The March to War: A Stroll Down Memory Lane

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by IJ Reilly, Mar 17, 2006.

  1. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #1
    Just a few words to ponder, three years on.
     
  2. blackfox macrumors 65816

    blackfox

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Location:
    PDX
    #2
    You know, I read (somewhere) recently that Saddam purposefully bluffed with regards to Iraq having WMDs as leverage against Iran - in terms of regional strategy.

    I also read that Hussein was more concerned in the lead-up to the war with internal stability concerns (eg: threat of a coup), than of the US forces. His concerns about sectarian violence and chaos resulting from the breakdown of order were astute and prescient.

    Hussein seems, in retrospect, a somewhat moral man in that he knew his country, it's people and the Region and did what it took to hold it together. Although horribly vicious at times, I tend think that he knew that was what was necessary to maintain order and the status quo.

    He just underestimated the ideological zeal of the Bush Administration. He played the hand he was dealt as best he could.

    Lest people think I am being too soft on Mr Hussein, I would remind that the most pressing human right for many is not "freedom" but "security/personal safety". It is the US's inability to provide this basic right, that forments dislike of the US presence and support for the Insurrgency. Regular Iraqis are merely adhering to what looks like the strongest "tribe", because they have the best chance of security in that decision.

    Hussein provided basic security, however imperfect, through order. In pursuit of that order, he bluffed himself into a position of strength and got called out by an overzealous America.

    It is all kind of tragic. I do wonder how ignorant the US was of the real situation, or if it just posed (at the time) a low-risk point for ideological intervention.
     
  3. Dont Hurt Me macrumors 603

    Dont Hurt Me

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Location:
    Yahooville S.C.
    #3
    20 million a day, 2400+ dead, many thousands limbless and Iraq is a bigger mess then when we went in. We were lied to many, many ,times. The agenda wasnt the agenda of the people. We have a 9 trillion dollar debt and growing. Best thing we can do is vote out all the incumbants, Everyone of them is tainted by special Interests. We also have to eliminate 100% the lobbiest who control govt with their election $$$.

    Even today they are saying this swarm is the largest operation in Iraq, another Lie to spin this presidents sagging polls. They had plenty of operations that were much larger, no wonder they didnt want any reporters there.
     
  4. cc bcc macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2001
    Location:
    nl
    #4
    2400? I think you forgot about the tens of thousands of Iraqi civilians that have died. It's a nation wide trauma for generations of people, so very often (conveniently?) unmentioned.
     
  5. Dont Hurt Me macrumors 603

    Dont Hurt Me

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Location:
    Yahooville S.C.
    #5
    True , we really dont how many Iraqi's have died and everyone of them has family members. I know i would be very pissed if someone killed a family member. Then I would be labeled a ...Insurgent? or some other spin. The President was 100% wrong but stay the course stay the course, 400 billion dollars later. Unless this president is prepared to remove the Koran from that country he is wasting our time,our lives,our money.
     
  6. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #6
    Ah yes, but when the lies were about sex it was time to bring out the impeachment stick...
     
  7. IJ Reilly thread starter macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #7
    I posted an article about this a couple of years ago, I think it was. It could probably be located in the archives. Saddam was reportedly surprised to discover that the U.S. didn't know that he didn't have any WMD.
     
  8. cc bcc macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2001
    Location:
    nl
    #8
    You think they didn't know? It was never about WMD's, they just hoped to find some.
     
  9. miloblithe macrumors 68020

    miloblithe

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2003
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    #9
    I especially like the insane estimates by Rumsfeld and the others about the cost and difficulty of the war ahead. There are two possible interpretations:

    These people have absolutely no understanding of the complexity of international affairs and military operations.

    Or they just didn't care and were happy enough to lie to the American people about their intentions.
     
  10. tristan macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2003
    Location:
    high-rise in beautiful bethesda
    #10
    So why didn't Saddam let the weapons inspectors in?
     
  11. Mike Teezie macrumors 68020

    Mike Teezie

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2002
    #11
    Interesting. I'd like to see that blackfox.

    Maybe because Iran would have been able to call his bluff then. And as bf said, he just underestimated Bush and co.'s zest for war. It's just insane when you think of where we are now with Iraq.
     
  12. IJ Reilly thread starter macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #12
    A better question is: Why did George Bush kick them out?
     
  13. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #13
    he did.
     
  14. tristan macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2003
    Location:
    high-rise in beautiful bethesda
    #14
    Saddam kicked out UNSCOM in October 1998 and didn't let inspectors return until November 2002, 5 weeks after congress had already authorized war and UN 1441 had been passed with its own "serious consequences" language. Why did he do this?

    In Dec 2002, Iraq submitted a 14,000 page declaration stating that Iraq had no banned weapons. Yet within two months, UN inspectors had discovered empty chemical warheads and missiles that exceeded the range limitations (Al Samoud). Hans Blix reported to the UN that he was very critical of Iraq's cooperation. Why didn't Iraq disclose the banned weapons and cooperate more fully?

    Did Saddam just not get the danger he was in? It seems to me like he could have easily prevented the gulf war with a little more cooperation up front.
     
  15. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #15
    the gulf war? in 1991?
     
  16. tristan macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2003
    Location:
    high-rise in beautiful bethesda
    #16
    Sigh... obviously I was referring to the second gulf war...
     
  17. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #17
    sorry, i'm not trying to be annoying. the term "gulf war" makes me think of desert storm. "iraq war" seems to be the popular moniker for the current action.

    imo, saddam's actions w/ the inspectors had precious little to do with gw bush's desire for war. i don't think there's any action saddam could have taken, perhaps self-exile, that would have stopped bush's war.
     
  18. mkrishnan Moderator emeritus

    mkrishnan

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Location:
    Grand Rapids, MI, USA
    #18
    I'll take the bait... we've been heading down an inevitable path towards the useless loss of American and Iraqi life ever since the 90s, when I was in high school, and this foolishness started. This should never have been allowed to get as far as a long-term military presence inside / over around Iraq. The elder Bush, of whom I am not a big fan, but whom I do not hate, did not do enough to stop this. Clinton did not act decisively to right this wrong. And now we've passed the fire extinguisher on to a pyromaniac.
     
  19. joepunk macrumors 68030

    joepunk

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2004
    Location:
    a profane existence
    #19
    What's interesting to me is that many of these same areas where wars have been fought in the last 2000 years are still being fought over today.
     
  20. solvs macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA
    #20
    He was trying to bluff us, and Iran. He didn't think we'd invade so quickly, underestimating GW's resolve and America's zeal for revenge after 9/11. Even though there were plans for the Iraq war even before 9/11 apparently. When he realized we were serious, he got scared and began to want to cooperate. Seems pretty similar to what Iran is doing now. Not saying we could have fully trusted him, but we definitely did rush to war and planned things very poorly. Obvious at this point, but hindsight is 20/20, and even the most skeptical of us didn't realize it would get this bad.

    There was a time when I chalked this up to incompetence, but it's obvious now that it's not that simple. At best they cherry picked the intel that supported what they had already planned to do, ignoring everything that didn't fit the agenda. At worst... well, I don't even want to think about that. The real reasons for this war could be even worse than most of us are thinking. Far worse. Hopefully it's just about oil, because the alternatives are terrifying.
     
  21. pseudobrit macrumors 68040

    pseudobrit

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Location:
    Jobs' Spare Liver Jar
    #21
    Because we were using our inspectors to spy on his government.
     
  22. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #22
    As noted, the CIA was using UNSCOM to spy on Saddam's government. Also, allowing weapons inspectors in would have illuminated the deception he was trying to pull off in convincing his neighbors that he had WMDs and would use them if he had to.

    Also, inspectors were let in before the war started, which was supposedly the whole point of the AUMF resolution in Congress. That resolution was supposed to be a tool to allow Bush to pressure Saddam into allowing weapons inspectors in -- yet Bush used it as a declaration of war, as well as the underpinning for his 'unitary executive' theory that allowed him to (among other things) data-mine vast quantities of American communications, and torture prisoners in violation of the Geneva Convention.
     
  23. IJ Reilly thread starter macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #23
  24. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
  25. blackfox macrumors 65816

    blackfox

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Location:
    PDX
    #25
    a phrase rife with meaning, on so many levels.

    Shame I don't understand any of them.
     

Share This Page