• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Iraq war costs U.S. more than $2 trillion: study

Muhammed said:
Do you have any proof of the veracity of those ridiculous LWNJ claims?
Click to expand...

I've posted more "proof" that the war began in 2003 than you have proving that the first war never ended in 1995. In fact, if your argument was the correct one, Bush-CHeney never would have needed to go in in 2003. Duh.
 
Cyrylek said:
Democratic colleagues of Kerry and Biden voted 29 to 21 in favor of the AOF. What exactly is your definition of "majority" - as unusual, perhaps, as your definition of "Western"?
Click to expand...

My definition of a majority is more than half, which was the case of the majority of Democrats that voted against AOF in Iraq.
 
Catawba said:
I never said the neocon plan outlined in the Strategic Energy Challenges for the 21st Century was well thought out, just that military intervention in Iraq was the US plan to deal with unstable Middle East oil prices.
Click to expand...

There's no such things as "Middle East oil prices". Oil is a globally traded commodity governed by supply and demand. Making a gigantic effort to "stabilize" oil prices by changing government in one oil producing country makes no sense whatsoever.
 
Cyrylek said:
There's no such things as "Middle East oil prices". Oil is a globally traded commodity governed by supply and demand. Making a gigantic effort to "stabilize" oil prices by changing government in one oil producing country makes no sense whatsoever.
Click to expand...

I definitely think the US meddles with unfriendly nations in the ME to secure strategic interests and keep a balance of power. Having Israel and Turkey as allies gives the US an ability to strike at any country trying to cut off oil supplies. It's not one nation we're worried about as much as it's a coalition that could put a strangle hold on the Persian Gulf. Cutting off that much oil would cause the prices world wide to sky rocket hurting the economy, even for a short time.
 
grip said:
I definitely think the US meddles with unfriendly nations in the ME to secure strategic interests and keep a balance of power. Having Israel and Turkey as allies gives the US an ability to strike at any country trying to cut off oil supplies. It's not one nation we're worried about as much as it's a coalition that could put a strangle hold on the Persian Gulf. Cutting off that much oil would cause the prices world wide to sky rocket hurting the economy, even for a short time.
Click to expand...

It seems to me that all our interference in the ME and Afghanistan have merely increased our exposure to terrorist fanatics. Do we need to add any more countries which hate us ?
 
Cyrylek said:
Democratic colleagues of Kerry and Biden voted 29 to 21 in favor of the AOF. What exactly is your definition of "majority" - as unusual, perhaps, as your definition of "Western"?
Click to expand...

Regime change in Iraq was US Policy enacted by Clinton

Bill Clinton 1998 Iraq Liberation Act - YouTube

President Clinton orders attack on Iraq - YouTube

Bill Text - 105th Congress (1997-1998) - THOMAS (Library of Congress)

It should be the policy of the United States to support efforts to remove the regime headed by Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq and to promote the emergence of a democratic government to replace that regime.
Click to expand...
 
wolfie said:
It seems to me that all our interference in the ME and Afghanistan have merely increased our exposure to terrorist fanatics. Do we need to add any more countries which hate us ?
Click to expand...

We used the CIA and dirty PR tactics far too often in our attempt to cause internal troubles. That and making the worst of their rulers wealthy with oil profits has caused the fundamentalists to despise our intrigue. Some of that probably couldn't be helped but the Iraq War was an overreach and waste, while Afghanistan should've been done in two years.
 
Cyrylek said:
There's no such things as "Middle East oil prices". Oil is a globally traded commodity governed by supply and demand. Making a gigantic effort to "stabilize" oil prices by changing government in one oil producing country makes no sense whatsoever.
Click to expand...

You'll have to take that up with the neocons, it was their plan, not mine:

"The report, Strategic Energy Policy Challenges For The 21st Century, concludes: "The United States remains a prisoner of its energy dilemma. Iraq remains a de-stabilising influence to the flow of oil to international markets from the Middle East. Saddam Hussein has also demonstrated a willingness to threaten to use the oil weapon and to use his own export programme to manipulate oil markets. Therefore the US should conduct an immediate policy review toward Iraq including military, energy, economic and political/ diplomatic assessments."
 
calamity said:
I've posted more "proof" that the war began in 2003 than you have proving that the first war never ended in 1995.
Click to expand...
BS. You've shown zero proof that GWB started the war in Iraq in 2003 and I've posted a video of Operation Desert Fox from 1998 and other documentation that proves that the war was ongoing on the very day GWB became president.

Are you aware that the year 1998 precedes the year 2003? Or are you mentally disabled with dyslexia? Or what?

Why don't you just admit that you are wrong?
 
Last edited:
Catawba said:
My definition of a majority is more than half, which was the case of the majority of Democrats that voted against AOF in Iraq.
Click to expand...

21 is more than 29? Are you sure?
 
grip said:
We used the CIA and dirty PR tactics far too often in our attempt to cause internal troubles. That and making the worst of their rulers wealthy with oil profits has caused the fundamentalists to despise our intrigue. Some of that probably couldn't be helped but the Iraq War was an overreach and waste, while Afghanistan should've been done in two years.
Click to expand...

So after seeing Sadaam Hussien publicly hanged on U-Tube...Gadhaffi getting his ass abused before he was shot..all these countries are still in deep unrest..they are waiting for the troops to get out..and then they can restore their natural balance..

I know that maybe the Muslim fundamentalist may move in..but at least we will know the name of our enemies..
 
Cyrylek said:
21 is more than 29? Are you sure?
Click to expand...

Are you just completely unaware of how many Democrats were in Congress at the time?

Let me break it down for you:

147 Democrats in Congress voted against AOF in Iraq and 111 voted for it.

In what reality is 147 not more than 111?

And how many Republicans in Congress voted against AOF in Iraq? 7

Iraq Resolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Muhammed said:
BS. You've shown zero proof that GWB started the war in Iraq in 2003 and I've posted a video of Operation Desert Fox from 1998 and other documentation that proves that the war was ongoing on the very day GWB became president.

Are you aware that the year 1998 precedes the year 2003? Or are you mentally disabled with dyslexia? Or what?

Why don't you just admit that you are wrong?
Click to expand...
What part of enforcing the peace agreement not being a "war" do you not understand? SHeesh.

A four-day bombing run is not a war.
The December 1998 bombing of Iraq (code-named Operation Desert Fox) was a major four-day bombing campaign on Iraqi targets from December 16, 1998, to December 19, 1998, by the United States and United Kingdom. The contemporaneous justification for the strikes was Iraq's failure to comply with United Nations Security Council resolutions as well as their interference with United Nations Special Commission inspectors.
Bombing of Iraq (December 1998) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...
 
calamity said:
What part of enforcing the peace agreement not being a "war" do you not understand? SHeesh.
Click to expand...

"Enforcing the peace agreement" and "war" are not mutually exclusive terms, obviously.

Everyone who is not an idiot can understand that concept.

Fact is, GWB inherited the war in Iraq whether you like it or not.
 
Muhammed said:
1. "Enforcing the peace agreement" and "war" are not mutually exclusive terms, obviously.

2. Everyone who is not an idiot can understand that concept.

3. Fact is, GWB inherited the war in Iraq whether you like it or not.
Click to expand...
1. Yes they are.

2. Your the one equating a four-day bombing run with sticking 1/4 million coalition troops on Iraqi soil. What's that tell ya?

3. Bush inherited a situation that needed some handling. He handled it wrong. I doubt many people not vested in their side of the argument would disagree.
 
wolfie said:
So after seeing Sadaam Hussien publicly hanged on U-Tube...Gadhaffi getting his ass abused before he was shot..all these countries are still in deep unrest..they are waiting for the troops to get out..and then they can restore their natural balance..

I know that maybe the Muslim fundamentalist may move in..but at least we will know the name of our enemies..
Click to expand...

Those atrocious acts weren't committed by US personnel directly but we did allow them to apply their form of justice. I personally think that during Bush's term they were seriously concerned about Iran and Iraq using their military in the Gulf, hence the Iraq invasion. I do believe we over reacted to 9/11 for too long a period. We could've knocked down the terrorists and then kept a close eye on their activities attacking only when imminent threat was presented. That would've seemed far more like justice, then these never ending occupations and drone attacks.
 
calamity said:
Your [sic] the one equating a four-day bombing run with sticking 1/4 million coalition troops on Iraqi soil. What's that tell ya?
Click to expand...
No, actually you are lying. I never said that, implied that, nor insinuated that in any way shape or form. Why are you lying to the DP forum?
 
Catawba said:
The majority of Democrats that voted against AOF in Iraq had a problem going along with what they said.
Click to expand...

Just not the most senior members of the Dem Party.
 
ReformCollege said:
Just not the most senior members of the Dem Party.
Click to expand...

Yep, not those dickwads, but the majority of the Democrats in Congress did vote against AOF. We need more in Congress like them!
 
Muhammed said:
No, actually you are lying. I never said that, implied that, nor insinuated that in any way shape or form. Why are you lying to the DP forum?
Click to expand...

So now you deny that you brought up Desert Fox as proof that the war was in full swing before Bush?
 
Catawba said:
Are you just completely unaware of how many Democrats were in Congress at the time?

Let me break it down for you:

147 Democrats in Congress voted against AOF in Iraq and 111 voted for it.

In what reality is 147 not more than 111?

And how many Republicans in Congress voted against AOF in Iraq? 7

Iraq Resolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...

Can you, like, pay attention, for a moment? We were talking about Kerry and Biden - Senators. More Democrats in Senate voted for AOF than against. Now out of sudden you start talking about both chambers. What gives?
 
OK, I have re-read the thread, and I stand corrected: You were talking about the House early on, I just missed it.

Of course, it is the Senate vote that really mattered - the House was solidly Republican, while in Senate GOP did not have enough votes to pass SJ Res 45. The 29 Dem Senators had provided more than enough. (And how many probably voted against only because it was Bush asking, and not Gore)
 
calamity said:
So now you deny that you brought up Desert Fox as proof that the war was in full swing before Bush?
Click to expand...
I'm not sure what you mean by the term "full swing". That is your term, not mine

I correctly stated that the US was at war with Iraq before GWB was president and actually bombed Iraq just a few hours before GWB became president.

These are verifiable historical facts. Nobody's idiocy changes truthful history.
 
Muhammed said:
I'm not sure what you mean by the term "full swing". That is your term, not mine

I correctly stated that the US was at war with Iraq before GWB was president and actually bombed Iraq just a few hours before GWB became president.

These are verifiable historical facts. Nobody's idiocy changes truthful history.
Click to expand...
And I said just because we hurled a few cruise missiles at them and had one four-hour bombing run, it did not constitute "war". 1/4 Million boots on the ground in Iraq--now that's war.

Dude, going by your definition there would be no WW2, just one long war against Germany which began in 1914, never ended in 1918 or started again in 1938.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom