Buck Fush

I've been pulling ~90 hrs/wk so I'm a little slow to get involved these days, but thanks for thinking of me.

Phantom

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003_invasion_of_Iraq

That is one place leejo.

__________________

Buck Fush

Nice. Nice.

Phantom

I do what I can to prove those wrong by using facts. And look at that, it's a fact, how weird.

__________________

Steeler

Vice President Cheney is the founding officer of the Project for a New American Century, an advocacy group extremely well-represented in the Bush administration (and, some would say, in control of it). The wikipedia entry has a fairly comprehensive rundown of their major philosophy and goals. They are not particularly secretive about their ideology.

Essentially, they believe that the end of the Cold War presents a unique opportunity for the United States, as the "sole remaining superpower," to project an economic, political, and military authority over large portions of the globe. They hold that American style democracy and capitalism is the most successful and beneficial form of government known to man, and that this ideology should, for our own benefit and that of the world, be extended to all nations.

This belief is not neccessarily wrong, but frighteningly naive in its assumptions.

Establishing a beachhead in the Middle East against Iran and other forces there has been one of their first steps toward this larger vision. In the late 90s you'll recall a brief dust-up over weapons inspections and an increased rate of bombing in the no-fly zone. During that time PNAC lobbied the Clinton administration to consider military force to remove Hussein. Note the names on that letter. That would explain why, on Sept. 12, 2001, Rumsfeld was advocating hitting Iraq instead of Afghanistan.

So that's why I take EVERY statement about Iraq made by this administration with a grain of salt. Terrorism is a convenient hook. WMD is a compelling argument, but I'm not convinced they really expected to find anything. So I can only assume that they were sincere about exporting democracy, with the cheering and the being greeted by thrown flowers and singing and all that bull. Unfortunately I think they completely misread the situation in the region and have left us holding a very heavy bag for a very long time.

__________________

leejo

What are your qualifications to make this judgment?

I have read (Bob Woodward's Bush At War) that Rumsfeld wondered if we needed to invade Iraq or at least plan for it based on 9/11, but I haven't read that he advocated Iraq over Afghanistan. What evidence do you cite for that statement?

leejo

You need to read the full document.

Steeler

There have been many powerful figures in history who believed that the world would be better off if everyone else just agreed with them and did what they said. We frequently call them conquerors. The founders of PNAC believe, quite explicitly, that it is just and right to extend an American hegemonic influence over the entire globe, and that the rest of the world will thank us for the effort. Do I need to have a degree in political science to call that a naive assessment of how the world works?

Wasn't there another superpower that wanted to do something like that? Spread their sphere of influence over the globe, convert others to their way of life, consume the local faiths and traditions in favor of a benevolent government of the people? I think there was a hammer and a sickle involved?

As Europe becomes more independent from the US economy, as China and south Asia modernize, as South America reinvents itself, the nations of the world will rapidly become less dependent on our largess and leadership and we will become more dependent on their cooperation. Just as the Soviet Union lost the uniting threat that held it together when Bush 41 began to disarm, we lost the communist threat that held many of our allies close to us. That decay will continue until we reach a kind of global balance of power. There is no way, militarily or otherwise, to prevent this. The best course of action would be to build alliances and work toward mutually-beneficial causes with our neighbors.

The sooner we learn that 1) we are not invincible, and 2) the world doesn't owe us anything, the better off we will be.

That was Richard Clarke's claim, at the very least. You will, of course point out that he is a bitter disgruntled former employee out for revenge and that his statement is therefore untrustworthy. Blah.

__________________

leejo

You don't list any of your qualification for claiming that the opinions expressed in the document are naive. These are professionals who have devoted their careers to the study of the matters in question. I don't know anything about you.

I think Richard Clarke's opinions are highly suspect, yes. I think if you would say "according to Richard Clarke...." instead of tossing out a statement like that as if it were indisputable fact, it would help us understand the veracity of your claims and would help the precision of your thought.

CingularDuality

I disagree. It looks like Iraq now has a Constitution. And democratically elected leaders. If you don't think that people having freedom is a good thing, well, then I don't know what to say...

I think that in ten, maybe twenty, years, we'll see the tremendous accomplishment that is taking place in Iraq right now. I think it'll change the world in ways we can only imagine right now. Granted, the war on terror is far from over, but a democratic Iraq is a huge step towards making this world a better place.

Go ahead and try to compare this to imperialism or nazism or the cold war or whatever else you want, but you know in your heart that good things will come with the spread of freedom...

__________________

Become a supporting member! -- Shop at the Tactical Market!

Take the world's smallest political quiz! "I was touched by His Noodly Appendage."
TacticalGamer TX LAN/BBQ Veteran:

Steeler

leejo, I'm sorry I don't meet your high standards necessary to comment on world events. I am not a member of the ruling political class, but I do have a brain capable of logical reasoning. If you feel that invalidates my input and you choose to ignore it, that's your loss, not mine.

That's a straw man, and an insulting one. I would very much like it if everyone were free to live in an open society of their own determination - free from fear, free from opression, free from want. But you can't slap the word freedom on anything you please and call it success. A constitution doesn't categorically make one free. A pretty banner doesn't make a mission accomplished.

The Iraqis still have a lot of hurdles to clear before they have a stable, functional central government, assuming that the warring factions, corruption, and the insurgency don't tear it apart. We have Shiite police officers openly talking about waging a war of vengeance on the Sunnis, and we can't even trust the Iraqi military units we have trained not to betray our own guys to the insurgents. We're losing 10-15 civilians a day that we know about, and we can't even adequetely define who it is we're fighting against. Foreign jiadists? Baathists? Sunni partisans? Ethnic Shiites? Iranian agents? Home-grown nationalists? Take your pick.

I think we have no choice but to remain in Iraq to prevent an openly hostile civil war from erupting. That is the bed we've made for ourselves and we have to see it through. But it will be a long and costly war for all parties and there is no guarantee that we will ultimately benefit from the outcome. So pardon me if I don't get all misty-eyed at the purple fingers.

I believe that there will be an accounting within the next few years, and either the country will decide to swallow the bitter pill of a draft or other major economic sacrifices, or we will get the Hell out.

__________________

Drizzid

Ya know the problem with all this is you do not know what to believe anymore. With WWii and other wars ( not all of them) the people of this country saw what was going on. They saw the truth of the war. Now you have media outlets that will only broadcast reports to support one side or the other (left or right). These media outlets now have the power to sway the american people to their own political views and that is not right. Everyone in this thread has made arguments for both sides of the story. The only problem is that the third side is not being told and that's the WHOLE truth. I personally struggle with reporters I have heard on the talk radio shows that literally want this war to fail just so they can rub it in Bush's face and I'm sorry that's not the way to do things. The liberals have come into this thinking that they can use the dying men and women who have payed the ultimate sacrifice to their country as a way of gaining momentum in the political race. You can't always believe ANYTHING you hear,see, or read anymore. I just hope the men and women of our military can come home soon to a heroes welcome no matter what side of the fence your on. If this is off topic then I apologize but I couldn't help but say my beef.

__________________

CingularDuality

How is it a straw man? You said and I pointed out that the Iraq war has accomplished a LOT. You'll not hear me say that things are perfect there right now, but they sure are headed in the right direction. Are they completely free? Heh, is anyone? Perhaps not, but they're certainly free from an oppressive and abusive government and are now able to choose their future for themselves. I will label that freedom and say that it's a good thing.

Draft? We've lost 2000 troops in two years. Do you know how many we lost in the first two years in other conflicts? I just happened to have heard a news story on this particular topic, since the media decided this was a milestone that needed to be celebrated... No, we're doing fine and are far from needing to draft anyone...

__________________

Become a supporting member! -- Shop at the Tactical Market!

Take the world's smallest political quiz! "I was touched by His Noodly Appendage."
TacticalGamer TX LAN/BBQ Veteran:

RandomGuy

It's a straw man simply because Steeler never said "People having freedom is a bad thing" and never indicated any position like that but you came back with "If you don't think that people having freedom is a good thing, well, then I don't know what to say" anyways. So at that point you are not aguing with Steeler. You are arguing against the straw man who believes "people having freedom is a bad thing".

leejo

I made no such statements, I merely asked you to clarify your qualifications for dismissing these people's opinions and strategic thinking so casually as if you had the expertise and experience to do so. Pull your skirt up Sally.

I also have a brain capable of logical reasoning. I think your views are naive. I don't care that you're not in the ruling class but because I think you've bought the anti-Bush story hook line and sinker such that it's clouding your judgment.

Like Cing said: the people of Iraq are free. They have satellite dishes that pump in any news source they choose to watch. They vote. They have a constitution. Their neighbors are watching. This is a big deal and a noble cause for our soldiers to undertake. I'm so proud of them.