• 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!

Was the Iraq War "Worth it"

Was the Iraq War Worth it?

  • Yes

    Votes: 5 6.4%

  • No

    Votes: 65 83.3%

  • Other

    Votes: 8 10.3%
  • Total voters
    78
TheDemSocialist said:
We better start invading a lot of ****ing countries if we really care about "human rights".
Click to expand...

Have you never heard of priorities and why they exist?

The "if the US does not do everything at the same time it's a hypocrite" argument is crap, any HS student can see that.
 
ecofarm said:
Have you never heard of priorities and why they exist?

The "if the US does not do everything at the same time it's a hypocrite" argument is crap, any HS student can see that.
Click to expand...

Worse places than Iraq....like most of Africa. Wonder why we're in Iraq and not Africa....hmmmmmmm
 
Ikari said:
Worse places than Iraq....like most of Africa. Wonder why we're in Iraq and not Africa....hmmmmmmm
Click to expand...

We are in Africa. We provide support to Kenya, Ethiopia, the East African Union and the African Union in Somalia. In North Africa, we were obviously involved in Libya.
 
ocean515 said:
Of course there was that little attempt to capture a massive chuck of the worlds oil supply, and thereby hold the world at his mercy, but I guess that doesn't count.
Click to expand...

I would prefer to talk in terms of cause and effect rather than intent. It's not that motive doesn't count, it's just that there are facts on the ground to consider.

It is their culture that is responsible for both the rise of evil men like Sadaam as well as ISIS. THere are no real possibilities for a functioning democracy because of their culture.
 
LowDown said:
[*]Iraq's noncompliance with the conditions of the 1991 ceasefire agreement, including interference with U.N. weapons inspectors.
Click to expand...

[*]Iraq "continuing to possess and develop a significant chemical and biological weapons capability" and "actively seeking a nuclear weapons capability" posed a "threat to the national security of the United States and international peace and security in the Persian Gulf region."
Click to expand...
Not true
""There were about 700 inspections, and in no case did we find weapons of mass destruction," said Hans Blix, the Swedish diplomat called out of retirement to serve as the United Nations' chief weapons inspector from 2000 to 2003; from 1981 to 1997 he headed the International Atomic Energy Agency. "We went to sites [in Iraq] given to us by intelligence, and only in three cases did we find something" - a stash of nuclear documents, some Vulcan boosters, and several empty warheads for chemical weapons. " U.N. weapons inspector Hans Blix faults Bush Administration for lack of "critical thinking" in Iraq


"Through the inspections conducted so far, we have obtained a good knowledge of the industrial and scientific landscape of Iraq, as well as of its missile capability but, as before, we do not know every cave and corner. Inspections are effectively helping to bridge the gap in knowledge that arose due to the absence of inspections between December 1998 and November 2002.

More than 200 chemical and more than 100 biological samples have been collected at different sites. Three-quarters of these have been screened using our own analytical laboratory capabilities at the Baghdad Centre (BOMVIC). The results to date have been consistent with Iraq's declarations." Full text: Hans Blix's briefing to the UN security council | World news | theguardian.com

[*]Iraq's "brutal repression of its civilian population."
Click to expand...
So what? Many countries do this. Many countries we support do this.

[*]Iraq's "capability and willingness to use weapons of mass destruction against other nations and its own people".
Click to expand...
Iraq had lost all its weapons. And i quote the great Condy and Powell in 2000: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nUNsv66m8Rw

[*]Iraq's hostility towards the United States as demonstrated by the 1993 assassination attempt on former President George H. W. Bush and firing on coalition aircraft enforcing the no-fly zones following the 1991 Gulf War.
Click to expand...
"Hostility"? Really?

[*]Members of al-Qaeda, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq.
Click to expand...
:lamo Also not true.
Hussein's Iraq and al Qaeda not linked, Pentagon says - CNN.com
Al Qaeda-Hussein Link Is Dismissed (washingtonpost.com)

[*]Iraq's "continu[ing] to aid and harbor other international terrorist organizations," including anti-United States terrorist organizations.
Click to expand...
The PLF? Or giving money to suicide bomber families?


Of the above most were remedied and the situation was stable as of 2008. At that point it could be stated that increased stability was purchased pretty cheaply considering the cost in terms of men and materials in previous wars. At this time, however, it looks like most of those gains have been lost. This is entirely due to Pres. Obama's poor judgement.
Click to expand...
Also, simply not true
http://www.debatepolitics.com/gener...-all-proved-righty-iraq-2.html#post1063420347
 
Gardener said:
It is their culture that is responsible for both the rise of evil men like Sadaam as well as ISIS. THere are no real possibilities for a functioning democracy because of their culture.
Click to expand...

That's what they said about every country before democracy arrives.
 
ocean515 said:
So let's see. Saddam developed and used WMD's. He sought to build nuclear weapons. He invaded another country with the objective to control a big portion of the worlds oil supplies, thereby leaving the world at his mercy. And the list goes on.

Complex history, and complex situation, let's not get carried away in the rewrite of most it.
Click to expand...

Yes, lets not rewrite history. Lets learn from it:

Iraq

A review of thousands of declassified government documents and interviews with former U.S. policymakers shows that U.S. provided intelligence and logistical support, which played a role in arming Iraq in its war with Iran. Under the Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush administrations, the U.S. authorized the sale to Iraq of numerous dual-use technology (items with both military and civilian applications), including chemicals which can be used in manufacturing of pesticides or chemical weapons and live viruses and bacteria, such as anthrax and bubonic plague used in medicine and the manufacture of vaccines or weaponized for use in biological weapons.

A report of the U.S. Senate's Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs concluded that the U.S. under the successive presidential administrations sold materials including anthrax, and botulism to Iraq right up until March 1992. The chairman of the Senate committee, Don Riegle, said: "The executive branch of our government approved 771 different export licenses for sale of dual-use technology to Iraq. I think its a devastating record."[10] According to several former officials, the State and Commerce departments promoted trade in such items as a way to boost U.S. exports and acquire political leverage over Hussein.[11
Click to expand...
 
ecofarm said:
That's what they said about every country before democracy arrives.
Click to expand...

Not every country is the product of generations of inbreeding, or possess a culture where every sphere of human endeavor is dominated by clan relationships.
 
Gardener said:
Not every country is the product of generations of inbreeding, or possess a culture where every sphere of human endeavor is dominated by clan relationships.
Click to expand...

That's been true in every country that's realized democracy. It's simple development.
 
Gardener said:
I would prefer to talk in terms of cause and effect rather than intent. It's not that motive doesn't count, it's just that there are facts on the ground to consider.

It is their culture that is responsible for both the rise of evil men like Sadaam as well as ISIS. THere are no real possibilities for a functioning democracy because of their culture.
Click to expand...


Totally agree. We have been naïve to apply our western ideas and values to a culture that lives in the dark ages. Assessing the past, we should do what can be done to contain their violence inside their borders, and allow them to do what nature has been trying to do for thousands of years: Remove their strain from the planet.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
With the situation in Iraq unfolding do you believe that the Iraq War was worth it?
Click to expand...

Interesting - the sheer number of people who said "no" to the poll indicates that it must include quite a few of the conservatives on this forum...yet so many of them are outraged that Obama isn't more eager to put more boots on the ground elsewhere.
 
Gardener said:
No, that is simply not true.
Click to expand...

But it is.

Europe was a bunch of clans and tyrants. As was Japan. As was North America, Central America and South America. And Kenya, and Eastern Europe. Well, everywhere was. It's a stage in development.
 
ocean515 said:
What does your post have to do with anything?
Click to expand...

That America's involvement in the Middle East has been nothing short of a disaster -- supporting one faction; arming another; facilitating the rise of dictators, then toppling them. Where does it end? It ends with America losing. It ends with the Middle East in shambles.

This should be America's Foreign Policy theme song. It sooo fitting.

Fischerspooner - Never Win - Video Dailymotion
 
Gwynne Dyer: Tony Blair talks ISIS and the Middle East

'WHATEVER ELSE YOU may say about the “young war criminal” (as British journalist Alan Watkins used to call former prime minister Tony Blair), he certainly fights his corner with great determination.

He is condemned to spend his life defending his part in the invasion of Iraq in 2003, and last weekend he was at it again.

In a 3,000-word essay on his website, Tony Blair wrote about last week’s conquest of almost half Iraq’s territory by the fanatical fighters of ISIS (Islamic State of Iraq and Syria): “We have to liberate ourselves from the notion that ‘we’ have caused this. We haven’t.” What he really meant by “we”, of course, was “I”. And he would say that, wouldn’t he?'

Gwynne Dyer: Tony Blair talks ISIS and the Middle East | Georgia Straight, Vancouver's News & Entertainment Weekly
 
Grand Mal said:
I forget, what was the beef with Ghaddafi again?
Pick your dictator if you want an ally in the region. Drop any ideas of promoting democracy- there'll be exactly one election and you'll have either another strongman dictator or an Islamist state..
Click to expand...

I think that was the genesis of the biggest mistake many of us (me included) made in 2003 in supporting going into Iraq. That everyone (humans) want the same thing - that they want freedom, they want liberty, they and they want a government that protects these ideals. What we found out by staying and trying to nurture that ideal was it was a bad assumption. Perhaps at some level all people are alike and want the same things but certainly they don't all want these things as much as the US does or maybe I should say they don't covet it was much as the US does, nor do they see the benefits. Perhaps over a long period of time and many generations such a thing could occur in a secular state with secular morality and without the corruption religious nuttery.... but that is just not in the cards. No matter how much we showed Iraq could be better they just do not want to buy in. They quickly fall back into the same rut and that taught us two things. You can't export freedom if the people overwhelmingly do not want it and will not fight for it and two, when dealing with Islam and it's varying groups, power struggles, politics and extremisism - it's better to let them kill each other and come to a realization that themselves that something must change rather than make them for their own good.

So that means, let this turn into a civil war between Sunni and Shia - from my view let it continue for 10 years, 100 years, 1000 years whatever but contain it and don't let any group export terrorism. If we see that they are planning to or are capable of doing it - bomb the **** out of them and come home. Rinse. Repeat. Eventually either they will kill themselves off, or one side will win over the other and then the west can engage, or they will eternally be at each others throats. I see no benefit to involving ourselves again until they are ready - and they are not ready.
 
CRUE CAB said:
Had to be done.
Click to expand...

No it didn't. That is what you tell yourself, but it no it didn't have to be done. It was a choice to go in there and THAT choice was wrong.
 
CRUE CAB said:
No different then when we went to Europe, twice.
Click to expand...

Sure there was a difference, we had substantially more support in those wars than the Iraq war. Again, we didn't HAVE to do it. It was a choice. Can't escape that fact.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
Interesting - the sheer number of people who said "no" to the poll indicates that it must include quite a few of the conservatives on this forum...yet so many of them are outraged that Obama isn't more eager to put more boots on the ground elsewhere.
Click to expand...

They would be outraged if he did too. They hate the president. There is nothing he can ever do to change that. He cannot ever win with these people. No sense in even trying. I think he should just tell these insignificant, whiny and remedial hater's to just to ****-off. That's what I tell them. :mrgreen:
 
Last edited:
CRUE CAB said:
Europe was a choice too.
Click to expand...

Yes World I and World war II were the same as the Iraq war :roll:

Seriously you are out of your league here comparing those world wars to the Iraq War. Pathetic comparison.
 
TheNextEra said:
Yes World I and World war II were the same as the Iraq war :roll:

Seriously you are out of your league here comparing those world wars to the Iraq War. Pathetic comparison.
Click to expand...

Calling out of someones league is not a debate tactic unless you have just run out of information.
We did NOT HAVE to enter either war in Europe, we chose to. Really we didn't have to wage war on Japan if you really want no war.
 
CRUE CAB said:
Calling out of someones league is not a debate tactic unless you have just run out of information.
We did NOT HAVE to enter either war in Europe, we chose to. Really we didn't have to wage war on Japan if you really want no war.
Click to expand...

Yes because the inmportance of the world wars, was that of the IRaq war. :roll: Sorry your comments acting like all three are the same is ridiculous and deserve to be called out as such.

When Japan attacked us a total of 2,335 U.S. servicemen were killed and 1,143 were wounded. Sixty-eight civilians were also killed and 35 were wounded.

Please tell us how many Americans were attacked, injured, and killed with Iraq at the time of the no-fly zones. Again your comaprison is idiotic.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom