• 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!

A lefty's take on Iraq

Philly Boss

Banned
Joined
Feb 19, 2013
Messages
563
Reaction score
142
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Well all the years over there, all the lives lost, and all the money spent...look what we got for it. I'll be quick to give Bush his blame. We never should have invaded. But here's something else to think about. Do you see Afghanistan turning out any better when we eventually leave? I don't. It will be just as bad.

So in this thread, I want to point out that thousands of Americans have died in Iraq and Afghanistan during the years that Obama has kept us in Iraq and continues our presence in Afghanistan. These were fruitless wars and he continued them for far too long and if we as progressives want to maintain some integrity we should rightfully give him his share of the blame for all the Americans that were senselessly killed under his watch because he didn't want to accept that these were lost causes.
 
Your first mistake was mentioning bush. Everyone will just key in on that as an excuse to ignore your greater point.
 

So why is this a lefties view on Iraq? I don't see any repubs objecting to how long we have been in Afghanistan.
 

Sometimes, the sweet fragrance of reasoning wafts through the acrid stench of political BS..

Kudos

Enjoy life

Thom Paine
 
Carleen said:
So why is this a lefties view on Iraq? I don't see any repubs objecting to how long we have been in Afghanistan.
Click to expand...

Look more deeply. I don't know of any conservatives who are "dancing in the streets because of war"; I don't know of anyone of any political persuasion happy about the situation for a wide variety of reasons.

Thom Paine
 
Obama's continuing American military presence in Iraq and Afghanistan is one of the primary things that the left criticizes him about. This is nothing new. The left is not afraid at all to criticize the president when he does no live up to our expectations. None of this, however, validates the right's frothing hatred of the man.
 
Carleen said:
So why is this a lefties view on Iraq? I don't see any repubs objecting to how long we have been in Afghanistan.
Click to expand...

Boehner (chicken hawk) wants to go back in Iraq, whining about Obama today. Hmmmm. he wants grease constituents war tools?
 
Thom Paine said:
Look more deeply. I don't know of any conservatives who are "dancing in the streets because of war"; I don't know of anyone of any political persuasion happy about the situation for a wide variety of reasons.

Thom Paine
Click to expand...

Aren't they advocating boots on the ground in Iraq?
 

I agree. But really, it is realistic to think Obama (or any President, for the matter) can pull out the troops just like that? The biggest mistake/misconception made, IMO, was that even intelligent and experienced people talked of Iraq and Afghanistan as "in and out" missions. Yet -- based-on history -- is it does not happen like that. Not even close.
 

Fruitless wars? I think the original war in Afghanistan was fully justified. Remember it as UBL and AQ which devised and flew the planes into the trade towers and the pentagon. It was Sheik Omar and the Taliban which controlled the southern two thirds of Afghanistan who was giving sanctuary, a safe haven for UBL and AQ to run their terrorist plots out of and as a training ground for more and more terrorist. I believe that portion of the war was fully justified.

Hooking up with the Northern Alliance, an alliance of 14 different tribes fighting against the Taliban for control of Afghanistan was ideal. This enabled us with but a few SF and paramilitary on the ground to let the Northern Alliance do all the ground fighting and for us to provide air power. It worked magnificently. The Northern Alliance drove the Taliban with AQ and UBL along with them pretty much out of Afghanistan. No more safe haven, sanctuary or training grounds no more. But they failed to capture UBL.

I would say that is pretty much mission accomplished, except for one thing, no UBL. So we sent in 100,000 troops and began this so called nation building thing. From this point on, was it justified, I don’t know. Iraq is another story, I really have a problem with pre-emptive wars.
 
The people who just got rid of Eric Cantor might want to weigh in here.

Seems the VA 7th is led by isolationists like Rand Paul, not Ted Cruz, all-around neo-Canadian .
 
It seems now, as it did then, that the best way to deal with non-state terrorism is to bring down the wrath and get out. That may hold for state-actors lacking a civil society, too.

Remember how impressed the Northern Alliance was when the CIA guy used the laser designator and knocked out tanks, seemingly with a shoulder laser-pointer? Wouldn't it have been best, if we simply hit them and left? Does anyone think they are impressed by us now? Scared of us? Respect us?

The only thing staying accomplishes is garnering contempt. Look at them cheer as we leave? They think they ran us off.

Wouldn't it have been better to hit them and leave? That way, they'd think twice before launching another attack? Are they afraid to launch an attack after thirteen-years in Afghanistan?

Sure, we might have made a few friends, but we made enemies too. Are they about to break into Jeffersonian democracy? Is that what they learned?

Lastly, Afghans were very good fighters when we got there. Are they better now or worse? Did we simply train them in high-tech, communications, coordination, etc.? Are we better fighters for it or are they? Did we learn more about their vulnerabilities or did they learn more about ours?
 
Carleen said:
Aren't they advocating boots on the ground in Iraq?
Click to expand...

Yes the current GOP mouths today--Boehner, Graham, McCain--
want to give away more equipment, bomb, and put a residual force on the ground in perpetuity.

Since the GOP fired the first shots in this latest round of politicizing foreign affairs, let's give it right back to them .
 
Carleen said:
Aren't they advocating boots on the ground in Iraq?
Click to expand...

To my awareness, no, not generally; but there does seem to be a befuddlement of sorts from the whole political spectrum concerning the correct actions. I believe, I hope, there will be no boots on the ground other than, if needed, to get our 10,000 to 20,000 personnel out of there. ( last I heard we had 20,000 persons there but someone on the forum reported Obama stating a presence of 10,000 )...

Personally, I 'm so disgusted our foreign policy administrations ( notice the plurality )... I'm ready to turn the entire area into a glass topped parking lot OR let them fight it out alone; last man standing wins; winner take all.... ( end of mini rant, sorry ).

Have a good day Carleen and
find something to smile about

Thom Paine
 

I think that was Obama offering such, Nim... or I missed something ??


Thom Paine
 
Thom Paine said:
I think that was Obama offering such, Nim... or I missed something ??Thom Paine
Click to expand...
1. Do you support going back into Iraq as the GOP neo-cons do?
2. How do you plan on paying for it?
3. How do you think the anti-Cantor voters feel about this?

Unfortunately, the civil war in the GOP continues to roll over into the world's civil wars .
 
Ok.

As far as I know from the reports that I saw, the coalition sent far to view troops into Iraq at the invasion, sent a to small occupation force, criminalised all Baath party members and thereby made reconsiliation impossible, were to incompetent to keep the peace and lied about the cause for war.

I might be speculating here, but, if the administration had not lied to the world, planned things more carefully and commited more resources to the war effort - it could have worked.
 


You hit them.

And then his in bunkers...............

Whilest the rest of the country ingulfed in chaos and anarchy because nobody was there to keep the peace. The first victims of the insurection were shias, kurds and sunis slaughtering each other and American troops started dying when the occupation force desperatly tried to reestablish civil order.

So no, hit and leave would have brought up the same chaos as hit and hide had already done, so you would be repeating a mistake.
 

I am unaware of anyone of any political persuasion wanting to put boots on the ground in Iraq; also, there is not a GOP vs. Dem situation here. There does seem to be a considerable amount of uncertainty all the way around... For me... let them stand and fight alone at first sans our continued assistance and if they put in a good showing offer equipment... or assist the Kurds; they will do okay but it will cause some grumbling from Turkey.

There is no perfect answer... we should mind our own business more often.

have a good day Nim

Thom Paine
 
Thom Paine said:
I am unaware of anyone of any political persuasion wanting to put boots on the ground in Iraq;
Click to expand...
Today, specdifically, Graham and McCain spoke of a residual force left in perpetuity.
also, there is not a GOP vs. Dem situation here.
Click to expand...
The GOP mouthpieces made it one today--McCain, Graham, Boehner, etc.
There does seem to be a considerable amount of uncertainty all the way around...
Click to expand...
Yet Obama's been pounded all day for a situation he didn't create.
Like blaming Nixon for how he got out of Vietnam.
For me... let them stand and fight alone at first sans our continued assistance and if they put in a good showing offer equipment...
Click to expand...
The enemy already has our equipment from the Iraqis laying down once again.
This new terrorist group is said to be the wealthiest in the world.
or assist the Kurds; they will do okay but it will cause some grumbling from Turkey.
Click to expand...
We can't afford to put off the Turks--too bad we can't get the Kurds/Turks on the same page, especially with Syrian and Iranian problems.
have a good day Nim

Thom Paine
Click to expand...
you too--Linc
 
Last edited:
So you are a lefty who is against both wars and thinks you are somehow unbiased by admitting that the wars are 90% Bush's fault and 10% Obama's for continuing Bush's failed war plan.

Wow, that's awful big of you.
 
NIMBY said:
Today, specdifically, Graham and McCain spoke of a residual force left in perpetuity.

The GOP mouthpieces made it one today--McCain, Graham, Boehner, etc.
Click to expand...

I'll check out their latest utterances; hoping they don't sound like a Three Stooges comedy... ( I'm from Arizona with a love/hate thing for McCain )..
Damned if we do; damned if we don't. If we're to be damned anyway, I'd prefer we don't.

Good eve Nim

Thom Paine
 
And it is entirely impossible to withdraw the first day you take office.
Not even Obama could do that.

No change in administration is completely black-and-white, as we saw with LBJ's gift to Nixon.
Once the DEM left/GOP Rinos deserted LBJ/Nixon/Ford, the USA has played politics with foreign entanglements ever since.
JoeTrumps said:
So you are a lefty who is against both wars and thinks you are somehow unbiased by admitting that the wars are 90% Bush's fault and 10% Obama's for continuing Bush's failed war plan.
Click to expand...
I don't blame Veterans from Vietnam and now Iraq-2 for being upset at nothing to show for all the deaths and life-long injuries/problems.
This is why the VA is swamped.
 
It doesn't work. You don't try to se up democracies in these places. Saddam was the better bet.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…