Why would anyone continue to claim the iraqi war was a failure?

[JRK]

1) REMOVE SADDAM
DONE
2) STABILIZE COUNTRY
DONE
3) HAVE A REPUBLIC BORN OF THESE EVENTS
DONE

Am missing something here?

The jury is still out on it. We haven't left the country and YES we are still doing partols there. Sadam might have been a bad man, but he was a good polarizing force to Iran. With Iraq seemingly pro-Iran now, I'm not sure that is a good outcome. We were sold on Iraq have WMD, which even Sadam said he mislead the world to thinking he had them, in order to frighten Iran. There was no discovery any WMDs! That was a failure, because that is what we were sold on.

In the end, Iraq won't go down as a failure like Vietnam. HOWEVER, I think it will go down as an unnecessary war of choice built on erroneous intelligence (but not built on lies, I truly believe the administration thought there were WMDs and it was a kneejerk reaction to invade because the ashes of 9/11 were still present). That is hardly something to brag about!

Oh yea, like the ungrateful Kuwaitis, fictionious people of Kosovo, Afghanistan, Somalians etc, the Iraqi Shia (who lead the country and are the people we freed from Sadam's wrath) will preach hatred of America, the West and Amerians within a decade.

I may not agree with all, but your opinion had class

 

[konradv]

Why would anyone debate opinions?
This is where you on the left do not get it
This is why my threads as well as my links are information based

Debate?
murdering the innocent people?
without Saddam and 9-11 does this event ever occur? W was the last man standing, the problem with Saddam and terror had been going on for along time
Occupation? what occupation?
the green zone?

Sure Saddam was a bad guy, but was it really in our national interest to go in just for that? Are you now going to call for an invasion of NK?

Look Saddam was the reason for the season
with respect
the left puts out propaganda so the details of the events become bush lied people died

Saddam lied
Saddam had 10 years to clean his act up
this is from the UN 11/2002
Saddam had been lying for 10 years

####Clearly Saddam was in violation of the cease fire agreement

Chemical
The document indicates that 13,000 chemical bombs were dropped by the Iraqi Air Force between 1983 and 1988, while Iraq has declared that 19,500 bombs were consumed during this period. Thus, there is a discrepancy of 6,500 bombs. The amount of chemical agent in these bombs would be in the order of about 1,000 tonnes. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, we must assume that these quantities are now unaccounted for.

Bilogical
Iraq has declared that it produced about 8,500 litres of this biological warfare agent, which it states it unilaterally destroyed in the summer of 1991. Iraq has provided little evidence for this production and no convincing evidence for its destruction.

There are strong indications that Iraq produced more anthrax than it declared, and that at least some of this was retained after the declared destruction date. It might still exist. Either it should be found and be destroyed under UNMOVIC supervision or else convincing evidence should be produced to show that it was, indeed, destroyed in 1991.

As I reported to the Council on 19 December last year, Iraq did not declare a significant quantity, some 650 kg, of bacterial growth media, which was acknowledged as imported in Iraq’s submission to the Amorim panel in February 1999. As part of its 7 December 2002 declaration, Iraq resubmitted the Amorim panel document, but the table showing this particular import of media was not included. The absence of this table would appear to be deliberate as the pages of the resubmitted document were renumbered.

Missiles
Two projects in particular stand out. They are the development of a liquid-fuelled missile named the Al Samoud 2, and a solid propellant missile, called the Al Fatah. Both missiles have been tested to a range in excess of the permitted range of 150 km, with the Al Samoud 2 being tested to a maximum of 183 km and the Al Fatah to 161 km. Some of both types of missiles have already been provided to the Iraqi Armed Forces even though it is stated that they are still undergoing development.


Update 27 January 2003

he was lying then, 13 months after 9-11

How did that make him an "immediate threat" to the US as the administration said. I believe we're further than 183 km away from Iraq and could have bombed him into the Stone Age, if he'd used them on anyone else.

 

[JRK]

Sure Saddam was a bad guy, but was it really in our national interest to go in just for that? Are you now going to call for an invasion of NK?

Look Saddam was the reason for the season
with respect
the left puts out propaganda so the details of the events become bush lied people died

Saddam lied
Saddam had 10 years to clean his act up
this is from the UN 11/2002
Saddam had been lying for 10 years

####Clearly Saddam was in violation of the cease fire agreement

Chemical
The document indicates that 13,000 chemical bombs were dropped by the Iraqi Air Force between 1983 and 1988, while Iraq has declared that 19,500 bombs were consumed during this period. Thus, there is a discrepancy of 6,500 bombs. The amount of chemical agent in these bombs would be in the order of about 1,000 tonnes. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, we must assume that these quantities are now unaccounted for.

Bilogical
Iraq has declared that it produced about 8,500 litres of this biological warfare agent, which it states it unilaterally destroyed in the summer of 1991. Iraq has provided little evidence for this production and no convincing evidence for its destruction.

There are strong indications that Iraq produced more anthrax than it declared, and that at least some of this was retained after the declared destruction date. It might still exist. Either it should be found and be destroyed under UNMOVIC supervision or else convincing evidence should be produced to show that it was, indeed, destroyed in 1991.

As I reported to the Council on 19 December last year, Iraq did not declare a significant quantity, some 650 kg, of bacterial growth media, which was acknowledged as imported in Iraq’s submission to the Amorim panel in February 1999. As part of its 7 December 2002 declaration, Iraq resubmitted the Amorim panel document, but the table showing this particular import of media was not included. The absence of this table would appear to be deliberate as the pages of the resubmitted document were renumbered.

Missiles
Two projects in particular stand out. They are the development of a liquid-fuelled missile named the Al Samoud 2, and a solid propellant missile, called the Al Fatah. Both missiles have been tested to a range in excess of the permitted range of 150 km, with the Al Samoud 2 being tested to a maximum of 183 km and the Al Fatah to 161 km. Some of both types of missiles have already been provided to the Iraqi Armed Forces even though it is stated that they are still undergoing development.


Update 27 January 2003

he was lying then, 13 months after 9-11

How did that make him an "immediate threat" to the US as the administration said. I believe we're further than 183 km away from Iraq and could have bombed him into the Stone Age, if he'd used them on anyone else.

I think the real question post 9-11 was who is in this world to do harm and who is not.
The 19 insane terrorist that caused all of this to reach the level it did, did it with basically pocket knives
If I was a person who opposed that war the argument would be what does it matter if he had a nuclear bomb. all of that death and mayhem was caused with 19 pocket knives

There is so much from gassing a sub-way system to supplying WMDs to those we where about to go to war with. GWB and his admin had-had enough
Saddam does this or else

 

[beowolfe]

The Shiites in Iraq are not interested in establishing a republic. They don't trust the Sunni and will do their best to keep them underfoot. Remember, this is a part of the world where revenge is still an admirable quality.

 

[JRK]

The Shiites in Iraq are not interested in establishing a republic. They don't trust the Sunni and will do their best to keep them underfoot. Remember, this is a part of the world where revenge is still an admirable quality.

I will not debate that
The difference is Iraq was a free country until 1959 (I think it was 59 when they went to a dictator-ship)

another item that is missed in this discussion is having a secure base and airfield where they have the 50,000 american troops at is not a mistake in this venture as I deem a success

 

[BlindBoo]

11. Directs the Executive Chairman of UNMOVIC and the Director-General of the IAEA to report immediately to the Council any interference by Iraq with inspection activities, as well as any failure by Iraq to comply with its disarmament obligations, including its obligations regarding inspections under this resolution;

12. Decides to convene immediately upon receipt of a report in accordance with paragraphs 4 or 11 above, in order to consider the situation and the need for full compliance with all of the relevant Council resolutions in order to secure international peace and security;

13. Recalls, in that context, that the Council has repeatedly warned Iraq that it will face serious consequences as a result of its continued violations of its obligations;

14. Decides to remain seized of the matter.

Annex

Text of Blix/El-Baradei letter


United Nations Monitoring, Verification
and Inspection Commission
The Executive Chairman
International Atomic Energy Agency
The Director General
8 October 2002

What is it called when the USA signs a SCR and then renigs on it's obligations in that SCR?

 

[JRK]

11. Directs the Executive Chairman of UNMOVIC and the Director-General of the IAEA to report immediately to the Council any interference by Iraq with inspection activities, as well as any failure by Iraq to comply with its disarmament obligations, including its obligations regarding inspections under this resolution;

12. Decides to convene immediately upon receipt of a report in accordance with paragraphs 4 or 11 above, in order to consider the situation and the need for full compliance with all of the relevant Council resolutions in order to secure international peace and security;

13. Recalls, in that context, that the Council has repeatedly warned Iraq that it will face serious consequences as a result of its continued violations of its obligations;

14. Decides to remain seized of the matter.

Annex

Text of Blix/El-Baradei letter


United Nations Monitoring, Verification
and Inspection Commission
The Executive Chairman
International Atomic Energy Agency
The Director General
8 October 2002

What is it called when the USA signs a SCR and then renigs on it's obligations in that SCR?

War?

 

[JRK]

1) REMOVE SADDAM
DONE
2) STABILIZE COUNTRY
DONE
3) HAVE A REPUBLIC BORN OF THESE EVENTS
DONE

Am missing something here?

only the ability to think

That picture you have is funny
Why you would call your fellow american, or should I say state I am un able to think because we dis agree is sad
See its like how did we get here?

 

[BlindBoo]

11. Directs the Executive Chairman of UNMOVIC and the Director-General of the IAEA to report immediately to the Council any interference by Iraq with inspection activities, as well as any failure by Iraq to comply with its disarmament obligations, including its obligations regarding inspections under this resolution;

12. Decides to convene immediately upon receipt of a report in accordance with paragraphs 4 or 11 above, in order to consider the situation and the need for full compliance with all of the relevant Council resolutions in order to secure international peace and security;

13. Recalls, in that context, that the Council has repeatedly warned Iraq that it will face serious consequences as a result of its continued violations of its obligations;

14. Decides to remain seized of the matter.

Annex

Text of Blix/El-Baradei letter


United Nations Monitoring, Verification
and Inspection Commission
The Executive Chairman
International Atomic Energy Agency
The Director General
8 October 2002

What is it called when the USA signs a SCR and then renigs on it's obligations in that SCR?

War?

Illegal war?

 

[JRK]

What is it called when the USA signs a SCR and then renigs on it's obligations in that SCR?

War?

Illegal war?

why do you feel its illegal?

 

[idb]

It was a cock-up from start to finish - it made great t.v. though.

 

[FreedomAli]

1. By disregarding the UNSCR 1441(which the US signed onto) the US led invasion of Iraq in 2003 was illegal.

Then the Democrats share in that illegal behavior. Bush did not take this nation to war on his own, he could not have done it without the support from the congress and senate, and here is what they thought.
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iSwSDvgw5Uc"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iSwSDvgw5Uc[/ame]


2. Not stable. Civilians dead in Iraq bus bombing 7-3-2011
Who detonated the bomb that blew the bus up? Us or the terrorists? And if you say our presence brought this about, you are officially a retard because these people have been doing this to each other for about a thousand years.
More stable now then it was in 2003. Have you been there? I didn't think so. The US deaths you hear of now are in Afghanistan, not Iraq, pay attention to the news and not to the Bots running the white house and you will see this for yourself.

Again a lie. There were few terror attacks in Iraq until the U.S. invaded. But, since the U.S. funds Posada, the MEK, the PPK, the Jundallah and other terrorist groups, it is only fair to fight fire with fire. Not only that, but the U.S. government uses the military as an instrument or terror. They drop 1000 lb bombs and the second someone hits the U.S. with an aircraft into a building the government wants us to surrender all our liberty. As far as people killing people, I would say modern government has them all beat. Hitler, Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot killed many tens of millions of people. I guess the U.S. figures that since Muslims kill each other that gives the U.S. license to kill innocents?

The fact is you are a neocon fascist warmonger and will soon find that no country ever had a military so powerful that it could prevent war in times of peace, or guarantee victory in times of war.

Also, you are such a moron to say: "Well, the Democrats did that too". In case you did not notice, both parties have been engaging in imperialism and militarism since WWII. The Trotskyites have equally infected the Right and the Let.

 

[JRK]

1. By disregarding the UNSCR 1441(which the US signed onto) the US led invasion of Iraq in 2003 was illegal.

Then the Democrats share in that illegal behavior. Bush did not take this nation to war on his own, he could not have done it without the support from the congress and senate, and here is what they thought.
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iSwSDvgw5Uc"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iSwSDvgw5Uc[/ame]


2. Not stable. Civilians dead in Iraq bus bombing 7-3-2011
Who detonated the bomb that blew the bus up? Us or the terrorists? And if you say our presence brought this about, you are officially a retard because these people have been doing this to each other for about a thousand years.
More stable now then it was in 2003. Have you been there? I didn't think so. The US deaths you hear of now are in Afghanistan, not Iraq, pay attention to the news and not to the Bots running the white house and you will see this for yourself.

Again a lie. There were few terror attacks in Iraq until the U.S. invaded. But, since the U.S. funds Posada, the MEK, the PPK, the Jundallah and other terrorist groups, it is only fair to fight fire with fire. Not only that, but the U.S. government uses the military as an instrument or terror. They drop 1000 lb bombs and the second someone hits the U.S. with an aircraft into a building the government wants us to surrender all our liberty. As far as people killing people, I would say modern government has them all beat. Hitler, Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot killed many tens of millions of people. I guess the U.S. figures that since Muslims kill each other that gives the U.S. license to kill innocents?

The fact is you are a neocon fascist warmonger and will soon find that no country ever had a military so powerful that it could prevent war in times of peace, or guarantee victory in times of war.

Also, you are such a moron to say: "Well, the Democrats did that too". In case you did not notice, both parties have been engaging in imperialism and militarism since WWII. The Trotskyites have equally infected the Right and the Let.

Terror has increased?
How would you know that?
Until it became politically advantageous to cover the bad events as they occurred in Iraq, do you have any idea how many murders took place in one year? how many people Saddam had executed per year?
Is the killing of over 30 people in Fort Hood Texas with the "alleged" killer screaming Alli Akbar any different than whats going on in Iraq? if so how?

 

[JRK]

Good Morning Liberals and Cons both

 

[Uncensored2008]

Without the big lie how would ALL governments socialize cost and privatize profit?

Considering TARP, Porkulus and the fascist merging of GM, Chrysler and the federal government, it looks like our government socializes costs and funnels profits to well connected looters in a very "in your face" fashion.

Which of the current crop of big lies is the biggest threat to US democracy?

The US isn't a democracy.

But fascist care and the lies supporting Obama's fascist care are the biggest threat to the economic stability and viability of the nation.

 

[Uncensored2008]

If I was getting my "news" from tommyduggan.com, I wouldn't provide a link either, JRK.

Good thing you get 100% of your "news" from George Soros then, huh?

 

[Uncensored2008]

Oh, it's from the Freepers! That's much better than tommyduggan.com! )

So he absolutely fucking nails you with the facts, and the best you can do is attack his source?

BWAHAHAHAHA

 

[Vanquish]

I was on Bush's side when he flew the "Mission Accomplished" banner on the aircraft carrier back in the day. (Of course it was for that one mission and got blown out of proportion, but hey)

Why?

Think about what we achieved:

1. Bloody dictator ousted
2. Fair & Balanced Constitution written (no small feat)
3. Police force gathered and trained
4. Democratic elections
5. Schools & Hospitals Restored and even improved
6. Military force gathered and trained

THAT'S A LOT! MISSION A-FUCKING CCOMPLISHED!

But on the other side of things...here's what pisses me off. Conservatives I just gave you your credit...but WHERE IS THE PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY??

I'm talking about the personal responsibility of the Iraqi people!! Some conservatives love to bitch and moan when it's the personal responsibility of minorities or other liberal groups they want to rail against...but when it comes to an ENTIRELY OTHER fricking country...we're supposed to hold their hand for 20 - 100 years? Hell no.

Power vacuum or not...it's PAST time for us to get out. And time for the Iraqis to have some personal responsibility of their own.

 

[JRK]

If I was getting my "news" from tommyduggan.com, I wouldn't provide a link either, JRK.

Good thing you get 100% of your "news" from George Soros then, huh?

What is this link from have to do with the truth?
What am I missing here from this guy that keeps talking about tommyduggan.com?

 

[JRK]

I was on Bush's side when he flew the "Mission Accomplished" banner on the aircraft carrier back in the day. (Of course it was for that one mission and got blown out of proportion, but hey)

Why?

Think about what we achieved:

1. Bloody dictator ousted
2. Fair & Balanced Constitution written (no small feat)
3. Police force gathered and trained
4. Democratic elections
5. Schools & Hospitals Restored and even improved
6. Military force gathered and trained

THAT'S A LOT! MISSION A-FUCKING CCOMPLISHED!

But on the other side of things...here's what pisses me off. Conservatives I just gave you your credit...but WHERE IS THE PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY??

I'm talking about the personal responsibility of the Iraqi people!! Some conservatives love to bitch and moan when it's the personal responsibility of minorities or other liberal groups they want to rail against...but when it comes to an ENTIRELY OTHER fricking country...we're supposed to hold their hand for 20 - 100 years? Hell no.

Power vacuum or not...it's PAST time for us to get out. And time for the Iraqis to have some personal responsibility of their own.

The mission accomplished banner was not GWB idea
Ex-Bush aide takes blame for ‘Mission Accomplished’ – CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs
From the minute it was put up he said it was a huge mistake