Poll: Has dicussion on the High Road changed your opinion about the Iraq war?
- Thread starter SkunkApe
- Start date
- Status
Art Eatman
Moderator In Memoriam
The "how tos" for polling are in the FAQs, I guess. I've not done it, so I dunno.
As for the war, nothing here has brought about any change for me. The daily news of events--as opposed to conclusions drawn from observing those events--have led me to believe that the post-combat phase was inadequately thought out.
"Thought out" meaning the "What if...?" of Baathist behavior later on; or outside hostile people coming in; or the reactions of various religious leaders, aside from the general populace. Not enough thought given to the whole package of the "independent contractor" civilians, or of control of the flow of money and the accountability therefor.
It should be obvious that little or no thought was given to the PR aspects of prison managment, much less what it means to overcrowd by a factor of three or more.
Art
As for the war, nothing here has brought about any change for me. The daily news of events--as opposed to conclusions drawn from observing those events--have led me to believe that the post-combat phase was inadequately thought out.
"Thought out" meaning the "What if...?" of Baathist behavior later on; or outside hostile people coming in; or the reactions of various religious leaders, aside from the general populace. Not enough thought given to the whole package of the "independent contractor" civilians, or of control of the flow of money and the accountability therefor.
It should be obvious that little or no thought was given to the PR aspects of prison managment, much less what it means to overcrowd by a factor of three or more.
Art
Waitone
Member
The discussion has showed me how enslaved we are to our assumptions. We inevitably come to a conclusion in accord with our assumptions regardless of the facts. No different than debating anti-second amendment types.
Hkmp5sd
Member
Hasn't changed my mind...but I do enjoy the discussions.
Baba Louie
Member
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2002
- Messages
- 3,831
No. Unfortunately. Some form of honest to goodness action was needed on somebodies part as a result of the political mess left over from '90/'91 (when oil was up to $40 a barrel)... which was left over from the political mess of '79/'89... left over from the political mess of...
I really wanted to see the evil of my ways in thinking that we should have finished things in '91 but "Nice Guyed" out doing the "Kinder and Gentler" thing then, allowing the UN, France, Germany and Russia ample time and opportunity to make money/take oil while madness and mayhem continued internally w/in Iraq as the US took THR instead of suzerainty (doncha know ya just cain't do that nowadays Baba?). Wouldn't be prudent at this juncture, circa '91.
Who knows? It mighta cost GHB the '92 election.
Should anyone ever get around to writing the know-all-tell-all book on this whole sordid Fertile Crescent affair, they should title it ALAS BABYLON (Too bad it's already been used as a successful book title) as that title works well from several different points of view.
Looking into my crystal ball, I'd expect to see more turmoil over there in another 12-15 years or so for one reason or another, be it religion, politics, oil or terror types (more than likely all of the above) due to the political mess we'll end up leaving.
On the bright side (for oilmen types), oil is up to (surprise) $40 a barrel, gas up to $2.22/gal (here in LV) just in time for summer travel season w/ less than 2 months to go for Iraqi gov't turnover.
I really wanted to see the evil of my ways in thinking that we should have finished things in '91 but "Nice Guyed" out doing the "Kinder and Gentler" thing then, allowing the UN, France, Germany and Russia ample time and opportunity to make money/take oil while madness and mayhem continued internally w/in Iraq as the US took THR instead of suzerainty (doncha know ya just cain't do that nowadays Baba?). Wouldn't be prudent at this juncture, circa '91.
Who knows? It mighta cost GHB the '92 election.
Should anyone ever get around to writing the know-all-tell-all book on this whole sordid Fertile Crescent affair, they should title it ALAS BABYLON (Too bad it's already been used as a successful book title) as that title works well from several different points of view.
Looking into my crystal ball, I'd expect to see more turmoil over there in another 12-15 years or so for one reason or another, be it religion, politics, oil or terror types (more than likely all of the above) due to the political mess we'll end up leaving.
On the bright side (for oilmen types), oil is up to (surprise) $40 a barrel, gas up to $2.22/gal (here in LV) just in time for summer travel season w/ less than 2 months to go for Iraqi gov't turnover.
Malone LaVeigh
Member
It was obvious to a lot of people from the start that there was no way the "post-combat phase", as Art put it, could be successfully pulled off. I was convinced by those people that the war was folly. Not that the occupation phase wasn't "thought out." That implys that a little bit better planning would have solved tha problems we're facing right now. The Iraqis did not, for the most part, greet us as liberators. Surprise, surprise. We now and from the begining have had a choice between a long-term occupation of an increasingly hostile population, or cutting our losses and bailing out. If we choose the latter, the country will either become another Iran or another Saddam will emerge. Either way, they're not going to be our friends.
Maybe I'm wrong, and I'll admit it if it turns out so. But the fantasy of a pro-US democratic government coming out of this is a lot harder to believe.
Edited: Iraq, Iran, what's the dif?
Maybe I'm wrong, and I'll admit it if it turns out so. But the fantasy of a pro-US democratic government coming out of this is a lot harder to believe.
Edited: Iraq, Iran, what's the dif?
Waitone
Member
I'm inclined to believe the large chunks of Malone's points. The nation building part has never been done before. That said we've a considerable number of really bad decisions for which we are paying the price now. Curiously enough a number of those decisions come out of the dept of State.
But I digress. A number of Americans are skeptical of the Iraqi's drive to implement and hold to a "democratic" vision of government. Not that is not racists, it is merely an observation of history and a series of logical questions. That said, the islamofascist terrormongers are working hard to stop the handover to the Iraqi people. Are they handicapping the chances of representative government differently than we here in America? I think so. The truly smart play would be for IFT's to abandon Iraq and concentrate on hitting us at home. No so! Seems they are interested in killing us there as opposed to killing us at home.
Proof positive Islamofascist terrormongers do not think like Americans.
But I digress. A number of Americans are skeptical of the Iraqi's drive to implement and hold to a "democratic" vision of government. Not that is not racists, it is merely an observation of history and a series of logical questions. That said, the islamofascist terrormongers are working hard to stop the handover to the Iraqi people. Are they handicapping the chances of representative government differently than we here in America? I think so. The truly smart play would be for IFT's to abandon Iraq and concentrate on hitting us at home. No so! Seems they are interested in killing us there as opposed to killing us at home.
Proof positive Islamofascist terrormongers do not think like Americans.
Standing Wolf
Member in memoriam
We scrapped and rebuilt both Germany and Japan after World War II.
Waitone
Member
Yup! and we faced completely destroyed armies and devastated economies. We also were in the process of beginning the next big war so there was a strong incentive on our side to do it once and right. We also didn't have digital phone with photo capabilities and an internet giving instantaneous worldwide publishing.
Yup! we did it before and quite well but we also have to recognize things are a little bit different this goaround.
telomerase
Member
There's a war?
There's a war in Iraq? When did Congress declare a "war" in Iraq?
There's a war in Iraq? When did Congress declare a "war" in Iraq?
I've had my opinions changed by discussions. Sometimes it takes time to sink in an realize that you're arguing past the point where you are not still sure of your assumptions before you reevaluate them.
When I first hear of the Assault Weapon Ban I thought it made sense. However, I learned that the politicians and media were lying to me. I joined the NRA a short while later because I believed they were doing a better job of telling me the truth. I don't always agree with the NRA on every issue, but at least they are willing to spell out their reasoning without trying to hide facts from me.
stevelyn
Member
I was never in favor of invading Iraq for many of the reasons already stated. Saddam was not a direct threat to us and not much of one to his neighbors. The long term problem with not invading was the cost and commitment of maintaining the northern and southern "no fly" zone indefinitely. We couldn't pull out and leave, Saddam wins. Staying and maintaining the status quo for years wasn't attractive either. Option? Invade and overthrow the current regime.
There should not have been "no fly" zones to begin with. The job Bush I started should have been finished properly with a march to Baghdad while we had the forces, a crushed Iraqi resistance, partisan Kurds and a larger coalition of nations willing to participate. Had this been done then, we would very likely have been more successful in building a postwar Iraq and would probably see an emerging economy, rather than the abortion we're facing now.
However we need to stay on and finish this thing up properly, because having our troops die in vain isn't acceptable. Neither is having to revisit the same neighborhood 20 years from now.
Edit for sp.
There should not have been "no fly" zones to begin with. The job Bush I started should have been finished properly with a march to Baghdad while we had the forces, a crushed Iraqi resistance, partisan Kurds and a larger coalition of nations willing to participate. Had this been done then, we would very likely have been more successful in building a postwar Iraq and would probably see an emerging economy, rather than the abortion we're facing now.
However we need to stay on and finish this thing up properly, because having our troops die in vain isn't acceptable. Neither is having to revisit the same neighborhood 20 years from now.
Edit for sp.
Last edited:
rayra
member
I've learned that most people, and surprisingly many in the gunowner arena who ALREADY should be aware of gross media bias and misrepresentation of facts, are completely snookered by the media's ongoing mendacity and 'lies by omission' regarding the true situation in Iraq.
95% of the media, and the arabist news agencies Reuters & AP that feed them their stories tell us nothing but a constant drumbeat of defeatism and american guilt triggering negativity, wholly ignoring the facts on the ground. BBC / ABC tried some more muckraking a couple months ago, and to their chagrin their commissioned survey of Iraqis showed the majority WANT us there and acknowledge our good efforts there.
Our own media keeps trying to paint Iraq as a Vietnam-esque 'quagmire', since before we even went to war, predicting massive humanitarian disaster, massive casualties, and total failure. They've done everything since to portray it as such.
The constant nightly bodycount by the media is also disgusting. While every individual loss is a tradegy for their families, the amazingly LOW casualties for such a huge undertaking are grossly misrepresented by the media, with little / no context and NO relation to historical precedents for such campaigns.
Anyway, I'm ranting about politics and media abuse.
I'm just surprised that more people in these (firearm) forums would be duped by the defeatism, after being exposed to similar tactics used by the Left in the RKBA struggle. Look around. Seek additional / wider news sources. The campaign in Iraq is no different, in its gross misrepresentation by the Left / Media.
95% of the media, and the arabist news agencies Reuters & AP that feed them their stories tell us nothing but a constant drumbeat of defeatism and american guilt triggering negativity, wholly ignoring the facts on the ground. BBC / ABC tried some more muckraking a couple months ago, and to their chagrin their commissioned survey of Iraqis showed the majority WANT us there and acknowledge our good efforts there.
Our own media keeps trying to paint Iraq as a Vietnam-esque 'quagmire', since before we even went to war, predicting massive humanitarian disaster, massive casualties, and total failure. They've done everything since to portray it as such.
The constant nightly bodycount by the media is also disgusting. While every individual loss is a tradegy for their families, the amazingly LOW casualties for such a huge undertaking are grossly misrepresented by the media, with little / no context and NO relation to historical precedents for such campaigns.
Anyway, I'm ranting about politics and media abuse.
I'm just surprised that more people in these (firearm) forums would be duped by the defeatism, after being exposed to similar tactics used by the Left in the RKBA struggle. Look around. Seek additional / wider news sources. The campaign in Iraq is no different, in its gross misrepresentation by the Left / Media.
Rayra,
I appreciate your viewpoint, but I'm not trying to re-argue the pros/cons of the war in this thread. I'm simply asking if your opinion has changed, either way, as a result of anything you've read here.
I'm starting to think that the hand of the deity could come down and touch George Bush, or that Rumsfeld and Cheney could be caught on film with an Iraqi love harem, rolling around in a Scrooge McDuck vault full of Iraqi gold, and still nobody's opinion would change.
I appreciate your viewpoint, but I'm not trying to re-argue the pros/cons of the war in this thread. I'm simply asking if your opinion has changed, either way, as a result of anything you've read here.
I'm starting to think that the hand of the deity could come down and touch George Bush, or that Rumsfeld and Cheney could be caught on film with an Iraqi love harem, rolling around in a Scrooge McDuck vault full of Iraqi gold, and still nobody's opinion would change.
jimpeel
Member
My mind was made up before the war started.
My mind was made up before the first post appeared on THR.
My mind was made up regardless of any post to the contrary on THR.
My mind is made up now.
Nothing has changed.
My mind was made up before the first post appeared on THR.
My mind was made up regardless of any post to the contrary on THR.
My mind is made up now.
Nothing has changed.
Aguila Blanca
Member
No.
glocksman
Member
Nothing here has changed my mind.
What did change my mind was the total lack of any WMD's turning up.
Bush lied about WMD and the threat they posed to the US in order to get support for the war, and I don't take kindly to being lied to.
I'm not going to vote for Kerry, but I sure as Hell won't vote for GWB either.
What did change my mind was the total lack of any WMD's turning up.
Bush lied about WMD and the threat they posed to the US in order to get support for the war, and I don't take kindly to being lied to.
I'm not going to vote for Kerry, but I sure as Hell won't vote for GWB either.
I hear you. Last year I honestly believed that WMD or an active WMD development program (NOT just "WMD program related activity" - whatever the f*** that gov doublespeak means) would be found. I figured Bush was exaggerating, but I thought they'd find SOMETHING. Turns out I was wrong. But then, I wasn't getting info from the world's most sophisticated intel services, either.
Bush and his people were either lying (bad) or grossly incompetent (worse) about Iraq. Either way, they need to be fired.
And spare me the stuff about how Clinton and the Dems also thought Saddam had WMD. Dude, I expect them to be incompetent dumbasses.
Art Eatman
Moderator In Memoriam
idd, consider something about "inside the Beltway" and an atmosphere of willingness to believe: Isn't it quite similar to what we see here at THR on many gun-related issues? The majority has a mindset, and is quite vocal about it?
Bush entered office with a predisposition of hostility toward Saddam, for violations of UN Resolutions, human rights abuses, and WMD. These matters would have been in the briefing papers given him before he took office. Aren't those matters which had been mainstays of public discussion for some ten prior years?
If most of the movers and shakers around you are reinforcing your own belief in this notion of WMDs, and your Intel is giving you the same stuff, what do you do?
Art
Bush entered office with a predisposition of hostility toward Saddam, for violations of UN Resolutions, human rights abuses, and WMD. These matters would have been in the briefing papers given him before he took office. Aren't those matters which had been mainstays of public discussion for some ten prior years?
If most of the movers and shakers around you are reinforcing your own belief in this notion of WMDs, and your Intel is giving you the same stuff, what do you do?
Art
Abominable No-Man
Member
Everyone thought Saddam had WMD's, including the UN, France, Germany, and Russia.
Iraq is about the size of California, but there's a lot of desert to hide stuff in over there. Hell, look at how long it took to find Saddam- and he was the
most wanted man in Iraq, and everyone knew what he looked like (his picture was all over the friggin' place.......). WMD's? Does anyone know what they look like? I don't, and I'm active duty. It's not without precedence, either, look at the poor guys who came back with Gulf War Syndrome. Maybe it was depleted uranium, maybe not.
Personally, I think they are still around somewhere, just not as many as everyone may have thought. Maybe they were shipped to Libya or Syria, as has been alluded to before; maybe they dropped it in the Tigris or Euphrates somewhere, they aren't small rivers; maybe they rocketed the crap to the moon, who knows?
I don't think Bush lied. Bad intel, yeah, and they probably had something like a "target of opportunity" list drawn up somewhere that had OIF listed on it.
ANM
Iraq is about the size of California, but there's a lot of desert to hide stuff in over there. Hell, look at how long it took to find Saddam- and he was the
most wanted man in Iraq, and everyone knew what he looked like (his picture was all over the friggin' place.......). WMD's? Does anyone know what they look like? I don't, and I'm active duty. It's not without precedence, either, look at the poor guys who came back with Gulf War Syndrome. Maybe it was depleted uranium, maybe not.
Personally, I think they are still around somewhere, just not as many as everyone may have thought. Maybe they were shipped to Libya or Syria, as has been alluded to before; maybe they dropped it in the Tigris or Euphrates somewhere, they aren't small rivers; maybe they rocketed the crap to the moon, who knows?
I don't think Bush lied. Bad intel, yeah, and they probably had something like a "target of opportunity" list drawn up somewhere that had OIF listed on it.
ANM
ojibweindian
Member
Nope.
nero45acp
Member
No. I still believe it was a mistake that once again requires that the greatest sacrifice be made by our youth. Who coincidently usually have the least financial resources and the least political muscle. No politician should be able to vote for, or support a war unless his/her children are there serving also. I suspect we would then see our military power being exercised more judiciously.
nero
nero
The Real Hawkeye
member
I haven't been following the discussion here, but here are my views on the subject. I am opposed to preemptive wars. They are not consistent with liberty, limited government and republicanism. I am opposed to the president starting wars, as it is not his place constitutionally. I am opposed to the president exaggerating facts in a way designed to rile the American people up for war. I am opposed to wars on concepts, like "terrorism" or "drugs," which can never ultimately be won, and provide an excuse for the government to remain in a constant state of emergency where one right after another is compromised and/or ignored, which results in the trampling over of the rule of law.
There is a real argument to be made that Afghanistan justified our war with Afghanistan. That being the case, they got what was coming, and our war with them (though always regrettable) was justified. Bush should have stopped after victory there. He'd be universally hailed as a truly great president, having responded with devastating consequences to an attack on our shores by an Muslim nation. The conquest of Afghanistan showed the Muslim world what happens when you F____ with the U.S. of A. Bush got some very bad advice, however, in taking 911 as a blanket permission to invade any Islamic state he didn't like. It has now become a fiasco, which is what I predicted from the beginning, even as invasion plans were being preliminarily discussed.
There is a real argument to be made that Afghanistan justified our war with Afghanistan. That being the case, they got what was coming, and our war with them (though always regrettable) was justified. Bush should have stopped after victory there. He'd be universally hailed as a truly great president, having responded with devastating consequences to an attack on our shores by an Muslim nation. The conquest of Afghanistan showed the Muslim world what happens when you F____ with the U.S. of A. Bush got some very bad advice, however, in taking 911 as a blanket permission to invade any Islamic state he didn't like. It has now become a fiasco, which is what I predicted from the beginning, even as invasion plans were being preliminarily discussed.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
