the Bathists? why aren't we freeing the Chinese from their oppressors? what about the Iranians? How about the Russians?

Did a majority of the Iraqi people ask us to come over and free them from the Bathists?

That they can't be a modern nation state without being oppressed from above is not our fault.

No but the fact that 10's of thousands of innocent lives were lost not to mention a mountain of American blood & treasure is OUR fault.

It is a lesson we should remember the next time we want to overthrow a Muslim DIctator, though.

Yes except for the fact that YOU apparently won't remember it since YOU are still attempting to justify it even after history has demonstrated what a colossal mistake it was, I can forgive all the citizens that were suckered into supporting that war as long as they acknowledge the fact that they were wrong, what I cannot forgive are citizens that refuse to learn from history and still seek to justify the stupidity since they're the leading contenders in the "who's going to fall for this type of idiocy again" contest.

It does not matter if Saddam had WMD or not. There can be no justification for invading a nation because the dictator has WMD. If that is justification for war, why not invade N. Korea, Pakistan, Russia, China, etc? Bogus argument designed to mislead, which lead to the deaths of thousands and resulted in nothing but turmoil and suffering.

This is almost always what war leads to, but sadly the people continue to allow their lying corrupt leaders to take them to war. We should know better by now, but most people know nothing of history.

 

[sealybobo]

1. All of them except WMDs, and the Happy Ever After.

Again you cannot come up with specifics, did you think that nobody would notice that? your dodging skills need a lot of work.

2. Irrelevant comparisons. Lots of reasons for each one.

Of course you would claim it's irrelevant since it destroys your nonsensical attempt at a justification i.e. that "We freed the Iraqis from the Oppressor" .

3. Thank you for agreeing that their failures are not our fault.

No thank you for confirming my suspicions that even you realize how devoid of validity your own arguments are by making a weak attempt at a strawman. I don't agree with you on anything with respect to this question and that should be quite clear to any rational person.

4. If you are just scoring partisan political points, then you are, by your actions, actively retarding any learning of historical lessons. INdeed, it is obvious from Obama's actions in Egypt, Libya and Syria that he is still operating from the same belief system as Bush was, ie the Oppressed Arabs are yearning to breath free and all we have to do is remove the

I have no interest in "scoring partisan political points", that would be impossible since I don't support any political party, however I do find your attempts to deflect and obfuscate entertaining but I'm curious as to why you feel this urge to continue to dig yourself deeper into this hole when it's clear that you cannot defend your position with reason and evidence. It's clear that I and many others have learned from history on this question unfortunately you appear to be unable to demonstrate that you have.

Now just imagine had the Iraq War happened on Obama's watch or Hillary's watch how different this guys arguments would be

 

[SAYIT]

Good on him. That took some serious balls.

Kinda reminds me of Robert McNamara's Viet Nam mea culpa.

How so?

Decades after Nam McNamara wrote in his memoir:

"We were wrong, terribly wrong. We owe it to future generations to explain why."

 

[paulitician]

Russia, Iran, Al Qaeda, and ISIS are the biggest winners in the Iraq War debacle. It's one of the bloodiest blunders in history. But i'll give Blair some credit for manning-up. Does it really matter though? No, it doesn't. The countless Thousands of innocents are dead and the Middle East is a horrific nightmare.

 

[Correll]

1. All of them except WMDs, and the Happy Ever After.

Again you cannot come up with specifics, did you think that nobody would notice that? your dodging skills need a lot of work.

2. Irrelevant comparisons. Lots of reasons for each one.

Of course you would claim it's irrelevant since it destroys your nonsensical attempt at a justification i.e. that "We freed the Iraqis from the Oppressor" .

3. Thank you for agreeing that their failures are not our fault.

No thank you for confirming my suspicions that even you realize how devoid of validity your own arguments are by making a weak attempt at a strawman. I don't agree with you on anything with respect to this question and that should be quite clear to any rational person.

4. If you are just scoring partisan political points, then you are, by your actions, actively retarding any learning of historical lessons. INdeed, it is obvious from Obama's actions in Egypt, Libya and Syria that he is still operating from the same belief system as Bush was, ie the Oppressed Arabs are yearning to breath free and all we have to do is remove the

I have no interest in "scoring partisan political points", that would be impossible since I don't support any political party, however I do find your attempts to deflect and obfuscate entertaining but I'm curious as to why you feel this urge to continue to dig yourself deeper into this hole when it's clear that you cannot defend your position with reason and evidence. It's clear that I and many others have learned from history on this question unfortunately you appear to be unable to demonstrate that you have.

1. That I won't pretend that you don't know the answers you are asking for reflects not at all on me. I'm not sure why you want to play this game, but I know you know, you know that I know that you know, ect. You got a point to make about the historical reasons, just come out with it.

2. NOpe. To recommend that we invade North Korea would be the act of a fool. The reasons are obvious to anyone who has seriously considered the situation for a single moment. For one example. I did not bring up Oppressor being overthrown as a justification, but an step in how the planned outcome did not occur.

3. YOur agreed that their failures were not our fault. Then you said "but" and went off onto irrelevant tangents.

4. Liar.

 

[gipper]

1. All of them except WMDs, and the Happy Ever After.

Again you cannot come up with specifics, did you think that nobody would notice that? your dodging skills need a lot of work.

2. Irrelevant comparisons. Lots of reasons for each one.

Of course you would claim it's irrelevant since it destroys your nonsensical attempt at a justification i.e. that "We freed the Iraqis from the Oppressor" .

3. Thank you for agreeing that their failures are not our fault.

No thank you for confirming my suspicions that even you realize how devoid of validity your own arguments are by making a weak attempt at a strawman. I don't agree with you on anything with respect to this question and that should be quite clear to any rational person.

4. If you are just scoring partisan political points, then you are, by your actions, actively retarding any learning of historical lessons. INdeed, it is obvious from Obama's actions in Egypt, Libya and Syria that he is still operating from the same belief system as Bush was, ie the Oppressed Arabs are yearning to breath free and all we have to do is remove the

I have no interest in "scoring partisan political points", that would be impossible since I don't support any political party, however I do find your attempts to deflect and obfuscate entertaining but I'm curious as to why you feel this urge to continue to dig yourself deeper into this hole when it's clear that you cannot defend your position with reason and evidence. It's clear that I and many others have learned from history on this question unfortunately you appear to be unable to demonstrate that you have.

Now just imagine had the Iraq War happened on Obama's watch or Hillary's watch how different this guys arguments would be

Probably so.

The objective view is Obama is no different than Bush. He has caused nearly as much suffering and turmoil in places like Libya, Syria, and the Ukraine. His failures in Afghanshitstan are evident, but few know it. His drone program has murdered many innocent people.

Both W and BO should be charged for war crimes and imprisoned.

 

[Misty]

When with Dubya admit he effed the whole thing up?

He's done that already. They admit they made mistakes not that it WAS a mistake.

 

[Jantje_Smit]

1. Link please. With a cut and paste where any Republican of note claims that Hillary is Obama's boss. Simple request. NOt sure why you are hesitating.

I said tea zombies, now it's republican of note?

2. YOur disagreement with the reasons is noted. The Iraqi violations of the Cease FIre alone was legal cause for resumption of hostilities. Please stop with the dramatics.

I'm not being dramatic at all, if you want to excuse war crimes that's your problem, not mine.

And your idiot in chief was the one who violated the cease fire, which was between the UN and Iraq btw, not between the US and Iraq.

But if you don't want to invade Iran, which country do you think should be next?

 

[Correll]

A true liberal progressive sees both sides of every argument. Only problem is our opponents don't.

Liberals have been shown to be the WORST at understanding people different than themselves in an peer reviewed academic study.

Would you like a link?

Will you accept my peer reviewed academic studies on global warming evolution and the big bang?

Then yes I would love a link.

Born This Way?


For some reason it is not letting me cut and paste. The meat is down the page at "in a study", but the whole article is great.

 

[gipper]

Russia, Iran, Al Qaeda, and ISIS are the biggest winners in the Iraq War debacle. It's one of the bloodiest blunders in history. But i'll give Blair some credit for manning-up. Does it really matter though? No, it doesn't. The countless Thousands of innocents are dead and the Middle East is a horrific nightmare.

Would only disagree with your statement that the Iraq War was one of the bloodiest blunders in history. It does not come close to WWII, WWI, Korea, Vietnam, and so many other wars.

 

[Jantje_Smit]

...There can be no justification for invading a nation because the dictator has WMD. If that is justification for war, why not invade N. Korea, Pakistan, Russia, China, etc?

Are you insane, they have nukes so they can defend themselves.

 

[Correll]

1. Link please. With a cut and paste where any Republican of note claims that Hillary is Obama's boss. Simple request. NOt sure why you are hesitating.

I said tea zombies, now it's republican of note?

2. YOur disagreement with the reasons is noted. The Iraqi violations of the Cease FIre alone was legal cause for resumption of hostilities. Please stop with the dramatics.

I'm not being dramatic at all, if you want to excuse war crimes that's your problem, not mine.

And your idiot in chief was the one who violated the cease fire, which was between the UN and Iraq btw, not between the US and Iraq.

But if you don't want to invade Iran, which country do you think should be next?

1. So, you are justifying your claim that Cheney was in charge because of what a "Tea zombie" supposedly said?

That's dumb.

2. NOpe Iraq violated the terms of the agreement repeatedly. Have you really managed to edit your memory to "forget" that?

3. I don't want to invade anyone.

 

[Correll]

Russia, Iran, Al Qaeda, and ISIS are the biggest winners in the Iraq War debacle. It's one of the bloodiest blunders in history. But i'll give Blair some credit for manning-up. Does it really matter though? No, it doesn't. The countless Thousands of innocents are dead and the Middle East is a horrific nightmare.

Would only disagree with your statement that the Iraq War was one of the bloodiest blunders in history. It does not come close to WWII, WWI, Korea, Vietnam, and so many other wars.

A world with a Hitler Dominated Europe would not have been in US interests. I don't think you can call that a blunder.

 

[deltex1]

Let history judge them


Tony Blair says he's sorry for Iraq War 'mistakes' - CNN.com

(CNN)Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair says he's sorry for "mistakes" made in the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003, but he doesn't regret bringing down dictator Saddam Hussein.

"I can say that I apologize for the fact that the intelligence we received was wrong because, even though he had used chemical weapons extensively against his own people, against others, the program in the form that we thought it was did not exist in the way that we thought," Blair said in an exclusive interview on CNN's Fareed Zakaria GPS that airs Sunday.

Blair was referring to the claim that Saddam's regime possessed weapons of mass destruction, which was used by the U.S. and British governments to justify launching the invasion. But the intelligence reports the claim was based on turned out to be false.

An exaggerated headline. Much ado about nothing.

 

[Correll]

...There can be no justification for invading a nation because the dictator has WMD. If that is justification for war, why not invade N. Korea, Pakistan, Russia, China, etc?

Are you insane, they have nukes so they can defend themselves.

North Korea's nukes are not the problem.

Their artillery that can shell Seoul is. They hold millions hostage.

 

[Jantje_Smit]

1. So, you are justifying your claim that Cheney was in charge because of what a "Tea zombie" supposedly said?

That's dumb.

2. NOpe Iraq violated the terms of the agreement repeatedly. Have you really managed to edit your memory to "forget" that?

3. I don't want to invade anyone.

Eh, I said that according to the tea zombies Hillary was in charge

Everyone with an IQ above 70 knows Cheney called the shots for Bu$h. Do you remember his "testimony" before the 9/11 commission, he would only testify if Cheney could hold his hand?

The UN was the only party that could make a judgement about a violation of the agreement, not Bu$h, not Blair, not Cheney...and certainly not you

And you don't want to invade anyone? Are you sure, I thought you said you learned lessons for the next time?

 

[NightFox]

1. That I won't pretend that you don't know the answers you are asking for reflects not at all on me. I'm not sure why you want to play this game, but I know you know, you know that I know that you know, ect. You got a point to make about the historical reasons, just come out with it.

In other words you cannot even come up with ONE valid reason, well join the club pal neither can I because their ain't one, the difference between you and I is that you are too dishonest to admit it.

2. NOpe. To recommend that we invade North Korea would be the act of a fool. The reasons are obvious to anyone who has seriously considered the situation for a single moment. For one example. I did not bring up Oppressor being overthrown as a justification, but an step in how the planned outcome did not occur.

Of course it would be and so was recommending invading Iraq as history has clearly demonstrated but that apparently doesn't stop some fools from making weak attempts at justifying it, after all what the heck does history know?

3. YOur agreed that their failures were not our fault. Then you said "but" and went off onto irrelevant tangents.

Of course somebody else's failures are not our fault, I assume that is patently obvious to anyone, your strawman is built on the supposition that because we can agree on the fact that the sky is blue we agree on everything else. The fact that you apparently believe all the bloodshed and squandering of American treasure is irrelevant to whether or not the Iraq War was justified leads one to question your sanity since you appear to be arguing that the negative consequences of an action are irrelevant to evaluating the wisdom of said action, which frankly is insane.

4. Liar.

I knew it was just a matter of time before you attempted to replace reason and evidence with name calling as a basis for your "argument", thanks for confirming my suspicions about you.

 

[deltex1]

Good on him. That took some serious balls.

Give me a fucking break. He was party to the destruction of a country that led to the deaths of countless innocent lives. The ramifications from his decision continue today. He should be strung up by his balls.

Can we say the same about the overthrow of Gadaffi, Assad and Mubarak? If not why not. And how about Obabble taking it in the ass from the Supreme Leader in Iran...and Putin?