Saddam was being difficult...was that an excuse to go to war? Of all the Axis of evil, don't you think this was (at the time) the easiest target? They are worst people than him around.
Too many things to blame.....
Too many things to blame.....
Poll
The blame for Iraq
| George W. Bush | 36% | 36% - 57 | ||||
| The Republican Party | 18% | 18% - 28 | ||||
| The Democrat Party | 18% | 18% - 28 | ||||
| Other | 27% | 27% - 42 | ||||
| Total: 155 | ||||||
I blame the American people. People were calling it a parallel to Vietnam within the first few months. They may have believed that the dictionary-defined weapons of mass destruction where present, but the public apparently didn't believe in it enough to support the action taken. During the Civil War, Lincoln managed to keep the support of the Union despite losses early in the war with thousands of bodies taken back home. When the media began counting 100, 250, 500, 1000 there was a large loss in morale of soldiers and a blow to the political backing at home. This guy has a great view of what I'm saying:
DesertFox423 wrote:
This generation does not know what a war is. It all takes place half a world away and is unimportant to them. It affects few of the lives back home as people continue going about their business. Nobody is preaching to buy war bonds, no factories have turned to producing equipment and no rationing is taking place. War is an idea as distant as peace. It's just boring now.
how about some hope for what our troops are doing
the main problem why this war went south, yes some poor planning, budgets spent places they shouldnt have been, bad intel etc
but the main problem is the sudden loss of moral in the american people
remeber all those flags waiving on trucks, and stickers post 911..and in early 03...all the support. thats gone, and in turn our trops have felt that impact
nam repeat's itself
and oh ya our new congress sitting at a college football game on their first day of real work doesnt help much
the main problem why this war went south, yes some poor planning, budgets spent places they shouldnt have been, bad intel etc
but the main problem is the sudden loss of moral in the american people
remeber all those flags waiving on trucks, and stickers post 911..and in early 03...all the support. thats gone, and in turn our trops have felt that impact
nam repeat's itself
and oh ya our new congress sitting at a college football game on their first day of real work doesnt help much
1) Iraqi people
2) Cheney
3) Rumfuck
4) Clinton
UN UN UN UN UN
2) Cheney
3) Rumfuck
4) Clinton
UN UN UN UN UN
Last edited by usmarine2007 (2007-01-12 06:55:01)
You obviously haven't read the "Downing street papers"Kmarion wrote:
I do place blame on intelligence agencies. Somewhere you heard me say I don't? Ultimately if Saddam had complied we would not be there though.Bubbalo wrote:
Yet you place no blame on the intelligence agencies who were supposed to find out what he was really up to? And you ignore the fact that he said he had no weapons? How about the GWB postured to be more capable than he was?
He had opportunities.
http://www.state.gov/p/nea/rls/18728.htm
Saddam blocked the work of the Inspections teams numerous times. It would have been hard to go to war under the idea of WMD's if Saddam had allowed the weapons inspectors to do their job wouldn't it?
Supporting terrorist acts does not help neither.Unfortunatly your theory is not logical considering the entire world had the same information. http://www.globalsecurity.org/intell/li … ll_toc.htmaardfrith wrote:
I blame the Intelligence Agencies for making up shit about the weapons Hussein was allegedly storing.
Everyone in thier heart knows Bush and the cronies fucked up. Blaming the Democratic party for "voting for the war" automatically makes them liable. Forget that Republicans brought the whole deal to the table, Democrats voted for it so they are to blame. Its the ol' double standard let me benefit when things are great, place the blame when things fail. KInd of like Enron. One big fucking Enron.
The failure in Iraq stems from the Republicans being pressured by the Anti War crowd, blame America first crowd, international pressure, media coverage of ground operations, and people thinking that war must be fought in a way to protect innocense above all else.
Basically, we are all to blame. America never had the resolve needed to fight this war properly.
Soooooo,
Since Bush ultimately made the decisions (he was the decider), he gets all the credit for doing the right thing the wrong way.
They are all corrupt in Washington and put their own interests above America's interests. Bush has failed along with every other politician since Regan.
Basically, we are all to blame. America never had the resolve needed to fight this war properly.
Soooooo,
Since Bush ultimately made the decisions (he was the decider), he gets all the credit for doing the right thing the wrong way.
They are all corrupt in Washington and put their own interests above America's interests. Bush has failed along with every other politician since Regan.
Not so. There are certainly cases of intelligence being manufactured in the UK. While the US intelligence agencies do not have as much transparency as those in the UK, but there were reports on a BBC documentary about the intelligence fabrication which implicated the CIA as well as the British intelligence services.Kmarion wrote:
Unfortunatly your theory is not logical considering the entire world had the same information. http://www.globalsecurity.org/intell/li … ll_toc.htmaardfrith wrote:
I blame the Intelligence Agencies for making up shit about the weapons Hussein was allegedly storing.
I'm not so clued up about how it all happened in the US, but in the UK the intelligence was 'sexed up', as they called it at the time.
The Iraqis and external terrorist sponsors are responsible for the failure in Iraq. It was never a realistically achievable goal and it's also the US's and their allies fault for not realising this before they went and turned Iraq into even more of a mess than it was before.
Last edited by Bertster7 (2007-01-12 12:00:52)
After the "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED" banner was flown. After G.W. flew the fighter jet in his little suit. After G.W. stood on that carrier and announced victory. Yeah, we're all to blame. All to blame for fighting a war his daddy didn't finish.Major_Spittle wrote:
The failure in Iraq stems from the Republicans being pressured by the Anti War crowd, blame America first crowd, international pressure, media coverage of ground operations, and people thinking that war must be fought in a way to protect innocense above all else.
Basically, we are all to blame. America never had the resolve needed to fight this war properly.
Soooooo,
Since Bush ultimately made the decisions (he was the decider), he gets all the credit for doing the right thing the wrong way.
They are all corrupt in Washington and put their own interests above America's interests. Bush has failed along with every other politician since Regan.
I hate to rehash old shit but I know Republicans want to move past it. Why are we there again? Yeah. But hey I'll take the blame. Whatever. nothing changes.
I'd say the Republican party. I want to lean towards other for the American people re-electing Bush...but it still has to go to the party for being corrupt and no longer being conservative with money like they used to be.
Bush did great at winning the war in Iraq. He was right on and the mission was a GREAT military success and he should be proud of that.Mason4Assassin444 wrote:
After the "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED" banner was flown. After G.W. flew the fighter jet in his little suit. After G.W. stood on that carrier and announced victory. Yeah, we're all to blame. All to blame for fighting a war his daddy didn't finish.Major_Spittle wrote:
The failure in Iraq stems from the Republicans being pressured by the Anti War crowd, blame America first crowd, international pressure, media coverage of ground operations, and people thinking that war must be fought in a way to protect innocense above all else.
Basically, we are all to blame. America never had the resolve needed to fight this war properly.
Soooooo,
Since Bush ultimately made the decisions (he was the decider), he gets all the credit for doing the right thing the wrong way.
They are all corrupt in Washington and put their own interests above America's interests. Bush has failed along with every other politician since Regan.
I hate to rehash old shit but I know Republicans want to move past it. Why are we there again? Yeah. But hey I'll take the blame. Whatever. nothing changes.
It was how and what he tried to accomplish afterwards in Iraq. He could still succeed at this and most likely will to one degree or another, but at what price financially. This and selling out our troops to protect the people supporting terrorists is where he lost my support for "the war".
Why didn't we invade Saudi Arabia and Hang their royal family? This is still a "WAR" on terrorists, right? Why can't we carpet bomb entire cities that provide safe haven for terrorists?
QFECameronPoe wrote:
That's not a personal attack. Me and ATG get along just fine. If you read my post I am criticising a thread of his - I'm not hurling insults at the man.TrollmeaT wrote:
On a side note I thought personal attacks weren't aloud or I would have slammed you long ago Mr.poe.
That and the world community for not bothering to put any teeth behind their own U.N. resolutions.Kmarion wrote:
I blame Saddam for posturing to be a threat he wasn't. This is no secret.Bubbalo wrote:
So, you're blaming Saddam for you failure to effectively take over his country?
In that case, can I blame Americans for the 9/11 attacks, for building a tower?
The United States acted within the U.N. mandates and resolutions with regards to Iraq. Member nations voted for this or that, while accepting oil payments and scams through back door channels. One of the reasons the French were so opposed to us is that they were making millions in illegal oil transactions. They then did nothing but stall and appease will Saddam was funding the familes of suicide bombers and makng like he was developing WMD's
Ever consider that there is truth to the rumors that the WMD's ended up in Syria? We don't have a legal mandate to attack Syria, like we did for Iraq.
He hasn't read "State of Denial...Bush at War Part III" by Bob Woodward.GATOR591957 wrote:
You obviously haven't read the "Downing street papers"Kmarion wrote:
I do place blame on intelligence agencies. Somewhere you heard me say I don't? Ultimately if Saddam had complied we would not be there though.Bubbalo wrote:
Yet you place no blame on the intelligence agencies who were supposed to find out what he was really up to? And you ignore the fact that he said he had no weapons? How about the GWB postured to be more capable than he was?
He had opportunities.
http://www.state.gov/p/nea/rls/18728.htm
Saddam blocked the work of the Inspections teams numerous times. It would have been hard to go to war under the idea of WMD's if Saddam had allowed the weapons inspectors to do their job wouldn't it?
Supporting terrorist acts does not help neither.Unfortunately your theory is not logical considering the entire world had the same information. http://www.globalsecurity.org/intell/li … ll_toc.htmaardfrith wrote:
I blame the Intelligence Agencies for making up shit about the weapons Hussein was allegedly storing.
Saddam was bluffing. The CIA had very old intelligence and most of it was from the CIA agents based in Saudi. Hardy the smoking gun Bush was looking for.
I don't know about you but if the police are standing outside my door telling me they are coming in to throw me out of my house and take over my place because they think I have a bomb in here I say" Come on in and have a look". Now that seems like the quickest way to diffuse the situation.BN wrote:
He hasn't read "State of Denial...Bush at War Part III" by Bob Woodward.GATOR591957 wrote:
You obviously haven't read the "Downing street papers"Kmarion wrote:
I do place blame on intelligence agencies. Somewhere you heard me say I don't? Ultimately if Saddam had complied we would not be there though.
He had opportunities.
http://www.state.gov/p/nea/rls/18728.htm
Saddam blocked the work of the Inspections teams numerous times. It would have been hard to go to war under the idea of WMD's if Saddam had allowed the weapons inspectors to do their job wouldn't it?
Supporting terrorist acts does not help neither.
Unfortunately your theory is not logical considering the entire world had the same information. http://www.globalsecurity.org/intell/li … ll_toc.htm
Saddam was bluffing. The CIA had very old intelligence and most of it was from the CIA agents based in Saudi. Hardy the smoking gun Bush was looking for.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Just a quick question... Why do you people starting these type of threads...? We get the point... Bush is dumb and evil and he ruined the US and Iraq.... hes a bully and the US supports Israel and Republicans are corrupt... lol... These debates are pointless you believe what you believe and we believe what we believe...
Now unless your willing to change? lol Didnt think so... me either peace
Now unless your willing to change? lol Didnt think so... me either peace
Love is the answer
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz. Yet another Iraq war thread. Lock.
I stand by my statements in an earlier theard. It was Al Gore and the Crab-people.
The Nonconservative Movement, GWB, his administration, the Republican Party, the New Iraqi Government, Iran and Syria.sergeriver wrote:
GWB, his administration, the Republican Party, the New Iraqi Government, Iran and Syria.
Last edited by JahManRed (2007-01-12 16:34:36)
Can you flush your toilet and tell me which way the water spins.JahManRed wrote:
The Nonconservative Movement, GWB, his administration, the Republican Party, the New Iraqi Government, Iran and Syria.sergeriver wrote:
GWB, his administration, the Republican Party, the New Iraqi Government, Iran and Syria.
I don't see why any of the poll's options should be excluded from the search of those responsible. In other words, why is the Democratic Party not guilty?
+1 DonFck for the sake of conspiracy theories
+1 DonFck for the sake of conspiracy theories
ƒ³
i blame jesus
Amen to that.herrr_smity wrote:
i blame jesus
Anyone who decided that we needed to go there.
Vietnam take two....
Vietnam take two....
Yes exactly, the public & the politicians trying to run the war instead of the military.CommieChipmunk wrote:
Anyone who decided that we needed to go there.
Vietnam take two....
Although I agree with your point about the newest generations not knowing what a war is, I think it also has to do with the reasons we are fighting the war. If you remember, after 9/11, I think Bush had something like an 80 percent approval rating, and a large number of Democrats were voting to go to war in Afgahnistan (which, after all, was where the 9/11 terrorists were from).DesertFox423 wrote:
I blame the American people. People were calling it a parallel to Vietnam within the first few months. They may have believed that the dictionary-defined weapons of mass destruction where present, but the public apparently didn't believe in it enough to support the action taken. During the Civil War, Lincoln managed to keep the support of the Union despite losses early in the war with thousands of bodies taken back home. When the media began counting 100, 250, 500, 1000 there was a large loss in morale of soldiers and a blow to the political backing at home. This guy has a great view of what I'm saying:DesertFox423 wrote:
This generation does not know what a war is. It all takes place half a world away and is unimportant to them. It affects few of the lives back home as people continue going about their business. Nobody is preaching to buy war bonds, no factories have turned to producing equipment and no rationing is taking place. War is an idea as distant as peace. It's just boring now.
If you notice, the huge discussion today is about Iraq. Afgahnistan had a clear purpose, to avenge those that died on 9/11. I think you're confusion anti-Iraq war discussions with anti-war on terror.
For the most part, I think I can safely say people don't believe in wars when they can't win. You can go on and on all day about who screwed up in Iraq, and say "the Iraqi people are to blame". But in the end, it is not their fault for living in an F'ed up country, it is our fault for believing we could fix it.
It cracks me up when people say "A duhr, the Iraqis don't know how to run their own country". No shit. The very word "Iraqis" refers to millions of different people, with different beliefs, different values, and different morals. Referring to the Iraqi people as a whole is doing nothing more than referring to people within its borders. The FACT of the modern world we live in is that "BORDERS" means almost nothing. As you can see with the immigration problem, along with civil war in Iraq, "borders" are completely outdated. At this point it refers to nothing more than a piece of land drawn by colonialists hundreds of years ago. And that's what people need to realize.
You're blaming the Iraqis because they're in the middle of a thousand year religious civil war? SHAME ON YOU. Please, just ADMIT the USA as a whole screwed up, it might make you seem like you somewhat know what you're talking about.
Iraq has always been F'ed up, and will always be F'ed up. Much like many other countries around the globe. Welcome to the modern world, a world without borders.
Last edited by Spearhead (2007-01-12 18:57:02)