George W.s War

[packsaddle]

Even George W. Bush admitted there were no WMD. You can hear it for yourself:

 

[BulldogBlitz]

"These George W. "mythic personality" pieces that roam the internet are amusin' that way. Make us feel all warm and patriotic about Washington and try to project that feelin' on a completely different and much less honorable and capable fellow."

 

these warm and fuzzy stories are the same thing i hear from obama supporters after he speaks. that nice warm and fuzzy feeling... it is good at separating our hearts from our heads.

[Beavah]

these warm and fuzzy stories are the same thing i hear from obama supporters after he speaks. that nice warm and fuzzy feeling... it is good at separating our hearts from our heads.

 

Yah, no question, eh? Long on schmaltz, short on policy depth. Not that anyone would ever accuse a GWB speech of bein' long on policy depth either, eh?

 

At least it's Obama's own speechifyin' that's makin' folks warm and fuzzy, though. Better than these rewrite history bits done and delivered anonymously. Just another version of Hillary takin' sniper fire, IMO.

 

Beavah

 

 

[theysawyoucomin']

Gern,

Is it possible he gave them to somebody else prior to us invading. I don't know who. I just ask if it's possible.

 

 

Saddam's list of people to fear

Kurds

Iranians

Imperialist oil hungry America (at least that's what the TV says we are)

 

Hmmmm,

I kill one for sport before breakfast.

 

The second I battled for 8 years to stalemate.

 

The third went from "go" to 20 some days of bombing to standing on my throat and threatening to cut off my soft parts in 4 days. Has an Air force I can't see or touch. And somebody that looked remotely like me recently killed 3000 people at their desks at work. Half the American people don't know Farsi from Arabic they collective call us camel jockies and I plotted to kill his daddy. Their President is trying to tie me in with the guy that killed all those people. That event was so big it made Americans stop arguing for about a month.

 

 

Me, Saddam has been in power for over 30 years sometimes by killing my friends, which of those 3 dogs described above do I want to mess with the most?

 

 

I doesn't wash Gern, a possible conflict with one and two or certain death by opening door#3, the biggest dog that is still digesting you from '91 and after Sept 11 is looking to kill somebody to feel better about themselves.

We can't notice 12-20 million Mexican invaders but we can sure whip anybody's tail in a war. We're still good at something. The only reason Iraq has taken longer than WW2 is because we are trying to help half the population. In WW2 we didn't care about how many Japanese or Germans we killed. We firebombed Tokyo and killed more people there, with plain old fire, than with one nuclear bomb.

 

Or I let the inspectors in and the world feels confident that I'm (Saddam) only going to kill my own people and maybe a few fellow Middle Eastern folks that made America look like idiots in the mid-1970's.

 

I maintain he would still be in power if he let the inspectors do their job like he agreed to when we had our foot on his throat in spring of '91.

 

I wish he had let the inspectors in. 4000 of our folks would stiil be alive. 50% of the country wouldn't hate the President, though some would still find a way, VFW membership would still be lagging, and we would have less debt.

 

Hillary Clinton said Saddam had to be stopped and she is the smartest lady in the world.

[acco40]

The President of the United States is the Commander in Chief not because he needs to be the top "lobbiest" but because he (so far, none have been a she) has command authority over the armed services of our country.

 

One of the George Ws had the French on his side. One did not. Those cheese eating surrender monkeys may have helped.

[Horizon]

The French have a better recent understanding of occupying and trying to pacify a similar nation than we do. I recommend the book: A Savage War of Peace by Horne.

[TheScout]

Didn't the French get whipped in Algeria, suffering 100,000 casualties in the process, all of which led to the collapse of the Fourth Republic?

[Horizon]

The unsuccessful occupation of Algeria is certainly one of the factors that took down a few French politicians. I really do recommend reading the book. You can see how well torture, bombing, rounding up suspects, etc. did them when fighting the people of Algeria in their own country. The parallels to what we are dealing with in Iraq are certainly striking. There is a reason the book is so popular among the officers in Iraq and Afghanistan right now.

[TheScout]

Might be an interesting read. I must admit I only know the basic outline of the Algerian War. I have heard that that book was popular with US military officers recently.

[SctDad]

John in KC

-Had the President called General Mobilization, had he used the incredible pool of talent in civilian occupations and professions which the Reserve Components bring to the table-

 

The reserves and National guard make up over half of the fighting force in Iraq. I went as a national guardsman. I am out now, but if I was told that I would have to go back, then give me my equipment, and I hope that someone would stand next to me.

 

I can say that IF SADAM can hide full sized Migs in the desert sand, then he can surely hide some WMD's. Or like someone else said, give them to someone else.

 

As for the question of "If he had WMD, why did he not use it on the US during the invasion"

 

Because if he did then Bush would be right. and then the world would have to respond. Not to mention, the US military is trained in tactics of fighting while in NBC gear.

 

Sorry, I saw a lot of things that got my attention. I was thinking one time, since there are those that believe that if it is not on US soil then we need to stay out of it. THe last time that there was a full out war on US Soil, (That I can think of)....

 

Anyone....anyone....The Civil War.

 

 

All these were in foreign Countries

WWI Europe and other countries

WWII Europe and other countries

Korea (DUH)

CUBA

Vietnam

Panama

 

 

HERMS

 

I liked the original post.

[Gold Winger]

" Those cheese eating surrender monkeys may have helped."

 

They're frog eating surrender monkeys. Sheesh!

[theysawyoucomin']

I thought he would gas me like a cockroach in between the two minefield belts in 1991.

 

One reason we surmised then was the laws of land warfare (or whatever they are called, maybe John in KC can add something) allow and "victim nation" of NBC warfare to respond in kind with any other weapon. It was explained to us that if he used gas we could nuke him and be justified. That was the only satisfaction I though I would get whilst I got jiggy on the desert floor with a lung full of nerve gas. I hoped we would obliterated him.

 

Fast forward to today, I don't know why gas in arty shells were not expended by his side. He was losing it all, I'm sure he could hide some 155 mm type gas rounds and we did not find them prior to the invasion.

 

I am also sure that as his world closed in he thought maybe if he could hide out for a couple of years that maybe he could regain his power. Americans as a people look for microwave time solutions to problems. Hide out for a few years, invaders go home maybe he thought he could rise again.

 

I still don't know why he didn't let the inspectors do their job.

 

Scott Ritter lived not more than 10 miles from me. We'll never know what evidence they had on him. If it was all fabricated why did he show up to meet the under age girl?

[Horizon]

A second analogous error of the original post is that they use Washington to defend the War in Iraq. This is an error since Washington was one of the Founders who warned us of getting in bed with foreign nations:

 

"Against the insiddious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe me, fellow citizens) the jealousy of a free people out to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government."

 

The great rule of conduct for us, in regard to foreign nations, is in extending our commercial relations to have with them as little political connection as possible. So far as we have already formed engagements, let them be fulfilled with perfect good faith. Here let us stop.

 

"It is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliances with any portion of the foreign world...

 

Both Washington and Jefferson would have had issues with our role as the world's policeman.

[TheScout]

Jefferson squashed the Barbary pirates with quite dramatic action, that other countries with much greater navies didn't dare.

 

Couldn't the Barbary pirates be considered an early 19th century form of terrorist? I don't think anyone else from that time period could be as close of a comparison.

 

Is this also the same Jefferson who was prepared to launch a preemptive attack against France to seize New Orleans to secure the mouth of the Mississippi for America to prevent Emperor Napoleon from gaining a foothold on North America if he refused to sell?

[Horizon]

Barbary Pirate actions is analogous to Afghanistan. You will also note that we did not stick around with occupation forces and try to implement a Republic. We took them down and gave the Corps their distinctive sword! It was also in direct response to attacks on the US merchant fleet.

 

War with France around New Orleans was our border - it was NOT an alliance or war on the other side of the globe. It also did not happen. The analogy there is more than suspect.