Boo Radley
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2009
- Messages
- 37,066
- Reaction score
- 7,028
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
You see, this is what I mean by the default protestor....
The failure was in 1991. 2003 was inevitable.
"They" said we were dictator supporters. What did we show "them" in 2003? What have we shown them since during the Arab Spring and even with Syria? "They" say a lot about America. It's what "they" do. It's the price we pay for being history's victor playing their rules while all others fell to the side. People think far less negative about Iraq these days, what with Muslims demonstrating how they behave without outside forces removing their dictators. By the way, we have been what "they" say we are ever since we agreed to cross the Atlantic to fight Germans. So what? Our goal should be more than that and to live up to our preach. Of course, when the Syrian rebels turn and slaughter "inferior" tribes "they" will say more. Incidentally, "they" were also saying a lot when we were riding the fence in regards to Libya. Don't worry about what the world's losers have to say about America. Until America carves the Third World up into a disastrous border mess, starts a couple World Wars, and starts a Cold War, "they" can't say much.
Iran's been economically crippled for some time and its leaders used Iraq to oppress its people further, especially when they riot at elections. The nuclear program isn't new and has been around since the Shah. This too was inevitable.
Al-Queda is a crippled mess, afraid to show its head and relies on the many others who do in their name simply to be noticed. They have merely scooped up from the region what the mess in Iraq revealed. Or do you think the Sunni traveled to Iraq to slaughter Shia because they admired Saddam Hussein? Like I stated before, the more the world changes the more this civilization will produce radicals. And as they realize that Islam has failed as an organizing tool they will simply be what they were raised to be. Let them lash out regionally, die for Allah and Al-Queda. Future generations that grow up in democracies where they have healthy outlets to voice opposition will seek the "sword" far less than their recent ancestors. We get crazies even in our Democracy. The trick is to create an environment that doesn't breed violent extremist organizations.
Nothing after any war changes the number of dead or the money spent. We aren't getting anybody back from Afghanistan. We aren't getting anybody back from Beirut. From Vietnam. From Korea. From World Wars. Complaining about this for wars we don't approve of is selective. "Nothing that happens now" is a protestors chant to cling to his protests no matter what. It's this attitude that brands the dead as being in vain.
Not default, but what I believe to be true.
1991 may not have been a success, but Chalibi played a role in that as well, making Bush's alliance with him even more mind boggling. But Bush sr. Knew better than to go into Iraq to stay. He knew he need some in power, and to create a vacuum. Bush sr rarely gets the credit he deserves.
No matter Iran's economic status, a friendly Iraq helps them. And they do have some influence (not control) in Iraq.
Nor is al Qaeda destroyed. They weren't large to begin with. They didn't send an army to hit the towers. But they got serious training in Iraq. Grew their numbers. Gained in status with our help. And did more to us then they ever could had we not invaded.
And no one suggests we can bring anyone back. But to prevent future mistakes, we must recognize the problem. Reckless spending of human lives should be harder to do.